Fatworks: The Defenders of Fat!

We can state unequivocally that—no, no, no—Fatworks tallow does not contain phthalates. And never did.
Why are we even having to say this?

Because in November 2024, an incredibly irresponsible blogger published a post claiming that our Organic Beef Tallow contained phthalates. The damage to our reputation has been severe and entirely undeserved, costing us revenue, trust, and momentum. As a small business, the financial impact alone has been frightening to contemplate. And, of course, sadly, some of our less scrupulous competitors seized the opportunity to discredit us, capitalizing on her misinformation.

Since then, we’ve conducted over 20 tests for phthalates across multiple lots of both our Organic and non-organic Beef Tallow—in glass jars and in plastic buckets. All tests were performed by independent laboratories at the parts-per-billion (PPB) level (and in some cases, parts-per-million as well). Every single one came back with no detectable phthalates.

So, yes, unfortunately, it seems that Fatworks and our customers have paid the price for “blog science.” That’s the short version—and really, all you need to know if you're wondering whether our products contain phthalates (they don't).


That’s the short version. But if you're up for a deep dive intothe full story, feel free to read on...

As you probably know, Fatworks has spent the last 15 years leading the healthy fat movement. Creating clean, amazingly sourced, nourishing fats has always been our mission, and we take that responsibility more seriously than anyone, especially the blogger behind these claims.

For months, we repeatedly requested lab details and test results so we could properly evaluate the data, conduct our own testing, and communicate transparently with our customers. We even reached out to the phthalate experts she cited as consultants on her blog. It turns out that while these consultants may have expertise in the harmful effects of phthalates, none of them were involved in designing or implementing the study. If her goal was truly to help us eliminate phthalates from our fats, we fail to understand the delay—or the refusal to collaborate.

Here’s where things get interesting.

The blogger tested one single jar of our Organic Beef Tallow—and here’s the twist: it was just one week from expiration, meaning it had been sitting in the jar for 357 days. Yet, by her own admission, several of the other brands in the “study” were much, much fresher—some less than 30 days old.

This isn’t speculation; it was confirmed by the blogger herself and further corroborated by the lab she used. On her blog, she states that jars were purchased between August 2023 and August 2024. But the lab confirmed that all testing occurred at the same time—in August 2024. In other words, our nearly year-old jar was tested alongside freshly packed products, with no controls whatsoever for age or oxidation.
The jar was sourced from an Amazon warehouse during peak summer conditions, then sat for nearly a year with no documentation verifying the integrity of the vacuum seal. Given this, oxidation or environmental degradation of the fat becomes a highly plausible scenario.

So, despite surrounding the blog with so-called “experts,” this was anything but a controlled scientific study.
That’s why the director of the lab that performed her testing (Symbio Laboratories US) told us the following, directly and unequivocally:
“I could definitely see the oxidation and degradation of the oils into free fatty acids and other smaller solvent molecules could increase the solubility of the phthalates in the oil, and therefore cause more leaching. I could also just see the fact that the oil having more time to leach the phthalates out of the container could increase phthalate concentrations in the oil.”

Simply put: Her “study” failed to control for the one factor most likely to cause phthalates to leach from the plastisol lid: time. Had the other brands been tested a week before their expiration date, the lab believes they could have shown high phthalate levels too.
We were not able to retest using the same lab the blogger used (though we intended to), in order to control for lab-to-lab variation. However, after months ofhaving her stonewall us, we eventually discovered that the lab she used no longer performs phthalate testing as they decided to return to their primary area of expertise: pesticide testing in cannabis.
Instead, we chose what we believe to be a far more qualified alternative: labs that specialize in polymers and plastics, which is the appropriate field for accurate phthalate analysis.

We were also informed that there was a chance only the top layer of the jar was sampled, rather than the full contents. The plastisol lid liner (used in all the tested products, by the way) sits at the top of the jar and can leach phthalates into that upper layer if conditions like oxidation or extended storage are present.

In other words, if phthalates were present, they would likely be concentrated near the lid—not evenly distributed throughout the jar. And according to the lab, that’s likely where the sample was taken from, though they admitted they couldn’t say for certain. Why that wouldn’t be documented or confirmed is, frankly, beyond us.
To obtain a valid phthalate reading, the entire jar must be melted and thoroughly mixed before testing.

Failing to do so risks sampling only the surface layer, which can lead to a distorted, misleading result that doesn’t reflect the product as a whole.

That said, in the interest of transparency and comparison, we replicated her lab’s flawed sampling method on some of our own jars—and even then, the results still came back with no detectable phthalates.

As many readers of the blog have pointed out, the other two Fatworks products tested in the “study”—our Grass-Fed Lamb Tallow and Grass-Fed Bison Tallow—were among the lowest in the entire cohort (!). And yet, the blogger didn’t think to re-test the obvious outlier: our Organic Beef Tallow?

Compounding matters, her impartiality is shall we say, highly questionable as she promotes a competing tallow brand that she tested fresh, as an affiliate. We believe this reflects a shocking level of negligence—and shows exactly what happens when bloggers/affiliate sites, play scientist.

Simply put, there is no plastic in our rendering or processing chain, nor has there ever been. We've always prioritized the purity of our fats, long before this blogger ever entered the picture.

Fatworks is ironically the only tallow company that actively tests for phthalates.

Since the publishing of her blog, we’ve tested over a dozen jars and pails from different lots. Every single test has come back non-traceable (NT) for phthalates.

Just as a point of fact, a proper phthalate test at parts-per-billion sensitivity—from a reputable lab—costs around $10,000 to set up. As a small family-owned company, this is a huge cost for us. We mention that not to complain (although we are certainly not happy to have had to do it), but to emphasize our commitment: we’re doing this because your trust in our purity means everything.

Ok, we know that’s a lot, but we feel it’s important for any concerned customers to understand the full story. Fatworks built an impeccable reputation over 15 years—but the actions of one irresponsible (and frankly, malicious) blogger have caused reputational harm that’s difficult to even quantify. We thank you for making it to the end of this FAQ—we wish we never had to write it in the first place.

At this point, to be quite blunt, your choice is one between a sensationalist blogger who makes money working with our competitor and doing negligent “studies,” or the company that has invested in extensive phthalate testing and more importantly spent 15 years bringing back real, healthy fats to the mainstream—long before any of the other companies in the “study” even existed.

Hope that helps, and please let us know if you have any other questions.