Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers • Hacker News Board

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#261

Post by sfn42 » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 2:53 PM UTC

peteradio wrote: post #241

WithinReason wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it seems that a concentration of microplastics that's 50 million times higher than a toddler would get still leaves 20% of cells alive? To me this implies that normal exposure levels to microplastics are likely completely harmless.

Sleeping next to abandoned nuclear batteries will give you radiation burns and kill you in a few weeks to months, exposure to high radon will give you cancer in decades. Unrealistically high dosages can hint at problems that might occur at low levels.

Drinking a shitload of water can kill you, not drinking water will certainly kill you. In fact having a shitload of just about anything is likely to harm or kill you.

Unrealistically high doses imply absolutely nothing about lower doses.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#262

Post by giraffe_lady » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 2:54 PM UTC

Ekaros wrote: post #81

NovaDudely wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more chemists I have spoken to over the years, the more I hear warnings about polymers in general. Seems as though, that in general structure simply cannot be manufactured in a way that is innocuous to our health. It is plausible that plastic will be the next tobacco/leaded gasoline. Time will tell however.

I have wondered about carbon steel and cast iron for cooking. The common method is to "season" them for use. But that is done with fats and high heat? What is the stuff that forms? Is it also some type of polymer? It doesn't seem to survive acidic environment too well. So acids could break it down, is it actually safe to eat? Or something comparable to plastics?

My background is cooking not chemistry, but I suspect there's a lot more to that process. IIRC the iron is a catalyst for oxidation in a particular way that affects the resulting polymer. Then the polymer is carbonized by the very high heat process.

This all happens in the same "step" of seasoning, over time, but when learning to season I was taught it was several distinct things that had to be allowed time to run their course.

Pans where the seasoning was done at too low a temp or aborted early, usually both to avoid smoke, have a distinctly tacky or even sticky feel to their surface. This is probably the more straightforward polymer you're thinking of. I believe these actually handle acid better though. When you get the acid reaction it's definitely the iron part of the seasoning involved. Tastes like old coins.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#263

Post by CyberDildonics » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 2:56 PM UTC

chaxor wrote: post #176

chrisco255 wrote: post #98

I'm one of the most skeptical people when it comes to these types of claims. I think the effects are being exaggerated. However, I've recently begun to replace all plastic containers and dishware from my kitchen with stainless steel and glass. Drinks taste better in glass anyways, and steel is a good non-fragile alternative. And I cook in cast iron. It's almost impossible to avoid plastic, and I'm not religious about…

What about the heavy metals that are part of the cast iron and steel though? What about the heavy metals in ceramics? The list is pretty endless, but very specific types of glass (boron silicate or pyrex) and titanium can be good to switch to, as long as you are very careful about not getting lead or uranium glass. Or you could just not buy that lead testing kit or Geiger counter and live in ignorant bliss. People li…

I'm not an expert in metallurgy, but I think a cast iron pan is just made out of iron.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#264

Post by balaji1 » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 2:57 PM UTC

mrob wrote: post #200

flangola7 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it isn't plastic then what is it? We have been steadily identifying and reducing the number of toxic agents the public is exposed to. Fifty years ago in the 70s the average person would have regular exposure to lead gas, lead paint, tobacco smoke (even if they didn't smoke themselves - indoor smoking was still legal), potent pesticides, and maybe even asbestos. But there were far fewer everyday plastics at the tim…

I suspect improvements in communications media. Every day, the average man sees many other men who out-compete him, with no hope of that ever changing. He sees men who are richer, taller, stronger, smarter, etc., in ever increasing realism and "engagement". Beating them is impossible, so the correct strategy in the environment of evolutionary adaptedness would be social submission and hoping they are generous. It see…

so if you put the "natural" back around the people, biology and mental well-being will improve?

> I suspect improvements in communications media... But this is an interesting take. So wifi is hurting us after all haha

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#265

Post by sfn42 » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 2:57 PM UTC

nucleardog wrote: post #217

Dalewyn wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't frame it as "harmless", but it is probably accurate to say any harm is insignificant at worst.

If it's a single, acute exposure sure. I'm no doctor or microbiologist or anything, but there definitely seems to be a strong connection between "things that cause cellular damage" and "increased risk of cancer with long term exposure".

Yeah but cellular damage in the body is not the same as cellular damage in a petri dish.

I bet water kills cells in a petri dish. It's just a really useless test to do, that at absolute best gives a vague hint at something that may be true.

It's not useful to talk about in any capacity other than "let's explore this further with better experiments".

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#266

Post by throwawayiron » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 2:58 PM UTC

balls187 wrote: post #230

chrisco255 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cast iron is not bad at all to clean if you have a chain link steel scrubber (The Lodge sells these, other companies too). Ideally you scrub it when the pan is still warm. If you've let something sit in there that hardens, like cheese, you may have to let it soak in some warm water for a bit and apply elbow grease with the scrubber. You can even fill it with water and set it on the stove to warm the water up a bit to…

I wouldn’t soak a cast iron pan. Just apply a little heat, then use a bamboo/wood spatula to scrape the stuck food, then rinse (if needed) and wipe clean. For me, the biggest problem with Cast iron is the weight. I’m a big guy, with physical strength commensurate to my size, and cast iron pans are cumbersome to deal with. I have a 9” pan that I leave on the stove for daily use, but I don’t want to have cast iron cook…

>For me, the biggest problem with Cast iron is the weight

Seek out better cast iron cookware. For example, Lodge brand stuff is very heavy and poorly balanced. Compare to a Wagner cast iron pan of similar size made a century ago: it is significantly lighter, and well-balanced. I'm sure there must be modern cast iron cookware that can offer the same experience, but probably not new for $30.

I have problems with my hands and those heavy Lodge pans are annoying (good value though). My old Wagner stuff is no more cumbersome than my nice stainless steel pans, and, for meats at least, is a pleasure to cook with.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#267

Post by pseudosaid » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 2:59 PM UTC

sfn42 wrote: post #261

peteradio wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sleeping next to abandoned nuclear batteries will give you radiation burns and kill you in a few weeks to months, exposure to high radon will give you cancer in decades. Unrealistically high dosages can hint at problems that might occur at low levels.

Drinking a shitload of water can kill you, not drinking water will certainly kill you. In fact having a shitload of just about anything is likely to harm or kill you. Unrealistically high doses imply absolutely nothing about lower doses.

Read better please

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#268

Post by john-radio » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 2:59 PM UTC

sfn42 wrote: post #261

peteradio wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sleeping next to abandoned nuclear batteries will give you radiation burns and kill you in a few weeks to months, exposure to high radon will give you cancer in decades. Unrealistically high dosages can hint at problems that might occur at low levels.

Drinking a shitload of water can kill you, not drinking water will certainly kill you. In fact having a shitload of just about anything is likely to harm or kill you. Unrealistically high doses imply absolutely nothing about lower doses.

This comment is unhelpful; the person you're replying to clearly is not claiming that "absolutely everything that's harmful in large doses is harmful in small doses."

> Unrealistically high doses imply absolutely nothing about lower doses.

The example they give of nuclear radiation is a clear illustration of how a useful hint can be drawn from the high-level example of harm, a pattern which microplastics might very well follow.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#269

Post by hunter2_ » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 3:02 PM UTC

Dah00n wrote: post #155

epolanski wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Avoiding this exposure will be easy for me, because I was never very comfortable microwaving plastic. Maybe this specific one, but microplastics are in everything you eat and drink, the presented article merely points out that this specific use case produces lost of micro plastics which are ingested by children.

If you avoid this and other easily avoided situations, like stop using soft plastic drinking bottles and stop reusing bottled water bottles, you would be a big step in the right direction though.

> stop reusing bottled water bottles

Can you elaborate? Like is it somehow worse to buy a bottle of water and refill it periodically over the course of a year, than to let the original contents sit in my house for a year and then drink it? If so, I'm guessing the extra handling (squishing, crunching) is the main culprit? Or does leeching occur more readily when the contents are refreshed, as opposed to static contents that already reached equilibrium? Or is the pH (or other characteristics) of the original contents less likely to cause leeching than arbitrary contents?

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#270

Post by sfn42 » Fri, Jul 21, 2023, 3:07 PM UTC

balaji1 wrote: post #250

y7 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those things could be related to any change in society. There's nothing to suggest it's plastics in particular, right?

> There's nothing to suggest it's plastics in particular Sometimes wonder if these arguments are just devil’s advocating. I mean do you avoid heating food in plastic for you and yours? Or are you so scientific that you believe it’s fine until proven otherwise? Said another way, if you were to bet money, which way would you bet - that plastics are benign?

I'm not OP but yeah I assume it's fine until proven otherwise. Why wouldn't I?

Otherwise where does it end? What other things should I assume are dangerous despite no evidence? Or are you saying I should latch on to whatever baseless hysteria is popular at the moment?

I'm not a betting man. I think plastics have been around for a long time and as far as I know we haven't proven that they have a negative effect. If they did have a significant negative effect I'm pretty sure we would have proven it by now. So maybe they have an insignificant negative effect. I'm okay with that risk. If I weren't I wouldn't have time to do anything other than worry about and avoid shit that might have an insignificant negative effect - not to mention things that we know have a significant negative effect such as alcohol.

Honestly if you drink alcohol and you worry about microplastics you're just hypocritical.