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

Gore-TEX, a lightweight, waterproof fabric made from the expanded form of PTFE

sciencehistory.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 220 posts

Re: Gore-TEX, a lightweight, waterproof fabric made from the expanded form of PTFE

#211

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

_yb2s wrote: post #207
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is that you do not live in a climate that resembles, say, the British Isles. Goretex was a total game changer in these environments (and as noted by other commenters, similarly in the PNW in N.America). > If it's not raining you'll be way more comfortable with plain fabric, especially wool. If it is raining, you'll be just as comfortable in a plastic raincoat (especially polyurethane) with pit zips, and you…

I am from the PNW and do a ton of hiking in the rain, this is how I came to have such a poor opinion of goretex. I’ll add that I sweat too much on a hard hike for goretex to keep up, which could be a physiological difference that makes it not work for me. Sweat will literally be pouring out the bottom of the shell. For the light constant rain in the PNW, wool with the natural lanolin intact will keep me dry all day w…

A couple of years ago, I did the Cape Wrath Trail (230 miles +/-) in the Scottish Highlands. 17 days with endless rain (+/-). I had a Mountain Equipment jacket and Rab non-goretex pants/trousers. Temperatures were mild. Can't imagine trying to wear wool (other than the smartwool t-shirt/fullsleeve tops I did wear). The GTX did wonderfully.

I would never wear GTX for trail running, for the reason you highlight. But then for trail running, short of a torrential downpour with cool/cold temps., I doubt I would wear anything waterproof at all.

It's a fair point that with venting, PU might be much better today than the PU shells of my youth, which were totally unvented.

Re: Gore-TEX, a lightweight, waterproof fabric made from the expanded form of PTFE

#212

Post by lobstersammich »

pneumatic1 wrote: post #196
adrr wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Teflon(brand) coated pans don't use PFOA or PFOS in their manufacture and PFOA is banned in the US for cookware.

https://epi.dph.ncdhhs.gov/oee/a_z/genx.html One is called GenX and Chemours (DuPont) has been poisoning the city of Wilmington.

You may have to turn on your VPN to appear to be coming from an EU country (or maybe even from inside Germany, since this Youtube channel, Strg-F [literally "Ctrl F", so 'find'] is part of `Funk`, which is a German public broadcast station) but I found this half-hour-long documentary on PFAS and PFOAs, more generally, to be quite informative:

https://youtu.be/ovCvW22ol3Y

The video covers Chemours, DuPont, etc. and how there's a town in the US where the rain and soil is poisonous due to PFOA production in the past (and still on-going: not PFAS but other deemed-safe-by-corporate-lawyers PFOAs). The man who they interviewed had pet dogs that he would let outside and the husky loved being outside in the rain. However, the dog developed sores / lesions on its back and then died. Turns out the groundwater and basically the whole environment around the PFOA factory is highly toxic.

The video also interviewed a worker at a PFOA plant in Germany who has (had?) thyroid cancer, I believe it was, and suffers from many disrupted endocrine system effects. (He worked inside a PFOA factory where sometimes the chemical vapor would condense on the ceiling and drip down on to the workers. Again, the ground water and soil there is not safe for human or animal consumption.)

They also cover / touch upon the lawsuits that farmers with grazing cattle (that died off) tried to bring against PFOA manufacturers like DuPont, Chemours, etc. Unfortunately, most of those farmers are now dead due to cancers of various sorts (from consuming PFOA-laden groundwater, the same water which they were giving to their animals which died by the hundreds a few decades ago).

They also touch upon how difficult it is to recycle PFOA-containing fabrics: they must be incinerated at much higher temperatures to render the compounds inert and safe for disposal in the way that regular trash is disposed of after incineration.

Re: Gore-TEX, a lightweight, waterproof fabric made from the expanded form of PTFE

#213

Post by refurb »

CorrectHorseBat wrote: post #208
refurb wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't quote wikipedia. That's a theory from the 70's.

I rather believe Wikipedia than random strangers on the internet

Those are the same.

Look at peer reviewed papers.

Re: Gore-TEX, a lightweight, waterproof fabric made from the expanded form of PTFE

#214

Post by ComputerGuru »

refurb wrote: post #149
ComputerGuru wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not how it causes cancer. Its physical properties are incompatible with human biology.

Yes it is. Asbestos has chelated iron in it that catalyzes free radicals that result in DNA damage. Saying "Its physical properties are incompatible with human biology." is not an actual answer. What physical properties?

95% of all asbestos in use is of the chrysotile variety, which is Mg3Si2O5(OH)4 and doesn’t contain any iron [0]. It’s linked with human health hazards but is less dangerous than the crocidolite variant.

Crocidolite does contain iron (Na2FeIII2FeII3Si8O22(OH)2 per [1]) but it’s not the common type of asbestos and is known as blue asbestos and is found primarily in South Africa, Australia, and Bolivia.

I think given how dangerous asbestos is, it can’t statistically be reasonable to assume that it’s cancerous properties arise from something only found in a minority of the asbestos we use.

[0]: https://www.britannica.com/science/asbestos-mineral

[1]: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crocidolite

The second link is in French.

Re: Gore-TEX, a lightweight, waterproof fabric made from the expanded form of PTFE

#216

Post by CorrectHorseBat »

refurb wrote: post #213
CorrectHorseBat wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I rather believe Wikipedia than random strangers on the internet

Those are the same. Look at peer reviewed papers.

Wikipedia links to those, you haven't yet.

Peer reviewed papers aren't absolute truth either and one usually needs to be an expert in the field to see which papers are sound and which are not, if even possible. I'd even wager there's a lower percentage of bullshit to be found on Wikipedia than in peer reviewed papers.

Re: Gore-TEX, a lightweight, waterproof fabric made from the expanded form of PTFE

#217

Post by lowkey »

Important to note that the Gore-TEX membrane is made from PFAS, a forever chemical that is absolutely destroying the health of virtually every living thing on the planet. Correction: As of 2022, Gore-TEX will no longer use PFAS in their membrane [0] however PFAS will continue to be used in the durable water-resistant coating [1].

Why PFAS are so concerning:

1. PFAS and PFOA are known as forever chemicals because they virtually never break down under normal conditions and therefore bio-accumulate in all living organisms.

2. 99% of Americans are known to have toxic levels of PFAS or PFOS in their blood. Toxic levels of PFAS are found in rainwater all over the world - even Antarctica and Tibet. There is no rainwater anywhere in the world that is safe to drink.

3. There is no known safe level of PFAS/PFOS in the system. The EPA currently rates the recommended level at under 0.04 parts per trillion. The best testing methods can only measure as low as 4 parts per trillion.

4. PFAS are known to cause an incredible number of diseases including various cancers, obesity, liver disease, thyroid disease, kidney disfunction, and a wide range of fertility issues in both the parents and the children.

[0] https://www.gore-tex.com/pressroom/press-release/responsibil...

[1] https://toxicfreefuture.org/press-room/gore-tex-manufacturer...

Re: Gore-TEX, a lightweight, waterproof fabric made from the expanded form of PTFE

#218

Post by nequo »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #201
CharlesW wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People get so upset about Toot and Coq and Gimp, but Gore seems totally OK. For me (a native American English speaker) the context matters. When used in a name or as part of a longer name (e.g. Gore-TEX), it's totally okay. Actual gore can be upsetting, but the word itself is commonly used in content warnings and guides. "Gimp" is different than "Coq" or "Cox" (a popular cable provider in the U.S.) in that it's con…

The author of Coq named it that way deliberately, which is why some people are annoyed by it. It's not that big a deal when it happens naturally, but going for such a pun in an academic/professional setting isn't really something to do.

Was it really named Coq in order to sound weird in English? I thought that it is a reference to Thierry Coquand and the French word for rooster.

Re: Gore-TEX, a lightweight, waterproof fabric made from the expanded form of PTFE

#219

Post by rootusrootus »

chrisseaton wrote: post #199
s0rce wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't work in cold rainy conditions, you'll freeze without something to keep you dry, sweaty and warm is better than wet and hypothermic. You don't need breathable jackets but you need the waterproof.

Short of specialist arctic conditions, if you’re moving you’re going to be a warm enough anyway.

Knowing more now about Chris Seaton than I ever did, ironic that this comment got downvoted. Chances are good he knew more about cold, wet, and moving than the vast majority of people on HN.

Re: Gore-TEX, a lightweight, waterproof fabric made from the expanded form of PTFE

#220

Post by emit_time »

johnwalkr wrote: post #159
unixhero wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you can get USD50 back? Worth the hassle?

No, I could have explained more clearly. I mean it’s good to know there is still value in the goretex brand (quality control, warranty) now that the patent is expired, when making the decision to buy goretex vs. a knockoff.

What did you buy from where?
Post reply on HN