Indulgent yet responsible fabrics

Polyester and our health

O Ecotextiles (and Two Sisters Ecotextiles)

Polyester is a very popular fabric choice – it is, in fact, the most popular of all the synthetics.  Because it can often have a synthetic feel, it is often blended with natural fibers, to get the benefit of natural fibers which breathe and feel good next to the skin, coupled with polyester’s durability, water repellence and wrinkle resistance.  Most sheets sold in the United States, for instance, are cotton/poly blends.

It is also used in the manufacture of all kinds of clothing and sportswear – not to mention diapers, sanitary pads, mattresses, upholstery, curtains  and carpet. If you look at labels, you might be surprised just how many products in your life are made from polyester fibers.

So what is this polyester that we live intimately with each day?

At this point, I think it would be good to have a basic primer on polyester production, and I’ve unabashedly lifted a great discussion from Marc Pehkonen and Lori Taylor, writing in their website diaperpin.com:

Basic polymer chemistry isn’t too complicated, but for most people the manufacture of the plastics that surround us is a mystery, which no doubt suits the chemical producers very well. A working knowledge of the principles involved here will
make us more informed users.

Polyester is only one compound in a class of petroleum-derived substances known as polymers. Thus, polyester (in common with most polymers) begins its life in our time as crude oil. Crude oil is a cocktail of components that can be separated by industrial distillation. Gasoline is one of these components, and the precursors of polymers such as polyethylene are also present.

Polymers are made by chemically reacting a lot of little molecules together to make one long molecule, like a string of beads. The little molecules are called monomers and the long molecules are called polymers.

Like this:

O + O + O + . . . makes OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Depending on which polymer is required, different monomers are chosen. Ethylene, the monomer for polyethylene, is obtained directly from the distillation of crude oil; other monomers have to be synthesized from more complex petroleum derivatives, and the path to these monomers can be several steps long. The path for polyester, which is made by reacting ethylene glycol and terephthalic acid, is shown below. Key properties of the intermediate materials are also shown.

The polymers themselves are theoretically quite unreactive and therefore not particularly harmful, but this is most certainly not true of the monomers. Chemical companies usually make a big deal of how stable and unreactive the polymers are, but that’s not what we should be interested in. We need to ask, what about the monomers? How unreactive are they?

We need to ask these questions because a small proportion of the monomer will never be converted into polymer. It just gets trapped in between the polymer chains, like peas in spaghetti. Over time this unreacted monomer can escape, either by off-gassing into the atmosphere if the initial monomers were volatile, or by dissolving into water if the monomers were soluble. Because these monomers are so toxic, it takes very small quantities to be harmful to humans, so it is important to know about the monomers before you put the polymers next to your skin or in your home. Since your skin is usually moist,
any water-borne monomers will find an easy route into your body.

Polyester is the terminal product in a chain of very reactive and toxic precursors. Most are carcinogens; all are poisonous. And even if none of these chemicals remain entrapped in the final polyester structure (which they most likely do), the manufacturing process requires workers and our environment to be exposed to some or all of the chemicals shown in the flowchart above. There is no doubt that the manufacture of polyester is an environmental and public health burden
that we would be better off without.

What does all of that mean in terms of our health?  Just by looking at one type of cancer, we can see how our lives are being changed by plastic use:

  • The connection between plastic and breast cancer was first discovered in 1987 at Tufts Medical School in Boston by
    research scientists Dr. Ana Soto and Dr. Carlos Sonnenschein. In the midst of their experiments on cancer cell growth, endocrine-disrupting chemicals leached from plastic test tubes into the researcher’s laboratory experiment, causing a rampant proliferation of breast cancer cells. Their findings were published in Environmental Health Perspectives (1991)[1].
  • Spanish researchers, Fatima and Nicolas Olea, tested metal food cans that were lined with plastic. The cans were also found to be leaching hormone disrupting chemicals in 50% of the cans tested. The levels of contamination were twenty-seven times more than the amount a Stanford team reported was enough to make breast cancer cells proliferate. Reportedly, 85% of the food cans in the United States are lined with plastic. The Oleas reported their findings in Environmental Health Perspectives (1995).[2]
  • Commentary published in Environmental Health Perspectives in April 2010 suggested that PET might yield endocrine disruptors under conditions of common use and recommended research on this topic. [3]

These studies support claims that plastics are simply not good for us – prior to 1940, breast cancer was relatively rare; today it affects 1 in 11 women.  We’re not saying that plastics alone are responsible for this increase, but to think that they don’t contribute to it is, we think, willful denial.  After all, gravity existed before Newton’s father planted the apple tree and the world was just as round before Columbus was born.

Polyester fabric is soft, smooth, supple – yet still a plastic.  It contributes to our body burden in ways that we are just beginning to understand.  And because polyester is highly flammable, it is often treated with a flame retardant, increasing the toxic load.  So if you think that you’ve lived this long being exposed to these chemicals and haven’t had a problem, remember that the human body can only withstand so much toxic load – and that the endocrine disrupting chemicals which don’t seem to bother you may be affecting generations to come.

Agin, this is a blog which is supposed to cover topics in textiles:   polyester is by far the most popular fabric in the United States.  Even if made of recycled yarns, the toxic monomers are still the building blocks of the fibers.  And no mention is ever made of the processing chemicals used to dye and finish the polyester fabrics, which as we know contain some of the chemicals which are most damaging to human health.

Why does a specifier make the decision to use polyester – or another synthetic –  when all the data points to this fiber as being detrimental to the health and well being of the occupants?  Why is there not a concerted cry for safe processing chemicals at the very least?

[2] http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/zwa-reports-are-plastic-products-causing-breast-cancer-epidemic-76957597.html

[3]  Sax, Leonard, “Polyethylene Terephthalate may Yield Endocrine Disruptors”,
Environmental Health Perspectives, April 2010, 118 (4): 445-448

23 thoughts on “Polyester and our health

  1. eremophila says:

    As usual, a great article, thank you. The diagram simplifies the chemistry brilliantly – surely sufficient to convert the skeptics. Once again, oil is problem, or rather, the greed of those using it instead of less dangerous products.

    1. Vladimir says:

      Great article but contains faulse reference (number 2) to the source that has nothing common to the subject

      1. Thanks so much for catching that! I’ve updated with correct reference.

  2. Thanks for sharing your site because Mesothelioma is a serious disease and is the most aggressive because it attacks the internal lining of the lungs.Because california has more asbestos related deaths than any other state.California’s courts are generally reasonable about an attorney’s request for rapid proceedings on behalf of a gravely ill client.

  3. Erik Rozen says:

    Very interesting article, especialy the monomer/ polymer explanation.. Working with recycled PET a lot, but it definitely made us thinking. A step to the side: how does the above translate to the use of bio-based yarns, eg PLA? Does this have the same chemical limitations compared to eg cotton?

    1. We did a series of blog posts on bio polymers, one pertaining especially to PLA (“Biopolymers and polylactic acid (PLA) – or rather Ingeo): https://oecotextiles.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/biopolymers-and-polylactic-acid-pla-or-rather-ingeo/; also see the series of posts on general topic of biopolymers and the new bioeconomy – you can search on the right hand side of the page for “biopolymers”. They ran in April and May of 2012.

      1. Erik Rozen says:

        Totally missed that one, thanks a lot for the in-depth information on your Blog and keep up the good work!

  4. Lalita says:

    My son is wearing school pants that are 100% cotton but treated for stains and wrinkles and a poli cotton blend that is not treated. Both are not ideal but which is the least of the 2 evils?Thank you Lalita

    1. Hi Lalita I’m not qualified to split those kinds of hairs – but sure sounds like a toss up to me.

  5. Finally, I have found a very informative source, going deep into the issues! thank you. I am wondering about used polyester clothing…I’m wondering about the off-gasing life of the monomers…if one is on a budget, and conscious of the garment/fabric industry and all it’s evils, then used clothing seems to be a good option. But I”d like to know more about the life-span of the “fiber” and the better or worseness, if you will, of a piece of clothing that has already “off-gased” a signifcant amount of monomers. Lesser of many evils? thank you!

    1. Hi Azula: The real chemical of concern in polyester is antimony, and it’s pretty much locked in the polymer. It is not volatile, so no off gassing. But the problem with using synthetic fibers of any kind is that they don’t readily decompose, sitting in landfills for a very long time and leaching the chemicals of concern into our soil and groundwater. But I think reusing an existing garment/fabric is a good idea since it’s destined for the landfill either way – and you’re doing your part to postpone that eventuality!

  6. Anne says:

    Hello O Ecotextiles, first of all, thank you for this brilliant and clearly written article! I am hoping to create cushions and would like to offer them with a washable filling (I have a house dust mite allergy so am mindful of people like myself needing to wash the insert). I have come across one (!) company doing recycled PET fillings, in Australia. I would have thought this is the best practice solution. Can you advise on any alternatives that are washable, eco-friendly in production and non-toxic in use? Thank you!

    1. We have heard that kapok might fit the bill – sourced from the kapok tree (Ceiba Pentandra), it’s a batting that has a silky feel. From what we hear, nothing is done to it, so it’s entirely non-toxic and also hypo-allergenic It can be washed. These washing instructions are from Nest Bedding: WASHING KAPOK PILLOW – Kapok was originally used in life jacket as it is water resistant so when you wash in other than a front loader, you need to fill washer and submerge. HEAVY FILL NOT RECOMMEND FOR MACHINE WASHING.
      DRY KAPOK PILLOW – Some washers cause the kapok to clump – before putting in dryer, through the cover, pull the kapok apart to allow the heat from the dryer to get to all the kapok. After about 30 minutes, do this same process again if there are any clumps. HEAVY FILL NOT RECOMMENDED FOR DRYER.

  7. Paula says:

    Hi ladies,
    Thank you for your wonderful and informative blog. Do you have any suggestions on materials to use for blackout Roman blinds? Polyester is just so cheap (and at least it’s not coated with PVC). I understand we bear the cost of plastics in other ways, though. Modern life is complicated!

    1. Hi Paula: Yes modern life is complicated and plastics are part of modern life, in fact we depend on plastic for so many things. It’s just that we’re overwhelmed by the quantity so it might be nice to limit our exposure! One suggestion we have is to interline your Roman Blinds with a black fabric (cotton or natural fiber, GOTS preferably).

  8. Paul says:

    Any comment on environmental impacts of marine microfibre plastic pollution from polyester? Combined with human health concerns this doesn’t look too good for polyester and recycled polyester textiles.

  9. I thought we had done a blog on that subject, but I couldn’t find it. Should revisit the topic soon – especially since this microfiber pollution is linked directly to fabrics.

  10. Leigh Anderson says:

    This article helps me understand why I can’t wear polyester, or nylon for that matter. As soon as I put on a polyester garment I begin to black out from heat sensation. Every summer I have problems looking for suitable clothes. I have felt a bit of a mess in creased linens and cottons at important events,but well and very alive! Just a week ago I tried on a dress in a shop , (a size larger than the previous one), handed to me by an assistant. I had a real panic to get out of it fast; a hot day in a hot changing room, I had to sit down to recover! People smile patiently and maybe think I exaggerate but I am finding a whole number of fellow sufferers too. Thank you for the information.

  11. April says:

    I noticed in this article you are very anti polyester, but on another article comments, you stated “There is, truly, little to fear from the polyester itself” Which seems a little contradictory to this post.

    1. You’re right – I’m no fan of polyester. Though the fibers themselves might pose little in the way of health risks (at this point in time, though not much research has been done to date and I’m sorry I didn’t explain the statement about polyester fibers themselves posing little risk), if those fibers were processed conventionally then they’d still be full of the chemicals that are used in textile processing which have been proven to be bad for our health. But the real reason I’m no fan of polyester is that it’s just another plastic, and we’re drowning in plastic pollution. The chemicals used to produce the polyester are some of the most toxic known, and just to get rid of the sludge from polyester production is a major headache. We use our dwindling fossil fuels to produce the stuff, and then the chemicals leach into our groundwater where it transitions to tuna and salmon and other fish that we then eat. As I said in an earlier blog post: Polyester is the terminal product in a chain of very reactive and toxic precursors. Most are carcinogens; all are poisonous. And even if none of these chemicals remain entrapped in the final polyester structure (jury’s out on this), the manufacturing process requires workers and our environment to be exposed to some or all of the chemicals. The production of the stuff is an environmental and public health burden. And what about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, or the fact that scientists are finding that the sand on beaches around the world is made up of plastic fibers from textiles. Polyester is just another plastic, it does not biodegrade, it poisons the food chain, and it affects the health of humans and wildlife.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: