Understanding PFAS and Testing Results at Avocado Green Mattress

Avocado Green Mattress is committed to providing safer, certified-organic adult mattresses, kids' mattresses, crib mattresses, pillows, and bedding accessories. Our GOTS-certified organic mattresses, crib mattresses, pillows, and our organic waterproof mattress protector have been independently tested for 679 PFAS substances, with no PFAS detected above laboratory detection limits.

This article details our testing scope, methodology, and results, explains why PFAS chemicals are a concern in mattresses and bedding, and shows why component-level analytical testing is more rigorous than generic organic-fluorine screening.

More important: don't make it a comparison table. The moment you add a competitor or "typical industry" column, you're making comparative claims about testing you haven't seen, on a page whose entire credibility rests on not overstating. That's a George gate and an unnecessary one. The specificity does the comparative work without asserting anything about anyone else.

​

PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are a class of synthetic chemicals widely used across industries for water, stain, and grease resistance. They're known for their persistence in the environment and the human body — hence the nickname "forever chemicals." Exposure has been associated with a range of health concerns, including certain cancers, hormone disruption, immune system effects, and developmental issues in children. The United States Environmental Protection Agency publishes ongoing research and regulatory tools on PFAS.

​

In our 2026 round of independent third-party testing — expanding on results we first published in 2024 — we tested the following components and finished products:

Our 2024 round covered organic cotton, needle-punched wool, latex and coir pad, and the waterproof mattress protector. Reports from both rounds are published at the bottom of this page.

​

All testing was conducted by Intertek, an independent ISO/IEC 17025-accredited laboratory. Each component was analyzed using solvent extraction followed by:

These targeted analytical methods identify and quantify specific PFAS substances at parts-per-billion levels. The detection limit was 0.01 mg/kg (10 ppb) for most substances, with a small subset at 0.1 mg/kg.
​

Across all tested components, the results for all targeted PFAS substances were ND — not detected (below the laboratory detection limit). Our 2026 testing scope covered 679 individual PFAS substances, expanded from 320 in our 2024 testing. The expanded panel includes:

Full substance lists, CAS numbers, and detection limits are available in the underlying Intertek test reports (PDFs linked at the bottom of this article).
​

Some brands rely on total organic fluorine (TOF) screening as a PFAS test. TOF measures total fluorine content, but it doesn't identify which compounds are present and can miss specific PFAS at the levels that matter. Targeted LC/MS/MS and GC-MS analysis identifies and quantifies individual substances and provides a defensible chain of evidence — substance by substance, component by component.

For the Waterproof Mattress Protector, every fabric layer, the elastic band, the printed labels, the brand label, the storage bag, and the cord were each tested separately. This level of granularity is unusual in the category.

​

Other PFAS verification approaches certify a finished product against a compliance threshold—for example, a total-fluorine ceiling of 50 ppm across a panel of roughly 80 compounds. That type of certification confirms the product passes a threshold, but it often doesn't tell you exactly what substances were screened, what the per-substance detection limits were, or what the actual measured values were. Avocado's approach is different: we publish the full Intertek reports for every component, with every substance and detection limit. Certification is a pass/fail outcome. We publish the underlying data and evidence behind it.
​

PFAS are commonly used in conventional bedding for:

PFAS are associated with a function, not a feature. Cooling and antimicrobial treatments are usually delivered by other chemistries, but they frequently appear on fabrics that also carry a repellent finish. That is why component-level testing matters more than asking what a product claims to do.

Avocado's design philosophy eliminates the need for these treatments: our protector achieves waterproofing through a food-grade thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) membrane laminated to organic cotton — not chemical surface treatments. Our mattresses meet federal flammability standards using organic wool, not chemical flame retardants.
​

PFAS testing is one layer of verification. Our certifications add others.

Finished-product certifications verify the product as it arrives in your home:

Material-level certification:

Company-level certification:

Excerpt from Intertek report WOHK20875-A(G) — waterproof mattress protector, seven components tested separately. Full report below.

We don't use that phrase, and it's worth explaining why. Targeted analytical testing reports on the substances it screens for, at the detection limits used. It cannot establish the absence of every possible compound. What we can say is specific: across every component tested, all 679 targeted PFAS substances returned ND, not detected, below laboratory detection limits of 0.01 mg/kg for most substances. The full reports, with substance lists, CAS numbers, and per-substance detection limits, are published above. When any brand says "PFAS-free," the useful questions are what was screened, at what detection limit, and by whom.

Targeted PFAS testing extracts substances from a material sample and analyzes them using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) or gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GC-MS). These methods identify and quantify individual named substances at parts-per-billion levels. The alternative approach, total organic fluorine screening, measures total fluorine content as a proxy. It is faster and cheaper, but it does not identify which compounds are present or at what level.

Intertek, an independent laboratory accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, the international standard for testing laboratory competence. Avocado did not perform the analysis and does not self-report results. Both rounds are published in full above.

No. OEKO-TEX® Standard 100 is a harmful-substance threshold test. It screens finished textiles against limit values for a defined list of substances, and its criteria have included restrictions on certain perfluorinated compounds — but it is not a PFAS testing program, and passing it is not the same as having a product screened against a broad PFAS panel. It also permits materials people often assume it excludes, including polyurethane foam and flame retardant finishes. Our mattresses hold OEKO-TEX® Standard 100 Class I certification, and we had them separately tested for 679 PFAS substances, because those two things answer different questions.

Closer than the others, but still a different kind of thing. MADE SAFE®'s banned and restricted list explicitly covers fluorinated and PFAS compounds as a category, so certification requires that they not be intentionally used. EWG Verified® requires full ingredient disclosure and screening against health-based criteria, which means an undisclosed surface treatment cannot pass. Both are meaningful, and both go further on PFAS than a threshold test does.

But prohibition and disclosure are not the same as measurement. Neither program produces an analytical result showing which substances were screened, at what detection limit, and what was found in the finished material. That is what a laboratory report does. We hold both certifications and commission independent testing, because together they answer the whole question: what is not permitted, and what was actually measured.

No. GOTS restricts chemical inputs across the supply chain, from farm through finished product, and those restrictions exclude many of the treatment chemistries PFAS are used in. But GOTS is an organic textile standard, not a PFAS screening program, and a GOTS certificate is not a test result. This is why we commission independent PFAS testing separately and publish the reports. Certification tells you a standard was met. Testing tells you what was measured, at what detection limit, and by whom.

Material is the wrong question — treatment is the right one. PFAS are applied, not inherent, so the risk follows the finish rather than the fiber. Water-, stain-, and soil-repellent treatments are the most common application in bedding, which puts waterproof protectors, performance covers, and treated fabrics at the top of the list. Some flame-retardant barriers and certain foam production processes are also associated with PFAS. Untreated natural fibers have no inherent PFAS content, but they can still carry a later-applied finish, which is why we tested our components individually rather than reasoning from what they are made of.

Usually not from the product page, because PFAS are not required to be disclosed. Practical steps: ask for third-party test reports rather than a statement; check that the report names the laboratory and its accreditation; look at how many substances were screened and at what detection limit; and pay particular attention to water-resistant and stain-resistant treatments, which are among the most common applications in bedding. One thing to watch: some finishes marketed as PFAS alternatives are still fluorinated. Ultra-short-chain fluoropolymer coatings, for example, break down into short-chain PFAS, so whether they count depends entirely on which definition is being used. This is why the number of substances screened matters more than the label on the box.

Waterproof and stain-resistant products are where PFAS most often appear in bedding, so this one was tested in unusual detail: seven components separately, including each fabric layer, the elastic band, printed labels, brand label, storage bag, and cord. All returned not detected. Waterproofing is achieved through a food-grade thermoplastic polyurethane membrane laminated to organic cotton, not a chemical surface treatment.

The reports cover the components listed above. They do not cover every product in the line, and each report is only on the substances within its screening panel. We publish what was tested and what was not, rather than generalizing from a sample.

On a recurring basis, with the substance panel expanded as analytical methods develop. The 2024 round screened 320 substances. The 2026 round screened 679.

Sources

Related articles