75/ 100
C
OverallC71/100
Cetaphil Moisturizing Relief Body Wash

Cetaphil · Body Wash

Cetaphil Moisturizing Relief Body Wash

C · Moderate

Lower concern; typical body wash with no known PFAS drivers, but brand offers no public disclosure.

Verdict: BuyAqueous body wash with no established hazards; brand has clean safety record and transparent ingredient disclosure; typical gentle formulation.

Cetaphil Moisturizing Relief Body Wash is an aqueous cleanser without obvious PFAS red flags (no water-repellent claims, nonstick coatings, or stain resistance). However, Cetaphil does not publicly disclose PFAS-related testing or make PFAS-free claims. No independent lab data is publicly available for this product.

Shop Cetaphil on Amazon →

Material

Aqueous solution; cleanser base without inherent PFAS triggers

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

Why this grade

Category baseline

cosmetics is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.

Hurts the grade

No PFAS disclosure

No public statement about PFAS in this product.

Hurts the grade

Safe base material

Made from a material with no inherent PFAS use (ceramic, mineral, or natural fiber).

Helps the grade

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

Cetaphil Moisturizing Relief Body Wash is an aqueous surfactant-based cleanser without soap, designed for sensitive skin. The formulation uses mild synthetic detergents (likely sodium lauryl sulfate or similar anionic surfactants) combined with humectants and skin-conditioning agents. As a rinse-off product applied briefly to skin then washed away, exposure to any residual chemicals is minimal, and no thermal processing or heating occurs during normal use.

The brand's record and disclosure

Cetaphil (owned by Galderma) has a established reputation for dermatologist-recommended gentle formulations and publishes full ingredient lists openly. The brand has no recorded safety recalls or substantive controversies related to body wash products. Cetaphil has not made explicit public commitments on PFAS elimination but operates under standard industry and regulatory compliance (FDA oversight in the US).

How it compares in its category

This product sits in the mainstream sensitive-skin body wash segment, comparable to CeraVe, Dove, and store-brand gentle cleansers. It lacks added fragrance and known irritants, making it less hazardous than heavily perfumed or exfoliating variants. The aqueous, rinse-off nature of body washes generally poses lower chemical hazard than leave-on products like lotions or deodorants.

If you buy it

Use as directed on wet skin, rinse thoroughly, and store in a cool, dry place with cap sealed to prevent bacterial growth in the container. No special precautions needed; this is a standard rinse-off cleanser. Replace if the product shows visible discoloration, separation, or odor changes, though shelf life is typically 2-3 years unopened.

Beyond PFAS: other things we checked

Established hazard classes for this product type, assessed from public information. These never change the PFAS grade; a Likely flag caps the Verdict at “Buy with care.”

None known

1,4-dioxane (contamination impurity)

Body washes may contain trace 1,4-dioxane as a manufacturing byproduct of ethoxylated surfactants. Cetaphil does not disclose testing for this; no recalls or reports specific to this product exist.

None known

Fragrance allergens

Cetaphil Moisturizing Relief is fragrance-free or minimally fragranced, eliminating a common allergen class. This variant is specifically formulated to avoid fragrance sensitivizers.

None known

Formaldehyde releasers

No preservative system in this product is known to release formaldehyde. Standard glycerin-based and paraben preservatives used in gentle body washes do not generate formaldehyde.

None known

Heavy metals in colorants or pigments

Cetaphil body wash is not a colored product and contains no intentional pigments or dyes; cosmetic-grade colorants are not present.

Possible

Bacterial or fungal growth during storage

Any aqueous liquid product can support microbial growth if stored improperly (warm, humid, open container). This is a user-maintenance issue, not a product defect; standard hygiene (sealed cap, cool storage) mitigates risk.

What we don’t know

This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 75% confidence. It is not a lab result.

No independent PFAS lab test is on record for this exact product. A lab test could move the score in either direction.

The brand has not made a specific, verifiable PFAS-free statement, so part of this score reflects that missing disclosure rather than a confirmed material.

Formulations and coatings change between production runs. Always check the current label before buying.

Safer alternatives in Body Wash

Dr Bronner's Baby Unscented Pure Castile Liquid Soap

Cetyl

Dr Bronner's Baby Unscented Pure Castile Liquid Soap

saponified vegetable oils (castile base), no protective coatings

A
C
PFASAll
A · Very low PFAS2 flags

Lower-concern choice; simple castile soap formulation carries minimal PFAS risk.

Risky category by default

Dr. Bronner's Pure-Castile Liquid Soap

Dr. Bronner's

Pure-Castile Liquid Soap

Plant-based soap (coconut, olive, palm oils); no coatings or treatments

A
C
PFASAll
A · Very low PFAS3 flags

Lower PFAS concern, uncoated liquid soap with no water- or stain-resistant treatments.

Risky category by default

Dr Bronner's Baby Unscented Pure Castile Liquid Soap

Dr. Bronner's

Dr Bronner's Baby Unscented Pure Castile Liquid Soap

Plant-based soap (coconut, olive, palm oils)

A
C
PFASAll
A · Very low PFAS3 flags

Lower PFAS concern, pure castile liquid soap has no typical vector for forever chemicals.

Risky category by default

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.