6 ms·

I assume they switched to a less studied but very similar analog, like happened with BPA? Edit: Yep, of course they did. > Another potential concern is that o

I assume they switched to a less studied but very similar analog, like happened with BPA? Edit: Yep, of course they did. > Another potential concern is that other PFAS are now in use. For example, hexafluoropropylene oxide (HFPO, also known as a ‘GenX’ chemical) is often used to replace PFOA in manufacturing processes, while perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (PFBS) is used as a replacement for PFOS. New PFAS also continue to be developed. These chemicals haven’t been around long enough for researchers to fully understand if they might have the same (or even different) health effects. https://www.cancer.org/healthy/cancer-causes/chemicals/teflon-and-perfluorooctanoic-acid-pfoa.html https://www.cancer.org/healthy/cancer-causes/chemicals/teflo...

amluto 4y ago
I think the end goal is to not use a similar analogue. The problematic chemicals are fluorosurfactants used in production, and they are not actually useful in the final pan. Manufacturers are working on getting rid of them: https://www.solvay.com/en/article/eliminating-pfas https://www.solvay.com/en/article/eliminating-pfas As far as I know, PTFE itself is also a “forever chemical”, but it’s an extremely inert polymer and is unlikely to be particularly dangerous as long as it doesn’t get too hot. (PFOA and PFOS are water soluble. PTFE is not.)
- gilrain 4y ago
  > Manufacturers are working on getting rid of them. It might be more ethical to stop selling the dangerous product until a replacement can be found, but I’m not a huge chemical manufacturer.
  - mensetmanusman 4y ago
    Many stopped selling a generation ago, but the chemicals last longer than a generation…
- arcticbull 4y ago
  > ... but it’s an extremely inert polymer and is unlikely to be particularly dangerous as long as it doesn’t get too hot. You mean like on a stovetop?
  - 124816 4y ago
    Usually beyond the range you normally cook at, but definitely achievable if you leave a pan unattended for a minute, or use it with insufficient coverage. Pet birds are extremely vulnerable, and there's plenty of stories of them dying due to nonstick cookware. I get little benefit from nonstick cookware, so for me the "canary in the kitchen" aspect was enough reason to eliminate it from the house.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

amluto 4y ago

I think the end goal is to not use a similar analogue. The problematic chemicals are fluorosurfactants used in production, and they are not actually useful in the final pan. Manufacturers are working on getting rid of them: https://www.solvay.com/en/article/eliminating-pfas https://www.solvay.com/en/article/eliminating-pfas As far as I know, PTFE itself is also a “forever chemical”, but it’s an extremely inert polymer and is unlikely to be particularly dangerous as long as it doesn’t get too hot. (PFOA and PFOS are water soluble. PTFE is not.)

gilrain 4y ago
> Manufacturers are working on getting rid of them. It might be more ethical to stop selling the dangerous product until a replacement can be found, but I’m not a huge chemical manufacturer.
- mensetmanusman 4y ago
  Many stopped selling a generation ago, but the chemicals last longer than a generation…
arcticbull 4y ago
> ... but it’s an extremely inert polymer and is unlikely to be particularly dangerous as long as it doesn’t get too hot. You mean like on a stovetop?
- 124816 4y ago
  Usually beyond the range you normally cook at, but definitely achievable if you leave a pan unattended for a minute, or use it with insufficient coverage. Pet birds are extremely vulnerable, and there's plenty of stories of them dying due to nonstick cookware. I get little benefit from nonstick cookware, so for me the "canary in the kitchen" aspect was enough reason to eliminate it from the house.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]