75/ 100
C
OverallF47/100
Mitchum Advanced Clean Control Anti-Perspirant Deodorant Stick

Mitchum · Deodorant

Mitchum Advanced Clean Control Anti-Perspirant Deodorant Stick

C · Moderate

Lower PFAS concern; no water-repellent coating needed for this powder format.

Verdict: BuyTalc-based stick with established safety record; no known PFAS water-repellent coatings; standard category hazard profile manageable with normal use.

Mitchum anti-perspirant sticks are talc or starch-based powders without the water-resistant or nonstick coatings that typically trigger PFAS use. The brand makes no PFAS claims or disclosures. No public lab testing or recalls linked to PFAS in this product line.

Shop Mitchum on Amazon →

Material

Talc-based powder stick with wax binders

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

Mitchum Advanced Clean Control is a powder-based antiperspirant stick formulated with talc as the primary base, combined with wax binders (typically paraffin or similar) and aluminum salts (likely aluminum zirconium as the active antiperspirant agent). The talc provides absorbency and slip; the wax allows it to adhere as a solid stick form. This format does not require water-repellent coatings, which is why PFAS concern is lower than in water-resistant textiles or some cosmetic powders with Teflon-family coating additives.

The brand's record and disclosure

Mitchum (owned by Revlon) does not maintain a publicly visible position statement on talc sourcing, asbestos testing protocols, or fragrance allergen transparency. The brand has not faced major recalls or lawsuits tied to talc contamination as of available records, but does not voluntarily publish third-party safety certifications or raw material supplier audits. This represents a 'silent' stance typical of mass-market deodorant brands that rely on baseline FDA compliance rather than proactive disclosure.

How it compares in its category

Talc-based stick deodorants are a conventional middle market segment. Competitors like Dove and Secret use similar talc formulations; higher-end brands (Lavanila, Native) often market talc-free alternatives using corn starch or arrowroot. Clinical-strength sticks in the same price tier (Degree, Sure) also rely on talc-based matrices. Mitchum's positioning is price-accessible and stable; no performance or safety outlier relative to peers.

If you buy it

Store in a cool, dry location away from direct heat or sunlight; talc-based sticks can soften or separate if exposed to temperatures above 85°F. Replace every 6-12 months or when the stick becomes crumbly or depleted. If you have sensitive skin or a known talc allergy, patch-test on inner arm first. Wash hands after application and avoid inhaling powder cloud during application to minimize respiratory exposure to fine talc particles.

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.”

Possible

Talc contamination (asbestos risk)

Talc ore can contain asbestos depending on mining source and processing. Mitchum does not publicly disclose asbestos testing or sourcing standards. While regulatory talc used in cosmetics must meet FDA purity standards, third-party verification is absent from available brand communications. Risk is low under normal use (dermal exposure only, no inhalation during application); higher if powder is a

Reported

Aluminum salt absorption (systemic aluminum)

Antiperspirant-active aluminum salts (aluminum zirconium compounds) are absorbed percutaneously at low levels. Long-term daily use of aluminum antiperspirants has been epidemiologically linked to potential aluminum bioaccumulation, though causation to Alzheimer's or bone disease remains unconfirmed by major health agencies. FDA considers approved antiperspirant aluminum concentrations safe for gen

Possible

Fragrance allergen sensitization

Mitchum Advanced Clean Control contains fragrance compounds (not itemized on label, as is standard FDA allowance). Common fragrance constituents in mass-market deodorants include limonene, linalool, and geraniol, which can trigger contact dermatitis or respiratory irritation in sensitive individuals. No brand-specific fragrance allergen incident record is on file, but fragrance remains the leading

None known

Formaldehyde-releasing preservatives

Mitchum's publicly available ingredient disclosures do not indicate formaldehyde releasers (such as DMDM hydantoin or imidazolidinyl urea); talc-based stick formats typically use paraffin wax and aluminum compounds, which do not require formaldehyde donors. No recalls or reports of formaldehyde off-gassing have been documented for this product line.

Reported

Skin irritation from aluminum salts or additives

Aluminum zirconium antiperspirant compounds can cause localized irritation, rash, or folliculitis in ~1-5% of regular users, particularly in warm climates or after shaving. Mitchum's formulation does not include botanical or calming additives (e.g., aloe, chamomile) that might buffer irritation. Discontinuation typically resolves symptoms within 48-72 hours.

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

Tom's of Maine

Deodorant

mineral-based, baking soda formulation

A
B
PFASAll
A · Very low PFAS3 flags

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

Tom's of Maine

Most-Loved Deodorant Bundle

mineral-based and plant-derived actives; stick formulation

A
A
PFASAll
A · Very low PFAS2 flags

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

Tom's of Maine

Antiperspirant Deodorant

mineral-based active ingredients, plant-derived botanicals, no synthetic water-repellent coatings

A
A
PFASAll
A · Very low PFAS2 flags

Lower PFAS concern, mineral-based formula with MADE SAFE cert; antiperspirant category has minimal waterproof-coating risk.

MADE SAFE CertifiedLeaping Bunny (cruelty-free)

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.