The report examining the chemical composition of headphones found dangerous substances in all 81 tested models available on the Central European market. The study covered 180 samples of plastic components – both soft parts that come into contact with skin and rigid structural elements – and identified the presence of bisphenols, phthalates, chlorinated paraffins, and various types of flame retardants.
Key risks for consumers according to the report:
- long-term exposure to hormone-disrupting substances
- possible developmental effects in children and adolescents
- accumulation of multiple toxins from everyday products
- lack of chemical composition information at the time of purchase
The most frequently detected group of compounds were bisphenols – known endocrine disruptors. They appeared in every tested model, and bisphenol A was found in 177 out of 180 samples. The maximum concentration of a single bisphenol reached 351 mg/kg, many times above the 10 mg/kg limit proposed by European authorities.
Researchers stress that the risk usually does not stem from single exposure but from the so-called chemical cocktail effect – daily contact with multiple low doses of different substances simultaneously. Such compounds may affect the endocrine system, fertility, and child development, and their effects may only become apparent years later.
The analysis also showed widespread presence of phthalates. Traces of these plasticizers were detected in all 98 samples in which they were tested, and 61% contained three or more substances from the CMR group – potentially carcinogenic, mutagenic, or toxic to reproduction. The highest concentration of a single phthalate was 4,950 mg/kg and was found in the headband of children’s headphones purchased on the Temu platform.
Flame retardants – additives that reduce plastic flammability – were also common. Organophosphate flame retardants were found in 72% of samples in quantities of at least five different compounds simultaneously, and in 10% of samples more than ten were detected.
Importantly, the report challenges the common belief that more expensive products are safer. Among branded products, 48% received a “red” rating – meaning they exceeded limits or contained multiple problematic substances – while among unbranded products the share was 27%.
The study’s authors emphasize that the issue is systemic. The lack of full transparency regarding chemical composition means consumers cannot consciously assess product safety, and existing regulations often target individual substances rather than entire chemical groups.
The report also notes that many substances banned in the past have been replaced with chemically similar substitutes that carry comparable risk profiles. Researchers call for regulations covering whole classes of compounds and mandatory disclosure of product material composition.
The analysis included products purchased on popular online marketplaces as well. It did not show clearly higher risk across all such items – some performed well – although in isolated cases very high concentrations of harmful substances were recorded, indicating wide variation in quality. The main conclusion, however, is clear: the issue of potentially harmful chemical additives in consumer electronics does not concern single brands or market segments, but the entire industry.