Unwrapping Polyester: The Health Risk Lurking in Your Clothes

Polyester is everywhere. In your gym kit, your office shirt, your child’s school uniform, the jacket you bought last month for ₹999. By the time you finish reading this sentence, you are probably wearing some.

It is also plastic. Specifically, it is a petroleum-derived polymer — the same basic chemistry as a plastic bottle, spun into fibres, woven into fabric, and pressed against your skin for hours every day.

For decades, the conversation about polyester has been limited to comfort and performance. It’s cheap. It’s wrinkle-free. It dries quickly. What the label doesn’t tell you — and what a rapidly growing body of scientific evidence is now making very hard to ignore — is what it does to your body, and to everyone else’s.

This article is about that evidence. And at the end, it is about the fact that India’s government, rather than taking note, just made the problem significantly worse.

What polyester actually is

Polyester is manufactured from ethylene glycol and dimethyl terephthalate — both petroleum derivatives — through a chemical reaction requiring high heat and toxic catalysts. The result is a long-chain plastic polymer: PET, the same material used to make plastic bottles.

This polymer is then spun into fibres, woven into fabric, and treated with a range of chemical finishes — dyes, flame retardants, wrinkle-resistance agents, antimicrobial coatings, stain-repellent compounds. Many of these finishes contain substances that have been independently linked to health concerns. The fabric is, in every meaningful sense, a processed petrochemical product with an extensive chemical history before it reaches your skin.

Natural fibres — cotton, hemp, linen, wool — are processed too, but they begin as plant or animal material. Their chemistry is fundamentally different. They breathe, they biodegrade, and they don’t shed plastic into the environment every time you wash them.

The microplastic problem: what happens every time you wash your clothes

This is where the science has moved fastest, and where the findings have become impossible to dismiss.

Every time a polyester garment is washed, it sheds microscopic plastic fibres — microplastics — into the water. These are too small to be captured by most wastewater treatment systems and flow directly into rivers, lakes, and eventually the ocean.

Research published in PLOS ONE found that a single wash cycle can release between 8,800 and 6.8 million microplastic fibres from a single garment, depending on fabric type and construction.¹ A separate study found that one person could release almost 300 million polyester microfibres per year to the environment through washing alone — and more than 900 million simply by wearing the garments, through friction against skin and furniture.² Worn polyester garments shed more microfibres than new ones, meaning the problem compounds over the garment’s lifetime rather than diminishing.

The scale is global and accelerating. Polyester and polyamide together account for roughly 60% of world fibre production. Every one of those garments is shedding, washing by washing, wear by wear.

Where those fibres end up: inside you

Until recently, microplastics were discussed primarily as an environmental problem — something happening to rivers, oceans, and fish. The last three years of research have fundamentally changed that picture.

Microplastics have now been detected in virtually every part of the human body that scientists have thought to look. They have been found in human blood, lungs, liver, kidneys, lymph nodes, and colon. They have been found in breast milk and in meconium — the first stool of a newborn infant. They have been found in the human placenta.³ They have been found in the human brain, in concentrations that have grown measurably between samples taken in the 1990s and those taken in the 2020s.

In 2024, researchers at the University of New Mexico found microplastics in every single human testis sample they examined — 23 samples in total — at concentrations nearly three times higher than those found in human placentas.⁴ Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) — the specific plastic used to make polyester fabric — was consistently among the polymers detected.

“We’re born pre-polluted.” — Stanford Medicine researcher, 2025

What those fibres appear to be doing

The presence of microplastics in human tissue would be concerning enough on its own. What makes the current body of research alarming is the emerging evidence of what they may be doing once inside.

Cardiovascular disease. In March 2024, a landmark study published in The New England Journal of Medicine examined arterial plaque removed from 304 patients. More than half contained detectable microplastics. Patients whose plaque contained microplastics had a 4.5 times higher risk of heart attack, stroke, or death over a 34-month follow-up period compared to those whose plaque did not.⁵ The authors were careful to note this is an association, not proven causation. But a hazard ratio of 4.5 — in a study that controlled for diabetes, hypertension, and cholesterol — is, as one Harvard researcher described it, “stunning.”

Reproductive harm. A 2023 Chinese study found microplastics in 76% of human semen samples tested, with PET among the most abundant polymer types.⁶ Animal studies have shown that microplastic exposure damages the blood-testis barrier, leading to reduced sperm count, higher rates of abnormal sperm, and hormonal disruption. The global decline in male sperm count is now being actively investigated for links to microplastic exposure.

Developmental risk. Microplastics have been detected in human placentas and in infant breast milk, raising serious questions about foetal and infant exposure during the most sensitive windows of development.

Inflammation and gut health. Multiple studies have established that microplastics trigger inflammatory responses in human tissues, disrupt gut microbiota, and alter metabolic function. Smaller particles — nanoplastics — can cross the blood-brain barrier, with potential neurological implications under active investigation.

Skin irritation and allergies. Polyester does not breathe. In warm and humid climates — which describes most of India for most of the year — it traps heat and sweat against the skin, creating conditions for bacterial and fungal growth. This leads to rashes, contact dermatitis, and fungal infections in sensitive areas. A study in the American Journal of Contact Dermatitis identified synthetic fibres including polyester as a common irritant for individuals with sensitive skin or eczema.⁷

Endocrine disruption from chemical finishes. Beyond the fibre itself, polyester garments are routinely treated with chemical finishes: formaldehyde for wrinkle resistance, perfluorinated compounds (PFAS) for water and stain repellency, phthalates from dyes and prints. Many of these are established endocrine disruptors — substances that interfere with hormone function. Repeated skin exposure to these chemicals has been linked to hormonal imbalances, reproductive issues, and developmental problems in children.⁸

Respiratory risks from VOCs. Some polyester items — particularly those with waterproofing or antimicrobial coatings — emit volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including toluene and benzene. These can cause dizziness, headaches, and long-term respiratory damage with prolonged exposure. Homes with high concentrations of synthetic fabrics — polyester curtains, carpets, upholstery — can have measurably elevated indoor VOC levels.⁹

Fire safety. Polyester has a low melting point and can melt onto skin in the event of a fire. Fire safety experts consistently advise against polyester garments — particularly undergarments — for children, factory workers, and motorcyclists. In a country with India’s road conditions and growing two-wheeler culture, this deserves more attention than it receives.

The workers who pay first

The health costs of polyester don’t begin with the consumer. Textile workers involved in polyester manufacturing and dyeing are exposed to hazardous substances throughout their working lives. The WHO has documented that chronic exposure to solvent-based dyes and polyester resins is linked to skin and eye irritation, lung inflammation, and an elevated risk of certain cancers.¹⁰

Dyeing polyester requires disperse dyes — compounds that are not water-soluble and can remain embedded in fabric, leaching out through sweat during wear. The worker absorbs the highest concentration. The consumer absorbs what’s left. Neither is informed.

A note on what we don’t yet know

The science is honest about its limits, and so should we be.

Most mechanistic research on microplastics has been conducted in animal models and cell cultures. The NEJM cardiovascular study is observational — it demonstrates a powerful correlation, not proven causation. The full dose-response relationship — how much exposure causes how much harm — is not yet established for most outcomes.

What we do know: microplastics are in our bodies in quantities that have been increasing for decades. They are present in our most sensitive tissues. The preliminary signals across cardiovascular, reproductive, and developmental health are serious enough to have prompted major institutions worldwide — Harvard, Stanford, UCSF, The New England Journal of Medicine — to treat this as an urgent public health question.

The precautionary principle applies. We did not need certainty of harm to justify reducing exposure to cigarettes, leaded petrol, or asbestos. In each case, the delay was costly. The same logic applies here.

The regulatory gap — and India’s policy failure

The EU’s REACH regulation and California’s Proposition 65 have improved transparency around chemicals in textiles, but enforcement globally remains inconsistent. In India, textile chemical safety at the consumer level is largely unregulated.

This gap is troubling on its own. What makes it significantly worse is what India’s GST 2.0, implemented in September 2025, chose to do in this context.

In the same reform, the government cut GST on synthetic fibres like polyester from 18% to 5% — directly reducing the input cost for manufacturers of the fabric most responsible for textile microplastic pollution — while simultaneously raising GST on garments above ₹2,500 from 12% to 18%, making naturally-fibred, responsibly-made clothing more expensive for Indian consumers.

The reform rewarded the industry whose product sheds plastic into rivers and human bodies. It penalised the clothing that doesn’t. It did both at once, in the same announcement, framed as rationalisation.

India is already one of the world’s largest generators of textile waste. It has stressed water systems, limited wastewater treatment capacity for microplastics, and a population of 1.4 billion people increasingly wearing synthetic clothing as fast fashion expands into every tier of city and town.

What you can do

Avoiding polyester entirely may not be practical. But awareness is a starting point.

• Choose natural fibres where it matters most — clothing worn directly against skin, sleepwear, children’s clothing, and garments worn for long periods in India’s heat and humidity. Hemp, cotton, linen, and their blends don’t shed microplastics, breathe better, and decompose rather than persist.
• Wash synthetic clothing less frequently and at lower temperatures where possible. Heat and agitation increase fibre shedding significantly.
• Microfibre-catching washing bags (such as the Guppyfriend) are worth considering for households with significant synthetic wardrobes.
• When choosing what to buy, consider what the price includes — and what it doesn’t.

What we believe

At The Rugged Soul, we make jackets and shirts exclusively from natural fabrics — hemp-cotton blends, cotton canvas, cotton twill, and cotton-linen. Not because it’s a marketing position, but because the alternative doesn’t make sense to us.

Natural fibres work with the body rather than against it. They breathe in Indian heat. They don’t shed plastic into water systems. They don’t carry a chemical history of petroleum processing and synthetic finishing. And when they eventually wear out, they break down without leaving a trace.

We won’t pretend our clothes are cheap. They are not. The honest cost of responsible manufacturing at small scale is higher than what fast fashion charges — because fast fashion doesn’t pay the full cost. It externalises what it can and prices the rest.

That cost gets paid eventually. The question is who pays it, and when.

→ Shop our natural fabric collection