Are Squishy Toys Toxic? What Parents Need to Know

Many squishy toys contain chemicals that raise legitimate health concerns, particularly for young children who squeeze, sniff, and mouth them regularly. A 2026 study analyzing volatile organic compound emissions from tactile toys found hazardous chemical residues at levels that exceeded U.S. EPA safety benchmarks in screening-level comparisons. That does not mean every squishy toy on a store shelf is dangerous, but the gap between what researchers are finding and what most parents assume about toy safety is wider than you might expect.

What Researchers Have Actually Found in Squishy Toys

Squishy toys are typically made from polyurethane foam, sometimes with added silicone or thermoplastic materials to achieve that slow-rising, stress-ball feel. The manufacturing process leaves behind chemical residues that release into the air and onto skin. A study that quantitatively evaluated hazardous volatile organic compound emissions from tactile toys detected process-related residues including dimethylformamide and methylene chloride at levels that, in screening comparisons, significantly exceeded U.S. EPA Reference Concentrations.¹ Reference Concentrations are the thresholds below which the EPA considers daily inhalation exposure unlikely to cause harm over a lifetime. Exceeding them does not guarantee illness, but it means the margin of safety the regulatory system is designed to maintain has been eroded.

Dimethylformamide is an industrial solvent used in polyurethane production. It can irritate the respiratory tract, eyes, and skin, and chronic exposure has been linked to liver damage in occupational settings. Methylene chloride, also known as dichloromethane, is a solvent that the EPA has increasingly restricted in consumer products because of its links to nervous system effects and, at high levels, cancer risk. Finding both of these in toys marketed to children is not trivial.

These findings matter because the chemicals in question are not intentional ingredients. Nobody adds dimethylformamide to a toy on purpose to make it squishier. They are leftovers from the manufacturing process, residual solvents that were not fully removed before the toy was packaged and shipped. The same study investigated what drives emission levels and found that material composition and manufacturing conditions play a significant role in how much of these compounds a toy releases.¹ That variability is part of the problem: two seemingly identical squishy toys from different batches or factories can have very different chemical profiles.

Why Children Face Higher Risk Than Adults

Adults who squeeze a stress ball at their desk are not in the same risk category as a toddler sleeping with a squishy toy against their face. Children interact with toys differently, and their bodies process chemical exposures differently, too. A study modeling children’s exposures to bisphenol A and its alternatives in toys identified direct dermal contact, mouthing, and dust ingestion as the primary exposure pathways.² While that study focused on BPA specifically, the exposure routes it identified apply across the board to any chemical present in or on a toy’s surface.

Think about how a young child actually uses a squishy toy. They press it against their mouth. They hold it close to their nose while squeezing repeatedly, inhaling whatever the foam releases. They chew on it. They fall asleep holding it. Each of those behaviors creates a direct route for chemicals to enter the body, whether through the skin, the lungs, or the digestive tract. Children also breathe faster relative to their body weight than adults do, which means they inhale a proportionally larger dose of any airborne compound in their immediate environment.

The mouthing behavior deserves special emphasis because it is so persistent in younger children. Kids under three routinely put objects in their mouths, and plenty of four- and five-year-olds still do it when distracted or self-soothing. A squishy toy that a child mouths regularly becomes a sustained chemical delivery system in a way that an adult squeezing the same toy at arm’s length never experiences.

The Smell Test and What Off-Gassing Means for Your Home

If you have ever opened a package of squishy toys and been hit with a strong chemical smell, you were inhaling volatile organic compounds. That new-toy smell is off-gassing: chemicals evaporating from the material into the surrounding air. The stronger the smell, the more compounds are being released.

Off-gassing is most intense when a toy is new and has been sealed in its packaging for weeks or months. The airtight bag traps all the compounds that the foam has been slowly releasing since it left the factory, so opening that bag unleashes a concentrated burst. Over time, emissions decrease as the most volatile compounds dissipate. But “over time” can mean days to weeks depending on the material, the specific chemicals involved, and the ventilation in your home. A squishy toy stored in a child’s bedroom with the door closed and poor air circulation will off-gas more slowly than one left on an open porch.

This matters because children’s bedrooms tend to be smaller, less ventilated, and the places where kids spend the most continuous time, especially at night. A freshly opened squishy toy placed on a nightstand in a small room creates a concentrated exposure scenario that persists for hours while the child sleeps.

Where Regulations Stand and Where They Fall Short

Toy safety regulations exist in both the United States and the European Union, but they were not designed with the specific chemical profiles of modern squishy toys in mind. In the U.S., the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act sets limits on lead, certain phthalates, and a handful of other substances in children’s products. The EU Toy Safety Directive imposes stricter chemical safety rules, including limits on heavy metals, phthalates, nitrosamines, allergenic fragrances, and various hazardous chemicals, and also requires compliance with broader chemical regulations such as REACH restrictions on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

The regulatory gap for squishy toys is twofold. First, the volatile organic compounds that researchers are finding at concerning levels, like dimethylformamide and methylene chloride, are not specifically targeted by most toy safety standards. Regulations tend to focus on chemicals that are intentionally added to products, not on residual solvents left over from manufacturing. A toy could comply with every phthalate and heavy metal limit on the books and still release harmful VOCs because nobody tested for them.

Second, enforcement depends heavily on where a toy is manufactured and who is importing it. The vast majority of squishy toys sold online or in discount stores are produced in factories that may or may not follow the same quality controls as manufacturers supplying major toy brands. When a small seller on an e-commerce platform imports a batch of squishies from an unvetted factory, there is no guarantee that anyone has tested those specific toys for chemical content. The regulatory framework exists, but it has blind spots that cheap novelty toys slip through routinely.

Practical Steps That Actually Reduce Exposure

You do not need to throw out every squishy toy in your house, but a few practical habits can meaningfully reduce your child’s chemical exposure.

Air them out: When you buy a new squishy toy, remove it from its packaging and leave it in a well-ventilated space for at least a few days before giving it to your child. Outside on a covered porch is ideal. A room with open windows works, too. The goal is to let the most volatile compounds dissipate before the toy enters a child’s play space or bedroom.
Limit mouthing: For children old enough to understand instructions, discourage them from putting squishy toys in their mouths. For younger children who cannot reliably stop mouthing objects, consider whether a squishy toy is the right choice at all.
Buy from established brands: Major toy manufacturers are more likely to test their products against chemical safety standards. A branded squishy toy from a well-known company is not guaranteed to be chemical-free, but it has probably been through more quality control than a no-name import from an online marketplace.
Wash hands after play: Since dermal contact is a primary exposure route, having kids wash their hands after extended squishy-toy sessions removes surface chemical residue before it gets transferred to food, eyes, or mouths.
Trust your nose: If a toy has an overwhelmingly strong chemical odor even after several days of airing out, it is releasing more volatile compounds than typical. Consider discarding it rather than hoping it will improve.

These steps are not a perfect shield. They are practical risk-reduction measures that acknowledge most families are not going to send their children’s toys to a lab for VOC analysis. The point is to shrink the exposure window and reduce the total dose a child absorbs, especially through the highest-risk routes of inhalation and mouthing.

How Squishies Compare to Other Popular Tactile Toys

Squishy toys are not the only children’s product that has drawn scrutiny for chemical content. Slime, another enormously popular tactile toy, has been repeatedly flagged for excessive boron levels from the borax used as a cross-linking agent. Boron in high doses can cause nausea, vomiting, and skin irritation, and several European consumer safety agencies have issued warnings about homemade and commercial slime products exceeding safe boron limits.

Fidget toys made from silicone, like pop-its, generally have a better safety profile than polyurethane foam squishies because silicone is chemically inert and does not require the same solvents during manufacturing. That said, cheaper silicone toys sometimes contain filler materials or are made from lower-grade compounds that can still release unwanted chemicals. Color and scent additives, sometimes marketed as a feature, add another layer of chemical complexity.

Play dough and modeling compounds tend to be formulated with children’s safety specifically in mind, especially name-brand versions, but homemade recipes using household ingredients can introduce irritants like excess salt or essential oils. The broader lesson is that any toy a child handles extensively, mouths, or holds close to their face for prolonged periods deserves at least a passing thought about what it is made from.

The Difficulty of Studying Toy Chemical Exposure in Real Life

One reason parental guidance on squishy toys often feels vague is that studying real-world chemical exposure from toys is genuinely difficult. Researchers can measure what a toy emits in a controlled chamber, but translating that to what a specific child actually absorbs during play involves a cascade of variables: how long they play, whether they mouth the toy, room ventilation, the child’s breathing rate, skin permeability, and whether they are exposed to similar chemicals from other sources simultaneously.

The study that modeled children’s BPA exposure from toys used exposure pathway modeling to estimate intake from dermal contact, mouthing, and dust ingestion.² That kind of modeling is useful for identifying which routes matter most, but it relies on assumptions about how often and how long a child interacts with a toy, and those assumptions vary widely across studies. A child who fidgets with a squishy toy for ten minutes at a time has a very different exposure profile from one who sleeps with it.

Similarly, the VOC emission study measured chemicals released under specific test conditions.¹ Real bedrooms are not sealed chambers with controlled airflow. They are messier, less predictable environments where a toy might sit unwrapped for a week before a child plays with it, or might go straight from the package into their hands. The science gives us a direction and a rough magnitude of concern, not a precise dose-response prediction for your child and their specific toy.

This uncertainty is frustrating for parents who want a clear yes-or-no answer, but it also explains why regulatory agencies have been slow to act on squishy toys specifically. The evidence base is growing, and the direction is consistent: these toys emit chemicals at levels worth paying attention to, especially for young children. What remains unclear is exactly how much real-world exposure children get and what threshold of harm should trigger regulatory action. In the meantime, the practical steps that reduce exposure, like airing toys out and limiting mouthing, are low-cost and backed by the basic physics of how volatile compounds behave. You do not need to wait for a definitive risk assessment to take sensible precautions.