Georganics · Deodorant
Fig + Green Tea Deodorant
Lower PFAS concern; stick deodorant powder unlikely to contain intentional fluorochemicals.
Georganics Fig + Green Tea is a powder deodorant with no disclosed PFAS treatment or waterproofing. The brand makes no PFAS claims either way. Powder and botanical deodorants rarely require Teflon-type coating or water-repellent coating coatings, making PFAS exposure unlikely, though no third-party testing or certifications confirm this.
Shop Georganics on Amazon →Material
Powder-based deodorant (mineral/talc/starch base)
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
This is a powder-based deodorant likely combining talc or arrowroot starch with mineral absorbents (possibly magnesium oxide or zinc oxide) and fragrance compounds (fig and green tea extracts/oils). Powder deodorants avoid the polymer coatings and propellants found in aerosols and stick formulas, reducing exposure to volatile organics and synthetic binders. The mineral base itself is chemically inert once applied to skin, though the quality of sourcing and processing determines whether trace contaminants are present.
The brand's record and disclosure
Georganics markets itself as a natural/organic brand with minimal synthetic inputs, but maintains silence on PFAS risk assessment and third-party testing. The brand does not publicly document heavy metal screening, talc purity verification, or independent safety certifications (e.g., EWG Verified, NSF Organic). No major recalls or safety controversies are on record for this specific product line. Transparency is limited compared to mainstream competitors.
How it compares in its category
Powder deodorants as a class carry lower systemic toxicity risk than antiperspirant sticks (which contain aluminum salts) and aerosols (which carry VOC and propellant exposure). Among powder alternatives, this product sits mid-range: more transparent than mass-market mineral powders, less verified than lab-tested indie brands. Typical concerns in the category (talc asbestos contamination, heavy metals in mineral fillers) apply here at standard baseline risk.
If you buy it
Store in a cool, dry location away from humidity to prevent clumping and bacterial growth in the powder. Apply sparingly to clean, dry skin; excess powder offers no added benefit and increases inhalation risk during application. Replace after 6-12 months or if odor develops in the container (sign of microbial colonization). Do not inhale directly from the container; use a dispenser or closed applicator to minimize airborne particle exposure.
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.”
Talc contamination (asbestos, heavy metals)
If the base is talc rather than arrowroot, contamination risk exists depending on ore source and processing. Georganics does not publicly disclose talc sourcing or asbestos testing. Modern talc mining in regulated regions is generally asbestos-free, but independent verification is absent here.
Fragrance allergens (fig and green tea extracts)
Natural fragrance compounds in botanical deodorants can trigger contact dermatitis or sensitization, especially in high concentrations. Fig and green tea extracts contain compounds (psoralens, tannins) that may cause photosensitivity or irritation in sensitive individuals. No ingredient concentration data is publicly available for this product.
Bacterial growth (moisture entrapment)
Powder formulas stored in humid bathrooms or applied to damp skin can promote bacterial and fungal colonization within the container. This is a handling and storage issue rather than a formulation defect, but risk is standard for all loose powders.
Inhalation hazard (airborne powder particles)
Repeated inhalation of fine mineral powder (talc or arrowroot) during application can deposit particles in respiratory airways. Risk is low with typical use but increases with frequent direct inhalation or use in poorly ventilated spaces. No warning label is standard in this category.
Heavy metals in mineral fillers (zinc, magnesium, iron oxides)
Mineral-based deodorants may contain trace heavy metals depending on filler quality. Georganics does not publicly disclose heavy metal testing results. Skin absorption from topical powder application is minimal unless skin barrier is compromised.
What we don’t know
This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 78% 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.