They are soft, colorful, oddly satisfying to squeeze, and often designed to look like cupcakes, fruit, animals, or other objects children love. Some even come with sweet scents that make them especially appealing.
Squishy toys seem harmless.
Yet when researchers began testing some of these toys in laboratories, they discovered something parents could never see simply by looking at them: certain products were releasing a mixture of volatile chemicals into the surrounding air.
That finding has sometimes been turned into alarming social media claims suggesting that squishies are “toxic” or packed with dangerous chemicals.
There is a real scientific story behind those warnings. But it is more complicated than saying that every squishy toy is dangerous.
Studies commissioned by European environmental authorities have found potentially concerning chemical emissions from some products. European scientists have subsequently evaluated the issue, and problematic squishy toys have continued to appear in product-safety recalls.
Understanding what those findings actually mean requires looking at something viral posts often leave out: exposure.
Why can a foam toy release chemicals into the air?
Many slow-rising squishy toys are made from polymer foams, including polyurethane-based materials. Manufacturing these materials involves various chemicals, and additional ingredients may be used to create colors, coatings, textures and fragrances.
Some compounds remaining in a finished product can gradually escape from the material into the surrounding air.
This process is commonly called off-gassing.
It isn’t unique to toys. Paints, adhesives, furniture, plastics, building materials and many other everyday products can release volatile organic compounds, usually referred to as VOCs.
The important question, therefore, isn’t simply whether scientists can detect a chemical.
Modern laboratory equipment can identify extremely small quantities of substances.
What matters for health is which chemical is present, how much is released, how a person is exposed to it and for how long.
That distinction became particularly important when researchers started investigating squishy toys.
A Danish investigation put 12 squishies under the microscope
In 2018, the Danish Environmental Protection Agency published an investigation into fragrances and other organic substances in squishy toys.
Researchers examined 12 products and looked not only at their chemical composition but also at substances released from them.
The screening identified compounds considered relevant for further toxicological assessment, including N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF), various amines and fragrance substances.
The researchers then conducted emission testing. Measurements were taken one hour after the products were unpacked, while four toys were tested again after three days.
Interestingly, migration tests using artificial sweat did not detect migration of the selected problematic substances. The emission tests, however, told a different story: some compounds were being released into the air at levels that warranted closer examination. Danish Environmental Protection Agency investigation
This distinction matters.
For the chemicals investigated in that study, simply touching a squishy wasn’t the primary concern. Researchers were particularly interested in what children might breathe.
How many chemicals can a toy release?
Research commissioned in Norway later provided another useful look at emissions from children’s handheld toys.
The Norwegian Institute for Air Research, NILU, analyzed VOC emissions from a selection of toys. Researchers identified between 12 and 30 individual VOCs from each tested toy. Across different measurements, between 65 and 143 individual VOCs were detected above 1 µg/m³.
Compounds highlighted because of relatively high concentrations and/or relevant hazardous properties included cyclohexanone, xylenes, toluene, ethylbenzene, cyclic siloxanes and TXIB. HCFC-141b was also detected in five toys.
Some products emitting relatively high levels of cyclohexanone and cyclic siloxanes measurably affected the VOC composition and concentration of the indoor air under the experimental conditions. Norwegian Environment Agency study
So the idea that toys of this kind can release numerous chemicals isn’t something invented for social media.
But there is an important catch.
The number of chemicals detected does not tell us whether a toy will harm a child.
“Chemicals detected” and “dangerous exposure” are not the same thing
Chemical names can sound frightening, particularly when they are accompanied by words such as “toxic,” “carcinogenic” or “reproductive toxicity.”
But toxicology isn’t based simply on whether a substance exists.
Scientists distinguish between hazard and risk.
Hazard describes a substance’s ability to cause harm under particular conditions. Risk takes exposure into account: how much of that substance actually reaches someone, by what route and for how long.
This is why finding a potentially hazardous compound in a toy doesn’t automatically establish that a child using it receives a harmful dose.
The Danish researchers therefore went further than simply cataloguing chemicals.
They constructed exposure scenarios.
And one of those scenarios is particularly relevant to parents.
What if a child sleeps with a squishy next to their face?
Imagine two children.
One squeezes a toy for several minutes and leaves it on a shelf.
The other takes a newly opened squishy to bed and sleeps for hours with it close to their nose and mouth.
Those are very different exposure situations.
The Danish assessment included a scenario involving a small child sleeping while holding a squishy.
Using emissions measured one hour after unpacking, the assessment found levels considered unacceptably high for DMF, triethylenediamine and cyclohexanone in all 12 squishies tested under that scenario.
Four products were tested again after three days. DMF and triethylenediamine remained at levels considered unacceptably high in that assessment. Danish Environmental Protection Agency report
Researchers also considered scenarios involving multiple squishies being kept in a child’s room.
This doesn’t mean that every child playing with a squishy receives a dangerous dose.
It means something more specific: some of the products tested emitted enough of certain chemicals that prolonged exposure scenarios raised legitimate toxicological concerns.
What could these substances actually do?
This is where careful wording becomes particularly important.
Different chemicals have different toxicological profiles.
DMF, for example, has a serious hazard classification in the European Union. The European Chemicals Agency identifies N,N-dimethylformamide as a substance of very high concern because of its reproductive toxicity. Its harmonized classification also includes hazards associated with inhalation and eye exposure. European Chemicals Agency information on DMF
At sufficiently high exposure levels, DMF has also been associated with liver toxicity, particularly in occupational and experimental settings.
Cyclohexanone has a different toxicological profile. Sufficient inhalation exposure can irritate the eyes and upper respiratory tract.
Other VOCs found in toy-emission studies have their own health effects at sufficiently high doses.
But this is precisely where a viral warning can become misleading.
A chemical’s ability to cause a particular health effect does not prove that a child playing with a toy containing or emitting that chemical will experience that effect.
The dose still matters.
Do squishy toys cause cancer or fertility problems?
There is no evidence from these studies that ordinary squishy-toy use causes cancer or infertility in children.
That distinction deserves to be explicit because otherwise a parent can read “reproductive toxicant” and understandably interpret it as “this toy can make my child infertile.”
Those are not equivalent statements.
DMF’s European reproductive-toxicity classification describes a hazardous property of the substance. It does not establish that the amount released from any particular squishy produces reproductive harm in a child.
The same principle applies to carcinogens.
Whether exposure represents a meaningful risk depends on factors including dose, route, frequency and duration.
The squishy studies identified legitimate concerns about chemical emissions from certain products. They did not demonstrate that normal play with these toys causes cancer, infertility or other chronic diseases in children.
The issue eventually reached European scientific advisers
Concerns raised by investigations in Denmark and Sweden eventually led to a broader European assessment.
The European Commission asked its Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks, known as SCHEER, to evaluate toxicological reference values for organic chemicals emitted by squishy toys.
The committee examined eight organic substances and developed toxicological reference values and corresponding emission limits. European Commission SCHEER assessment
The European review also highlighted something that makes perfect sense to anyone who has spent time around young children.
Children don’t necessarily use toys in the way adults expect them to.
What about children who lick or bite squishies?
A brightly colored squishy shaped like cake, ice cream or fruit can be particularly tempting to a young child.
Children may smell it, press it against their face, lick it or bite it.
SCHEER therefore concluded that assessing inhalation alone was not enough. Experts noted that children may suck or bite squishies, creating the possibility that substances could migrate into saliva.
If the foam breaks apart and pieces can be swallowed, another issue appears: the physical risk posed by detached pieces, including choking depending on their size and the child’s age. European Commission scientific opinion
For the compounds investigated in the Danish and Swedish studies, available testing did not indicate migration into artificial sweat, so skin exposure wasn’t considered the major route of concern for those substances.
That doesn’t necessarily apply to every ingredient in every toy. Fragrances and other additives can have different irritating or sensitizing properties.
For parents, the practical distinction is useful: simply holding a squishy isn’t what generated the greatest concern in these investigations. Prolonged inhalation and putting the product in the mouth are more relevant scenarios.
This isn’t only an old squishy-toy controversy
One might assume that the issue disappeared once regulators became aware of it.
A 2026 product recall shows why market surveillance still matters.
On June 25, 2026, the UK’s Office for Product Safety and Standards published a recall involving a product called Squeezy Dumplings.
Testing found an excessive concentration of benzene in the toy’s outer layer: 20 mg/kg.
UK authorities classified the product as presenting a serious chemical risk and reported that it did not meet applicable toy-safety requirements. Consumers were instructed to stop using it and keep it away from children. UK product recall for Squeezy Dumplings
Benzene is a known human carcinogen, and sufficient long-term exposure is associated with serious effects on blood-forming tissues and an increased risk of leukemia. UK Health Security Agency toxicological overview of benzene
But there is an equally important fact to remember:
That recall tells us about that product. It does not establish that squishy toys in general contain benzene.
Turning a documented problem with one non-compliant product into a claim about an entire category of toys would be misleading.
My child has played with squishies. Should I be worried?
For most parents reading this article, this may be the most important question.
The fact that a child has played with squishy toys is not a reason to assume that they have been poisoned or will develop a health problem later.
The research discussed here does not establish that.
Exposure isn’t all-or-nothing. A child squeezing a toy briefly in a ventilated room isn’t experiencing the same exposure as a child sleeping for hours with a high-emission product directly beside their face.
That’s precisely why researchers model specific exposure scenarios rather than declaring every product dangerous whenever a laboratory instrument detects a chemical.
The studies give parents a reason to make sensible choices about these products.
They do not provide a reason to panic about past play.
Does a strong chemical smell mean a squishy is toxic?
Not necessarily.
Our noses are surprisingly sensitive to some chemicals, and certain substances can be smelled at concentrations far below levels expected to cause toxic effects. Other potentially problematic substances may not provide a useful smell warning at all.
So a strong smell is not a toxicity test.
Likewise, the absence of an obvious smell isn’t proof that a product contains nothing undesirable.
Nevertheless, if a newly opened toy produces an extremely strong and persistent chemical odor, there is little reason to have a child sleep with it next to their face. Ventilating the room and limiting prolonged close exposure are reasonable precautions.
What can parents actually do?
There is no scientific justification for treating every squishy in the house as hazardous waste.
A more useful approach is to pay attention to where children’s products come from.
Toys should have appropriate labeling and clear information allowing the manufacturer or responsible importer to be identified. Products with no meaningful traceability or purchased from difficult-to-verify sellers deserve greater caution.
Young children shouldn’t be encouraged to suck or chew squishy toys.
A newly opened, strongly scented product doesn’t need to spend the night directly beside a child’s nose.
And once a squishy begins tearing, crumbling or shedding pieces, replacing or discarding it is a sensible decision, particularly when younger children are around.
These are straightforward precautions rather than evidence that every squishy is dangerous.
So, are squishy toys toxic?
The science doesn’t support a simple yes-or-no answer.
Research has established that some toys can release numerous volatile organic compounds. Danish investigators found products for which estimated exposure to certain chemicals exceeded acceptable levels under specific scenarios. Norwegian research confirmed that handheld toys can contribute VOCs to indoor air. European scientific advisers subsequently examined the issue in detail, and a problematic squishy product was recalled in the UK in 2026 because of excessive benzene.
At the same time, none of this demonstrates that all squishy toys are toxic or that ordinary play with them causes serious disease in children.
That distinction is easily lost when scientific findings are condensed into a few seconds of social media video.
The useful question isn’t simply, “Does this toy contain chemicals?”
Almost everything around us does.
Better questions are: Which substances are being released? In what quantities? How could they enter a child’s body? And how long is the child exposed?
For squishy toys, the evidence supports sensible caution rather than fear.
A toy isn’t automatically dangerous because a laboratory can identify its chemical ingredients. But it isn’t automatically safe simply because it is soft, brightly colored and sold for children, either.