PFAS15/ 100Bad
Overall0/ 100Bad
Glad Slow Cooker Liners

Glad · Slow Cooker Liners

Glad Slow Cooker Liners

Bad

Skip; coating opaque and PFAS risk unaddressed.

Verdict: SkipUndisclosed plastic composition, unaddressed PFAS risk, single-use convenience with no transparency from brand.

Glad's disposable plastic liners have undisclosed coating composition and no PFAS statement. Many food-contact liners use fluorinated compounds for grease resistance.

The safe swap

Slow Cooking Liners

If You Care

Slow Cooking Liners

100/100 safety

100Excellent

Same rubric that flunked this product. The swap earned Excellent.

Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.

Material

Plastic liner (coating composition undisclosed)

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

Non-stick, chemistry undisclosed

Advertised as non-stick but coating type is not explained.

60/ 100
♾️

Category baseline

PFAS exposure happens more often with clothing products.

70/ 100
♾️

No PFAS disclosure

The company has not publicly discussed PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
🍼

BPA & bisphenols

Slow cookers operate at sustained moderate heat (170-280°F) for 4-10 hours, conditions known to accelerate migration of plasticizers from undisclosed plastic formulations. Glad's refusal to specify resin type or additives prevents assessment of whether safer alternatives are used.

Source: FDA
20/ 100
🫧

Microplastics

Repeated heating and cooling cycles, combined with acidic foods (tomato-based stews, citrus), can degrade plastic liners over time. Degradation fragments may shed into food; the extent depends on resin quality and additives, which are not disclosed.

Source: EPA
70/ 100
💨

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or off-gassing

New plastic liners may release VOCs during initial heating, particularly if the product contains residual monomers or processing aids. No information is publicly available on outgassing testing or limits for this specific product.

70/ 100
♾️

PFAS

Slow cooker liners marketed for non-stick, grease-resistant, or easy-release properties are candidates for PFAS-based water and oil repellent treatments. Glad has not denied or confirmed PFAS use, leaving this risk unresolved.

Source: ATSDR
70/ 100

What’s reassuring

Food contact approval and regulatory compliance

Glad does not publish FDA food contact substance compliance documentation for these liners. In the US, food-contact plastics are regulated, but manufacturers are not required to disclose full formulations, creating a transparency gap rather than proof of safety.

95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

Glad Slow Cooker Liners are plastic-based, but the company does not publicly disclose the specific resin type, coating formulation, or additives used. This opacity is a red flag because slow cookers generate prolonged heat (typically 170-280°F) that can accelerate leaching of plasticizers, stabilizers, or residual monomers into food. Without material specification, there is no way to verify whether the product contains safer alternatives to legacy plasticizers or whether any PFAS-based grease-repellent treatments are present.

The brand's record and disclosure

Glad (SC Johnson company) has not published material safety data sheets or ingredient declarations for these liners, nor has the brand made public commitments to PFAS phase-out or third-party testing for this product line. SC Johnson has faced historical scrutiny over undisclosed chemicals in aerosols and cleaners, though the company has made some sustainability pledges in recent years. The silence on this specific product's composition is consistent with industry-wide opacity around single-use food-contact plastics.

How it compares in its category

Slow cooker liners as a category are convenience products with minimal regulatory scrutiny; many brands (including Glad, Reynolds, and store brands) do not disclose full material specs. Glass, stainless steel, or ceramic slow cooker inserts offer complete transparency and eliminate heat-induced leaching entirely. Reusable silicone liners exist but carry their own disclosure gaps; the trade-off for single-use liners is convenience at the cost of material mystery and landfill impact.

If you buy it

Do not exceed the manufacturer's recommended temperature (typically capped at 200-210°F for liners, below slow cooker maximum). Never use liners on high setting for extended periods, as sustained heat increases leaching risk. Replace liners if they show visible degradation, cloudiness, or sticking. Better practice: skip liners altogether and use a glass or stainless steel insert, or line with parchment paper (food-grade, unbleached) for easier cleanup without thermal or chemical risk.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 35% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Glad has made none

Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.

Safer alternatives in Slow Cooker Liners

Slow Cooking Liners

If You Care

Slow Cooking Liners

Unbleached parchment paper

PFAS Grade100Excellent
Overall Grade88Excellent

Thermal degradation and smoke at high heat

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Mold or bacterial growth if stored wet or damp

Limited concern

70
🍂

Adhesion failure and paper fragments in food

Limited concern

70

Lower-concern option; parchment with verified PFAS-free certification.

MADE SAFE Certified

Risky category by default

(2 pack) Reynolds Kitchens Slow Cooker Liners, Small (1-3 quart), 5 Count

Reynolds

(2 pack) Reynolds Kitchens Slow Cooker Liners, Small (1-3 quart), 5 Count

polyethylene/plastic liner

PFAS Grade65Good
Good

Lower PFAS concern; basic plastic unlikely to contain PFAS.

Risky category by default

Slow Cooker Liners - 4 Pack

Glad

Slow Cooker Liners - 4 Pack

Plastic (polyethylene or similar polymer liner)

PFAS Grade65Good
Good

Lower concern; uncoated plastic, but Glad doesn't confirm PFAS status.

Risky category by default

More slow cooker liners grades

How we score: every product runs through the same public 0–100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.