PFAS20/ 100Bad
Overall16/ 100Bad
Patagonia Men's Insulated Storm Shift Ski/Snowboard Pants

Patagonia · Snow Pants

Patagonia Men's Insulated Storm Shift Ski/Snowboard Pants

Bad

Avoid until Patagonia clarifies water-repellent coating chemistry or commits to PFAS-free treatment.

Verdict: SkipPolyester snow pants with undisclosed water-repellent coating chemistry pose PFAS uncertainty; non-water-repellent coating hazards are low-risk if cared for properly. Buy only if you accept PFAS unknown and commit to durability.

The polyester shell uses a water-repellent coating finish for waterproofing, but Patagonia hasn't disclosed whether it contains PFAS or PFAS-free alternatives. No lab data or PFAS-free certification backs this product.

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

Material

Polyester shell with water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) finish; insulated lining

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment

Water-repellent treatments have historically contained PFAS chemicals.

65/ 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
♾️

water-repellent coating composition (fluorocarbon vs. fluorocarbon-free)

Undisclosed water-repellent coating chemistry creates uncertainty about PFAS presence. Fluorinated water-repellent coating coatings persist in the environment and bioaccumulate; this hazard is graded separately but drives the overall safety concern. No public testing or certification data confirms which type is used.

70/ 100

What’s reassuring

Polyester microfiber shedding during wear and washing

Polyester itself does not leach toxic chemicals, but mechanical wear and washing can release microfibers into aquatic environments. This is an environmental hazard rather than direct consumer exposure. Proper care (cold wash, infrequent washing) minimizes shedding.

95/ 100

Azo dyes in polyester coloring

No public recall or warning exists for Patagonia snow pants. Polyester is less prone to problematic azo dye use than natural fibers, and Patagonia's brand standards generally exclude restricted azo dyes, but independent testing of this specific product is not available.

95/ 100

Antimony in polyester

Antimony is sometimes used as a catalyst in polyester production but is tightly bound in the polymer chain and not bioavailable during normal wear. No specific concern has been raised for Patagonia polyester products.

95/ 100
🔥

Flame retardants

The insulation material composition is not disclosed. If it is polyester fiberfill, it typically does not require flame retardant additives for apparel use. Without material specification, this cannot be fully assessed.

Source: EPA
95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

These pants use a polyester shell with a water-repellent coating (water-repellent coating) finish applied to the fabric surface. The water-repellent coating chemistry is the critical unknown: manufacturers typically use either fluorocarbon-based treatments (PFAS, persistent and bioaccumulative) or fluorocarbon-free alternatives (PFC-free). Polyester itself is stable and does not leach chemicals under normal wear, but the water-repellent coating is where concern concentrates. The insulation lining material is not specified in available product data, so thermal stability of that layer cannot be assessed without additional disclosure.

The brand's record and disclosure

Patagonia has a mixed sustainability record on this issue. The company has made commitments to reduce synthetic chemical use and has published some environmental reports, but has not made a clear, product-level disclosure of water-repellent coating chemistry for this specific item or its snow pant line. No public PFAS-free certification (such as OEKO-TEX STeP or similar) is listed for these pants. Until Patagonia provides explicit confirmation that this product uses non-fluorinated water-repellent coating or commits to full transparency on water-repellent coating composition, the treatment remains a black box.

How it compares in its category

Most mainstream snow pants use fluorinated water-repellent coating coatings because they are cost-effective and durable through multiple wash cycles. Some premium brands (e.g., Arc'teryx, The North Face) now offer PFAS-free water-repellent coating options, though these are often labeled separately or certified. Patagonia's silence on this specific model places it in the category of products where water-repellent coating hazard is unconfirmed, making it harder to compare than brands with explicit chemistry disclosure. The lack of transparent labeling is the primary differentiator, not the fabric itself.

If you buy it

Wash infrequently and use cool water with mild detergent to extend water-repellent coating life and minimize any leaching from the coating. Avoid dry cleaning, which may use solvents that could mobilize surface treatments. Do not tumble-dry on high heat; air-dry or low heat only. Check the seams and coating annually for wear; if the water-repellent coating begins to break down (water stops beading), the coating may degrade into microparticles, increasing exposure risk. If environmental concern about PFAS is high for you, contact Patagonia directly to request water-repellent coating chemistry confirmation before purchase.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 42% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Patagonia has made none

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

More snow pants 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.