Cs/6 Fabric Protector 283G
Fabric protectors often contain PFAS; brand offers no disclosure.
Stone and Beam's Cs/6 Fabric Protector lacks ingredient transparency and PFAS claims. Fabric protection sprays commonly use fluorinated compounds, but this brand provides no safety information.
Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.
Material
fabric protection spray, likely silicone or fluorocarbon resin
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 Cs/6 Fabric Protector 283G is made of, ingredients and materials
Cs/6 is formulated as a spray-on fabric protector, most likely containing either silicone or fluorocarbon (PFAS-type) resins as the active ingredient. These compounds create a water and stain-resistant barrier by coating fibers. The 283g aerosol format suggests propellant use (typically hydrocarbons or compressed gas), which affects inhalation exposure during application. The brand does not disclose the exact resin chemistry, which is a significant transparency gap for a product designed to be sprayed directly onto textiles used in homes.
What’s concerning
Category baseline
The starting point for this type of product, before anything specific to this product is counted.
Vague safety claims only
Uses vague language ("eco-friendly", "clean") without a specific PFAS statement.
Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment
Water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.
Inhalation risk from aerosol propellant
Aerosol fabric sprays release propellant particles and fine mist during application. Prolonged or repeated exposure in poorly ventilated spaces can irritate respiratory passages, particularly in individuals with asthma or chemical sensitivity. The brand does not specify the propellant type (hydrocarbon vs. compressed gas).
Skin and eye irritation from spray contact
Fabric protector sprays can cause localized irritation if mist contacts skin or eyes during application. Without access to safety data sheets, specific irritancy classification is unknown, but typical fluorocarbon or silicone spray formulations carry this risk.
VOC off-gassing during application and drying
Resin-based fabric protectors release volatile organic compounds (solvents) during and after spraying, contributing to indoor air quality degradation. The brand provides no VOC content declaration, making it impossible to assess indoor air impact.
PFAS
If the fluorocarbon resin contains PFAS (highly probable but unconfirmed), treated textiles may shed PFAS particles over time, particularly when handled, washed, or worn. PFAS do not degrade in the environment and accumulate in human tissue with repeated exposure.
Source, ATSDR ↗Lack of safety documentation
The absence of publicly accessible safety data sheets, ingredient lists, or third-party certifications prevents independent hazard assessment. This is itself a consumer safety concern and suggests the brand prioritizes opacity over transparency.
How is this PFAS grade calculated?
The brand's record and disclosure
The brand, an Amazon-owned home furnishings brand, maintains minimal public disclosure about chemical composition across its product lines. No published certifications (e.g., Greenguard, OEKO-TEX, Bluesign) are evident for this fabric protector. The brand has not publicly committed to phasing PFAS or other hazardous substances, and product safety data sheets are not readily available to consumers. This silence on a chemically active product is a red flag for informed purchasing.
How it compares in its category
Fabric protectors span a wide spectrum, fluorocarbon-based sprays (high performance but PFAS risk), silicone-based alternatives (lower PFAS concern but variable durability), and water-based or plant-derived options (lower toxicity, shorter lifespan). Cs/6 appears to be a mid-range product with no stated performance tier or material specification, making it difficult to justify over transparent competitors like Scotchgard (which now offers PFAS-free formulas) or niche brands offering PFAS-free, solvent-reduced options. The lack of disclosure makes direct comparison impossible.
If you buy it
Apply only in well-ventilated spaces (outdoors preferred) to avoid inhalation of aerosolized particles and propellants. Do not spray near children, pets, or food preparation areas. Allow treated textiles to dry fully (typically 24 hours) before contact. Reapplication frequency depends on wear and washing; expect efficacy to decline after 6-12 months or 3-5 wash cycles. If you do purchase, choose PFAS-free fabric protectors or water-based alternatives instead for future applications.
What is not known about PFAS in this product?
- Basis
- Model estimate, 35% confidence, not a lab result
- Lab test
- None on record for this exact product
- Brand statement
- has made none
Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.
What are the PFAS-free alternatives to Cs/6 Fabric Protector 283G?
- wax-based waterproofing
- The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified
- Respiratory irritation or fume inhalation during application
2 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
Find an alternative on Amazon
- mink oil paste, natural oil-based conditioner
- We found no PFAS statement from the brand
- Microbial growth (natural oil rancidity)
2 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
Find an alternative on Amazon
- Wax-based leather protector
- We found no PFAS statement from the brand
- Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from solvents
3 hazards checked on this product, all on its full breakdown.
Find an alternative on AmazonMore fabric stain guard sprays 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.