Are Durable Water Repellent (DWR) Coatings Safe?

Traditional DWR coatings built on fluorinated chemistry are not fully safe, for wearers or the environment. Most DWR treatments applied to outdoor jackets, tents, and backpacks over the past several decades have relied on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, the family of synthetic chemicals commonly known as PFAS. These coatings shed PFAS during wear, washing, and disposal, and the compounds they release are extraordinarily persistent. The outdoor industry has been shifting toward fluorine-free alternatives, but the transition is incomplete, and even newer formulations involve trade-offs worth understanding.

Why Fluorinated DWR Coatings Raise Concerns

The reason DWR coatings work so well is the same reason they are worrying. Fluorinated side-chain polymers create a surface that repels both water and oil by lowering the fabric’s surface energy to a point where liquids bead up and roll off. The carbon-fluorine bond at the heart of this chemistry is one of the strongest in organic chemistry, which is exactly what makes it useful on a rain jacket and problematic everywhere else. The bond resists heat, UV light, microbial breakdown, and most chemical reactions. Once PFAS enter the environment, they do not meaningfully degrade on any human timescale.

Older DWR formulations relied on long-chain fluorinated polymers, typically eight carbons or more. Long-chain PFAS like PFOA have been shown to be more toxic to cells than their shorter-chain replacements, inducing stress responses and disrupting the development of liver and neural cell markers in laboratory models.

After mounting evidence of harm, global regulatory pressure pushed manufacturers to phase out long-chain PFAS. Most major outdoor brands switched their DWR treatments to short-chain fluorinated polymers (typically six carbons) or to entirely fluorine-free chemistries. But that switch did not eliminate the problem. It changed its shape.

Short-Chain PFAS Are Not the All-Clear

When the industry moved from long-chain to short-chain fluorinated DWR, the assumption was that shorter molecules would be less bioaccumulative and less toxic. That turned out to be partly true and partly misleading. Short-chain PFAS do accumulate less in animal tissue than their long-chain predecessors. But they are far more mobile in water and soil, meaning they spread faster through the environment and contaminate drinking water sources more readily. Their final degradation products are extremely persistent, and once emitted, they remain in the environment indefinitely. Because no widely available water treatment technology removes them efficiently, short-chain PFAS create what researchers have described as “everlasting background concentrations” that organisms are permanently exposed to.

Short-chain PFAS also accumulate in edible parts of plants, and their behavior in food chains is still poorly understood. A European regulatory review concluded that, considering the precautionary principle, short-chain PFAS are of equivalent concern to substances classified as persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic.

In other words, the replacement chemicals inherited the persistence problem even as they partially addressed the bioaccumulation one.

How DWR Coatings Break Down During Use

A DWR-treated jacket does not simply hold onto its coating forever. Over time, sunlight, physical abrasion, washing, and normal atmospheric exposure cause the fluorinated polymer coating to degrade. This degradation releases smaller PFAS molecules, including fluorotelomer alcohols, which can further break down into persistent perfluoroalkyl acids. Research on DWR-coated fabrics found that the concentration of extractable PFAS actually increased after aging and washing, rather than decreasing. The likely explanations include atmospheric oxidation of volatile fluorotelomer alcohols present in the coating, hydrolysis during washing that cleaves fluorinated side chains, and physical damage to both the DWR layer and the underlying fabric fibers that releases a larger fraction of bound chemicals.

Laboratory aging studies have confirmed this process at the molecular level, showing that both primary PFAS (those incorporated during fabric preparation) and secondary PFAS (those generated by degradation and photocatalytic oxidation of the coating) are present after simulated aging.

⁴

Outdoor aging studies using fabrics weathered in real-world conditions found the same pattern: loss of PFAS-containing microfiber fragments and formation of lower-weight PFAS compounds occurred continuously throughout the weathering period.

⁵

The practical takeaway is that a DWR-treated garment slowly releases PFAS the entire time you own it, and the release accelerates as the coating ages and is washed.

Can PFAS From Clothing Actually Get Into Your Body?

For most consumers, the immediate safety question is whether the PFAS in a DWR-coated jacket can actually enter their body through skin contact. The answer depends heavily on the chain length of the PFAS involved. An in-vitro study using human skin found that long-chain PFAS did not penetrate the skin barrier over a 24-hour period, while several short-chain PFAS did permeate at low but measurable rates. One compound, FBSA, achieved the highest permeation at about 7% when tested individually in water.

⁶

The presence of sweat dramatically changes this picture. A study modeling dermal exposure from children’s textiles found that sweat increased chemical absorption by up to roughly 3,250-fold for PFAS compared to dry contact.

⁷

That number sounds alarming, and it is worth putting into context: the baseline for dry contact is very low, so a thousandfold increase of a very small number can still be a small number in absolute terms. Still, the finding matters because it means the standard dry-skin laboratory test significantly underestimates what happens during exercise or in warm weather, exactly the conditions when most people wear DWR-treated outdoor gear.

Porcine skin models, which approximate human skin absorption reasonably well, have shown PFAS absorption rates ranging from about 30% to 83% depending on the specific compound, suggesting that certain PFAS from consumer products can cross the skin barrier more readily than previously assumed.

⁸

The dermal route is not the only exposure pathway. PFAS applied to textiles can also enter the body through inhalation of volatile fluorotelomer alcohols that off-gas from treated fabric, and through household dust contaminated with microfibers shed from DWR-treated items.

⁹

What Washing Sends Down the Drain

Every wash cycle strips fluorinated microfibers and dissolved PFAS from treated textiles. Researchers measuring fiber release from DWR-coated fabrics found that a single accelerated wash released fibers containing roughly 240 to 1,300 micrograms of total fluorine per square meter of fabric, depending on the textile type. Most of these fibers measured between about 10 and 500 micrometers in length. Under current wastewater treatment, a large fraction of these microfibers reach the environment either in treated effluent or in sewage sludge spread on agricultural land. Once in the environment, the fluorinated side chains slowly cleave from the fibers and transform into persistent short-chain perfluoroalkyl acids. One European-scale estimate suggested that treated outdoor rain jackets alone contribute up to about 0.7 metric tons of a common fluorotelomer alcohol per year just from washing.

¹⁰

This means your home washing machine is a direct conduit between the DWR on your rain jacket and the nearest waterway. Microfiber-catching laundry bags or filters can reduce the load, but they do not eliminate it, and they do nothing about dissolved PFAS in the wash water.

Workers Face Far Greater Exposure Than Consumers

If consumer-level exposure from wearing DWR gear is a dripping faucet, occupational exposure in textile manufacturing plants is a fire hose. Workers in facilities that apply fluorinated DWR coatings to fabrics can inhale fluorotelomer alcohols at concentrations up to five orders of magnitude higher than the background exposure experienced by the general population.

¹¹

A broader review of occupational PFAS exposure confirmed that workers experience varying levels depending on their specific industry and the tasks they perform, with textile production, firefighting gear handling, and certain maintenance activities posing the highest risks.

¹²

This is relevant to the safety question because the bulk of DWR-related health risk falls not on the person zipping up their jacket but on the workers who manufactured it, often in countries with less stringent occupational health protections.

The Acute Danger of Re-Proofing Sprays

One specific DWR safety risk that goes beyond chronic PFAS exposure is the use of aerosol waterproofing sprays to re-proof garments at home. These products create a fine mist of water-repellent chemicals that can cause acute respiratory poisoning if inhaled, even when used according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Case reports describe people who opened windows and doors as directed but still developed coughing and difficulty breathing shortly after spraying. Investigation into these cases pointed to the spray’s inhibition of lung surfactant function as the core mechanism of illness.

¹³

Lung surfactant is the thin layer of fluid lining the inside of your lungs that keeps the air sacs from collapsing. When aerosolized waterproofing chemicals coat that layer, gas exchange becomes impaired. This risk applies to both fluorinated and non-fluorinated spray formulations; the danger comes from inhaling aerosolized surface-active chemicals, not solely from PFAS content. If you re-proof gear, pump sprays or wash-in treatments are considerably safer than aerosol cans, and doing the work outdoors with the fabric hung away from your face reduces risk further.

Fluorine-Free Alternatives and What You Give Up

The outdoor industry’s migration toward fluorine-free DWR is well underway, with many major brands committing to fully fluorine-free product lines. The three main categories of alternatives are silicone-based coatings, hydrocarbon-based (paraffin or wax) coatings, and dendrimeric coatings. Each comes with real trade-offs.

Silicone-based DWR delivers water repellency comparable to fluorinated finishes and generally preserves the fabric’s breathability and hand feel at a reasonable cost.

¹⁴

Hydrocarbon-based options are the most environmentally benign and provide adequate waterproofing for everyday conditions, but they struggle in extreme wet environments. Dendrimeric DWR offers strong durability and breathability but remains expensive and difficult to apply at industrial scale.

¹⁴

The one performance gap none of these alternatives has fully closed is oil repellency. Fluorinated coatings repel both water and oil; non-fluorinated ones generally cannot repel oil, which limits their usefulness for applications requiring stain resistance against greasy or oily substances.

¹⁵

For most consumers, though, this gap is theoretical rather than practical. A survey of 300 outdoor apparel users found that while 82% rated water repellency as highly important for comfort, most did not see a need for the additional oil and soil repellence that fluorinated finishes provide.

Short-chain fluorinated DWR sits in the middle ground: it performs more robustly than non-fluorinated options across a wider range of conditions, but it still sheds persistent PFAS into the environment.

¹⁵

Why “Green” Labels Do Not Always Mean PFAS-Free

If you shop for outdoor gear with an eye on certifications, you might assume that a product carrying a recognized eco-label is free of PFAS. That assumption is unreliable. A study testing consumer products marketed to children and adolescents found PFAS present in items bearing green certifications, including products with water- and stain-resistance claims. The reason is that many green certification programs either do not test for PFAS at all or set individual compound limits well above the concentrations actually found in products. For instance, the Oeko-Tex 100 standard sets individual PFAS limits in the range of 25 to 50 nanograms per gram, while a certification like Greenguard Gold, which focuses on volatile organic compound emissions, did not include any PFAS on its list of chemicals of concern as of mid-2021.

¹⁶

The most reliable indicator is a brand’s explicit statement that a product uses a fluorine-free DWR, often abbreviated “PFC-free” or “PFAS-free” in marketing. Even then, third-party testing occasionally finds trace fluorine, likely from manufacturing contamination rather than intentional formulation. The labeling landscape is improving, but for now, “green-certified” and “PFAS-free” are two different claims that do not always overlap.

Where Discarded DWR Gear Ends Up

The safety question does not end when you donate or discard a jacket. Landfill studies using model anaerobic reactors filled with treated clothing found that PFAS leached into the surrounding liquid over hundreds of days, with the bulk of release not occurring until after day 100. In biologically active conditions, the leachate from carpet samples contained an average of 8.5 nanomoles per liter of total PFAS after 552 days, compared with just 0.62 nanomoles per liter in sterile conditions, suggesting that microbial activity accelerates the release of PFAS precursors. Clothing samples were more variable but also released PFAS, predominantly PFOA.

¹⁷

Landfill leachate eventually enters wastewater treatment systems, which are not designed to remove PFAS. From there, the chemicals reach surface water and groundwater. In aquatic ecosystems, PFAS with longer fluorinated chains are the most prone to bioaccumulation, building up in fish tissue through a process driven primarily by the compounds’ affinity for cell membranes.

¹⁸

Field sampling downstream of a contaminated wastewater outfall found PFAS concentrations in the water roughly 600 times higher than upstream, with bioaccumulation patterns varying depending on whether organisms lived in the water or on the riverbank.

¹⁹

PFAS Contamination From Recreational Fluorinated Products

DWR coatings on jackets are only one slice of the outdoor-recreation PFAS picture. Fluorinated ski wax, used on cross-country and alpine skis, has been shown to contaminate snow, soil, and shallow groundwater at competition sites. Researchers measuring PFAS in melted snow at the start line of a collegiate ski race found total concentrations between 7,600 and 10,700 nanograms per liter, dominated by long-chain compounds that matched the chemical signature of commercial ski wax.

²⁰

Soil at the start line contained the most abundant PFAS from the snow, and an on-site shallow well held only the shorter-chain compounds, consistent with their higher mobility in water. Sampling around ski resorts in northern China found a similar pattern, with PFAS levels in air, pine needles, soil, and snow significantly higher near resort operations than at rural reference sites.

²¹

The International Ski Federation banned fluorinated ski waxes in competition starting with the 2023–2024 season, partly in response to this kind of evidence and partly because of health concerns for the wax technicians who heat and apply these products in poorly ventilated spaces. The ban highlights a recurring theme: fluorinated DWR and related products often pose the most acute risks to the people who apply them, not just to the end users or the environment.

1
PubMed. Toxicological mode-of-action and developmental toxicity of different carbon chain length PFAS
2
PubMed Central. Short-chain perfluoroalkyl acids: environmental concerns and a regulatory strategy under REACH
3
PubMed Central. Fate of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances from Durable Water-Repellent Clothing during Use
4
Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects. Molecular-level insights into the secondary per-and poly-fluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) in durable water repellent fabric: Generation, properties, and adsorption mechanism
5
PubMed Central. An Outdoor Aging Study to Investigate the Release of Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) from Functional Textiles
6
PubMed. Dermal permeation of perfluoroalkyl substances in human skin – An in-vitro study
7
PubMed. Sweat-amplified dermal transfer and combined toxicity of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and organophosphate esters mixtures in children’s textiles
8
PubMed. In vitro assessment of dermal penetration and skin barrier impairment by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) from consumer products
9
Springer Nature. PFAS in textiles: a critical review on contamination pathways, analytical methods, toxicity assessment, and feasible control strategies
10
Environmental Science & Technology. Release of Side-Chain Fluorinated Polymer-Containing Microplastic Fibers from Functional Textiles During Washing and First Estimates of Perfluoroalkyl Acid Emissions
11
PubMed. Emissions of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in a Textile Manufacturing Plant in China and Their Relevance for Workers’ Exposure
12
PubMed. Occupational exposures to airborne per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)-A review
13
PubMed Central. The Underlying Mechanism of Poisoning after the Accidental Inhalation of Aerosolised Waterproofing Spray
14
Science and Technology of Engineering, Chemistry and Environmental Protection. Review on Non-fluorinated Durable Water Repellent Alternatives for Textile and Fabric Coatings
15
PubMed. Facing the rain after the phase out: Performance evaluation of alternative fluorinated and non-fluorinated durable water repellents for outdoor fabrics
16
Environmental Science & Technology. How Well Do Product Labels Indicate the Presence of PFAS in Consumer Items Used by Children and Adolescents?
17
PubMed. Release of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) from Carpet and Clothing in Model Anaerobic Landfill Reactors
18
PubMed Central. A food web bioaccumulation model for the accumulation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in fish: how important is renal elimination?
19
PubMed. Bioaccumulation and Transfer of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in a Stream and Riparian Food Web Contaminated by Food Processing Wastewater
20
PubMed. Ski wax use contributes to environmental contamination by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
21
PubMed. Occurrence and seasonal distribution of legacy and emerging per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in different environmental compartments from areas around ski resorts in northern China