Products are selected by our editors, we may earn commission from links on this page.
Lululemon is facing a Texas investigation into whether its activewear contains PFAS, a group of synthetic chemicals often called “forever chemicals” because they persist in the environment for a very long time. The Texas attorney general issued a Civil Investigative Demand to the company in April 2026, citing consumer concerns and emerging research, while Lululemon says it does not use PFAS in its products today. The investigation does not establish that Lululemon clothing is harmful or that consumers have been exposed to dangerous levels, but it has raised broader questions about chemicals used in workout clothing.
What Exactly Are PFAS?
PFAS stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, a large family of human-made chemicals that have been used in products designed to resist water, oil, stains and heat. Some PFAS have been associated in research with health concerns including certain cancers, immune-system effects, reproductive problems and developmental effects, although the risks vary substantially among individual PFAS compounds and exposure levels. Their extreme persistence means they can remain in the environment for years or decades rather than breaking down quickly.
Why Would Workout Clothes Contain Them?
PFAS have historically been used in clothing to provide water and stain resistance, particularly in garments designed to repel moisture. Activewear is also frequently made from synthetic materials such as polyester, nylon, elastane and other performance fibers that are manufactured through complex chemical processes. Experts quoted by Women’s Health note that contamination could theoretically occur during manufacturing even when a company is trying to eliminate intentionally added PFAS.
Lululemon Says It No Longer Uses PFAS
Lululemon says it does not use PFAS in its products today and says it phased out the chemicals more than two years before the Texas investigation. The company says it maintains a Restricted Substances List, works with suppliers and requires vendors to conduct regular testing for restricted substances, including PFAS, through third-party agencies. Lululemon also says its product-safety program is designed to prevent the unintentional reintroduction of PFAS through its supply chain.
Why the Investigation Is Happening Anyway
The Texas attorney general’s office says its investigation will examine whether Lululemon’s apparel contains PFAS and whether the company has accurately represented the safety and quality of its products. The Civil Investigative Demand gives investigators a way to seek information about the company’s restricted-substance standards, testing procedures and supply-chain practices. At this stage, the investigation is an inquiry into potential violations and does not itself prove that Lululemon violated Texas law or that its products contain harmful PFAS.
Manufacturing Makes Complete Elimination Difficult to Verify
Even when a brand prohibits a chemical, its global manufacturing network can make contamination more difficult to rule out completely. Lululemon says its suppliers undergo testing, but toxicology experts quoted by Women’s Health explained that facilities producing different garments can operate near one another and potentially create opportunities for unintended chemical contamination. That concern is not unique to Lululemon and could apply to other mass-produced activewear brands using complex international supply chains.
Should You Stop Wearing Your Leggings?
Experts cited by Women’s Health say consumers do not need to panic or immediately throw away their workout clothes because the skin is generally a less significant route of PFAS exposure than eating or drinking contaminated substances. However, sweating and increased skin temperature during exercise could potentially increase contact with chemicals on clothing, so people who are especially concerned can consider reducing their use of questionable garments rather than treating every piece of activewear as dangerous. There is currently no evidence from the investigation showing that ordinary Lululemon customers are being harmed by wearing the company’s clothes.
Older Clothing May Raise Different Questions
Lululemon says it phased out PFAS more than two years ago, but older garments can remain in consumers’ closets, resale markets and supply chains long after a manufacturing change. Experts note that the presence of older products does not mean they are automatically hazardous, but it can make it difficult for consumers to know exactly when a particular garment was manufactured or whether it was treated with PFAS. The same uncertainty can apply to older activewear from other brands that have changed their chemical policies over time.
There Are Other Ways to Reduce PFAS Exposure
Experts say consumers who want to reduce their overall PFAS exposure may get more meaningful benefits by looking beyond workout clothes because these chemicals can also be found in drinking water, food packaging, nonstick cookware and some cosmetics. One U.S. Geological Survey study cited by Women’s Health estimated that at least 45% of the nation’s tap-water samples contained detectable PFAS, although levels vary by location and detection does not necessarily mean the water exceeds health standards. Simple steps such as checking local water-quality information, replacing damaged nonstick cookware and choosing natural-fiber clothing when practical can reduce some potential sources of exposure.
The Investigation Raises a Bigger Activewear Question
The Lululemon investigation highlights how difficult it can be for consumers to determine exactly which chemicals are present in complex, globally manufactured clothing, even when companies maintain restrictions and testing programs. It is important to distinguish the Texas investigation from a finding that Lululemon’s current products are unsafe, because no such conclusion has been established by the probe so far. For consumers, the issue is less about abandoning workout clothes altogether and more about understanding chemical exposure, checking manufacturers’ current policies and recognizing that “PFAS-free” claims depend on testing, supply-chain controls and the distinction between intentionally added chemicals and unintended contamination.