Women's All Seasons Pull-On Pants vs Men's Houdini Rock Climbing Pants: which is safer?
Columbia Women's All Seasons Pull-On Pants is our pick: better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Our pick
Columbia
Women's All Seasons Pull-On Pants
PFAS grade
Good 65/100
Overall grade
Poor 47/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 3
Material
Nylon/polyester blend knit, no stated water-repellent finish
Confidence
72%
PossibleFormaldehyde resins (anti-wrinkle, sizing)
ReportedMicroplastics shedding
PossibleAntimony in polyester
Patagonia
Men's Houdini Rock Climbing Pants
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 12/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 2
Material
Nylon with water-repellent coating finish
Confidence
45%
PossiblePFAS in water-repellent coating finish
Possiblewater-repellent coating degradation and reapplication temptation
Where these two actually differ
- We flag Formaldehyde resins (anti-wrinkle, sizing), Microplastics shedding and Antimony in polyester on the Columbia and not on the Patagonia.
- We flag PFAS in DWR finish and DWR coating degradation and reapplication temptation on the Patagonia and not on the Columbia.
- The Columbia is Nylon/polyester blend knit, no stated water-repellent finish where the Patagonia is Nylon with DWR finish, 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 Columbia is the one to buy.
- We are less certain about the Patagonia grade, at 45% confidence against 72%, because it discloses less.
Both products run through the same public rubric: 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 hiking pants: see the full ranking