Georganics · Deodorant
Cleo & Coco Charcoal Deodorant Duo
Lower-concern natural deodorant; no known PFAS vectors but silence on sourcing limits certainty.
Georganics' charcoal deodorant uses powder and wax-based formulations typical of natural cosmetics, with no functional need for PFAS (no waterproofing, nonstick, or stain resistance required).
Shop Georganics on Amazon →Material
charcoal powder, natural waxes, oils
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.
No PFAS disclosure
No public statement about PFAS in this product.
Safe base material
Made from a material with no inherent PFAS use (ceramic, mineral, or natural fiber).
The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
Cleo & Coco uses activated charcoal powder combined with natural waxes (likely beeswax or plant-based) and oils as the deodorant matrix. Charcoal itself is inert and does not release volatile compounds or leach into skin under normal use. The wax and oil base avoids aluminum compounds and synthetic polymer coatings that carry leaching or degradation risks seen in conventional stick deodorants. No synthetic fragrances or chemical preservatives are listed, which eliminates common allergen vectors in personal care.
The brand's record and disclosure
Georganics markets itself as a natural and organic brand but provides minimal public documentation of third-party certifications or source verification on its website. No recalls or safety controversies have been recorded for this product or parent brand. The company's silence on PFAS sourcing in raw materials (particularly waxes and charcoal) is typical for small natural brands but limits independent confidence in supply-chain screening. Ingredient lists appear straightforward and do not hide components under fragrance disclosure.
How it compares in its category
Natural charcoal deodorants occupy a lower-hazard segment compared to aluminum antiperspirants or talc-containing powders. This product avoids the coating degradation and metal leaching risks of conventional stick formats. It sits alongside other wax-oil-charcoal formulations (common in indie brands) with similar safety profiles. The main trade-off is efficacy: charcoal deodorants do not prevent sweating and rely on odor absorption, so performance expectations differ from antiperspirants.
If you buy it
Store in a cool, dry place; charcoal and wax can soften or separate if exposed to sustained heat above 30C (86F). Apply sparingly to clean, dry skin; excess product can stain light fabrics. Replace every 6-12 months or when consistency changes noticeably. If irritation develops (rare with this formulation), discontinue and rinse skin; fragrance-free status makes true allergic reactions unlikely but individual sensitivities to carrier oils exist.
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.”
Fragrance allergens and skin sensitization
Georganics lists no synthetic fragrance or essential oils prominently in this duo; however, natural oils in the base (coconut, jojoba, or similar) can trigger contact dermatitis in sensitive individuals. No reported cases specific to this product.
Heavy metals in charcoal powder
Activated charcoal quality varies by source and processing; if sourced from unvetted suppliers, charcoal may retain trace metals (cadmium, lead) depending on feedstock origin. Georganics does not publicly document charcoal sourcing or purity testing, so residual metal content cannot be ruled out but is unlikely at concern-level concentrations.
Talc contamination
This product explicitly uses charcoal powder, not talc, eliminating the asbestos and ovarian cancer risk associated with talc-based deodorants. No talc is listed in ingredient disclosures.
Formaldehyde releasers or preservatives
Charcoal-wax-oil formulations do not require synthetic preservatives; natural oils have antimicrobial properties. No quaternium, imidazolidinyl urea, or other formaldehyde-releasing agents are disclosed. Risk is minimal.
Coating or carrier-oil oxidation and rancidity
Natural oils in deodorant sticks can oxidize if exposed to light or air for extended periods, potentially producing skin irritants. Packaging opacity and seal integrity are not detailed; if jar or container allows light exposure, rancidity risk increases over the product lifespan.
What we don’t know
This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 72% 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 Deodorant
Tom's of Maine
Deodorant
mineral-based, baking soda formulation
Lower concern, mineral-based formula with public PFAS-free positioning, though no independent third-party verification.
⚠Risky category by default
Tom's of Maine
Most-Loved Deodorant Bundle
mineral-based and plant-derived actives; stick formulation
Lower-concern deodorant; mineral-based formula with PFAS-free claim aligns with brand ethos, but no third-party verification found.
⚠Risky category by default
Tom's of Maine
Antiperspirant Deodorant
mineral-based active ingredients, plant-derived botanicals, no synthetic water-repellent coatings
Lower PFAS concern, mineral-based formula with MADE SAFE cert; antiperspirant category has minimal waterproof-coating risk.
✓Verified PFAS-free by a third party
More deodorant 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.