Firefighter Gear Contains Harmful Flame Retardants, New Study Finds
A new study published on December 16 in Environmental Science & Technology Letters reveals that some firefighter protective gear contains brominated flame retardants, raising concerns about potential health risks for first responders. The research marks the first U.S. investigation to formally document the use of these chemicals in turnout gear, and its findings could significantly impact how fire departments approach equipment procurement and replacement.
For structural firefighters – those responding to incidents in buildings – turnout gear is a critical line of defense. This gear consists of three layers: a flame-resistant outer shell, a moisture barrier to block germs while allowing airflow, and an inner lining for temperature regulation. Manufacturers apply chemical treatments to meet stringent safety standards set by the National Fire Protection Association, but the composition of these treatments is increasingly under scrutiny.
The Shadow of PFAS and the Search for Alternatives
Firefighters have long expressed concern over the presence of PFAS – per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances – in their gear. These chemicals, used for oil and water repellency and flame resistance, have been linked to various health problems, including certain cancers, in both human and animal studies. While a direct connection between PFAS-treated gear and firefighter health outcomes remains unproven, manufacturers are phasing out these chemicals, with multiple states enacting bans on their purchase beginning in 2027.
As PFAS are eliminated, attention has shifted to the substances being used as replacements. A key challenge is the lack of transparency regarding the chemical ingredients used in these treatments. “There was a rumor that one of the turnout gear manufacturers might be using brominated flame retardants in the non-PFAS treated textiles,” explained Heather Stapleton, Ronie-Richele Garcia-Johnson Distinguished Professor at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment. “Because some brominated flame retardants have known toxicity, I requested a sample of the gear in question to test.”
Why Brominated Flame Retardants Are Cause for Concern
Brominated flame retardants are added to numerous products, including fabrics, to reduce flammability. However, exposure to these chemicals has been associated with a range of health issues, including cancer, thyroid disease, and neurological developmental problems.
Stapleton’s initial testing confirmed the presence of brominated flame retardants in the sampled gear, prompting a broader study in collaboration with researchers at North Carolina State University’s Wilson College of Textiles and the International Association of Fire Fighters. The goal was to determine the prevalence of both PFAS and brominated flame retardants in turnout gear manufactured across different time periods.
Uncovering Chemical Layers
The research team analyzed nine sets of used turnout gear from 2013-2020, alongside three sets produced in 2024 marketed as PFAS-free. Using advanced analytical techniques, they tested each layer of the gear for both types of chemicals, measuring both total chemical content and “extractable” levels – the portion that could potentially leach out during use through skin absorption or inhalation.
“We wanted to know which chemicals were intentionally applied during manufacturing, and we wanted to know what was likely to leach out over time, which could raise the risk of exposure through skin absorption or inhalation,” Stapleton said.
As anticipated, PFAS were detected in all gear manufactured between 2013 and 2020. Conversely, gear from 2024 showed only low or undetectable levels of extractable PFAS, confirming manufacturer claims. Any trace amounts detected were likely from environmental contamination during use, the authors noted. Critically, every set of turnout gear tested also contained brominated flame retardants, with extractable levels generally exceeding those of PFAS.
PFAS-Free Gear Shows Higher Levels of Brominated Compounds
The highest concentrations of extractable brominated flame retardants were found in gear marketed as PFAS-free, particularly within the moisture barrier. This suggests manufacturers intentionally added these compounds to meet flammability requirements, likely as a substitute for PFAS previously used in that layer.
Among the identified chemicals, decabromodiphenyl ethane (DBDPE) was present at the highest extractable levels. While U.S. studies on the health effects of DBDPE exposure are lacking, researchers pointed to a 2019 study of workers at a chemical manufacturing plant in China, which linked DBDPE exposure to altered thyroid hormone levels and signs of thyroid disease.
“I was really surprised that the manufacturers used DBDPE in turnout gear,” Stapleton said. “It has similar properties as a toxic chemical called decaBDE that has been largely phased out globally, raising questions about its safety.”
A Complex Picture of Exposure
For gear produced between 2013 and 2020, the outer shell exhibited higher extractable levels of brominated flame retardants, likely due to accumulation from smoke and soot during fires. “When building materials burn, they can release brominated flame retardants into the air that stick to gear and don’t wash out very well,” Stapleton explained.
However, the presence of these chemicals in the inner layers indicates that some manufacturers had been incorporating brominated flame retardants into turnout gear treatments for years, even before the PFAS phase-out began. .
Balancing Cost and Safety
While the study does not yet quantify firefighters’ exposure levels or long-term health effects, it provides crucial information for fire departments evaluating protective gear. “Turnout gear is really expensive – one set costs thousands of dollars – and firefighters often use these garments for many years,” said coauthor R. Bryan Ormond, an associate professor at the Wilson College of Textiles and director of NC State’s Milliken Textile Protection and Comfort Center. “Fire departments must consider both the financial and personal safety costs of keeping or replacing gear.”
Stapleton noted that some manufacturers now offer gear free of both PFAS and brominated flame retardants. She urged fire departments to demand greater transparency regarding the chemical treatments used in protective equipment. “We know firefighters receive higher exposure to multiple chemicals from all the hazards they face during their duty, and they shouldn’t have to worry about receiving additional chemical exposures from their gear,” Stapleton said. “These first responders are a critically important component of our public safety and deserve to be respected and protected.”
This project was supported by the North Carolina Collaboratory at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, with funding appropriated by the North Carolina General Assembly. The Falk Exposomics Laboratory also provided support.
