3 ms·

I find with this and many other things, the answer is "butter". Even 2.5ml of oil and 2.5ml of butter mixed together will result in eggs that flip perfectly an

I find with this and many other things, the answer is "butter". Even 2.5ml of oil and 2.5ml of butter mixed together will result in eggs that flip perfectly and taste 100x better than teflon eggs.

cenamus 2y ago
The whole point of non-stick pans is not to need any fat/oil, not even a little bit, though. No matter how often people tell me, stainless steel, carbon steel or cast iron, none are as good and low effort as a simple non-stick pan.
- ozim 2y ago
  I’m find it troublesome to fry without oil or butter on any pan and I only had Teflon ones.
- williamdclt 2y ago
  I don't think it's really lower effort if you account for the care with which you need to cook with teflon (no metal utensil), wash it (no dishwasher) and store it (no stacking). Unless you replace it every ~year I suppose. There's plenty of things you can cook without fat in a stainless steel, too (pretty much all meats). And fat isn't just for nonstickiness properties, it's a part of making food taste good. If you want/need to avoid fat for health reasons, that's fair. You also just can't sear in a teflon, as you're not supposed to preheat the pan. I almost never reach for my teflon for the opposite reason as you: I find it more effort. The one thing I really use it for is fried eggs, or when I really can't be bothered to wait a few mins for the stainless to preheat
  - cenamus 2y ago
    I mostly use wooden cookware, and I throw that and non-stick pans in the dishwasher, teflon is so chemically stable that it shouldn't matter. But yes, I just buy a new pan every ~2 years, sometimes 3.
    - aphantastic 2y ago
      Why do you feel a need to buy a new pan? If something about the coating has degraded, where do you think the offed material has ended up?
      - cenamus 2y ago
        Yeah it's degrading. Half in the food, half down the sink I'd say? But what is it gonna do? The teflon isn't gonna do anything, maybe the binders/glue, but aslong as there's no new discoveries...
        aphantastic 2y ago
        Teflon is known to not interact when it is in its stable long polymer state. But if we accept that it is breaking away from that state, we know it is not stable, and is potentially reactive. Personally, a touch of avocado oil in a coast iron is much (much) lower risk (and price) than taking bets on whether this particular PFAS matrix will see the same fate as all the prior (now banned) ones or if we have somehow finally solved PFAS once and for all. Not to mention all the known-bad environmental PFAS’s the manufacture and disposal of these 2 year pans creates.
gruez 2y ago
Unless you're using a very small pan, there's no way 5ml of oil is going to provide enough coating for "eggs" (plural) "that flip perfectly". Also, the "taste 100x better" claim is so hyperbolic that I have to internally downgrade it to "I like it more".
- FredPret 2y ago
  I maintain that "100x better" is an understatement for teflon eggs vs eggs fried in butter. Also, there's almost never a good reason to be so extremely strict about fat consumption that 5ml or 10ml or 15ml is a problem, especially if you're eating eggs in the first place. If your diet is that strict, boil the egg. The old studies linking fat to heart disease are complete bunk.
  - gruez 2y ago
    >I maintain that "100x better" is an understatement for teflon eggs vs eggs fried in butter. I can't imagine this being true for any holistic metric "taste". The only way is if you used some contrived measure like "amount of caramelized particles from frying pan" (in which there's 0 from teflon pan and non-zero from butter eggs, so it's infinitely better), or you use a non-linear scale (eg. slightly better = 10x, slightly better than that = 100x, etc.) >The old studies linking fat to heart disease are complete bunk. Fats are at the very least, calorific. And studies showing weight gain to all cause mortality are robust. According to the USDA a tablespoon of butter is 100 calories. An egg on the other hand is 155. Even if you use some optimistic estimates (eg. 3 eggs, half the butter remains on the pan), that's still 10% extra calories. I'd rather spend my calorie budget on other delicious things than slightly more buttery fried eggs.
    - FredPret 2y ago
      How did you get to a tablespoon of butter? Also, calories is why you're eating in the first place. The butter is part of the breakfast. If you're getting fat, that's not the fault of the butter per se, but of all the calories put together, and plain chicken breasts are a better option.

I find with this and many other things, the answer is "butter". Even 2.5ml of oil and 2.5ml of butter mixed together will result in eggs that flip perfectly and taste 100x better than teflon eggs.

cenamus 2y ago

The whole point of non-stick pans is not to need any fat/oil, not even a little bit, though. No matter how often people tell me, stainless steel, carbon steel or cast iron, none are as good and low effort as a simple non-stick pan.

ozim 2y ago
I’m find it troublesome to fry without oil or butter on any pan and I only had Teflon ones.
williamdclt 2y ago
I don't think it's really lower effort if you account for the care with which you need to cook with teflon (no metal utensil), wash it (no dishwasher) and store it (no stacking). Unless you replace it every ~year I suppose. There's plenty of things you can cook without fat in a stainless steel, too (pretty much all meats). And fat isn't just for nonstickiness properties, it's a part of making food taste good. If you want/need to avoid fat for health reasons, that's fair. You also just can't sear in a teflon, as you're not supposed to preheat the pan. I almost never reach for my teflon for the opposite reason as you: I find it more effort. The one thing I really use it for is fried eggs, or when I really can't be bothered to wait a few mins for the stainless to preheat
- cenamus 2y ago
  I mostly use wooden cookware, and I throw that and non-stick pans in the dishwasher, teflon is so chemically stable that it shouldn't matter. But yes, I just buy a new pan every ~2 years, sometimes 3.
  - aphantastic 2y ago
    Why do you feel a need to buy a new pan? If something about the coating has degraded, where do you think the offed material has ended up?
    - cenamus 2y ago
      Yeah it's degrading. Half in the food, half down the sink I'd say? But what is it gonna do? The teflon isn't gonna do anything, maybe the binders/glue, but aslong as there's no new discoveries...
      - aphantastic 2y ago
        Teflon is known to not interact when it is in its stable long polymer state. But if we accept that it is breaking away from that state, we know it is not stable, and is potentially reactive. Personally, a touch of avocado oil in a coast iron is much (much) lower risk (and price) than taking bets on whether this particular PFAS matrix will see the same fate as all the prior (now banned) ones or if we have somehow finally solved PFAS once and for all. Not to mention all the known-bad environmental PFAS’s the manufacture and disposal of these 2 year pans creates.

gruez 2y ago

Unless you're using a very small pan, there's no way 5ml of oil is going to provide enough coating for "eggs" (plural) "that flip perfectly". Also, the "taste 100x better" claim is so hyperbolic that I have to internally downgrade it to "I like it more".

FredPret 2y ago
I maintain that "100x better" is an understatement for teflon eggs vs eggs fried in butter. Also, there's almost never a good reason to be so extremely strict about fat consumption that 5ml or 10ml or 15ml is a problem, especially if you're eating eggs in the first place. If your diet is that strict, boil the egg. The old studies linking fat to heart disease are complete bunk.
- gruez 2y ago
  >I maintain that "100x better" is an understatement for teflon eggs vs eggs fried in butter. I can't imagine this being true for any holistic metric "taste". The only way is if you used some contrived measure like "amount of caramelized particles from frying pan" (in which there's 0 from teflon pan and non-zero from butter eggs, so it's infinitely better), or you use a non-linear scale (eg. slightly better = 10x, slightly better than that = 100x, etc.) >The old studies linking fat to heart disease are complete bunk. Fats are at the very least, calorific. And studies showing weight gain to all cause mortality are robust. According to the USDA a tablespoon of butter is 100 calories. An egg on the other hand is 155. Even if you use some optimistic estimates (eg. 3 eggs, half the butter remains on the pan), that's still 10% extra calories. I'd rather spend my calorie budget on other delicious things than slightly more buttery fried eggs.
  - FredPret 2y ago
    How did you get to a tablespoon of butter? Also, calories is why you're eating in the first place. The butter is part of the breakfast. If you're getting fat, that's not the fault of the butter per se, but of all the calories put together, and plain chicken breasts are a better option.