Spoiler
Literally how do you review stain-resistant anything and bury the health effects of PFAS at the bottom of the article !? (To say nothing of the fact that the info about PFAS reads like industry talking points.)
Sure, there are two PFAS that are the most well studied, but that doesn't mean they are the only ones that have negative health effects. We know the effects of more than two and there is a reason experts want them regulated as a class
You can't make any kind of inference about the health effects of wearing PFAS-coated clothing if you don't know how much PFAS is on the clothing. Comparing shirts to the assumed safety of period underpants is misleading because no one has studied the safety of that either.
This completely ignores the potential environmental contamination that could occur from washing the shirts, inhaling dust from the shirts, or eventually landfilling the shirts.
This is especially annoying because we know [the Wirecutter column] can parse PFAS. Their nonstick cookware review, while still imperfect, went way more in depth into the science behind different compounds and their risks.
PFAS [per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances] are widely used, long lasting chemicals, components of which break down very slowly over time.
nobody's buying the repellent poison we were selling to people in their food products anymore :porky-scared:
quick, lets find a way to wrap them around people's bodies instead :porky-happy:
Love to absorb forever chemicals all the time instead of occasionally treating a stain :amerikkka-clap:
Here's a little tip: If you spill club soda on your shirt, use a little club soda on the spill area to get it out.
Do they still work after they've been laundered a few dozen times?
