Men's Go-Dry Cool Performance Boxer- Brief Underwear 3-Pack vs Women's Quarter Crew Socks (6 Pairs): which is safer?
PUMA Women's Quarter Crew Socks (6 Pairs) is our pick, better on PFAS and on the overall hazard picture.
Old Navy
Men's Go-Dry Cool Performance Boxer- Brief Underwear 3-Pack
PFAS grade
Bad 20/100
Overall grade
Bad 0/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 4
Material
Nylon/polyester blend with moisture-wicking treatment
Confidence
45%
PossibleFormaldehyde resins in fabric finishes
PossibleAntimony in polyester
LikelyMicrofiber shedding during laundering
Our pick
Puma
Women's Quarter Crew Socks (6 Pairs)
PFAS grade
Good 65/100
Overall grade
Poor 47/100
Verdict
Skip
Hazard flags
⚑ 3
Material
Cotton/polyester blend socks, no waterproofing
Confidence
82%
PossibleAzo dyes
PossibleFormaldehyde resins (finishing agents)
ReportedMicroplastic shedding
Where these two actually differ
- We flag Formaldehyde resins in fabric finishes, Antimony in polyester, Microfiber shedding during laundering and Skin sensitization from undisclosed chemical treatments on the Old Navy and not on the Puma.
- We flag Azo dyes, Formaldehyde resins (finishing agents) and Microplastic shedding on the Puma and not on the Old Navy.
- The Old Navy is Nylon/polyester blend with moisture-wicking treatment where the Puma is Cotton/polyester blend socks, no waterproofing, 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 Puma is the one to buy.
- We are less certain about the Old Navy grade, at 45% confidence against 82%, 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 sports performance undergarments, see the full ranking