Redwood Body Wash
Body wash presents lower PFAS concern. No known high-risk ingredients.
Harry's Redwood Body Wash is a rinse-off cosmetic with typical surfactant-based formulation. No reported PFAS-related content or third-party testing available.
We flunk more products than we pass. This one earned its grade. How we grade
Material
water-based surfactants, glycerin, natural extracts
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
You may also be interested in
Top-graded picks in the categories readers replace first, every one scored on the same rubric.
- polypropylene filter housing, carbon/sediment cartridge
- We found no PFAS statement from the brand
- Bacterial growth in spent cartridges
3 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
Aquasure
Premier Series 75 GPD Under Sink Reverse Osmosis Water Filtration System
- RO membrane, carbon filters, stainless steel housing
- We found no PFAS statement from the brand
- Bacterial and microbial growth in housing and filters
4 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
Avocado
Vegan Mattress
- organic cotton, natural latex, coconut coir, recycled steel coils
- The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified
- Heavy metals
2 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
What Redwood Body Wash is made of, ingredients and materials
Redwood Body Wash is a water-based surfactant system with glycerin as a humectant and natural plant extracts. The surfactants (likely sodium lauryl sulfate or milder alternatives) are the cleansing agents; glycerin is a common skin conditioning ingredient. This formulation type avoids reliance on heavy emulsifiers or synthetic binders, reducing exposure to undisclosed polymer additives and their breakdown byproducts during use or storage.
What’s concerning
Category baseline
The starting point for this type of product, before anything specific to this product is counted.
No PFAS disclosure
No public statement from the brand about PFAS in this product.
Fragrance allergens and undisclosed fragrance components
Redwood Body Wash contains fragrance (likely from natural extracts and synthetic fragrance oil blends). Fragrance is a known skin irritant and contact allergen in 1-3% of consumers; full fragrance component list is not typically disclosed to end-users due to trade secret protection, limiting individualized risk assessment for fragrance-sensitive users.
1,4-dioxane contamination in surfactants or emulsifiers
1,4-dioxane is a manufacturing byproduct in some ethoxylated surfactants (e.g., sodium laureth sulfate). No testing data for this specific product is public. The ingredient list does not explicitly disclose presence of ethoxylated surfactants, so risk level cannot be confirmed but remains a known category concern for mass-market washes.
Microbial growth and preservative adequacy in liquid format
Liquid body washes are more vulnerable to bacterial and fungal overgrowth than solids if seals are compromised or bottles are refilled with unsanitized water. Preservative efficacy depends on proper storage and manufacturer formulation; no public data on preservative concentration for Redwood Body Wash is available.
What’s reassuring
Base material not linked to PFAS
The main material recorded for this product is not one associated with PFAS.
Formaldehyde / VOCs
No specific preservative system is documented for this product in available sources. Water-based washes typically use phenoxyethanol, parabens, or sodium benzoate; none are known formaldehyde releasers. Absence of public recall or safety alert suggests preservative choice meets regulatory thresholds.
Source, ATSDR ↗Heavy metals
Natural extracts can contain trace metals (cadmium, lead) if sourced from contaminated soil. No recalls or safety alerts link this product to heavy metal contamination. Standard cosmetic regulation (FDA CFR 700-880) requires testing for impurities, but results are not publicly disclosed for individual products.
Source, FDA ↗How is this PFAS grade calculated?
The brand's record and disclosure
Harry's maintains transparent ingredient labeling accessible online and on packaging, standard for a direct-to-consumer grooming brand. The brand has not faced documented recalls or regulatory actions related to cosmetic safety. No third-party certifications (e.g., EWG verified, Leaping Bunny) are on record for this product, though absence of certification does not indicate a safety gap. Harry's stance on PFAS is not publicly documented, but the water-based formula presents lower inherent risk compared to aerosol or silicone-heavy alternatives.
How it compares in its category
Body washes vary widely; premium brands often add silicones and synthetic fragrance blends, increasing potential irritant load, while this product emphasizes glycerin and plant extracts. Compared to bar soaps, liquid washes carry risk of preservative overuse or microbial growth if improperly stored, but individual-use bottles mitigate shared contamination. This product sits in the mid-range of transparency and ingredient simplicity for mass-market body wash.
If you buy it
Store bottle away from direct heat and sunlight to prevent glycerin degradation and preserve surfactant integrity. Use only the intended dispenser or cap; refilling with water or other liquids dilutes preservative efficacy and increases bacterial growth risk. Replace if product develops odor, visible discoloration, or separated layers, signs of emulsion breakdown. Patch test on inner arm if you have sensitive skin or known fragrance sensitivity; natural extracts do not exclude allergenic compounds.
What is not known about PFAS in this product?
- Basis
- Model estimate, 78% confidence, not a lab result
- Lab test
- None on record for this exact product
- Brand statement
- Harry's has made none
Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.
More body wash 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.