Teflon: Health and Safety

[ExtraMSG]

20/20 had a story about the dangers of burnt Teflon's smoke. Here's an article on its effect on birds.

I have burnt a non-stick pan or two, usually cheap ones. But I'm more worried about burning dried chiles. Ever get chile smoke in your eyes? Most unpleasant. The Aztecs used it as a form of corporeal punishment. I was hacking and had blurred vision for hours once.

[fifi]

I wondered about the bird deal with the toaster bags.

I just wish that people would get the science right when they report these things. It is not the polytetrafluoroethylene that is doing it. That molecule is much too large. It is the outgassing of smaller molecules with fluorine, maybe even down to HF, that are the product of incomplete polymerization or breakdown due to heat.

I agree with you... A burnt chile pepper is far more hazardous to humans.

edit: I seem to always miss tyos

Edited November 15, 2003 by fifi (log)

[Dave the Cook]

I agree with fifi that this is very irritating. Even if you were to throw out all your PTFE cookware (and light bulbs, I suppose), you would still be left with a lot of plastic in your kitchen. All plastics emit gases, especially when heated. (That wondeful "new car" smell, for instance, is the result of outgassing.) Many of these gases are poisonous in sufficient amounts, and birds are particularly susceptible. Anyone who keeps a bird in a poorly ventilated kitchen is a fool, and a cruel one at that.

[Motochef]

I don't see any references to human health and the use of non-stich coatings such as Teflon® in this article; hence it is meaningless.

The issue with Teflon ® and its competitive friends (Silverstone ®, etc.) is when they are exponed directly to an open flame. The fumes, in this case, will definately make a human sick.

M.

Like fifi, I am pronen to tyos.

Also, I forgot to mention, there is no known health risk to humand using a Teflon® type coating for cookware.

M.

Edited November 15, 2003 by Motochef (log)

[budrichard]

Teflon and other non-stick coatings have been used to sell aluminum cookware which is cheaper to manufacture and lighter in weight than copper. We now use Falk Culinair copper exclusively and have NO PROBLEM with food sticking to the stainless steel linings of the copper pans. We also don't have to worry about fumes from coatings. The only thing you have to worry about is 'Pumping Iron' with the larger pans. -Dick

[Dave the Cook]

From the horse's mouth: Dupont on Teflon fumes.

Shameless self-promotion: The Talking Frog of Roy J. Plunkett

[ExtraMSG]

Nice article Dave. Thanks. I didn't see it the first time around.

btw, I have a non-stick pan that was allegedly dishwasher safe, but lately (I've had it for maybe two years) it's been getting an odd film. I'm not sure if it's a bonding of grease and something in the detergent or a result of the non-stick coating breaking down or what. The stuff is like concrete after it dries, though.

[Katherine]

...a form of corporeal punishment...

Is that, like, complementary to spiritual punishment?

[ExtraMSG]

What Katherine, you expect me to proof-read before I hit "Add Reply"? This is what I get for being on another list always talking philosophy and religion.

[fifi]

I missed that article also, Dave. Great work.

Mumble years ago, I actually met Plunkett and some of the other folks that worked in that original lab. I got invited to this anniversary/reunion type party at the Dupont country club in Delaware. Listening to them telling their "war" stories was great fun. But then, you have to appreciate what a bunch of research engineers call fun. It seems that having to keep this great stuff a secret during the war was very frustrating as they continued to imagine new uses for it. Plunkett has to have passed on by now. At the time he was living somewhere around Corpus Christi, TX. (Dupont had a fluorocarbons plant near there.)

[Suzy]

20/20 information is listed here.

I don't use Teflon coated pans, as I hate the way they cook.

[Ben Hong]

There may be some drastic changes in peoples' preferences coming soon. As soon as the massive study on the impact of TEFLON on our health is released. Initial reports are not auspicious.

[slkinsey]

There may be some drastic changes in peoples' preferences coming soon. As soon as the  massive study on the impact of TEFLON on our health is released. Initial reports are not auspicious.

Oh yea? Like what? Where did you hear of this study and what were the findings? Who is conducting the study and for whom? Where will it be published? Inquiring minds want to know.

The EPA appears to be looking at ammonium perfluorooctanoate, which does appear to accumulate in human blood and have a toxic effect. But this is a chemical used to make polytetrafluoroethylene, not PTFE itsself. Given the PTFE inside my knee, and the fact that it has long been regarded as having high biocompatibility and low tissue reactivity, I am fairly skeptical than any seriously damning report is on the horizon. But who knows, maybe there is a serious report on the horizon that will turn the last 50 years on its head.

Ben, I'm not trying to break your balls with the questions in the first paragraph. I really am curious.

[Dave the Cook]

I would also be very interested in this report.

[fifi]

There may be some drastic changes in peoples' preferences coming soon. As soon as the massive study on the impact of TEFLON on our health is released. Initial reports are not auspicious.

Why does this Suspicious SSB smell lawyers in the water?

Good questions, Sam. And, yeah... Teflon® has been around and in peoples' bodies for a lot of years. The chemistry of such a stable and non-reactive material has been proven in the most hostile environment known to man.

[WHT]

I wondered about the bird deal with the toaster bags.

Any teflon or PTF could be harmful to birds.

[WHT]

Also, I forgot to mention, there is no known health risk to humand using a Teflon® type coating for cookware.

I guess you did not watch 20/20 they went over several. Hence the segment, they have known for a long time the adverse effects on birds. PTFE is made by heating Freon until it forms a particulate. Interesting enough phosgene gas is mad in a similar fashion.

[fifi]

PTFE is made by heating Freon until it forms a particulate. Interesting enough phosgene gas is mad in a similar fashion.

That whole Freon thing is simplistic. Making PTFE is a whole different process. As to the phosgene reference... Go back to Organic Chemistry 101. Phosgene isn't even remotely related. Processes are common to many things that aren't even related chemically.

*removing soapbox from the closet*

This is the kind of thing that drives me nuts. We have dumbed down or outright eliminated the sciences in our educational system. That means that any kind of outright bunk is taken in as fact if the media glitz is right. How can a population make rational decisions on scientifically complex questions if they don't have a clue? ARG!

*soapbox going back in the closet... for the time being*

[Dave the Cook]

I would not trust either 20/20 or the Environmental Working Group as as source for comprehensive, impartial scientific analysis. One is driven by popularity, the other by politics. Having said that, I would not go out on a limb and declare (or assume) that PTFE is perfectly safe. But two things occur to me.

First, it is entirely possible for an outbreak of birth defects to occur in a single locality with no other discernable correlation. This happens often; cancer "clusters" are sometimes found to have nothing in common other than geography. In fact, from a statistical standpoint, this is exactly what we should expect to happen.

Second, the Dupont spokesperson is correct: there's all kinds of stuff floating around in your bloodstream that has no apparent deleterious effects. To home in on C-8 and blame it for something that could have been caused by any number of other things is, at best, premature. It seems reasonable to wait for the EPA report -- and then read it very carefully, since the EPA is not above political influence, either.

A third thing: at 554 F, many, many things will shed "ultrafine" particles. This doesn't mean that they cause birth defects.

A fourth: anyone frying bacon at 554 degrees ought to be shot.

[Squeat Mungry]

Just a word from a bird-lover and former parrot-owner: no one should be keeping a bird in a kitchen. The dangers are too numerous to list.

[slkinsey]

To follow up on Dave's post above...

Just to be clear, I don't think anyone is suggesting that polytetrafluoroethylene ("PTFE" or "Teflon") is causing birth defects, etc. They are suggesting that ammonium perfluorooctanoate ("C-8"), a chemical used in the production or PTFE, is causing these problems. This assertion may or may not have merit, but it really doesn't speak to the safety of PTFE. There are plenty of perfectly safe substances created from "ingredients" that are quite harmful. Sodium, for example, reacts with water extremely violently (and occasionally explosively, as I discovered in high school chemistry). Chlorine is a deadly poisonous yellow-green gas. There is no way you want to be around a lot of pure sodium or chlorine. And yet, these two dangerous substances react (rather violently) to form the benign substance sodium chloride, otherwise known as table salt.

[Comfort Me]

...a form of corporeal punishment...

Is that, like, complementary to spiritual punishment?

I like the concept of corporeal punishment! If I ever need to break someone's spirit, I'm breaking out the peppers and a teflon skillet!

Thanks for a great laugh!

[WHT]

Still the question begs to be asked. In other cases involving chemical companies and health risks there is a bit of a pattern. Lack or regard for workers or the environment seems to be a recurring theme. You do have the factor of people looking to place blame to even out this little equation. Somewhere in the middle the truth lays rotting.

[GG Mora]

Sodium, for example, reacts with water extremely violently (and occasionally explosively, as I discovered in high school chemistry).

Wait...were you in my chemistry class??

[slkinsey]

Still the question begs to be asked. In other cases involving chemical companies and health risks there is a bit of a pattern. Lack or regard for workers or the environment seems to be a recurring theme. You do have the factor of people looking to place blame to even out this little equation. Somewhere in the middle the truth lays rotting.

I have a problem with your line of reasoning here...

Yes, the question does beg to be asked (and is being asked) with respect to C-8, a chemical used to make PTFE.

However, I have seen no evidence that there is any cause for concern as to negative health effects relating to PTFE itself. And no one seems to be asking this question, primarily because the last 50 years have shown PTFE to be a material with very good biocompatibility and very low tissue reactivity.

So... are the companies making PTFE covering something up with regards to C-8? Is C-8 actually all that bad for you? Are the factory sites unsafe? Who knows? Maybe? More germane to this discussion, does the answer to any one of these questions have any bearing on whether or not PTFE is a safe substance when deployed in the context of cookware? No. And all the evidence we have suggests quite strongly that it is safe in this context.

I should point out, by the way, that doctors and surgeons haven't been putting PTFE in people's bodies for 50 years bewcause the chemical companies told them it was okay. There has been voluminous research and experience.