I was being semi-facetious. The potential for harm exists but the conditions are pretty extreme. It is true however that teflon manufacturing is very toxic to the environment and the workers.The campaign to quiet the risks is pretty extreme however, so I do not personally trust claims of improved methodology in manufacturing. If you look at the recent ban in Australia (I am 95% sure this is where this is taking place) they recently banned the use of “forever chemicals” such as PFAS, FOOF, etc EXCEPT for in the use of cookware because the lobbying got very intense. Additionally, if you look in to the debacle with microplastics and such, it doesnt inspire much confidence in regulation and risk analysis. Anyhow, the choice to switch cookware is a small one and the risks to your person and the globe is potentially very large, so I personally try to avoid them.
p.s. ask any chemist if they want fluorine around their food and you will probably get some negative responses as wel
You might be thinking of France. They had the ban and exception for cookware.
Anyhow, the choice to switch cookware is a small one and the risks to your person and the globe is potentially very large, so I personally try to avoid them.
I mean, the personal risk very large in the sense that the current studies don’t show it but hey you never know. I just find that a bit eh. The environmental effects seem to be more real, but that’s more of an industry wide issue than something really affected by personal cookware decisions. It’s one of those things that if they banned them it’d suck but I guess it’d be alright, but I can’t be arsed to switch myself.
How dare you have a specific, detailed, and nuanced takeaway from data that suggests specific, detailed, and nuanced risks associated with a given manufacturing process!
Don’t you know that the only possible valid conclusions are “XYZ GOOD!” or “XYZ BAD!”?!
I was being semi-facetious. The potential for harm exists but the conditions are pretty extreme. It is true however that teflon manufacturing is very toxic to the environment and the workers.The campaign to quiet the risks is pretty extreme however, so I do not personally trust claims of improved methodology in manufacturing. If you look at the recent ban in Australia (I am 95% sure this is where this is taking place) they recently banned the use of “forever chemicals” such as PFAS, FOOF, etc EXCEPT for in the use of cookware because the lobbying got very intense. Additionally, if you look in to the debacle with microplastics and such, it doesnt inspire much confidence in regulation and risk analysis. Anyhow, the choice to switch cookware is a small one and the risks to your person and the globe is potentially very large, so I personally try to avoid them.
p.s. ask any chemist if they want fluorine around their food and you will probably get some negative responses as wel
You might be thinking of France. They had the ban and exception for cookware.
I mean, the personal risk very large in the sense that the current studies don’t show it but hey you never know. I just find that a bit eh. The environmental effects seem to be more real, but that’s more of an industry wide issue than something really affected by personal cookware decisions. It’s one of those things that if they banned them it’d suck but I guess it’d be alright, but I can’t be arsed to switch myself.
How dare you have a specific, detailed, and nuanced takeaway from data that suggests specific, detailed, and nuanced risks associated with a given manufacturing process!
Don’t you know that the only possible valid conclusions are “XYZ GOOD!” or “XYZ BAD!”?!