Apple has been hit with a class-action lawsuit alleging that it has engaged in false advertising regarding its Apple Watch bands. The lawsuit claims that certain bands contain hazardous “forever” chemicals.

These substances, known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), are characterized by their slow degradation and potential accumulation in the bloodstream of humans and animals, as well as in the environment, including drinking water sources.

The complaint contends that Apple promotes these products as beneficial for human health and wellness, environmentally friendly, and appropriate for regular use. However, it argues that the bands contain harmful levels of PFAS, which pose risks to both human health and the environment.

The complaint references a study by the University of Notre Dame published in December 2024, which identified at least 22 watch bands with “high levels” of PFAS, indicating that these chemicals may be absorbed through the skin. This study evaluated bands from various brands, including Apple, Fitbit, Google, and Nike, but did not specify which particular smartwatch bands were found to contain PFAS.

The lawsuit specifically mentions the Apple Watch Sport Band, Ocean Band, and Nike Sport Band, although Nike is not implicated in the lawsuit beyond the mentioned band.

In response, Apple has issued a statement asserting that any Apple Watch Bands containing PFAS are safe for consumer use. “Apple Watch bands are safe for users to wear. In addition to our own testing, we also work with independent laboratories to conduct rigorous testing and analysis of the materials used in our products, including Apple Watch bands.”

In November 2022, Apple published a white paper outlining its strategy to “completely phase out” PFAS in its products and manufacturing processes. While this initiative is still in progress, Apple has not disclosed any information regarding the success or challenges of its efforts since 2022.

Clarkson Law Firm filed the lawsuit on 21 January in California’s Northern District. The case is Cavalier et al v. Apple Inc.