h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Bertie,

There's no conspiracy here. Your post will have been hidden due to fair use policy...you will have posted too much of what might be copyrighted material.

Repost with just the main points and it should be OK to remain up.

Summarise in your own words and put the reference down.

>>"DONT THINK I NEED SAY ANY MORE."

My suggestion is that you follow that thought.

potholer, would you like me to go away so you and your friends can have this site to yourselves?

I'd rather you didn't, for the record.

Also, any clues as to what got hidden?

sure, it was a post from a retired hazardous materials consultant from the usa who essentialy said that ptfe coated frying pans should be banned as the gases released were dangerous in the extreme.
That the main cause of 'Teflon flu' was a substance which converted to hydroflouric acid when in contact with mucus membranes and that it was cumulative, in other words there was long term damage as a result.

http://willtaft.com/133/health/i-do-not-use-teflon-cookware
Its buried down the bottom.
Cheers for your comment - much appreciated.
B

"That the main cause of "Teflon flu" was a substance which converted to hydroflouric acid when in contact with mucus membranes "

Well, that's just false. And it's easily proven false. If it was true, plumber's tape would be incredibly dangerous.

PTFE *does* convert to hydrofluoric acid (among other things) when it decomposes - but you have to get it properly hot to do that, like over 400 C. And if your mucus membranes are at or above 400 C, you have larger problems.

Reading your link, what you're referring to is carbonyl fluoride, which is a different decomposition product, which converts to HF on mucous membranes. But, again, the PTFE has to be hot to generate that stuff. Very hot.

I have to take issue with the phrase "dangerous in the extreme". It simply doesn't pass the bullshit test.

Consider: how many people own non-stick cookware and use it every day? I would suggest the number in England alone is in the tens of millions. The figure worldwide might well be over a billion.

Consider: if this cookware was "dangerous in the extreme", don't you think a mainstream source might have pointed it out by now? As in, not just a nutter with a blog, but someone like Nature, say.

Consider: one of the most admired scientists in history is Richard Doll, who proved the link between asbestos and smoking and lung cancer. Don't you think there are hundreds of thousands of scientists out there who would jump at the chance to be the next Richard Doll... if there was a case to make?

If nothing else, the absence of a case-controlled study proving a link between PTFE and health problems should cause you pause.

mmm, you said that the amount of ptfe on a frying pan was incredibly small, in fact you gave a figure.
If this is the cause of "teflon flu" then for such a small amount of stuff to have this effect it must be powerful indeed.
I have not been able to refind the reports from those suffering from the effects of overheated coated cookware, but i was able to find reports of this flu like effect in workers at a plant where ptfe was used - your response was that they must have been exposed to a lot of the substance.
The fact is that they were all smokers, who presumably went out for a quick drag - i dont think anyone would be foolish enough to smoke a cigarette covered in ptfe dust therefore it must have been a miniscule amount - again pointing to its potency.

"i dont think anyone would be foolish enough to smoke a cigarette covered in ptfe dust"

Just three things in direct response to that:

1. you're talking about a white object potentially contaminated with white dust. You wouldn't be able to see it.

2. it wouldn't need to be "covered" - a piece of PTFE the size of a pinhead would be plenty, and much, much more than appears on a non-stick pan.

3. "I don't think anyone would be foolish enough to...". Really? REALLY? You don't get out much, do you? May I suggest watching the very wonderful BBC3 show "World's Craziest Fools", for a cavalcade of examples of video footage of people doing things you wouldn't think anyone would be foolish enough to do.

white object covered with white dust - fair enough
foolish things - spot on -
getting out enough - probably right - but that depends on your definition - does deep sea fishing 2 times a week count?
But again - enough to cover a pinhead is very little, so it must be very potent stuff.
Personaly speaking though i would be very wary of any substance promoted by any business as their motives would always be about money - my personal experiences do nothing to change this attitude.

Enough to cover a pinhead is hundreds or thousands of times the amount on a non-stick pan. Furthermore, that powder is then made VERY hot (maybe 700C!), much hotter than a pan on a hob, and you inhale the concentrated vapour directly and deliberately with no dilution.

Compare and contrast with your pan, on which very, VERY much less PTFE is being brought to a lower temperature at least a couple of feet from your face.

See the important differences?

"i would be very wary of any substance promoted by any business"

A fine, sensible, skeptical point of view. Indeed, I work for such a company. Who's to say I'm impartial?

Which is why I brought up the point about Richard Doll, and the fact that there are hundreds or thousands of doctors out there who would LOVE to be the next Richard Doll. Can you imagine the kudos that would follow someone who could prove a link between health problems and something as ubiquitous as non-stick cookware? While companies making it have a strong vested interest in it appearing safe, there are thousands of very clever people out there who could make a VERY good living out of proving it wasn't. And they haven't.

The fact that no such link has been found, and non-stick cookware is in use by, I think it would be reasonable to estimate, about a billion people, strongly suggests to me that there's no link there.

I'm reminded of the "moon landing hoax" conspiracy theory. That requires you to believe that hundreds of thousands of people spent billions of dollars over a decade putting together an elaborate hoax, and not one of them has ever come forward with any evidence. Not one.

Similarly, if PTFE were dangerous, you're required to believe that there's not a single epidemiologist, anywhere in the world, who has done a study and found a convincing link to ill health. It just doesn't pass the sniff test. You don't need to ask the companies making the stuff (or the engineers working for them ), you just need to consider human nature and how much personal benefit someone would derive from *proving* PTFE was a danger. (Answer: a LOT). Proving, mark you - not just claiming on a website. Publishing their peer reviewed data. There's no data, because if there was, I'd have a different job.

As it is, there are health concerns about the manufacture of the stuff, as I originally said, and those concerns have led to an expensive and time consuming change to our processes as we replace the harmful materials with alternatives. This is all good for me of course because the time being spent is mine, and the expense is at least partly my wages. But the lesson there is - when an effect is discovered, and proven, the industry reacts to minimise or eliminate it. We have to.

thats a very reassuing reply.
As you so ably pointed out however people are quite capable of doing the most stupid things - i believe the reason would be - my mother used one for years without any problems.
Thank you for taking the time and tackling my questions - going back to the health issue and public awarenes and protection - i lived in a very narrow little street in a town in devon for some 12 years - i knew perhaps 15 people in the street - 4 died of liver cancer in that period - brings me to mind the idea that some of the petrol additives were carcinogenic - an average of 60 cars per hour - day and night.
Ran an action group about a huge landfill site - south west water vetoed the proposal as too dangerous - the next time round they didnt say a thing - exactly the same proposal - turned out the group owning the waste company had brought south west water.
The lechate from the tip goes into the river culm, then into the river exe - to the upton pyne water works for exeter - aaaah, the water may taste a bit strange - BUT ITS PERFECTLY SAFE TO DRINK.

"Thank you for taking the time and tackling my questions "

Thank you for taking the time to think about the answers.

I can only sympathise with regard to drinking water. I worked for my local water authority 18 years ago, but I've had no involvement with the industry since.

Left that all behind - my water comes from the mountains beside the house, no chlorine either. Its a joy to drink.
Many thanks
Cheers

>>"Personaly speaking though i would be very wary of any substance promoted by any business as their motives would always be about money - my personal experiences do nothing to change this attitude."

Well, I guess that covers pretty much everything.

I'm not sure how many people would have the time to be 'very wary' about everything that anyone might be selling while managing to keep a normal life going.
Most people would seem likely to have to concentrate their worries on a handful of things chosen from among the thousands of possible sources of concern, and for people without particular knowledge (over and above anecdote) to guide them, likely chosen pretty arbitrarily.

While some degree of skepticism is a good thing, like most good things, it can be taken too far.
Ultimately, there does come a point where, depending on the particular objects of concern, someone could end up spending more of their life worrying about things that might just possibly shorten it than they seem likely to gain from their caution.

At least at the moment, it seems that even in the event that there was some quantifiable risk from PTFE on frying pans, it would seem likely to be far less important than any number of other domestic (or even kitchen) hazards such as chip pan fires, food poisoning, eating excessively or incorrectly, etc.

if you read the post from Twiglet then you would see that the amount the size of a pinhead is enough to make you ill. Despite of all reassurances those last words stick in my mind.
Dust drifting in the air landing on a cigarette is enough to kill -
So bully for you in saying that we should listen to the experts.
Did you notice the mother of one of those arrested after the recent rioting say that its the governments fault, not her sons for getting involved.
My health is my concern, and i will do everything i can to protect it - if frying pans have the capacity to make one ill then i would prefer to have my friends aware of that so that first, they dont get ill and second i dont when i go to visit.

See, it's that selective blindness that is so difficult to get over.

The selective blindness that latches onto the "piece the size of a pinhead" part of the sentence, but entirely disregards the part of the SAME SENTENCE that clearly states that said pinhead sized piece has to be raised to a VERY high temperature a matter of millimetres from your mouth and nose while you're inhaling for it to do you harm.

Unless and until that wilful ignorance can be overcome, people will continue to waste their time worrying about things that pose no measurable risk to them, while at the same time missing far more dangerous things right in front of them. I've done all I can here. I appear to have wasted my time.

Also, I can't let this go:

"Dust drifting in the air landing on a cigarette is enough to kill "

False, on more than one count.

I resent strongly the implication that I have said any such thing.

First, I challenge anyone to take any PTFE in their house and turn it into an airborne dust. You just can't do it. The stuff just isn't available to the public in that form, and it's practically impossible to get it into that form. If you tried grinding it up it would just fibrillate. Handle some PTFE tape for a few minutes to see what I mean.

So "dust drifting in the air" is a COMPLETE red herring, bordering on a deliberate lie.

Secondly, "landing on a cigarette"? Who do you picture smoking in a cloud of PTFE dust?

And finally "enough to kill". FALSE. FALSE. FALSE. I was pretty clear about this in earlier posts, and I'm quite angry that you seem to be deliberately ignoring or distorting what I've told you. Polymer flu is NOT fatal. It's unpleasant... for the 24-48 hours it lasts, and then it goes away, forever.

So... for "dust in the air landing on a cigarette can kill", please read "if you WORK IN A PTFE FACTORY and get some on your hands, then get some of that on a cigarette, then smoke that cigarette, it can cause you to suffer flu-like symptoms for up to 48 hours, with no further effects". You will note that this is quite a different message. It depresses and somewhat annoys me that I am required to translate it back to the truth from Bertie's apparently deliberate lies.

>>"if you read the post from Twiglet then you would see that the amount the size of a pinhead is enough to make you ill. Despite of all reassurances those last words stick in my mind."

It's difficult to imagine too many people being better qualified to answer your question than an intelligent chemical engineer who has spent years working with the very material you're concerned about.
If you're only going to pay attention to someone if they're the unquestioned #1 world expert, or if they say what you've already decided you want to hear, this really doesn't seem like the best place for you.

If your concerns trump anyone else's knowledge, you're not engaging in Science, nor seeking Explanations.

>>"Did you notice the mother of one of those arrested after the recent rioting say that its the governments fault, not her sons for getting involved."

What the hell does that have to do with anything?

>>"My health is my concern, and i will do everything i can to protect it - if frying pans have the capacity to make one ill then i would prefer to have my friends aware of that so that first, they dont get ill and second i dont when i go to visit."

'Doing everything one can' is a bit of a tricky phrase.
Even given a list of all the things one could do, it's highly unlikely that it's possible to actually do all of them.

Especially given that 'don't worry too much about negligible risks' should presumably be on the list, you're evidently not doing all you *could* do.

Are you actually prepared to discuss this logically without resorting to personal comments or are you going to use the Might is Right attitude!!!
If the latter then you are wasting your time and mine!