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

We Tested Nonstick Cookware: Coatings Don't Need to Look Worn to Shed Particles

rtings.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 103 posts

Re: We Tested Nonstick Cookware: Coatings Don't Need to Look Worn to Shed Particles

#61

Post by stult »

vaylian wrote: post #4
cdemer wrote: post #2

I’m the founder of RTINGS.com. A few notes about this investigation: - For each piece of cookware, we purchased and tested three separate units - Before taking the “new” measurement, each unit was washed three times with dish soap and rinsed with isopropyl alcohol - Oil blanks and uncoated cookware were included as controls - We did not chemically identify the particles that were released - This investigation measure…

Thank you for doing this. The conclusion from the text is: > For consumers who wish to minimize potential exposure to PTFE coating particles, the simplest approach may be to treat nonstick cookware as a specialized tool rather than a default choice. Instead, reach for uncoated cookware, such as stainless steel, cast iron, carbon steel, or glass, whenever practical. If we follow that advice: For which type of food/dis…

I stopped cooking with nonstick pans over 15 years ago, and the only thing I've found that can consistently be a bit tricky is eggs, but really only if the pan isn't hot enough yet when you add the butter or oil, you don't use enough butter/oil, you try to scramble the eggs in the pan, or you try to lift the eggs too soon. So arguably it takes a little more attention to detail to cook eggs on stainless steel, but in general I really don't think there is anything that requires nonstick. But even for the limited list of items that are easier to prepare on nonstick, it's usually just a matter of learning how to adjust your technique to match the cookware.

I made the switch to stainless steel and cast iron pretty much on a whim after I first read about Robert Bilott's lawsuits against DuPont, at which point I discovered it made almost no difference to my quality of life at all to avoid nonstick. To such an extent that I have never been even slightly tempted to switch back, despite honestly not feeling a particularly strong motivation to avoid nonstick in the first place. I've just always figured cooking with steel is an entirely painless way to reduce my potential exposure to dangerous chemicals, so even if it ends up being pointless, I haven't lost anything of value anyway.

Re: We Tested Nonstick Cookware: Coatings Don't Need to Look Worn to Shed Particles

#62

Post by et-al »

thegabez wrote: post #50

How are you suppose to cook an over easy egg on anything other than non-stick? Only thing I keep my non-stick around for.

If you watch the videos, folks use a generous amount of oil and butter. They basically "shallow"-fry their eggs.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49070419

Re: We Tested Nonstick Cookware: Coatings Don't Need to Look Worn to Shed Particles

#63

Post by nvme0n1p1 »

kccqzy wrote: post #42
stronglikedan wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cooking eggs in nonstick might be easier/require less fat I don't understand why anyone would want to cook eggs with less fat to begin with.

The usual health reasons I guess. And when I cook eggs in butter, most of the butter is discarded; I guess some could perceive this as wasteful.

Maybe you could use less butter? When I cook eggs, the butter is basically all absorbed by the end. It took a few tries to dial in the perfect amount though.

Re: We Tested Nonstick Cookware: Coatings Don't Need to Look Worn to Shed Particles

#64

Post by et-al »

kccqzy wrote: post #42
stronglikedan wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cooking eggs in nonstick might be easier/require less fat I don't understand why anyone would want to cook eggs with less fat to begin with.

The usual health reasons I guess. And when I cook eggs in butter, most of the butter is discarded; I guess some could perceive this as wasteful.

I can cook an over-easy egg with less than a teaspoon of oil on a non-stick.

If I do it on cast-iron, it's easily twice that. That adds up to a lot of oil being throw away in a year. And while I love butter on bread, I don't want the taste of it with my eggs.

Re: We Tested Nonstick Cookware: Coatings Don't Need to Look Worn to Shed Particles

#65

Post by breakyerself »

Cider9986 wrote: post #54
breakyerself wrote: post #29

I don't have any nonstick. It's not that hard to cook anything or to clean stainless or cast iron. For cast iron/carbon steel 99% of the time I run it under water and rub it with my hand and it comes clean in 30 seconds. Rarely I use some soap. Stainless comes clean easiest right after you use it. Especially if you pour a little water on it while it's still hot. I do occasionally use an SOS on stainless. There's noth…

The only thing that I need a nonstick for is a French omellete or French-style scrambled eggs. Because with stainless steel, carbon steel, or cast iron you need heat in order to prevent sticking. Apparently it's possible but hard to do in stainless steel: https://reddit.com/r/cookware/comments/1ove4wy/finally_a_non...

I just make them fast and I add a little slurry of potato starch and water or milk to the eggs. Around a teaspoon to 2 or 3 eggs.

I just get the pan hot, add oil, dump in the eggs, shake the pan with the fork agitating, but not touching the bottom, take off the heat or reduce to low depending on how it's going, switch to a rubber spatula, add filling, fold and plate in the traditional way.

Re: We Tested Nonstick Cookware: Coatings Don't Need to Look Worn to Shed Particles

#66

Post by loco5niner »

thegabez wrote: post #50

How are you suppose to cook an over easy egg on anything other than non-stick? Only thing I keep my non-stick around for.

I use my well seasoned carbon steel, but with a very nice metal spatula with a fairly 'sharp' edge. It really is necessary to scrape under the egg in a quick motion. Works great even without too much oil. You do have to use some oil.

Re: We Tested Nonstick Cookware: Coatings Don't Need to Look Worn to Shed Particles

#67

Post by archagon »

cdemer wrote: post #2

I’m the founder of RTINGS.com. A few notes about this investigation: - For each piece of cookware, we purchased and tested three separate units - Before taking the “new” measurement, each unit was washed three times with dish soap and rinsed with isopropyl alcohol - Oil blanks and uncoated cookware were included as controls - We did not chemically identify the particles that were released - This investigation measure…

Thank you for RTINGS, it’s an absolute gold mine for picky comparison shoppers.

Re: We Tested Nonstick Cookware: Coatings Don't Need to Look Worn to Shed Particles

#68

Post by [deleted] »

nvme0n1p1 wrote: post #63
kccqzy wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The usual health reasons I guess. And when I cook eggs in butter, most of the butter is discarded; I guess some could perceive this as wasteful.

Maybe you could use less butter? When I cook eggs, the butter is basically all absorbed by the end. It took a few tries to dial in the perfect amount though.

[deleted]

Re: We Tested Nonstick Cookware: Coatings Don't Need to Look Worn to Shed Particles

#69

Post by Kirby64 »

upcoming-sesame wrote: post #38

Coincidentally just saw an ad for this https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/barecookware/everpan Not affiliated in any way. But looks promising

Not really useful. Others have made titanium coated stuff, and it's not really significantly better for non-stick than just a nitrated steel pan.

Re: We Tested Nonstick Cookware: Coatings Don't Need to Look Worn to Shed Particles

#70

Post by Kirby64 »

ForHackernews wrote: post #33

I wonder how this compares to this new "no coating" nonstick they are hyping up: https://fromourplace.com/blogs/care-use/a-new-kind-of-nonsti...

It's worse. Non-stick PTFE is basically always the best. All these alternative "non-stick" coatings want you to use a little bit of oil. PTFE needs 0 oil to work.
Post reply on HN