Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Teflon Toxin

firstlook.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 263 posts

Re: The Teflon Toxin

#131

Post by codexjourneys »

Teflon has been known to be toxic for years. I'm not sure why "default trust" is a good position when dealing with companies like DuPont and Monsanto that have been caught lying to the public before. "Default suspicion" seems like the more cautious and logical approach here.

It's been more than a decade since I cooked with Teflon. I use glass, stainless steel, cast iron, or ceramic/enamel (love that old original Corningware from eBay!).

Much like eating real food, it's not hard to switch and the result tastes better.

Re: The Teflon Toxin

#132

Post by nkozyra »

hodwik wrote: post #87
tired_man wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd bet the issue is that you did not season the teflon pans (yeah, just about the same way as a cast iron pan...) and that you regularly use the pans at a very high heat which isn't exactly a teflon pan's forte. Teflon doesn't like high heat or rapid temp changes. Here's a really good article on use and care from Fine Foods Mag: http://www.finecooking.com/articles/the-science-of-nonstick-...

Off topic, but did you know the word "forte" in that context is pronounced "fort" not "for-tay"? I just learned that recently.

Both pronunciations are now standard.[1]

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/forte

The pronunciation for the Italian word for strong/strength is "for-tay"

Re: The Teflon Toxin

#133

Post by smoyer »

eevilspock wrote: post #102
smoyer wrote: post #56

What struck me most about this article is how much rationalization occurred. I'm amazed that a (presumably licensed) doctor can in one breath say they have a moral responsibility to safeguard the public, their workers and the environment, then in the next breath describe why the results of their own study didn't apply. But looking inward, I wonder if our industry doesn't do the same thing in many cases - what about:…

> - Failure to protect a user's privacy. Advertising is our C8. It pollutes nearly every corner of the web with deception and manipulation. It is the cause of the cancer called click-bait. It is so profitable it has given rise to factories that pump out cheap junk "content", overwhelming anything of merit on the web[1][2]. Then, to extract even more from the devil in this Faustian bargain, we invade our very customer…

I said it was a far-cry!

I don't work in the chemical industry and other than complaining, I can't effect much change in how it operates. I can however make life better for those using the software I create. As many others have pointed out, there are many more categories. I'll even add another - efficiency. I should create my software to use the least amount of resources possible. Eventually CPU and memory usage equate to power consumed from the grid.

Re: The Teflon Toxin

#134

Post by dceddia »

randallsquared wrote: post #75
thezilch wrote: post #9

I've never understood the gravity of Teflon pans. I can never seem to keep them non-stick, whether it be because of using too high of heat or somehow scratch the damn thing. So, I got cast irons. It's trivial to keep them seasoned and thus non-stick, and they can take the beating of very high heat -- searing meats -- and any metal utensils or rough substances.

Teflon pans are cheap, and you don't have to care for them at all. Just throw it in the dishwasher and after a year or so get a new one. Having said that, I'm really liking the two nonstick ceramic pans I bought a few months ago, and I'm not sure if I'll need to toss them next year, yet.

The T-Fal one I have has been going strong for a few years now (maybe 3?). The trick is to NEVER put it in the dishwasher. Hand wash only. It's the easiest thing ever to hand wash, since nothing sticks, and most of the water drips off before I grab the towel.

Re: The Teflon Toxin

#135

Post by tired_man »

hodwik wrote: post #87
tired_man wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd bet the issue is that you did not season the teflon pans (yeah, just about the same way as a cast iron pan...) and that you regularly use the pans at a very high heat which isn't exactly a teflon pan's forte. Teflon doesn't like high heat or rapid temp changes. Here's a really good article on use and care from Fine Foods Mag: http://www.finecooking.com/articles/the-science-of-nonstick-...

Off topic, but did you know the word "forte" in that context is pronounced "fort" not "for-tay"? I just learned that recently.

Yep. That's how the word was taught to me. In the US, quite a few people say it as "fort."

Re: The Teflon Toxin

#136

Post by tptacek »

eevilspock wrote: post #128
randallsquared wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Teflon pans are cheap, and you don't have to care for them at all. Just throw it in the dishwasher and after a year or so get a new one. Having said that, I'm really liking the two nonstick ceramic pans I bought a few months ago, and I'm not sure if I'll need to toss them next year, yet.

Great. More synthetic and toxic crap in our landfills. All for our myopic convenience. Dupont and 3M love you.

Well that and really good omelettes!

Re: The Teflon Toxin

#137

Post by tired_man »

nkozyra wrote: post #132
hodwik wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Off topic, but did you know the word "forte" in that context is pronounced "fort" not "for-tay"? I just learned that recently.

Both pronunciations are now standard.[1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/forte The pronunciation for the Italian word for strong/strength is "for-tay"

I wouldn't say its a standard. It's more that those who do pronounce it correctly can't be bothered correcting a sea of semi-literates any longer. Dictionaries are no longer the bastion of language they once were as they now stuff in new faddish words at the drop of a hat.

Too bad they don't also have a removal process to remove them once they've had their few years of trendiness and are forgotten.

Re: The Teflon Toxin

#138

Post by trebor »

codexjourneys wrote: post #131

Teflon has been known to be toxic for years. I'm not sure why "default trust" is a good position when dealing with companies like DuPont and Monsanto that have been caught lying to the public before. "Default suspicion" seems like the more cautious and logical approach here. It's been more than a decade since I cooked with Teflon. I use glass, stainless steel, cast iron, or ceramic/enamel (love that old original Corn…

Another good alternative cookware is Le Creuset. They make nice enameled cast-iron products, and they work well. I think Costco carries them as a white-label now and then.

Re: The Teflon Toxin

#139

Post by api »

codexjourneys wrote: post #131

Teflon has been known to be toxic for years. I'm not sure why "default trust" is a good position when dealing with companies like DuPont and Monsanto that have been caught lying to the public before. "Default suspicion" seems like the more cautious and logical approach here. It's been more than a decade since I cooked with Teflon. I use glass, stainless steel, cast iron, or ceramic/enamel (love that old original Corn…

I get irritated at the "but science!" crowd on these issues... Not because they are always wrong but because they don't get the social undercurrents at work here.

People preemptively reject GMOs for a fairly rational reason: they come from industries and an establishment with a hard documented history of lying and covering up problems. If a confirmed pathological liar comes to you with a new product and tells you it's safe...

I asked someone I knew who was very anti-GMO once if shs would consider them if they were being designed and tested by open non-profit agencies with a dedication to the public interest. She said yes.

For quite a few people, perhaps most, it's not some superstitious fear of the technology per se but a very rational distrust of the people who are wielding it.

Re: The Teflon Toxin

#140

Post by atourgates »

smoyer wrote: post #56

What struck me most about this article is how much rationalization occurred. I'm amazed that a (presumably licensed) doctor can in one breath say they have a moral responsibility to safeguard the public, their workers and the environment, then in the next breath describe why the results of their own study didn't apply. But looking inward, I wonder if our industry doesn't do the same thing in many cases - what about:…

I think points are valid and worth considering, but unless new research finds something entirely new, "eye strain" doesn't damage your eyes.

From the American Academy of Ophthalmology:

"Watching televisions, including LCDs and flat screens, can't cause your eyes any physical harm. The same is true for using the computer too much or watching 3-D movies. Your eyes may feel more tired if you sit too close to the TV or spend a lot of time working at the computer or watching 3-D movies, but you can fix that by giving your eyes a rest."

http://www.geteyesmart.org/eyesmart/living/five-vision-myths...

Post reply on HN