One industry prides itself on health and well-being above all else: the outdoor and sporting goods industry. Camp out in nature, go on a three-day hike, go on a jog, play football with your friends — or golf. Physical activity and being out in nature are good for you. No arguing with that.

Many consumers buying these products are among the people most concerned about their health and the environment. But at the same time, the outdoor and sporting goods companies have become obsessed with the “performance” of their materials. To the extent that many of them are reluctant to move away from the use of hazardous chemicals. One example is PFAS, which have long been prized in the sporting goods industry for their ability to repel water, resist stains and withstand harsh conditions. 

“There are alternatives available for all textile consumer uses — even ‘high-performance’ ones”

To be fair, PFAS substitution is not always simple. Some applications remain technically challenging. But that’s not really the case for the outdoor and sports industry. There are alternatives available for all textile consumer uses. Even “high-performance” ones that need waterproofing, fire protection, or whatever it might be. Moreover, PFAS will soon be banned in major markets like the EU.

So, question: why are these companies that market themselves as health-conscious putting their own brands at risk by using toxic chemicals in their products? 

Caught with their PFAS sportswear pants down

Recently, activewear giant Lululemon found itself under investigation over concerns that some of its products may contain PFAS despite sustainability and wellness marketing claims. They have since publicly refuted the claim. But it seems like an unnecessary risk to take for such a big producer of sportswear. Despite the cliché, it seems not all press is good press.

At the same time, governments are still struggling to meaningfully regulate PFAS pollution at the source. While headlines increasingly focus on contaminated leggings or waterproof jackets, consumer products account for only a fraction of overall PFAS uses — 18% to be specific.

The much larger issue remains the continued production and widespread industrial use of these chemicals in the first place.

Worse still, the Trump administration continues to roll back PFAS limits meant to protect citizens, letting chemical manufacturers responsible for the majority of PFAS emissions off the hook.

But consumer brands are not powerless observers in this system. Their demand helps shape what chemical suppliers continue to produce — and what alternatives are able to scale up.

Time to stop playing with dirty balls

While consumer brands need to take responsibility for what they put in their products, it’s ultimately the governments around the world that need to stop treating PFAS pollution as solely a downstream consumer issue. More attention should be focused upstream — on chemical producers and the continued flow of hazardous substances into supply chains. 

Outdoor and sportswear brands have a choice to make: continue treating PFAS as the default standard for performance or help push the industry toward a safer future free from toxic chemicals. There is no doubt that PFAS in textiles will be banned in major markets like the EU. The sooner sportswear brands adapt to this, the better. 

“Some companies have already demonstrated what a PFAS-free transition can look like.”

Some companies have already demonstrated what a PFAS-free transition can look like. Outdoor company VAUDE recently completed a full PFAS phase-out across all product categories after more than 15 years of investment and development work.

So… Just Do It.