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

PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

cyclingnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 397 posts

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#151

Post by Raidion »

paulcole wrote: post #43
acdha wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> waterproof, highly breathable, and incredibly lightweight This is basically the way most outdoors products have been marketed since the previous century so I’m not sure how much we’re actually talking about here. What I was hoping to see in that article was something more quantitative — does “heavy and doesn't breathe as well” mean something is 20% heavier or 200%, etc.?

This is what makes ShakeDry so revolutionary. The nonsense brands have been saying about waterproof and breathable is actually real. I’ve done 30 mile runs in the pouring rain w/ my ShakeDry jacket and come out “dry” at the end. The material never wets through. The only downside for me is that it does wear “warm” so I mostly wear it in under 45F degree weather — which coincides nicely with Portland’s rainiest weather…

As a runner myself, does being waterproof make that much of a difference? I've done pretty cold runs with various layers of under armour (or related) and while you don't stay dry, you do stay warm, and you will dry out pretty quickly if the rain stops.

Only thing I can think of would be very rainy and very windy weather but those are pretty rare in my area.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#152

Post by hedora »

clolege wrote: post #127
hashtag-til wrote: post #54

Since I watched the movie “Dark Waters”, I’m trying to avoid those PFO(A|E) as much as I can. Threw all non-stick pans away and learnt how to cook with just cast iron or inox pans. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Waters_(2019_film)

I was gifted a nice Our Place pan set for Christmas which uses Ceramic nonstick [0]. Ceramic nonstick doesn’t use PFOAs or PTFEs so some people think it’s safe. From Our Place’s FAQ [1]: > our Always Pan uses a sol-gel non-stick coating that is made primarily from silicon dioxide which is known in the cookware industry as "ceramic non-stick." It's tested not only to the standards of a ceramic coating (meaning no heav…

I'm reasonably sure non-stick ceramic pans are unsafe. They are certainly disposable, and misleadingly marketed. Also, the stuff under the coating should be cookware grade iron. It is fine if that leaches through. Why are they concerned about heavy metals leaching through? Is manufacturing leading to lead contamination or something?!?

There is an older technology that involves coating cast iron with actual ceramic. It is non-stick "enough", lasts generations and is safe. Example (high end) manufacturer:

https://www.lecreuset.com/

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#153

Post by klyrs »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #98
blindriver wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ditched them a while ago as well. I only use cast iron or stainless steel and it makes me wonder why I ever bothered with non-stick before.

Scotch pancakes. Scotch pancakes is still the one thing I can't cook without non-stick. If anybody has any tips that doesn't include half a kilo of lard, then I am very interested.

I'd never heard of scotch pancakes, but they look like what we make in north america. I use a cast iron griddle and the swipe of a lightly oiled rag. The trick is to get the griddle to exactly the right temperature before making your pancakes, using drops of batter to make "test pancakes." The drop should be big enough to get a few bubbles; when the bubbles stop closing in on themselves, the bottom should be a perfect golden brown. It can take several minutes of fidgeting before you dial it in, but if you're cooking with cast iron, that's the whole lesson: over-temperature burns and sticks, under-temperature sticks and burns.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#154

Post by reissbaker »

akira2501 wrote: post #143
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I only use cast iron or stainless steel and it makes me wonder why I ever bothered with non-stick before. Because they are incredibly useful when it comes to certain kinds of food, especially eggs and fish. I find all the "self-congratulatory" posts on the topic of non-stick pans, and demonization of people that use them, of the "thou doth protest too much" quality. Tons of renowned chefs, like Jacques Pepin, have…

> especially eggs Cooking eggs on a stainless pain isn't particularly difficult, you just need to change your technique and use quite a bit more preheating along with more oil or butter than you traditionally would for a non-stick pan. So, it's useful in that sense, but it's not as if we wanted for pan fried eggs before non-stick existed.

Making eggs on stainless steel is definitely more difficult... I'd say it's pretty easy with cast iron or carbon steel though, which were the traditional ways to make eggs pre-nonstick pans.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#155

Post by loeg »

Jolter wrote: post #124
loeg wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also seems like using these things in items like jackets is a lot less problematic than using them in ski waxes, which by design erode from the ski and get distributed in the environment. Jackets more or less stay in one piece.

The ski waxes use pretty small amounts, as I understand it. Anyway, they are indeed being phased out from ski waxes in many places/contexts. The FIS are phasing them out from all competitive skiing, to begin with.

My impression is that the international ski bodies (FIS et al) have fully banned the substances at this point. No phase out.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#156

Post by jmclnx »

peletiah wrote: post #69
jmclnx wrote: post #3

"All" is a bit over the top. I have Carradice bags and a Poncho and they work fine. I have ridden in very heavy rain without issues.

For how long though?

Not sure what you mean for how long, but I have not has issues riding all day.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#157

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

akira2501 wrote: post #143
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I only use cast iron or stainless steel and it makes me wonder why I ever bothered with non-stick before. Because they are incredibly useful when it comes to certain kinds of food, especially eggs and fish. I find all the "self-congratulatory" posts on the topic of non-stick pans, and demonization of people that use them, of the "thou doth protest too much" quality. Tons of renowned chefs, like Jacques Pepin, have…

> especially eggs Cooking eggs on a stainless pain isn't particularly difficult, you just need to change your technique and use quite a bit more preheating along with more oil or butter than you traditionally would for a non-stick pan. So, it's useful in that sense, but it's not as if we wanted for pan fried eggs before non-stick existed.

Here is the quote from Jacques Pepin about the utility of non-stick, starts at 1:35, https://www.nytimes.com/video/dining/100000001116746/jacques...

Basically, yes, it's certainly possible to get non-stick properties with a well-seasoned, very well-maintained pan. But even someone like Pepin, who has more than enough knowledge and experience to keep a pan in good working order, went the route of "that's too finicky, nonstick is just easier."

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#158

Post by 1MachineElf »

keitmo wrote: post #149
acdha wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> waterproof, highly breathable, and incredibly lightweight This is basically the way most outdoors products have been marketed since the previous century so I’m not sure how much we’re actually talking about here. What I was hoping to see in that article was something more quantitative — does “heavy and doesn't breathe as well” mean something is 20% heavier or 200%, etc.?

For years I've said "any clothing manufacturer that promises something is both 'waterproof' and 'breathable' is lying to you". Shakedry actually delivers on this promise. FWIW I do endurance cycling in the Seattle area, a.k.a. "The Pacific NorthWET". We tend to stress the hell out of waterproof clothing.

In Florida, living between the coast and the everglades, rain is a daily occurrence. Having grown up there for 20 years, I feel that rain doesn't phase me at all.

I have questioned the averseness northerners have towards getting wet. Living in Maryland now, so many I've interacted with will just not go outside all day if there is rain. They've been raised by parents who've trained them to wait for the rain to stop, to postpone yardwork, to waste time and space fiddling with umbrellas.

Is it just a comfort thing, or is there a real advantage to waterproof/breathable clothing?

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#159

Post by thorncorona »

1MachineElf wrote: post #158
keitmo wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For years I've said "any clothing manufacturer that promises something is both 'waterproof' and 'breathable' is lying to you". Shakedry actually delivers on this promise. FWIW I do endurance cycling in the Seattle area, a.k.a. "The Pacific NorthWET". We tend to stress the hell out of waterproof clothing.

In Florida, living between the coast and the everglades, rain is a daily occurrence. Having grown up there for 20 years, I feel that rain doesn't phase me at all. I have questioned the averseness northerners have towards getting wet. Living in Maryland now, so many I've interacted with will just not go outside all day if there is rain. They've been raised by parents who've trained them to wait for the rain to stop, t…

Comfort. Also being wet in warmer temps doesn't really cause you to get sick more vs cold temps.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#160

Post by stainforth »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #71
TrispusAttucks wrote: post #2

I am not optimistic about the future of sustainable specialized materials. It seems very likely that the same structures that give modern high tech materials their unique abilities are the same ones that make them so environmentally unfriendly.

People want to own a dream. Buy it for life, effective, durable, but also easily compostable! Very cheap, but hand made by workers paid a living wage with fair trade materials imported from pro-LQBTQIA green democracies.

Everything is permitted if its commerce. The right for a business to exist supersedes the right for a human to exist. There is no cause and effect, only commerce. The market is the only thing that exists. Markets will still exist after the end of men.
Post reply on HN