PFAS, more commonly referred to as “forever chemicals,” are everywhere. Studies have detected the harmful compounds in a plethora of everyday objects, from popular nonstick pans to waterproof clothing and just about anything in between. Now, a new class action lawsuit alleges some of those harmful chemicals are present in several Apple Watch wristbands at worrying levels. The suit was filed in the Northern District of California this week and first spotted by The Register. If true, the complaint only further confirms just how difficult it is to avoid contact with PFAS in everyday life.
The suit specifically sets its sights on three Apple Watch band models: The sports band that comes with most devices, the “Ocean Band,” and the Nike-branded sports band. Each of these, the suit alleges, includes harmful levels of PFAS that are used to make the bands resistant to sweat and skin oil. Lawyers cite a recent study which determined several smartwatch bands had median levels of detectable perfluorohexanoic acid, (773 ng/g,) a PFAS, in much higher levels than found in previous analyzing cosmetics (199 ng/g). It’s possible Perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA) may pass through skin at different levels with wearables than much finer cosmetics. Scientists also have not established clear guidelines on safe levels of PFHxA exposure, though federal agencies do regulate the amount of the compound that can be detected in drinking water. The suit claims Apple could have achieved similar performance with alternative compounds like silicone, but instead opted for PFAS to drive down cost. These choices were made, the suit claims, despite widespread public knowledge of the potential health risks associated with PFAS.
“[Apple] advertises these Products as designed to support and further human health and wellness, environmentally sustainable, and suitable for everyday use and wear,” the suit alleges. “However, in truth, they contain excessive levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (“PFAS”), which are toxic to human health and the environment.”
Apple did not immediately respond to Popular Science’s request for comment.
What are forever chemicals?
So-called ‘forever chemical’ refers to a collection of more than 9,000 Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances called PFAS. The substances trace their origin to 1938 with the creation of Teflon. Since then, variations have been used in everything from fertilizer and stain-resistant fabrics to popcorn bags. PFAS are valuable because they bond carbon and fluorine atoms in a way that makes them uniquely resistant to heat, water, and grease. They are also essentially indestructible. That means trace amounts of these chemicals build up in the environment and can take more than a thousand years to fully break down.
But PFAS aren’t just bad for the environment. Small portions of these chemicals seep into soil and drinking water which then inevitably makes its way into human bodies. Their presence has become pervasive. Studies have shown a trace of PFAS detectable in 97% of humans. Studies have also linked PFAS exposure to various health risks including liver and immune system damage, impaired fertility, and low birth weight or birth defects in babies. Other research has associated PFAS with increased rates of prostate, kidney, and testicular cancers.
Suit claims Apple engaged in fraud
The lawsuit bases its allegations primarily on a study published in December in the journal Environmental Science and Technology Letters. There, researchers from the University of Notre Dame U conducted an analysis of 22 smartwatch bands from multiple brands and various price points. The team tested samples using particle-induced gamma-ray emission ion beam analysis and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry to detect signs of PFAS. Nine of 22 samples were reportedly found to have “elevated levels” of a PFAS called perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA). Though the study did not specify which brand of strap were implicated, the findings were most prevalent in “higher-priced” watchbands over $15.
“The most remarkable thing we found in this study was the very high concentrations of just one PFAS—there were some samples above 1,000 parts per billion of PFHxA, which is much higher than most PFAS we have seen in consumer products,” study co-author and University of Notre Dame professor Graham Peaslee said in a statement.
Peaslee has previously found PFAS in other consumer products like cosmetics, fast food wrappers, contact lenses, and dental floss, among others. Researchers say chemicals in these products can migrate from the material into humans through “multiple paths of exposure” including “inhalation, ingestion, and dermal absorption.”
In the Apple case, lawyers representing the plaintiffs allege Apple should have known not to include harmful PFAS and taken steps to remove them from their products. The suit suggests possible health risks associated with PFAS might be more pronounced in this case because consumers are encouraged to keep wearable devices on throughout the day, often for long stretches of time. The complaints allege Apple engaged in fraud, fraudulent inducement, concealment, misrepresentation, negligence, and unjust enrichment. It seeks an injunction to halt the sale of the product as well as monetary penalties.
PFAS use isn’t unique to Apple. Companies across various industries have made efforts to remove PFAS from their products in recent years. Clothing brands like L.L. Bean and Columbia Sportswear have reportedly spent years testing for PFAS and have announced new lines of products free of the substances. Others like The North Face and Vans have pledged to totally eliminate PFAS by 2026. Several states, like New York and California, have enacted laws banning the sale of new clothes found to include so-called forever chemicals. Though there are fewer public examples of consumer tech companies explicitly removing PFAS from wearable products, the lawsuit points to the Google Pixel Watch and FitBit Sport bands, made respectively of recycled yarn and silicone, as examples of competitors using non-PFAS materials.
[ Related: PFAS are toxic and they’re everywhere. Here’s how to stay away from them. ]
Even if the allegations made in the Apple lawsuit are true, the unfortunate reality is simply removing a smartwatch won’t eliminate your risk of interacting with a PFAS. In fact, the most common source of PFAS exposure isn’t through tech or clothes; it’s through the water we drink. A recent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) analysis detected PFAS in almost half of the nation’s tap water. Typical faucet filtration devices aren’t always effective at removing these chemicals. More sophisticated, under-the-sink reverse osmosis machines are more effective, but studies show they also wont catch all forever chemicals. Luckily, newly enacted EPA rules, at least for now, require local utilities to have PFAS in drinking water down to near-zero levels. But completely avoiding PFAS in a world inundated with cheap, disposable goods is still much easier said than done.
