Women's Adrenaline GTS 24 Weatherized vs Chuck Taylor All Star Cx Exp2 4.5 Men A07199C: which is safer?
Converse Chuck Taylor All Star Cx Exp2 4.5 Men A07199C is our pick, better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Brooks
Women's Adrenaline GTS 24 Weatherized
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 6/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 2
Material
Mesh, synthetic textile upper with water-repellent coating-treated weatherized coating
Confidence
45%
ReportedPFAS in water-repellent coating weatherizing treatment
PossibleMicrofiber shedding during wear and wash
Our pick
Converse
Chuck Taylor All Star Cx Exp2 4.5 Men A07199C
PFAS grade
Good 65/100
Overall grade
Good 57/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 2
Material
Canvas upper, rubber sole
Confidence
72%
PossibleAzo dyes in canvas
PossibleFormaldehyde resin finishing on canvas
Where these two actually differ
- We flag PFAS in DWR weatherizing treatment and Microfiber shedding during wear and wash on the Brooks and not on the Converse.
- We flag Azo dyes in canvas and Formaldehyde resin finishing on canvas on the Converse and not on the Brooks.
- The Brooks is Mesh, synthetic textile upper with DWR-treated weatherized coating where the Converse is Canvas upper, rubber sole, which is most of the difference in these two grades.
- The gap is 45 points, wide enough that this is not a close call, and the Converse is the one to buy.
- We are less certain about the Brooks grade, at 45% confidence against 72%, because it discloses less.
Both products run through the same public rubric, which covers materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls, plus a beyond-PFAS hazard analysis. Grades are model-based estimates, not lab tests. How grades work →
More running & athletic shoes, see the full ranking