[HN Gopher] Do not put plastic in the microwave
___________________________________________________________________
Do not put plastic in the microwave
Author : say_it_as_it_is
Score : 220 points
Date : 2023-09-23 15:21 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bonappetit.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bonappetit.com)
| underseacables wrote:
| Plastics in cooking has probably caused an ecological and human
| disaster. The teflon and other plastic coatings scrape off into
| food, release chemicals when heated, and break down when holding
| acidic foods.
| 123pie123 wrote:
| whilst I have no proof of what you have said, I've not taken
| any chances either all our food prep is done with glass or
| stainless steel
| ZoomerCretin wrote:
| What an odd time to be alive. We've eliminated most of the
| obvious and immediate causes of death, and are left with health
| warnings for actions that are increasingly difficult to correlate
| with harms.
| chronicsonic wrote:
| That's why the IKEA 365+ glass containers are the bees knees for
| freezing and microwaving your food.
| avar wrote:
| I use these too, but as they have microwave safe plastic lids
| they're perhaps not the best example for those paranoid about
| plastic exposure: https://www.ikea.com/nl/en/p/ikea-365-food-
| container-with-li...
| jrmg wrote:
| It's important to keep health articles like this in context.
|
| Sure, try to mimimize risk, but if you're feeling too anxious
| remember that human beings are, currently, living longer,
| healthier lives than they ever have.
| sneak wrote:
| Also, given what we know about human physiology, if you want to
| live longer and healthier, the biggest ROI is not on changing
| your cookware, but on eating healthy foods and getting regular
| cardiovascular exercise.
|
| Eat some vegetables and go for a run or a bike ride. We know
| what works for improving health.
| Shaanie wrote:
| Not microwaving plastic is an insanely easy lifestyle
| adjustment that virtually anyone can do starting immediately
| without effort. Changing diet or exercising may be much more
| impactful, but they require significant time and effort -
| gargantuan amounts compared to just changing from plastic to
| glass lunch boxes.
| zmmmmm wrote:
| An awful lot of pre-packaged meals designed to be heated in
| the microwave come in (and sometimes, be eaten from)
| plastic trays. They couldn't really come another way. You
| can say people shouldn't use those but if that is their
| lifestyle beacause they don't have time to prepare meals
| then you lost the "insanely easy" argument.
| albert_e wrote:
| And I am sure a future study might also say : one risk factor
| for healthy and long life is reading about various health
| risks and worrying about them all the time :)
| saltcured wrote:
| Warning: Reading comprehension is known to the State of
| California to increase the risk of cancer, birth defects,
| or reproductive harm?
| FooBarWidget wrote:
| Maybe. But the other day I also read a news article about a
| research that says cancer rates (edit: of people below 60 years
| old) have risen 80% in the past 30 years, and are expected to
| rise another 31% by 2030. One suspected cause is the
| consumption of processed food, which contains additives such as
| preservatives that are harmful long-term. Another possible
| reason is microplastic accumulation.
|
| https://www.nu.nl/gezondheid/6279697/aantal-kankergevallen-w...
|
| https://bmjoncology.bmj.com/content/2/1/e000049
| paxys wrote:
| Everyone will get cancer if they live long enough. So as
| human lifespans increase, rates of cancer increase with it.
| It's as simple as that.
| FooBarWidget wrote:
| The article was about cancer rates in people _under 50_.
| walleeee wrote:
| Pesticide/herbicide exposure is also plausible, either via
| direct mechanisms or by disruption of gut microbiota (e.g.
| glyphosate and the shikimate pathway). It seems likely that
| these and other factors could interact, too.
| dimal wrote:
| People are living longer, but anecdotally it seems like almost
| everyone I know has at least one chronic health issue, and many
| have multiple. And medical science's answer to most chronic
| issues is "We don't know what causes it or how to help you.
| Come back if you get a disease I can see in a microscope."
| paxys wrote:
| People have more chronic issues _because_ they are living
| longer.
| developer93 wrote:
| To follow that: Genetic changes that have a short term
| advantage & a long term disadvantage, it's going to be
| selected for. Evolution stops caring as soon as you've got
| your child to child bearing age.
| teekert wrote:
| Yeah exactly. I probably have some form of rheumatism and
| fertility issues. Since forever I have avoided my country's
| traditional bread based lunch and instead microwaved
| leftovers in plastic containers. I feel bad about that. I
| also heated baby formula in plastic bottles. No bpa but it
| turns out: still bad.
| KennyBlanken wrote:
| > if you're feeling too anxious remember that human beings are,
| currently, living longer, healthier lives than they ever have.
|
| Not in the US, where life expectancy is plunging.
| Our_Benefactors wrote:
| > The health impacts of eating plastic is still unclear
|
| Wake me up when there's a reason to care.
|
| Why should society be restructured on a hunch?
| granshaw wrote:
| Might be impossible to wake you up at that point
| pixl97 wrote:
| "Unfortunately we cannot do anything, maybe we could have if
| we caught it before stage 4"
| Our_Benefactors wrote:
| fear monger
| pixl97 wrote:
| >Gastrointestinal (GI) cancers are the fastest-rising
| early-onset cancers, increasing by almost 15% from 2010
| to 2019. This increase is a global phenomenon.
|
| Or, maybe, there's something to this.
| permo-w wrote:
| reactive chemicals not normally found in nature probably
| aren't a good thing to introduce to your body
| mometsi wrote:
| "Wake me up when it's stage 5."
| shadowofneptune wrote:
| > If he "was on a deserted island and [plastic] was all that was
| available," Rogers says he'd opt for types two [High-Density
| Polyethylene] and five [Polypropylene]. These are both higher
| density formulas, used to contain liquids and manufacture items
| like the rigid plastic forks dispensed at your local takeout
| restaurant. They have a higher melting point, "and they also
| don't tend to chip or shatter as much," says Rogers. (Still,
| Hussain's team found these types of containers shed plenty of
| microplastics when heated.)
|
| This the part I feel should be focused on. HDPE is notable for
| being safe to handle during its entire lifecycle, from production
| to use to recycling. Even when pushed well past its softening
| point, it does not create any hazardous fumes. A sustainable
| future does not mean avoiding the use of plastics entirely, it
| means identifying which are the most useful in the long-term.
| bradfa wrote:
| Nalgene make HDPE water bottles now. They're really durable.
| I've had two as my daily use bottles for about 4 years and
| they're as durable or more durable than the hard plastic
| Nalgene bottles I used before.
| KennyBlanken wrote:
| Given one I purchased became brittle and shattered a few
| years after I bought it, I'd dispute that.
| mauvehaus wrote:
| They've made HDPE bottles for a while. When I was guiding
| canoe trips 20 years ago, the wisdom among the guides was
| that the HDPE ones will float, even if you fully submerge
| them with the cap off, whereas the Lexan ones will sink.
| xeonmc wrote:
| PE are essentially just really long fats.
| vlabakje90 wrote:
| This is false. PE is made up of hydrocarbon chains. Fats are
| made of fatty acids esterified to a polyol backbone, commonly
| glycerol.
| developer93 wrote:
| "Still, Hussain's team found these types of containers shed
| plenty of microplastics when heated.)"
| Robotbeat wrote:
| PE and PP are also the cheapest and most common plastics.
|
| They are NOT very stiff, tho.
| Hextinium wrote:
| HDPE is very stiff, MDPE is kinda stiff and LDPE is flimsy.
| Same monomer just cross linked differently with a different
| production process. Plastic is chemistry magic.
| dragontamer wrote:
| It's just carbon and hydrogen chains. How complex can it
| be? Surely not so complex to require its own field.
|
| /s
|
| For those unaware of the joke, Organic Chemistry is quite
| complex. Hydrogen+Carbon can make plastic or Gasoline
| depending on the details of how it chains.
| iknownothow wrote:
| I've always wondered, what about tooth brushes? Don't they
| release microplastics too?
| FooBarWidget wrote:
| I'm on a quest to reduce microplastic ingestion but it's really
| hard. All the easy choices don't help at all.
|
| In Netherlands we have the world's cleanest tap water, but my
| wife can't stand the tap water here, even getting stomach
| problems if she drinks it. So instead she drinks a particular
| brand of bottled water. However bottled water is apparently full
| of microplastics. Not only leeched from the bottle, vut also from
| the cap when you open it.
|
| There doesn't seem to be a product on the Dutch market for
| removing microplastics from water. The best thing I've found is
| Brita filters. They don't advertise filtering out microplastics
| but it's plausible that they filter at least some. So now we
| drinked Brita filtered tap water.
|
| The baby bottles are all plastic. Glass is available but they're
| hard to find, and our baby only likes one particular brand of
| bottle, refusing to drink from others.
|
| My son's children's water bottle is plastic. I've never seen
| children's water bottle not made of plastic. Frankly I'm not sure
| what to do here. Even if I find a glass version, it's heavy. And
| if he drops it then it becomes a big mess -- especially when he
| does so at school.
|
| I'm going to replace all the food containers with metal or glass
| soon.
|
| I also want to replace the sun-blocking curtains but it's really
| hard to find sun-blocking ones that don't contain nylon. It's
| madness.
| avar wrote:
| > Netherlands we have the world's cleanest tap water.
|
| Eh? Dutch tap water is fine, but do you have a citation for
| that?
|
| Also note that "clean tap water" is a bit of a fuzzy non-
| metric. I live in Amsterdam[1], where the pH of water is around
| 7.8, but H^2O would be 7.0.
|
| So the water can be trivially he demonstrated not to be
| "clean", otherwise the pH value wouldn't differ.
|
| But of course what people usually mean is "has bad stuff in
| it", not how far it is from being chemically pure.
|
| > my wife can't stand the tap water here.
|
| Yeah, I also don't like it. I grew up in Iceland, which has
| particularly "dirty" water, but it's the "good" sort of
| "dirty", i.e. minerals and the like.
|
| That and other things contribute to taste, also temperature,
| Dutch tap water is too warm for my tastes.
|
| I'm not right, nether are you or her. It's just an acquired
| taste.
|
| > The baby bottles are all plastic. Glass is available but
| they're hard to find
|
| They're quite easy to find? Search for "glazen zuigfles".
| But...
|
| > our baby only likes one particular brand of bottle, refusing
| to drink from others.
|
| ...ah, that might be, i.e. perhaps it's just that manufacturer.
|
| Also are you looking for 100% glass? Usually the fitting to
| close it and the "nipple" itself are plastic/rubber.
|
| > My son's children's water bottle is plastic. I've never seen
| children's water bottle not made of plastic. Frankly I'm not
| sure what to do here.
|
| Get him a stainless steel water bottle, my kids have that (I'm
| not paranoid about plastic, but it's a more durable bottle for
| school). Blokker, IKEA etc. sell these.
|
| > I'm going to replace all the food containers with metal or
| glass soon[...]
|
| Respectfully, I think you're going a bit off the rails here,
| there's probably 10 much easier things you can do to marginally
| move the needle further on your family's mortality, e.g.
| applying sunscreen consistently.
|
| But just to feed your paranoia a bit: some things that are
| "metal" are really just epoxy, e.g. aluminum cans are just
| epoxy "bags" surrounded by aluminum walls.
|
| Food grade stainless steel is almost always "pure" though.
|
| 1. https://www.waternet.nl/service-en-
| contact/drinkwater/waterh...
| fabii wrote:
| Seems like it is related to this: Study finds billions of
| nanoplastics released when microwaving containers (unl.edu) =
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36809565
| 54r4rf wrote:
| glad I never trusted the microwave for food. Something iffy with
| that cooking method
| BadBadJellyBean wrote:
| Is it? The problem is not the microwaves but the container you
| cook in. Put it on a plate and you are fine.
| alvperez82 wrote:
| or in a cristal tupperware, isn't it?
| shortcake27 wrote:
| > Something iffy with that cooking method
|
| It's anything but iffy; the science behind microwaves is well
| understood. What part exactly don't you trust? The laws of
| physics that govern this particular universe we happen to exist
| in?
| jschveibinz wrote:
| Look for "microwave safe" label from major providers, e.g. Glad.
| tremendo wrote:
| As others mention already, the problem is the plastic, not the
| microwave, even the article ends with "Go with glass". There have
| to be many alternatives but I happened upon cookanyday and never
| looked back. I almost never used the microwave oven before but
| these make it not only convenient, I actually like the results.
| Well, most times. Like many products (pressure cooker, air fryer)
| they want you to just do _everything_ in your new toy, but
| everything has its sweet spot. I use all at least once every
| week.
| Clamchop wrote:
| Startling number of people who either don't know how to or
| reject on principle actually cooking food (as opposed to merely
| reheating it) in their microwave, too.
|
| And a few classist remarks and at least one usage of "white
| trash".
| splatcollision wrote:
| Have not had a microwave in our home for at least 16 years, and
| don't ever feel like we are missing anything. There's literally
| never any ordinary household situation that requires that fast
| heating. Just put your leftovers in a pan and stir them
| occasionally!
| lr4444lr wrote:
| Soup? Thick cut of meat already seared? Melting cheese?
| splatcollision wrote:
| Stovetop. Slice meat and re-sear in cast iron pan and serve
| on toasted bread. Oh I don't have a toaster either!
| throw__away7391 wrote:
| Warming up with sous vide can restore most meats to be
| nearly indistinguishable from fresh from the oven/grill,
| however I've gotten worried lately about the heated plastic
| bags.
| treve wrote:
| It takes 1 minute to heat up many meals and there is no cleanup
| or gas in the air.
| ufo wrote:
| I also use my microwave to steam vegetables. It's more energy
| efficient than in the stove.
| tzs wrote:
| It's also great for reheating frozen rice. I make 14 servings
| in my rice cooker (I'm using a serving size where 1 serving
| is about 200 calories) and then freeze them in individual
| freezer bags.
|
| They will keep fine that way for months. Food Network says 6
| months but I've never taken more than 2 months to use 14 bags
| so don't know how accurate that is.
|
| To use I take one or two of the frozen bags, empty them into
| a large microwave-safe bowl, add a little bit of water, and
| cover. Microwave for 3 minutes on high in my 1200 watt
| microwave, or 4 minutes if I used two bags.
| polishdude20 wrote:
| Why don't you have a microwave?
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| Maybe "I don't use a microwave" is becoming the new "I don't
| watch TV."
| revertmean wrote:
| Well, young people don't really watch that much TV these
| days. Why would they? I mean, you have to choose a channel
| and then you're watching the same thing for _ages_ , like
| 25 minutes or something. Boring! And you have to sit there
| with your family for that whole time. I guess it's ok if
| you're really old and can't move very much, though that
| seems like a kind of torture where you can't move so you
| have to keep watching the same thing over and over.
| jpgvm wrote:
| I don't really do either on a regular basis...
|
| I never watched TV growing up and by the time I got money
| to buy my own already developed habits that didn't include
| TV. I have a big TV for watching films and some occasional
| YouTube however. I really enjoy films.
|
| I own a microwave but I rarely use it. I cook most of my
| meals fresh. I might use it for reheating something or
| melting some butter maybe once a month. Most of my meals
| are cooked in the oven or pan. I love to cook though so
| batching cooking up just so you can zap things throughout
| the week isn't something that appeals to me, etc.
|
| So not really conscious decisions, just two things I don't
| really do. Am I really that weird?
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| No, you're not weird. For a while, some people made a
| point of saying that they didn't watch TV as some kind of
| strange virtue signaling/position of snobbery and I got
| the same feeling from the GP statement.
| splatcollision wrote:
| Because I value cooking as it's own art, not something that
| needs to be disrupted and optimized.
| Our_Benefactors wrote:
| I admit that it's mostly convenience. But there are some things
| you can only do with a microwave.
|
| Popcorn during a short commercial break (stovetop popcorn is
| way way more involved)
|
| Melted butter (using a saucepan is NOT more convenient than
| just melting it directly in a measuring glass)
|
| Mug brownies
| chongli wrote:
| Commercial break? I can't remember the last time I saw one of
| those!
|
| For popcorn there's a third option: get an air popper!
| They're fast and convenient, make great popcorn, and allow
| you to precisely control how much fat you add (since they
| don't use fat to pop)!
| Our_Benefactors wrote:
| But then I have a kitchen gadget ONLY for making popcorn.
| The microwave is multifunctuonal.
|
| I don't see many actual commercials anymore but I do value
| being able to get up during a movie with other people and
| make popcorn without asking them to pause or missing much
| context.
|
| Maybe I'm weird in this way but pausing movies breaks my
| immersion, even if I miss a bit of context while I'm out of
| the room.
| chongli wrote:
| The key is to find the perfect moment to pause. Usually
| this is at the end of an act, during the fade-out.
|
| Are you a fan of Alton Brown? He seems to be at the
| vanguard in the war against "unitaskers". I would imagine
| he'd make his popcorn in a pot with oil, though!
| splatcollision wrote:
| Stovetop popcorn is superior in all ways end of story.
| Our_Benefactors wrote:
| No, it takes longer, it's messier, it's less consistent.
|
| You can make the argument that the end product is better,
| but that it's superior in "all ways" doesn't pass the sniff
| test even a little.
| mrfox321 wrote:
| You don't want faster solutions? Even when you really need to
| value your time?
| jpgvm wrote:
| No OP but personally I don't like to nuke things. Not because
| I'm scared of microplastics or radio waves or any nonsense
| but precisely because I value my time - the time I spend
| cooking and in the kitchen is some of the best time of the
| day.
|
| I much prefer to spend 5-10 minutes bringing leftovers back
| to life in the pan, maybe adding some extra water or
| balancing the seasoning as I do so than chucking it in the
| microwave and hoping for the best.
|
| Essentially instead of being time I minimize it's time I
| value more than what I would be doing otherwise (usually
| coding).
|
| Mind you I work from home and have the luxury of plenty of
| time to prepare the majority of my meals and am definitely a
| "foodie" so it's unlikely this is for everyone, just my
| perspective.
| splatcollision wrote:
| Thanks for taking the time to explain my position in more
| detail, this resonates.
| jwlake wrote:
| A good modern microwave is a fairly magical device, most people
| don't know how to use it right though. It's definitely useful
| the more you read recipes that specifically use it. It's like
| not a top 10 device but its like #11.
|
| Check out peeled steamed asparagus in the microwave, quick,
| beautiful and delicious.
| notbeuller wrote:
| I had never trusted the automatic "reheat" options that a lot
| of microwaves have had for years, until just recently I tried
| it out for reheating some chicken and pasta - and it really
| did a decent job. They've obviously iterated. (I don't even
| know the model, but it's a larger one probably two years old
| that I bought at goodwill for $30)
| wtallis wrote:
| A lot depends on whether the microwave oven has a humidity
| sensor, and how that data is used:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiS27feX8o0
| hmmdar wrote:
| I know it's a bit of a meme but I was always curious to try
| out some of the recipes in the "Microwave cooking for one"
| recipe book.
|
| https://www.microwavecookingforone.com/
| MSFT_Edging wrote:
| One main reason I started eating mostly vegetarian at home is the
| preparation stage. With all vegetables, wood cutting boards are
| simple and easy. But they're porous and I don't want meat
| bacteria getting absorbed in the wood. The typical response is
| "use a plastic cutting board", but have you ever looked at a
| plastic cutting board after a few uses? 1000s of nice crevices
| for bacteria and loose plastic.
|
| Nah I'm good, I'll just cook vegetables and have meat as a
| special treat. The only plastic in my kitchen is some measuring
| cups, and soft ended spatulas/ladles and even those should be
| replaced.
|
| Sure I don't know what exactly plastic does to my system, but
| should that be a reason to not avoid putting plastic in my
| system? I'm sure I'm already accumulating a ton but I can at
| least reduce it in areas that I control.
| lr4444lr wrote:
| Sorry for my ignorance, but what harmful bacteria predominant
| to meat will live for that long on a surface? After using my
| wooden cutting boards for meat, I throughly scrub them and let
| them dry for at least 48 hours before even putting them away.
| Salmonella and campylobacter I think are well destroyed by
| then, and I probably won't even use the board more than once
| every 5-7 days, always cooking everything cut on it.
| FrankoDelMar wrote:
| None, wooden cutting boards don't house bacteria for long.
| Plastic cutting boards also ruins knives.
| Helmut10001 wrote:
| Humans are really robust against meat bacteria. Even rotten
| meat is not as problematic as most would think. The majority of
| human evolution was spend without refrigerators, so we had
| ample time to adapt for the consequences.
| Tao3300 wrote:
| That doesn't mean it was a nice way to live
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyds_Bank_coprolite
|
| > Analysis of the stool has indicated that its producer
| subsisted largely on meat and bread whilst the presence of
| several hundred parasitic eggs suggests they were riddled
| with intestinal worms.
| npteljes wrote:
| Fascinating article, thanks for sharing it!
| undersuit wrote:
| Eating spoiled meat doesn't give you worms, eating raw meat
| would. One of our adaptions was cooking, which this
| individual probably didn't do all the time.
| rubatuga wrote:
| > In 2003, the coprolite broke into three pieces after
| being dropped
| Tao3300 wrote:
| Shit!
| steffres wrote:
| I simply rinse my wooden boards with boiling water after
| cutting meat on them (and then wash them of course).
| floren wrote:
| I've cut an awful lot of meat on wood cutting boards. It's
| fine. I always cut the meat last, then wash it soon. If it's
| chicken, I wash immediately after cutting, but that's kind of
| my practice regardless of cutting board material because I
| don't want chicken juice sitting around.
| randomdata wrote:
| What about the porousness of the vegetables? It is well
| understood that there is a high likelihood that vegetables are
| contaminated with "meat bacteria" before reaching your home. In
| fact, a significant number of "meat bacteria" illnesses are
| attributed to the consumption of contaminated vegetables.
|
| Which, of course, is why you wash your vegetables before use.
| If that washing is good enough for your vegetables, why
| wouldn't it be good enough for a cutting board?
| schnable wrote:
| This is backwards. Plastic gets those nicks and crevices as you
| point out. Good wood cutting boards don't absorb much, aren't
| good harbors bacteria anyway, and the nicks self heal.
| ksherlock wrote:
| There have been some studies (plural) that indicate wood
| cutting boards are safer than plastic cutting boards in terms
| of bacteria. That said, I have a dedicated cutting board for
| meat.
|
| https://commonsensehome.com/wooden-cutting-boards/
| somehnguy wrote:
| Being a vegetarian is totally fine, but I find your reasoning
| pretty flimsy - it seems like you worked backwards to come up
| with it. Millions & millions of people cut meat on wood cutting
| boards every single day and it's completely fine.
| fluidcruft wrote:
| You can put plastic cutting boards in the dishwasher, though,
| and get them quite hot to sanitize. Generally, that will
| destroy a wood cutting board. I suppose you could maybe use UV
| light to sanitize a wood cutting board.
| geoduck14 wrote:
| >I suppose you could maybe use UV light to sanitize a wood
| cutting board
|
| If your wood cutting board is made right, it helps with
| sanitization. The grain is supposed to be "up and down", so
| you cut "into" the grain. This pushes the microbes "into" the
| cutting board, where they are starved over oxygen and die -
| or the wood pushes the microbes back "out", where you can
| clean them off the surface.
|
| By the way, many wood "cutting boards" are actually
| "charcuterie" boards - they are _thin_ , and the grain
| doesn't run "up and down". The wood cutting boards I'm
| describing are _thick_ , like 1 inch thick.
| dundarious wrote:
| As discussed in the article, heating can increase shedding,
| creating a porous surface. It's OK that it's porous if it's
| cleaned in the dishwasher after every use, but, and I may be
| wrong, I wouldn't be confident all the shedding is washed
| away in the dishwasher.
| tgv wrote:
| I use a glass plate. Cleans easily and well.
| ChatGTP wrote:
| Only use wood. If it dries out throughly, I don't think much
| can survive on it. Put it in the sun if you're worried.
|
| I always oil my boards.
|
| Either way I've cut meat on wooden boards for 20 years and
| never been sick.
| tayo42 wrote:
| I think a lot of home cooks take advice meant for commercial
| kitchen standards out of context and apply them their home.
| where they make a few meals a day for probably pretty healthy
| people.
|
| like there are really people out there that won't eat cookie
| dough :(
|
| i remember digging into this a bit and came away from it
| finding that wooden cutting boards are fine for meat.
| supposedly they have some "antimicrobial" property, forgot
| what that was though or if its actually legit.
| kvetching wrote:
| What about all those foods that come wrapped in plastic that you
| put directly into the microwave. For example, you can buy
| countless vegetables that you are supposed to cook / steam in the
| package.
| prh8 wrote:
| Those are just as bad, and often times have an internal package
| coating that also deteriorates
| IshKebab wrote:
| > Definitely Do Not Put Plastic in the Microwave
|
| ...
|
| > The health impacts of eating plastic is still unclear
|
| Huh ok then.
| pipeline_peak wrote:
| You don't know what you don't know
| IshKebab wrote:
| I have high confidence that the health impacts of eating
| plastic are at worst minimal. Tupperware was invented in
| 1947.
| rasengan0 wrote:
| From cradle to grave, plastic everywhere: :-\ -
| Food supply and packaging: eat un-packaged, unprocessed food,
| leftovers in ceramic, glass, and metal - Clothing: use
| cotton, hemp, wool - Medical (PPE, masks, Covid/Flu vaccine
| syringe, IV administration set): stay healthy
|
| I remember the old days of tin canned soup and TV dinners in
| metal foil trays.
| dirtyid wrote:
| Are there any no plastic microwave containers that doesn't get
| hot?
| SubiculumCode wrote:
| What I am surprised about is that (please confirm if you know
| otherwise) microplastic contamination from microwaving plastics
| wasn't investigated decades ago. In the 80's we all knew that
| some plastics get soft in the microwave, it seemed exceedingly
| likely to the layman that it would leach out.
|
| Microplastics, were they unobservable in the 80's? Were there no
| scientists interested in this? I am decidedly anti-conspiracy
| when I look for explanations on phenomenon, but I am having a bit
| more trouble avoiding it on this one. Or is this the case that
| the research existed, but the media finally cared?
| notacoward wrote:
| > it seemed exceedingly likely to the layman that it would
| leach out
|
| It seemed exceedingly likely to scientists too. I've been
| reading about the dangers of microwaving stuff in plastic
| containers, or using plastic wrap in the microwave, as long as
| I can remember. Here's a study from 1990, citing several others
| that go back to 1988.
|
| https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Migration-testing-of-p...
|
| I'm pretty sure there were earlier ones as well. What's
| important here is not to conflate _leached chemicals_ with
| micro- or nano-particles. Scientists and consumer advocates
| (and many consumers) have been well aware of the former for a
| long time, while awareness of the latter is relatively new.
|
| > Microplastics, were they unobservable in the 80's?
|
| Sort of. The term is sometimes attributed to Richard Thompson
| in 2004.
|
| https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/discover/are-microplastics-a-big-...
|
| Prior to that (or thereabouts) nobody knew to look for whole
| plastic particles as opposed to individual chemical components.
| Therefore tools to quantify or analyze them were not well
| refined, and likewise for methodologies. The specific issue of
| microplastics _in microwaves_ is even newer than that. It 's
| evolving science, which is practically redundant because that's
| what science always does. Cases of zero awareness to high
| awareness overnight are rare. More often it's increasing
| awareness, and correspondingly increasing sophistication in
| measurement or analysis, as each study takes years and someone
| to fund it.
| texuf wrote:
| Don't put plastic in the microwave," has been common advice in
| my circle for over a decade, maybe three or more? I feel like
| it either finally stopped getting suppressed, or it finally hit
| an emergent "critical mass" and broke through (probably the
| second one).
| permo-w wrote:
| I mean we're talking about it here, and health hipsters have
| been talking about it for a long time, but are we actually at
| the point where enough people know/care that concerted
| society-wide effort is being made to fix it?
|
| besides companies selling water bottles as "BPA-free", not as
| far as I can see
| SubiculumCode wrote:
| yeah, in terms of public opinion, but I am specifically
| curious about what research was conducted in the 80's or
| 90's. I tried a few searches on Google Scholar this morning
| but their UI controls are heavily skewed toward finding new
| research, not old..plus the long issue of pre electronic
| publications. I bet there are publications, but probably
| skewed to particular contexts. e.g. I found a study examining
| leaching of plastic chemicals into blood plastic pouches used
| in hospitals. Medical device research probably doesn't tend
| to "leach" into other research fields
| dotancohen wrote:
| It should be noted in context that the labels and text "microwave
| safe" refer to the safety of the product, not the human. The
| label is added to products that will not melt in the microwave -
| there is no testing of volatiles emitted.
| albert_e wrote:
| Really?
|
| "Microwave safe" container labels are not labelled so because
| it is safe to heat food in them in Microwaves?
|
| Why would anyone just heat empty containers in a microwave?
| Because that's what the label is saying otherwise isn't it?
| uoaei wrote:
| Another one to keep an eye out for: "made with 100% organic
| x" doesn't mean "only contains organic x" but rather
| "contains organic x (and also maybe other kinds of x)".
| avar wrote:
| Is this in the US? I believe that the EU regulates this:
|
| > Overall Migration Limit (OML) of 60mg/kg food, or 10 mg/dm2
| of the contact material.
|
| - https://food.ec.europa.eu/safety/chemical-safety/food-
| contac...
| 0xcde4c3db wrote:
| I have my doubts that microplastic/nanoplastic exposure is
| something that the average person in industrialized countries can
| individually lifestyle-choice their way out of. This is just one
| vector out of dozens (if not hundreds), most of which haven't
| been studied so closely. Plastic pollution is a systemic problem,
| and has been for decades.
| scottLobster wrote:
| Why so binary? Are you one of those people who, during wildfire
| smoke, goes outside and smokes cigars because "well the air's
| already smokey so what's an extra cigar?". Yeah, and now you're
| breathing in wildfire smoke in addition to that cigar, that
| doesn't make it better.
|
| I intentionally use stainless steel cookware, a stainless steel
| thermos (although there's plastic in the cap/spout), and glass
| containers for meal prep/food storage. I use this stuff on a
| daily basis, so any bio-accumulation will add up. Just because
| I can't 100% lifestyle-choice my way out of microplastics
| contamination doesn't mean I can't 20 or 40% lifestyle-choice
| my way out, and it's 99% as convenient.
| uoaei wrote:
| I think I've said it on this site before in similar context,
| but:
|
| A good friend of mine who used to do hazardous waste disposal
| said the industry developed a winning mantra: mitigation, not
| elimination. Or to put it in more familiar terms, don't let
| perfect be the enemy of good.
| [deleted]
| ibejoeb wrote:
| The article suggests that heating certain plastics to the
| softening point significantly increases the amount of plastic
| shed into the food. Despite being only one vector, it could be
| a very high magnitude. So if you were to make any choice about
| it, this would be a good candidate, if the claim is true.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| This falls into the category of "the tiny bit of extra safety I
| may gain is not worth the huge amount of inconvenience that it
| causes."
|
| Even if I were to stop putting stuff in the microwave, that
| won't account for all the other foods I eat outside the home
| that may have had microwaving as part of their preparation
| process. I mean, I'll take a frozen package of ribs out of the
| freezer and microwave it for a minute so the surface softens
| enough for me to cut the plastic and peel it off before thawing
| or brining the meat.
|
| No, I think I'll just take my chances and not have yet one more
| thing to stress out about.
| ralfd wrote:
| I feel like there is a bit of a cultural divide here.
| Microwaving is here (central europe) not part of food
| preperation and if it is used stuff is filled into glass
| containers instead of plastic packaging?
| irrational wrote:
| Food prep? No. Reheating leftovers? Yes. Mainly because
| glass containers for storing leftover food are more
| expensive.
| jasonzemos wrote:
| I've never owned a microwave, instead I air-fry
| everything. Pretty sure this is the same trick
| restaurants use, especially fast-food ones. Microwaves
| make soggy leftovers.
| bobthepanda wrote:
| Not all leftovers need to be crispy.
|
| Microwaves work pretty well for saucy Chinese food, for
| example. (The alternate method is usually steaming, which
| is even soggier.)
| irrational wrote:
| How do you air fry soup, stew, chili, etc.?
| WD-42 wrote:
| You use a pot on a stove. It's faster than microwaving.
| irrational wrote:
| No way is it faster. I can heat a bowl of soup up in 1
| minute in the microwave. The pot is barely heated up
| after 1 minute in the stove, much less the contents.
| WD-42 wrote:
| Maybe it depends on the equipment. My stove can heat soup
| much faster than my microwave. Not to mention in the
| microwave you have to constantly stir to make sure it's
| not still cold in the middle, because a microwave doesn't
| heat evenly.
| Jill_the_Pill wrote:
| And it makes another pot to clean.
|
| But the warmth in the food heated on a burner is nicer
| than the warmth generated by the microwave (more even,
| cools slowly).
|
| Maybe we slow down and expect our lunch to take 10
| minutes to heat and 5 minutes to clean up?
| dionidium wrote:
| We switched to glass recently and it's great. They're
| more durable. They don't stain. They're easier to clean.
| And, this is subjective, but they just _feel_ more
| substantial; it 's nice in a way that's hard to describe.
|
| These glass containers will likely last forever.
|
| They are more expensive than the cheapest plastics, but
| it's buy-once, so not a significant long-term factor.
| dirtyid wrote:
| They also get hot after microwaving, which for inpatient
| people like me is a deal breaker.
|
| E: obviously I can spend extra effort to handle a hot
| glass container, but I'd rather deal with container
| without that property. Even with plastic containers there
| are some that gets suspiciously soft / weak after a few
| minutes in microwave, and then there's ones that stay
| sturdy and cool enough to handle. Half the point of
| microwave is convenience.
| jliptzin wrote:
| Just put it on a plate?
| janc_ wrote:
| that's what oven mits or pot holders are for...
| seabass-labrax wrote:
| And trivets, to prevent your kitchen worksurfaces from
| succumbing to the fate of a myriad ring-shaped marks.
| This is obviously moot if you are lucky enough to have a
| granite worktop :)
| Kathula wrote:
| I just lift them at the sides, close to the top, to avoid
| being burned. If you're home you could also use oven
| gloves or paper towel or something.
| schnable wrote:
| The containers may last forever but the lids don't.
| scottLobster wrote:
| The lids on my knock-off brand glass food containers have
| lasted several years now...
| thsksbd wrote:
| And the lids are expensive
| kagakuninja wrote:
| The lids on my pyrex bowls I bought in 1987 are still
| fine, although I did lose some.
| tenpies wrote:
| I don't know about most manufacturers, but IKEA sells the
| lids separately in part for this reason.
|
| I also have little doubt that IKEA will be around in 10
| years compared to some random Amazon brand.
| criddell wrote:
| We just bought a bunch of new lids for our glass
| containers. They are very inexpensive.
| emj wrote:
| At IKEA the lids cost 50% of a container + lid;
| inexpensive compared to the cost of a new plastic
| container. I bought steel containers 20 years ago and
| they are still going strong expensive and better value.
| thsksbd wrote:
| Really? We tried that about five years ago and they were
| very expensive (about 70% the price of getting new
| glassware)
|
| Where did you buy them? Were they name brand?
| kagakuninja wrote:
| I have a set of pyrex bowls I bought in 1987 and still
| use. The cost difference is negligible when amortized
| over your lifetime. I store all my left overs in pyrex
| when possible.
| tromp wrote:
| You can move the leftover food from its plastic storage
| container into a clean glass container or bowl before
| heating it in the microwave. You just have slightly more
| things to wash afterwards...
| jna_sh wrote:
| You can't just put the leftovers you want to microwave on
| a bowl or plate...?
| gmane wrote:
| For most Americans, they don't have glass plates/bowls at
| their work. That's where enough microwaving happens that
| if you can't "fix" the problem there then there's no
| point in changing habits at home.
| coldtea wrote:
| True, I've seen many not even have glasses made of glass.
| You go to some (not expensive) restaurant, or even a
| house, and they bring you water in a plastic "glass".
| scubbo wrote:
| > For most Americans, they don't have glass plates/bowls
| at their work
|
| Honest question - is there something wrong with
| microwaving ceramic bowls? Literally every bowl intended
| for eating (rather than for mixing cooking ingredients)
| that I have ever owned or encountered has been ceramic.
| marcosdumay wrote:
| The answer is almost certainly "it depends".
|
| And it depends on stuff you won't be able to discover.
| thsksbd wrote:
| What do you mean by "ceramic"? Anyway, its the enamel
| that worries me.
| Riseed wrote:
| Some ceramic items shouldn't go into the microwave
| because they have metal embellishments or trim. Some
| ceramics have lead glaze, which means they're not food
| safe once cracked or chipped, but I can't say whether
| microwaving them would make them more dangerous or less
| food safe.
|
| > > For most Americans, they don't have glass
| plates/bowls at their work
|
| As a note, most people I've seen microwaving their
| leftovers at work were microwaving plastic because that's
| how they packaged the leftovers from home. If there
| aren't dishes at work, let alone a full kitchen, then
| leftovers are transported, heated, and eaten from the
| same container.
| irrational wrote:
| Then you have the whole family waiting for their turn to
| use the microwave. Easier to just heat up all the
| leftovers in one go.
| jghn wrote:
| Microwaves are extremely useful for food prep, although
| for specific purposes. A lot of veggies actually do
| pretty well parcooking (or fully cooking) in the
| microwave for instance.
|
| I use it all the time for potatoes unless I'm baking
| them. It shaves a lot off the cooking time with no I'll
| effect
| wojciii wrote:
| IKEA has cheap glass containers with plastic covers that
| can go into the microwave. I think you can also get
| covers made of bamboo or something that looks like wood.
|
| I usually cover them with a plastic designed for this
| purpose which doesn't come in contact with food.
| panzagl wrote:
| Even for restaurants?
| coldtea wrote:
| Yes. If a restaurant microwaves, it would be some
| horrible place meant for the equivalent of "white trash"
| or the kind found in tourist traps (which for tourists
| might be the only kind they ever try, especially if they
| don't bother much to see where locals eat).
|
| There are all kinds of industrial heated plates,
| continuously running pots on stoves, or always on ovens,
| etc restaurants use to keep the day's food heated or
| slightly reheat it.
| sneak wrote:
| Please don't speak authoritatively about things of which
| you are ignorant.
|
| Almost every restaurant uses microwaves for some part of
| food prep. Go work in a kitchen for a bit.
| coldtea wrote:
| You'd be surprised of what I'm cognizant.
|
| If "almost every restaurant microwaves" in one's area,
| they should probably move to a better area.
|
| Though I'm not sure what you call a restaurant. Does it
| include fast food "restaurants" for example? Or some
| 2x-3x the local price tourist trap in places like
| Barcelona, Rome, Amsterdam, Paris (say, Montmartre) or
| the Greek isles?
| thsksbd wrote:
| Indeed, the vast majority of restaurants are filthy,
| terrible over priced eateries where you are gambling your
| health. Especially after covid.
| jghn wrote:
| How much would you like to bet on sone Michelin starred
| restaurants having microwaves in use?
| woodruffw wrote:
| Most restaurants use microwaves. They may not use it to
| prepare the entire dish (that's reserved for mass-market
| faux-nice places like Red Lobster), but it's a standard
| piece of commercial kitchen equipment. Reheating frozen
| soups, for example, usually starts with a quick zap to
| get the process going.
| bobthepanda wrote:
| Even in the US there is definitely derisiveness towards
| the type of restaurant that just microwaves frozen food.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| It appears that people are taking my remark "as a part of
| the food preparation process" to mean "they cook with a
| microwave." Whereas I meant, "take a prepared sauce or
| ingredient out of the freezer and thaw with the microwave
| before continuing with the meal."
|
| In much the same way that I take a stick of butter out of
| the fridge and nuke it for exactly 9 seconds to get it
| (at least the bottom) to spreadable consistency. In fact,
| this is 90% of what I use a microwave for.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _This falls into the category of "the tiny bit of extra
| safety I may gain is not worth the huge amount of
| inconvenience that it causes."_
|
| Could also be "the high adverse effects we pay for with extra
| cancers, higher inflammation, even lower fertility maybe, but
| were too preoccupied with some received idea of convenience
| to notice and attribute to such bad habbits".
|
| > _Even if I were to stop putting stuff in the microwave,
| that won 't account for all the other foods I eat outside the
| home that may have had microwaving as part of their
| preparation process_
|
| Whether at home or "outside the home", microwaving is just
| not seen in a good light in most of Europe I know, and is
| seldom a thing except as a low-class convenience when you're
| like a student or something. Though most fellow students I
| knew would never go for it either, and would start to cook
| simple but proper food themselves after the 2nd year or so.
| jimhefferon wrote:
| When I was a kid, secondhand smoke was everywhere. Now it is
| rare. If people learn, things can change.
| doubled112 wrote:
| Smoking inside public buildings became illegal where I am.
| Sometimes learning and habit breaking needs a push.
|
| Most smokers I know still smoke inside their houses.
| uoaei wrote:
| That's probably an age (culture) thing. The smokers I
| know smoke -- and even vape -- only outside. The oldest
| one is 48 but they're married to someone a bit younger.
| ip26 wrote:
| A quick warm water bath serves a similar purpose while often
| giving me better results.
| seabass-labrax wrote:
| If you're patient, you could also use cold water :) It
| seems to me that time management is a bigger part of food
| preparation than any specific technique for cutting or
| cooking.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| It was just an example, but since you mentioned it, that
| perfectly points out what I meant about convenience.
|
| I can stick a package of meat in the microwave and hit a
| couple buttons and then go do something else instead of
| running water for a few seconds until it heats up, possibly
| having to fill the sink or a bowl and put the meat in. All
| of which takes more time and effort for basically the same
| result.
| ip26 wrote:
| I find it more convenient to use water because I have to
| watch the thawing meat in the microwave like a hawk; it's
| very easy to cook the edges on accident. The center also
| stays more frozen. To each their own.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| Again, I'm not thawing meat!!! I'm making it easier to
| remove from the packaging.
| SCSIfloppy wrote:
| You can significantly reduce it easily. Don't heat things in
| plastic, don't buy hot food or beverages served in plastic or
| "bamboo / paper," stop using K-cups, etc.
| dqv wrote:
| >can individually lifestyle-choice their way out of
|
| >Plastic pollution is a systemic problem, and has been for
| decades.
|
| Sorry, this gets uncritically repeated so much that it's
| bordering on propaganda. Like it's just doing free work for oil
| companies at this point. This kind of stuff is exactly what I'd
| say as someone working for an oil company's social media team
| after realizing that individual choice is not something that
| happens in a vacuum. Corporate propaganda on the personal-
| carbon-footprint issue backfired - they thought they would be
| able to demoralize people, but it slowly grew into a movement
| that continues to grow. It's honestly kind of funny they
| thought people wouldn't attach their morality to decisions
| about environmental destruction.
|
| "individual lifestyle choices don't cause systemic change" is a
| bastardization of the original concept. And it's actually doing
| the original intent of corporations - to demoralize people
| about seeking an oilless future.
|
| The original concept was that _one should not feel guilty if
| they can 't make an individual lifestyle choice because
| something is preventing them from doing so_. It was never meant
| to demoralize people from using their own moral compass to
| decide not to participate in certain behaviors. I don't get why
| "I want to use less petroleum-derived products and eventually
| none at all" is exempt from spreading through the social
| network as a worthwhile idea when literally everything else
| does.
|
| Again, people aren't _individually responsible_ for the
| systemic results of their choices, but their individual choices
| do create signals that result in systemic change. Our choices
| don 't operate in a vacuum, our peers, friends, and family all
| look at what we do; their peers, friends, and family do the
| same.
| pessimizer wrote:
| This objection is obviously rote, and is entirely misplaced.
|
| Not microwaving plastic isn't a moral failure, it's a safety
| hazard due to the plastic falling apart. But if everything
| you consume is full of microplastics, then worrying about
| these microplastics is likely a waste of time.
|
| Saying that the environment is so full of microplastics that
| conscious efforts to avoid them will be a waste of time is
| _the opposite_ of excusing companies for filling the
| environment with microplastics. It 's saying that the _only_
| thing that will be effective is to attack the sources rather
| than lifestyling your way out of it.
|
| You've confused health for morality, then gone on to give a
| lecture about it.
| peyton wrote:
| Yeah given that we're finding micro/nanoplastics mainly in
| people's lungs and blood it seems more likely I'm getting
| dosed from aerosols after rainstorms or something.
| yyyk wrote:
| You (the average person) can't choose your way out or really be
| safe - but you can at least avoid doing the equivalent of
| putting your head in the lion's mouth. At least most of the
| time. It's not that difficult to use non-plastic kitchenware,
| or learning to not put plastic in a microwave (or come to think
| of it: any cooking) at least 99% of the time.
| kristopolous wrote:
| You can reduce (or increase!) your exposure to it through
| individual action though.
| patmorgan23 wrote:
| What size/impact does personal choice have. Plastics are so
| prevelant is the impact 1% or 50%. If the former your choices
| don't really matter that much, the latter they might.
| [deleted]
| eviks wrote:
| and that reduction may have 0 effect :(
| kristopolous wrote:
| it's definitionally non-zero. control what you have control
| over.
| Hackbraten wrote:
| This so much.
|
| It's a little like democratic elections. A single vote
| has negligible impact, but all those single votes
| combined? They have the power to make or break the future
| of a country. An individual decision not to use plastic
| is not unlike that.
| eviks wrote:
| Then change your definition to something useful. I care
| about impact on human health, so if you reduce (via
| personal choice) exposure by 1 out of 10, but 5 is enough
| to seriously impact you and anything above 5 but below
| 100 has no additional impact, then you've achieved 0
| 0xcde4c3db wrote:
| I'm sure there's some set of lifestyle choices that would
| lead to a measurable reduction, but whether that reduction
| matters practically is a different question.
| kristopolous wrote:
| ok, but have people's individual habits on tobacco
| consumption reduced the non-smokers exposure to it? These
| things can make a difference in large enough numbers. It's
| not irrelevant at scale.
| aradox66 wrote:
| I think OPs argument is that tackling microplastic exposure
| through personal choices like microwave use, etc, may be
| unlikely to make a significant dent in overall microplastic
| consumption, if it's in all the food, all the water, the
| soil, the air, the bedsheets, the flooring, etc etc.
| tempest_ wrote:
| Basically all food comes in plastic now a days. There are
| still people surprised to find out that the aluminum or
| steel can they get food out of is coated internally.
|
| This article is talking about heating plastic in a
| microwave which is something a lot of people do but I
| suspect fewer people have unloaded skids from the back of a
| tractor trailer in the summer. That stuff that is at room
| temp on the grocery store shelve has gone through a tone of
| heat cool cycles before it makes it to you.
| kristopolous wrote:
| sure, plastic coating is not what those consumers wanted
| but some goals take time to reach. Let's not dismiss
| people who are making sincere efforts.
|
| For instance, I've been using reusable shopping bags for
| 25 years and buy most of my food through farmers market,
| never touching plastic bags or packaging in the whole
| lifecycle. That's probably at least 10,000 fewer plastic
| bags. Sure there's some wasteful people that probably use
| that in a month, I see how people shop.
|
| This isn't a virtue contest - it's a lifestyle commitment
| just like deciding not to smoke for health reasons. At
| scale these things have impact.
|
| Also I'm not anti-plastic - I just don't like making a
| bunch of trash and appreciate higher quality materials.
| [deleted]
| bbarnett wrote:
| Bedsheets indeed! After all, isn't polyester essentially a
| variant of plastic?
| 10u152 wrote:
| What kind of monster has synthetic bedsheets? Cotton or
| linen only. I can't even think last time I saw a
| synthetic sheet.
| bbarnett wrote:
| Personally, I have 60% cotton, 40% polyester. Seems to
| handle my feet calluses better.
|
| (I get holes in pure cotton sheets too fast)
| ashildr wrote:
| I quit smoking about 20 years ago though I'm living in the city
| next to a major road. I don't see your point.
|
| I cook at least 50% of my warm meals myself and I learned to
| prepare meals in advance and to freeze or sterilize them. Not
| so much to save money but because I prefer good food with known
| ingredients. I don't see why I shouldn't be able to reduce my
| intake of microplastics by further phasing out the plastic
| containers I usually use and use relatively cheap glass
| containers.
| randerson wrote:
| Given that the problem is not the microwave, but the combination
| of plastic and heat, this may also affect sous vide cooking. I
| wonder if there's a specific temperature at which the plastic
| breaks down and if sous vide can stay beneath that?
| derefr wrote:
| A bit of solutionist brain-storming here:
|
| It seems to me that the main advantage of plastic food storage
| containers over glass ones -- other than price -- comes mostly
| from weight. You don't want to carry your leftovers to work in
| glass containers; they're heavy!
|
| (And AFAIK no other container material besides plastic is a good
| substitute for glass in food storage, because 1. they're not
| washable / interact chemically too much with the food, or 2.
| they're not visually transparent enough to tell what's in the
| container. So let's ignore other materials as possible solutions
| for now.)
|
| I presume that the problem here _isn 't_ that microwaves are
| causing vaporization or spalling of the container material in
| such a way that microplastic particles coming from the _outside_
| of the container can end up in your food. (If that 's the case,
| then plastics are basically entirely screwed for this use-case,
| and we may as well give up on them entirely.)
|
| But presuming instead that the problem is only with your food
| interacting with the _inner_ surface of the container, under heat
| /acid/etc -- i.e. some kind of leeching or osmosis of the food
| against the container surface, causing the plasticizers in the
| container to "exchange" out...
|
| Then, if that's the case, would it be possible to make a food
| storage container that's _mostly_ plastic, but then has "just a
| little bit" of glass, lining the inner surface? A glass barrier-
| layer, sort of like how plastics themselves are used as a barrier
| layer on the inside of aluminum cans? Resulting in something
| that's a lot lighter-weight than a thick glass container, but a
| lot more "inert" than a plastic container?
|
| Glass is usually brittle, I know; and unlike a glass food-storage
| container, which is usually thick, plastic food-storage
| containers are usually more thin and flexible. A plastic
| substrate would want to bend, and that would, naively, _shatter_
| a glass "film" on its surface.
|
| But! We've recently invented bendable ("foldable") glass, haven't
| we? And in fact we're _laminating_ this "foldable" glass to
| plastic substrates all the time. It's even transparent!
|
| I think it's workable as a process. You _could_ , in theory,
| produce glass-lined plastic food storage containers. I only
| wonder if it could be made cheap enough that, even at massive
| scale, these containers would come out at a price-point that
| anyone would pay.
| everdrive wrote:
| >You don't want to carry your leftovers to work in glass
| containers; they're heavy!
|
| I'll never, never understand people. "I don't want to have to
| carry an additional pound of weight, so I'll trade that for
| introducing a very small amount of poison into my body."
| Carrying just a bit more weight doesn't even register as
| inconvenient.
| tedunangst wrote:
| Wait until you hear about what people drink at happy hour.
| derefr wrote:
| I mean, I don't think anyone who is aware of the
| microplastics thing is still _using_ plastic containers. The
| point is that there is a reason (besides cost) that people
| _were_ preferring plastic containers when they were unaware
| of the problems with them: they were lighter. An ideal
| solution -- a true _replacement_ for plastic containers --
| would be something that retains that advantage, while not
| putting small amounts of poison into your body.
|
| > Carrying just a bit more weight doesn't even register as
| inconvenient.
|
| Do you drive/ride transit to work/school? Some people bike,
| or even walk/jog, with all the things they will need for the
| day in a bag. Students in school even continue to carry that
| bag all throughout the day, before, between, and after
| classes! For a kid who is already carrying a laptop,
| textbooks and notebooks, etc., having an extra kilo of weight
| from a glass container can make the difference between just
| "a heavy backpack", and ending up with bruised shoulders and
| a kink in their back.
| scottLobster wrote:
| As a former college student who carried a backpack stuffed
| with textbooks and a laptop sometimes for miles around
| campus, I didn't notice any difference between when my
| thermos (carried in backpack side pocket) was empty vs when
| it was full, and that's 20 floz of liquid which is roughly
| equivalent in weight to the glass containers I use for food
| prep.
|
| When people complain about how soft modern society it, it's
| this crap that they're talking about. "Oh I already carry
| around 30 lbs of stuff, 31 will break my back!". If you're
| carrying around so much that 1 lb will literally make the
| difference between injured and not injured, you need to
| seriously re-think your system. Possibly save up for a
| better backpack, possibly learn how to carry weight and do
| some exercises to strengthen your back, possibly re-arrange
| your schedule so you aren't carrying as much weight at one
| time.
|
| And I'm serious about the back strengthening, people
| (including myself) ruck-march with 20-40 lb packs for
| exercise, and our backs aren't falling apart. Lifting and
| carrying weight with good form is great for your back, and
| strengthens it to the point where you can even use bad form
| for limited time and avoid injury.
| dirtyid wrote:
| >Possibly save up for a better backpack
|
| TBH this does address a lot of problems, but many people
| don't like backpacks or whatever packs they use everyday
| isn't built for ergonmics in mind. A couple extra lbs
| shifting around can feel pretty annoying. Yes, those are
| solvable problems, abut I'd rather solve it by using a
| lighter container.
| derefr wrote:
| > Possibly save up for a better backpack, possibly learn
| how to carry weight and do some exercises to strengthen
| your back, possibly re-arrange your schedule so you
| aren't carrying as much weight at one time.
|
| I mean, I brought up high-school kids for a reason.
| They're carrying a bunch of weight mostly against their
| will, and they're generally smaller and weaker (incl.
| less muscle to "pad" parts like shoulders) than adults.
| nerdjon wrote:
| I have long wanted to get rid of all my plastic containers (On
| a fairly regular pace I look for glass alternatives).
|
| But for me it always comes down to 2 things:
|
| 1. Sizing options, I have yet to find a good 2 partition glass
| container. They are all either plastic or a glass container
| with a plastic insert, which defeats the purpose.
|
| 2. (And this is the biggest) is storage. Plastic containers
| just stack up better than glass ones do since they are thinner.
| In the same space I store plastic containers I may be able to
| store a third of the number of glass containers.
|
| Edit: Oh also storing them frozen. I have broken too many
| containers because I made a mistake trying to put glass in my
| freezer.
|
| I honestly don't know a solution to the second one but not sure
| if glass lined would fix it.
| dirtyid wrote:
| >storage.
|
| My meal prep uses lots of stackable take out containers, in
| different sizes that nest into each other, with
| interchangable lids, that take up a fraction of the space.
| Really optimizes fridge space as well since frequently you
| can use the best size containers.
| lukeinator42 wrote:
| I make ceramics using slip casting and I just realized this
| might be a great idea to try! I'm currently working on a
| ceramic mason jar that will be compatible with mason jar
| lids, but I should play around with other food storage
| containers.
| derefr wrote:
| > 1. Sizing options, I have yet to find a good 2 partition
| glass container. They are all either plastic or a glass
| container with a plastic insert, which defeats the purpose.
|
| You're not going to find cheap/mass-produced multi-chambered
| glassware; that's just not how machine glass-blowing works.
| At scale, glassware is produced basically by just casting a
| blob of glass into a solid "uninflated" shape, and then
| inflating that shape in a blow-mold. No additive steps
| possible, since the rapid expansion of the glass in the blow-
| mold cools it too much to enable other glass to stick at that
| point.
|
| (And before you suggest making a mold in a "w" shape: the
| arch in the middle would either have too much internal stress
| -- like a Prince Rupert's drop -- or do a nice gradual curve
| in a way that uses far too much material [= extra weight].)
|
| What you might want to try to find is a bento box that's
| designed to be a collection of independent/modular thinner-
| walled _glass_ internal compartments, that all slot into a
| _plastic_ outer racking. This would provide somewhat of the
| advantages I was describing above, though would certainly be
| heavier. You could also take the glass containers out of the
| plastic to microwave them individually. Not sure if I 've
| seen anything like this for sale, but it sounds "obvious", so
| I'm sure someone's done it.
|
| > Edit: Oh also storing them frozen. I have broken too many
| containers because I made a mistake trying to put glass in my
| freezer.
|
| I think buying _borosilicate_ glass containers would solve
| this. Borosilicate glass is much more resistant to heat
| shock.
| somat wrote:
| I suspect the broken glass in freezer is due to ice
| expansion not thermal shock, borosilicate will not save you
| here.
| bell-cot wrote:
| How about using cheap, old-fashioned food-grade silicone,
| instead of bendable glass?
| mastax wrote:
| Silicone absorbs odors from foods and detergents. I guess
| plastics do too, but not as badly usually.
| undersuit wrote:
| I accidentally left my silicone spatula at the bottom of
| the sink too long with some potato skins. It is a potent
| weapon now.
| BugsJustFindMe wrote:
| What about splatter guards which are almost universally made from
| plastic? Or glass containers with plastic lids? Microwaving food
| splatters the shit out of the walls and ceiling of the microwave.
| Is the problem any plastic in the microwave or just the plastic
| that touches the food?
| manicennui wrote:
| I recently picked up some dishes from AnyDay which don't
| contain any plastic. The lids are made out of glass, silicone,
| and metal (yes, it is safe to put some metal in specific shapes
| in the microwave). I haven't used them long enough to recommend
| them, but they seem fine so far.
| williadc wrote:
| It's possible to leave the lid off and put a cloth or paper
| towel on top to catch splatter.
| KennyBlanken wrote:
| Or just use a lower power setting, which is either an on/off
| duty cycle of a couple of seconds, or in the fancier models,
| actual variable power.
|
| Bonus: you don't fry the shit out some of your food while
| other spots are cold.
|
| I usually do a brief period on high if something came from
| the fridge, and then drop to a lower power level. On my
| microwave "programming" this is actually pretty easy; pushing
| the power button after entering time allows you to set a
| second power level and time.
| jbotz wrote:
| Yeah, I wondered about that, too... the article specifically
| mentions the involvement of water (hydrolysis) in the process
| of micropaticle formation, but the splatter guard is of course
| exposed to the steam coming from the food, and some of that
| condenses and drops back on the food, so not using these
| plastic splatter guards is probably indicated. Covering the
| container with an inverted plate (making sure to leave some
| space for steam pressure to exscape) is probably better. I'm
| going to do that from now.
| bentcorner wrote:
| You can get splatter guards that have a glass "top" and some
| kind of silicone edging. It seems a lot more durable than the
| entirely thin white plastic ones that are more common. Look
| for "GGG-GLOU-GLOU GOOSE" (really) on Amazon.
|
| Only downside is that the glass top can get dangerously hot,
| but there's a handle.
| dirtyid wrote:
| As someone not weary of using plastic in microwave, for
| some reason I am very distrustful of silicon used in
| cookwear, especially equipment that interacts directly
| touches hot metal like lids, baking sheets etc. I don't
| even know the science behind it. But I've seen enough semi
| melted silicon spatula tips to feel like it's not a good
| combo.
| BugsJustFindMe wrote:
| The ones I've seen of this sort are all kinda small. And
| "gets dangerously hot" makes it a complete nonstarter for
| me.
| qingcharles wrote:
| Most jails and prisons only have plastic containers for
| microwaving your food, because anything else would be a "security
| risk."
|
| When I was inside the only "cup" you could buy was a plastic
| storage container that was not food- or microwave-safe but was
| used for everything from drinking coffee to cooking noodles.
| boringuser2 wrote:
| [flagged]
| Tostino wrote:
| Maybe you should try looking at them as people?
| fizzynut wrote:
| It is strange to see people with such mistrust of a microwave
| because it is "unnatural" and therefore unhealthy.
|
| The process of cooking anything using something "natural" like a
| fire creates a lot more carcinogens than a microwave.
|
| You wouldn't put plastic in a pan or oven to cook your food in,
| so if you want to reduce your exposure to plastic just use
| another container, it would be useful to know what the objective
| harm of this practice is compared to say using gas stove.
| Ancapistani wrote:
| > You wouldn't put plastic in a pan or oven to cook your food
| in
|
| Someone should probably tell Costco. They offer a variety of
| ready-made frozen dinners that instruct you specifically to
| place the plastic container into the oven at 300oF.
| reducesuffering wrote:
| Ya frozen tv dinners are a big culprit here. Fortunately,
| atleast Trader Joe's in my area has just switched to paper
| containers. Who's got the over/under whether that paper is
| lined with plastic...
| FooBarBizBazz wrote:
| Generally paper containers are covered in PFAS.
| danjc wrote:
| I wonder about glue present in the paper/cardboard.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| It is. Unless the liquid has seeped through it or something
| NelsonMinar wrote:
| The article has a whole section on why microwaving plastic
| creates a specific risk.
| fizzynut wrote:
| Yes, but the risk is not quantified, one also exposes
| themselves to carcinogens when eating anything that has been
| smoked and I'm sure if you put kidney cells in a bath of
| carcinogens it would also not do so great.
|
| Tthe fact that there is no clear data on the danger of
| microwaving plastic containers despite millions of people
| doing it all the time means suggests the danger is
| low/negligible.
| voytec wrote:
| Last time I was putting plastic in a microwave was some 5-7 years
| ago. I went to a registered nutrition specialist with obesity and
| obesity-based issues. The guy had programs either providing you
| with diet-appropriate daily recipes, or a daily delivery of 5
| dishes in plastic containers. I was too lazy at the time for the
| former option. But the important part is: it was all about eating
| 5 times a day.
|
| The label on these boxes stated that you only have to break the
| (plastic) seal before putting the (plastic) box in a microwave. I
| was doing it for a year and a half, telling myself that it's
| beneficial and I'm doing it to be healthy. I was _forcing_ myself
| to eat 5 times a day, never being hungry and never enjoying this
| food. And I was possibly contaminating it by heating food
| surrounded by plastic in the microwave.
|
| The guy was a moron, pushing his "5 dishes a day is ideal for
| everyone" mindset on every customer, with no regard to personal
| preference. I was eating 2-3 times a day before this program but
| I had no understanding of nutrition and was eating crap with
| higher amount of calories than I was burning. Eating 5 times a
| day during the program have not improved my health. And the food
| was awful. I sacrificed the pleasure of eating for some 18 months
| with no beneficial results.
|
| Theory:
|
| To lose weight, one needs to stay in a caloric deficit based on
| burning more calories than ingesting. To do it smart, one also
| has to understand macro-nutrients and not stuff themselves with
| more fat+carbs than one burns. The basics are:
|
| - proteins (amino-acids chains) are building blocks required to
| build/restore cells
|
| - carbs and fat are fuel that one burns for energy
|
| - carbs are burned faster than fat and if you ingest more carbs
| and fat than you'll burn - you'll store fat
|
| It's that simple: burn more calories than the intake and avoid
| more fat+carbs than you can burn to actually burn and not store
| additional fat.
|
| Practice:
|
| For a few years now, I'm on a 20:4 intermittent fasting schedule,
| which translates to calories ingestion only during a single
| 4-hours-long window during the day. I went back to only eating in
| the late afternoon. I go to the gym in the morning and stay in
| caloric deficit 'till the evening.
|
| I'm also on keto. The "no gainz diet" works for me personally,
| but is not a "golden recipe" for everyone trying to lose weight.
| Proper knowledge of nutrition basics is the key.
|
| And... I had to break keto once in last year. My weight went down
| to 56kg and body fat to 8%. Great sixpack but my face resembled
| meth addicts'. I've found no way to gain weight without bumping
| LDL cholesterol to unhealthy levels and decided to go with "very-
| low-carb" for 2 weeks. It worked and I'm back on keto. Happy to
| repeat the "very-low-carb" thing every year or half but overall -
| keto works well for me and keeping caloric deficit for the better
| part of the day reduces my hyperactivity. It's a personal
| preference.
|
| I make all my food from basic ingredients, avoid plastics, have
| no microwave and I avoid frying, apart from making omelettes or
| scrambled eggs. And it's rather rare despite my daily 3-6 eggs
| intake.
|
| I'm happy with the choices I made. Organic food (from veggies to
| organic-fed meat), daily gym and 10+km walk, no plastics involved
| apart from meat containers just for transport and overall
| understanding of what I'm doing to my body.
|
| And it's all about personal preference: I know people on keto for
| whom eating early in the day works best, while I avoid any
| calories in the morning, apart from the fat in vitamin D3 softgel
| capsule.
| nerdjon wrote:
| The anti microwave comments in this thread are kinda wild
| considering if you put plastic in other cooking methods it's even
| worse. Microwave is just the less obvious one.
|
| Especially considering the studies that show how microwave keeps
| more nutrients in your food (I think the studies I have seen have
| been particularly for vegetables but I would imagine that is true
| for others but I don't know).
|
| Would be great if we could find an alternative to plastic covers
| you have to piece for frozen meals (or plastic steam bags) but I
| have yet to see an alternative.
|
| But this is a good reason to at least when storing leftovers or
| sauces to put them in a glass container instead to minimize
| exposure.
| thatwasunusual wrote:
| > The anti microwave comments in this thread are kinda wild
| considering if you put plastic in other cooking methods it's
| even worse.
|
| What other cooking methods involves using plastic?
|
| I use glass for everything microwave, not because I'm worried
| about plastic, but mostly because a) I have mostly glass
| storage containers, b) I feel that it contain the heat better,
| and c) they keep heat _out_ better.
|
| The latter is probably the most important thing. Easier to
| handle, and have a shorter cool-down time before putting it
| into the fridge.
| guender wrote:
| [dead]
| lucgagan wrote:
| This may sound dumb, but I never trusted microwaves. It just
| feels so unnatural. I even have basic understanding on how they
| work (water molecules in food start to vibrate producing heat),
| but it just doesn't taste good and feels off. No way it is
| healthy.
| noSyncCloud wrote:
| Can you give us a quick rundown of what heat is, in your
| understanding?
| adderthorn wrote:
| I think the takeaway here is cooking in plastic in the
| microwave, not the microwave technology itself.
| revertmean wrote:
| > water molecules in food start to vibrate producing heat
|
| That isn't really how microwaves work. Or, perhaps, that's how
| all radiation heat things work. It's any molecule that will
| absorb radiation of that frequency. So your grill works the
| same way, just at a different frequency. At microwave level,
| it's water, fats, all sorts of things. The difference is really
| the stuff that _doesn 't_ absorb at those frequencies.
| shortcake27 wrote:
| > No way it is healthy.
|
| That's a bold claim. How did you come to this conclusion? Do
| you have any scientific literature you can point us to that
| proves microwaved food is unhealthy?
| permo-w wrote:
| it's not healthy, but only in the sense that it lowers the
| barrier to eating more food. other than that, heat is heat
| nayuki wrote:
| If you go by that standard, barbecuing over a fire is pretty
| unnatural too. Burning chemicals, depositing random hydrocarbon
| soot onto your food, having poor control over the cooking
| temperature... And we know it's unhealthy.
| stouset wrote:
| The culprit here is _plastic_. There has never been a
| reasonable suspicion that microwaves themselves are in any way
| detrimental.
| aeternum wrote:
| Amazon referral link to the glass containers. The real question
| is: how many of these articles are complete BS just to sell a
| product?
|
| Definitely Do Not trust what you read when there is a referral
| link.
| labster wrote:
| Yeah, this company does the same thing at Ars Technica, putting
| up long lists of Amazon affiliate links whenever it's Prime
| Day.
| 93po wrote:
| Agree the potential bias is unfortunate
| sakawa wrote:
| > "Personally, I avoid heating food in any plastic with an
| automatic default to glassware." Beyond never microwaving food
| in plastic, Vandenberg hopes people simply stop using it. She
| says, "The market will provide us with alternatives if we just
| don't buy plastic."
|
| I find really astonishing how the article demonizes plastic and
| ends recommending glassware use, placing a product referral
| that have PLASTIC lids. Shouldn't we stop using it?
| kibwen wrote:
| In the wild, most of the glass food storage containers that I
| see have silicone lids, not plastic lids.
|
| In any case, the problem here is when food comes into contact
| with plastic, which is not happening regularly with lids
| unless you store your food upside-down.
| argiopetech wrote:
| All my Pyrex lids are plastic. I'm away from home at the
| moment and can't check, but some "search engine research"
| suggests BPA-free #7 (the "other" category) plastic. I've
| seen glass lids with silicone seals, but never a fully
| silicone lid.
|
| I'm not spending a lot of time microwaving those lids,
| though.
| developer93 wrote:
| From the Wikipedia article: "Silicone compounds are
| pervasive in the environment. Particular silicone
| compounds, cyclic siloxanes D4 and D5, are air and water
| pollutants and have negative health effects on test
| animals. They are used in various personal care products.
| The European Chemicals Agency found that "D4 is a
| persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) substance and
| D5 is a very persistent, very bioaccumulative..." So maybe
| silicones aren't great either
| himinlomax wrote:
| The lid is not in (much) contact with the food, so there's no
| leeching, plus you can remove it when microwaving.
| CrimsonRain wrote:
| You should not be putting the food in microwave with lids,
| plastic or silicone. Glassware with those lids are fine for
| storage.
| winternewt wrote:
| Ironically I always put the lid in for protection so food
| doesn't explode and stain the oven. Guess that was a bad
| idea.
| ghusbands wrote:
| Plenty of things are microwaved with the lid loosened or
| gently placed on top. That's certainly not a general rule.
| argiopetech wrote:
| A paper or light cloth towel suffices in place of a lid
| in every circumstance I've run across. Barring almost
| ready to eat meals in plastic containers designed for
| microwaving (which I use exceedingly rarely), plastic
| never enters my microwave.
| littlestymaar wrote:
| I'm doing it as well because I though it would be fine (I
| was mostly wary of BPA leaking from the plastic to my
| food so it didn't seem too big of a problem to microwave
| it), but that's a habit that you can change if you know
| about the risk. (And manufacturers should be mandated to
| engrave a warning in the lid "do not microwave" so that
| people are &actually made aware of it).
| darkclouds wrote:
| Various military's most notably the Russians experimented with
| body suits that microwaved their occupants to keep them warm in
| the polar regions.
|
| For some reason the idea didnt catch on, anyone know why not?
| GenerocUsername wrote:
| This sounds fake on my because generating microwaves is not
| really something you could 'shrink and distribute' to cover a
| body.
|
| There is a reason microwaves are boxes.
|
| If I had to guess, the suits were actually infrared heating
| elements
| iancmceachern wrote:
| There are anecdotes of people getting exposed to radar and
| communications arrays. The results range from instant
| vaporization to minor burns and a warming sensation
|
| https://www.quora.com/Would-anything-happen-if-you-stand-
| in-...
| throwanem wrote:
| The translation isn't splendid, but that seems to
| describe someone being badly burned as a side effect of
| passing very high current, rather than by high-energy RF
| exposure.
|
| There's also an anecdote I think I once heard from an old
| Lockheed engineer, about the idea of microwave cooking
| having been sparked by the misfortunes of birds exposed
| by surprise to WWII aircraft radar being tested. No idea
| whether that one's true or not, though; I was quite young
| and very credulous, so wouldn't put it past him to have
| been pulling my leg for the hell of it.
| iancmceachern wrote:
| "ing For More Commercial Kitchen Equipment? Visit
| celco.ca!
|
| info@celcook.ca (866) 697-0103 The Accidental Invention
| of the Microwave THE ACCIDENTAL INVENTION OF THE
| MICROWAVE Home >> The Accidental Invention of the
| Microwave The Accidental Invention of the Microwave The
| Accidental Invention of the Microwave December 29, 2017
| Commercial Microwave Canada, commercial microwave Toronto
| Commercial Microwave Commercial microwaves in Canada are
| the mainstay of restaurants, cafes, and cafeterias across
| the country. But before commercial microwaves in Toronto,
| Montreal, and Vancouver restaurants became popular pieces
| of kitchen equipment, the common microwave was considered
| a luxury item!
|
| The microwave was invented accidentally in 1945 by a
| self-taught engineer named Percy Spencer, who was leading
| a radar project for the defence giant, Raytheon. While
| testing a new vacuum tube called a magnetron, he
| discovered that a chocolate bar in his pocket had melted
| from the heat. He decided to try another experiment by
| placing some popcorn kernels near the magnetron, and he
| watched as the kernels popped into fluffy popcorns.
|
| Next, Spencer placed an egg near the magnetron and the
| egg began to move from the heat creating pressure inside
| the egg. The egg exploded and Spencer saw that the yoke
| had become hot. He realised that the low-density energy
| from the magnetron could cook food quickly. He created a
| metal box with an opening through which he fed microwave
| power. The energy was trapped inside the box, which
| created a high-density magnetic field. He placed food
| inside the box, and the heat generated by the energy
| cooked the food. The first microwave oven was born."
|
| https://celcook.ca/the-accidental-invention-of-the-
| microwave...
| dunham wrote:
| They're expensive, too. At least when epicurious ran a similar
| article, they also recommended wide-mouth ball jars.
|
| The biggest problem for me is cabinet space. The jars don't
| stack compactly, and the glass lock tend to live up to their
| name if you try to stack them.
| kagakuninja wrote:
| I have a set of pyrex bowls that I bought in 1987, and still
| use today. I wouldn't bother with wide mouth jars, although I
| guess they have advantages when storing food in the fridge.
| close04 wrote:
| I have a couple of these pyrex bowls that I took when I
| left home for Uni some decades ago and they were already
| some decades old. I have no lid for them so I cover them
| with regular plates or with a wooden chopping board (even
| when I microwave them), with the upside that with the board
| as a cover I can stack another bowl on top in the fridge.
|
| But for food heating I find it very easy to just take the
| food from whatever container it's in and put it in a
| regular bowl which I can microwave covered by a plate to
| contain the inevitable food explosion.
|
| Every one of the few times I microwaved even in high
| quality plastic containers they became soft and harder to
| handle. Also I always had the (probably very subjective)
| feeling that it subtly changes the taste of the food. Kind
| of how bottled water tastes when the PET bottle is left in
| the sun for a while.
|
| Anyway, I find the bowl+plate as an infinitely reusable
| option, easy to clean, and just takes a bit of extra care
| handling when hot. Also bowls and plates stack very nicely
| in the cupboard and not too expensive in IKEA.
| throwanem wrote:
| > microwave covered by a plate to contain the inevitable
| food explosion
|
| The default (maximum) power setting dumps so much energy
| so fast into the water in your food that some of it
| boils, and the expanding steam spatters food everywhere.
| This is also what causes the "burned on the outside,
| still cold in the middle" effect with leftovers, which
| aren't engineered to be microwaved on high the way most
| frozen packaged meals are.
|
| Use a lower power setting for longer, and pause to stir
| if possible. That way there's more time for the heat to
| dissipate into the bulk of whatever you're microwaving,
| and few to no tiny, messy steam explosions.
| close04 wrote:
| I actually use lower power in multiple shorter "sessions"
| with some minutes in between, which even without stirring
| lets the heat transfer more uniformly through the food -
| almost exclusively leftovers.
|
| I discovered this accidentally since usually I go about
| other stuff while heating the food in the microwave (not
| the stove) and more often than not I completely forget
| about it even with the "ding". Putting it though another
| session at low power, I noticed, makes the food very
| uniformly heated.
|
| But ever so often after a while heating there'll be the
| random drop of water under some fat or something like
| that, and without a lid it will paint the inside of the
| oven a lovely shade of splatter. No downside with
| covering the food.
| developer93 wrote:
| I've never microwaved wood, but I'm going to start,
| thanks!
| mauvehaus wrote:
| I once got a brandy snifter wedged into a Pyrex measuring cup
| (don't ask, I don't remember what I could have possibly been
| doing to arrange this).
|
| I filled the brandy snifter with ice, water, and salt, and
| dunked the outside of the measuring cup in hot water. It
| loosened the assembly enough to get it apart without
| destroying the brandy glass.
| j7ake wrote:
| In some Asian countries, microwaves are not common. They use a
| steamer with either metal or porcelain bowls inside.
|
| Maybe the data can be used to compare between microwave SV non
| microwave life.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-09-23 23:01 UTC)