What Did NIST’s Latest Study Reveal About “Forever Chemicals” in Protective Equipment?
According to a government study published this month, NIST researchers discovered high levels of PFAS chemicals in firefighter gloves and wildland protective equipment. The investigation, led by NIST chemist Rick Davis, found that 25 of 32 tested equipment samples contained measurable levels of these potentially harmful substances. One wildland firefighting garment contained PFAS concentrations of 4,240 micrograms per kilogram, the highest level detected in the study. This latest research builds on previous NIST findings about PFAS in firefighter jackets and pants, raising new concerns about potential exposure through equipment that directly contacts the skin.
5 Key Points
- NIST analyzed 32 samples of firefighter gloves, hoods, and wildland gear produced between 2021-2023
- Researchers identified 19 distinct PFAS chemicals across the tested equipment
- Interior layers of gloves contained PFAS levels comparable to those in structural firefighting jackets
- Wildland firefighting gear showed the greatest variation in PFAS concentration
- The 2021 National Defense Authorization Act mandated the study
Why Are Firefighters Concerned About PFAS Exposure in Their Gear?
Firefighters depend on their protective equipment to shield them from intense heat, toxic smoke, and hazardous chemicals encountered on the job. However, the NIST study reveals a troubling paradox: the gear designed to protect firefighters may expose them to dangerous chemicals. PFAS compounds are added to firefighting gear specifically for their water-resistant properties, which help prevent steam burns and ensure thermal insulation remains effective. Rick Davis, NIST chemist and co-author of the study, explained: “Our latest study showed that PFAS are present not only in the jacket and pants worn by firefighters but also in many of the smaller protective garments.” This finding is particularly concerning because firefighters already exhibit higher PFAS blood levels than the general population, and their gear represents a potential source of ongoing exposure.
Who Are The Defendants In Firefighter PFAS Lawsuits?
Firefighters nationwide have filed lawsuits against numerous manufacturers and chemical companies over PFAS exposure from their protective gear. Major defendants in these legal actions include chemical giants 3M and DuPont, which produced many of the PFAS compounds used in firefighting equipment for decades. Other companies named in various lawsuits include: Chemours (a DuPont spinoff), Tyco Fire Products, Kidde-Fenwal, National Foam, Buckeye Fire Equipment, Chemguard, and equipment manufacturers like Lion Group, Globe Manufacturing Company, and W.L. Gore & Associates (maker of Gore-Tex).
Additional defendants include AGC Chemicals Americas, Amerex Corp., Archroma, Arkema, Carrier Global Corp., Dynax Corp., Fire Dex LLC, Fire Service Plus, Honeywell Safety Products USA, Johnson Controls, Mine Safety Appliance Co., PBI Performance Products, Perimeter Solutions LP, Stedfast USA, and Tencate Protective Fabrics USA (dba Southern Mills). These companies either manufactured PFAS chemicals or incorporated them into firefighting gear and foam. The lawsuits allege these companies knew or should have known about the health risks of PFAS but failed to warn firefighters or develop safer alternatives. As research like the NIST study continues to document PFAS prevalence in equipment, legal experts anticipate more firefighters will join existing litigation or file new cases against these manufacturers.
What Cancer and Health Risks Do Firefighters Face From PFAS Exposure?
Firefighters exposed to PFAS through their protective gear face a range of serious health conditions that have been linked to these “forever chemicals.” Medical studies have connected PFAS exposure to multiple severe health problems that firefighters are experiencing at higher rates than the general population.
Health conditions linked to PFAS exposure in firefighters include:
- Cancer: Multiple types, including testicular, kidney, prostate, and bladder cancer
- Liver damage: Including non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and liver cancer
- Thyroid disorders: Hypothyroidism and thyroid cancer
- Reproductive issues: Decreased fertility and pregnancy complications
- Immune system suppression: Reduced vaccine response and increased infection risk
- Elevated cholesterol: Leading to cardiovascular disease
- Ulcerative colitis: Chronic inflammatory bowel disease
Firefighters may qualify for compensation if they have been diagnosed with one of these conditions after prolonged occupational exposure to PFAS-containing gear. To determine eligibility, firefighters should document their:
- Length of service and types of gear used
- Diagnosed conditions linked to PFAS exposure
- Blood tests showing elevated PFAS levels (if available)
- History of using PFAS-containing firefighting foam or equipment
Legal claims against manufacturers are strengthening as scientific evidence continues to mount. Firefighters diagnosed with these conditions should consult with attorneys specializing in PFAS litigation to evaluate their specific case and potential compensation options.
How Did NIST Researchers Measure PFAS in Firefighter Equipment?
The research team at NIST employed meticulous methodology to assess PFAS levels in firefighting gear. They analyzed 32 textile samples from garments produced between 2021 and 2023, including four types of gloves, eight types of hoods, and nine types of wildland firefighting gear from various manufacturers. To measure PFAS concentrations accurately, researchers extracted the chemicals using a specialized solvent and tested for 55 different PFAS compounds. The results revealed that 25 out of the 32 samples contained measurable levels of PFAS, with 19 distinct PFAS chemicals identified across all samples. The analysis showed significant variation in PFAS concentrations, with wildland gear demonstrating the greatest disparity. While most samples contained relatively low levels, one wildland garment exhibited a concentration of 4,240 micrograms per kilogram, the highest detected in the study. Notably, hoods had the lowest levels of PFAS, often falling below detectable thresholds. Still, the interior layers of gloves contained PFAS concentrations comparable to those found in structural firefighting jackets and pants analyzed in earlier studies.
Why Do Manufacturers Still Use PFAS in Firefighting Gear?
The continued use of PFAS in firefighting gear stems from its unparalleled performance in critical safety applications. The water-repellent properties of these chemicals are crucial for maintaining the protective qualities of the gear under extreme conditions. When protective clothing remains dry, it significantly reduces the risk of heat transfer and burn injuries compared to wet gear. Davis emphasized this point with a relatable analogy: “A dry potholder will let you safely pull a hot dish out of an oven. But that same dish can give you a third-degree burn in just one second if the potholder is wet.” This dramatic difference in protection illustrates why manufacturers have been reluctant to abandon PFAS despite health concerns. The challenge for gear manufacturers lies in developing alternatives that provide equivalent protection without the associated health risks. Until such alternatives become widely available and proven effective, fire departments and firefighters face a difficult balance between immediate physical protection and long-term health considerations. This tension underscores the need for accelerated research into PFAS-free materials that can meet the rigorous performance standards required for firefighting applications.
What’s Next for PFAS Research in Firefighter Safety?
NIST’s study provides a foundation for future research aimed at reducing PFAS exposure without compromising the safety features of firefighting gear. To build on this work, researchers plan to examine how wear and tear might influence PFAS release from protective equipment. This will involve subjecting samples to simulated use conditions and assessing any changes in chemical concentrations over time. Such studies could guide the development of safer materials and manufacturing processes, potentially leading to a new generation of PFAS-free or reduced-PFAS protective gear. Additionally, the data from NIST’s study will inform toxicologists, epidemiologists, and other health experts who assess the risks associated with PFAS exposure in occupational settings. Rick Davis, who leads the Fire Research Division at NIST and manages the Fire Risk Reduction in Buildings program, emphasized that providing unbiased, trusted data using rigorous methods is central to helping decision-makers address this complex issue. The findings will help policymakers and fire departments make informed decisions about adopting new standards and alternative materials that better protect firefighter health without sacrificing performance.
FAQ
Q: What are PFAS, and why are they used in firefighter gear?
A: PFAS (per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances) are synthetic chemicals used in firefighter gear for their water and stain-resistant properties. They consist of a polar functional group attached to a heavily fluorinated carbon chain. Manufacturers add them to gear to enhance water repellency, which is crucial for preventing steam burns and maintaining thermal insulation under extreme conditions.
Q: How does PFAS in firefighter gear potentially affect health?
A: PFAS have been linked to various health issues, including cancer (testicular, kidney, liver), thyroid disorders, immune system suppression, elevated cholesterol, and ulcerative colitis. The chemicals can be absorbed through skin contact or inhalation, and they accumulate in the body over time because they resist breakdown (hence the term “forever chemicals”).
Q: Which parts of firefighter gear contained the highest PFAS levels?
A: According to the NIST study, wildland firefighting gear showed the greatest variation in PFAS levels, with one sample containing the highest concentration at 4,240 micrograms per kilogram. The interior layers of gloves also contained significant PFAS concentrations comparable to levels found in structural firefighting jackets and pants. Hoods generally had the lowest levels.
Q: Which companies are being sued in firefighter PFAS lawsuits?
A: Major defendants include chemical manufacturers 3M and DuPont, along with Chemours, Tyco Fire Products, National Foam, Buckeye Fire Equipment, Chemguard, and equipment makers such as Lion Group, Globe Manufacturing Company, and W.L. Gore & Associates. Lawsuits allege these companies knew about PFAS health risks but failed to warn firefighters or develop safer alternatives.
Q: How can firefighters reduce their exposure to PFAS from gear?
A: While complete avoidance is difficult given current gear construction, firefighters can minimize exposure by thoroughly washing hands after handling gear, changing out of gear promptly after incidents, storing gear away from living and sleeping areas, and following manufacturer guidelines for cleaning. Departments may also consider purchasing PFAS-free alternatives as they become available.
Q: How do I know if my firefighter gear contains PFAS?
A: Most modern firefighting gear (especially water-resistant components) likely contains some level of PFAS. Manufacturers don’t typically list PFAS on labels, but gear with “water-resistant,” “stain-resistant,” or “durable water repellent (DWR)” features probably contains these chemicals. The most reliable way to confirm would be through testing, though this isn’t practical for individual firefighters.
Q: What is being done to develop PFAS-free alternatives for firefighter gear?
A: Researchers and manufacturers are developing PFAS-free alternatives that meet rigorous safety standards. Some companies are exploring silicone-based coatings, hydrocarbon polymers, and other technologies that can provide water resistance without PFAS. The transition is challenging because new materials must provide equivalent protection against heat, flames, and water without introducing new health risks.
Q: How can firefighters determine if they qualify for compensation related to PFAS exposure?
A: Firefighters may qualify for compensation if they have a documented PFAS-related diagnosis (such as kidney cancer or thyroid disease), evidence of occupational exposure to PFAS-containing gear or foam, and can establish a reasonable connection between the exposure and their illness. They should document their service history, gear usage, and medical conditions, then consult with attorneys specializing in PFAS litigation who can evaluate the strength of their potential case.
Citations
Hoey, Iain (2025, February 17). Breaking down synthetic barriers: Evaluating PFAS levels in firefighter gear and what it means for occupational health. Fire and Safety Journal Americas. https://fireandsafetyjournalamericas.com/breaking-down-synthetic-barriers-evaluating-pfas-levels-in-firefighter-gear-and-what-it-means-for-occupational-health
Medeiros, Dan (2022, February 19). Fall River firefighter suing chemical companies, saying PFAS in gear gave him cancer. The Herald News. https://www.heraldnews.com/story/news/fire/2022/02/19/fall-river-firefighter-files-lawsuit-against-pfas-chemical-companies/6834986001/
Medeiros, Dan (2024, October 9). Fall River firefighter wins years-long fight against PFAS in gear. What does he do now? The Herald News. https://www.heraldnews.com/story/news/2024/10/09/ban-of-pfas-forever-chemicals-in-firefighter-gear-activists-next-step-fall-river-ma/75557353007/
