"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
pltrgyst wrote
Cape Cod Bob wrote

Non stick pans have a definite place in t he kitchen - crepe pans for
example.

There is no reason to prefer non-stick for crepes.

Wrong.

You might note that there are no non-stick commercial crepe makers.

Thats because the detail is different with commercial operations.


What do you mean by "the detail is different"?

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 07:50:09 -0700 (PDT), Sheldon
wrote:

pltrgyst wrote:
Cape Cod Bob wrote:
Non stick pans have a definite place in t he kitchen - crepe pans for
example.

There is no reason to prefer non-stick for crepes. You might note that
there are
no non-stick commercial crepe makers. All I do on my commercial crepe
makers is
use clarified butter, and there is never the slightest sticking or
build-up.

However, Non stick woks do not.

I would point out that no less a chef than Ming Tsai often uses a
non-stick wok.

FoodTV personalities cook whatever and with whatever their sponsors
(the people who pay them) mandate. Professional kitchens are nothing
like FoodTV cartoon kitchens.

My wife is a working cook (her management calls her a "chef" but she
calls herself a cook) and always gets a laugh when she see TV chefs
wearing kitchen-unsuitable "chef costumes."
Especially those with long and wide sleeves designed to pick up
everything they flap against.

--Vic


......including the flame from the stove burner?

JoeSpareBedroom wrote
Rod Speed wrote
pltrgyst wrote
Cape Cod Bob wrote

Non stick pans have a definite place in t he kitchen - crepe pans for example.

There is no reason to prefer non-stick for crepes.

Wrong.

You might note that there are no non-stick commercial crepe makers.

Thats because the detail is different with commercial operations.

What do you mean by "the detail is different"?

Most obviously that its used multiple times a day in a commercial
operation and only weekly at most in a home situation. And a
commercial operation has minimum wage monkeys to wash them,
whereas many prefer the lowest cleaning effort for the home etc.

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 07:50:09 -0700 (PDT), Sheldon
wrote:

pltrgyst wrote:
Cape Cod Bob wrote:
Non stick pans have a definite place in t he kitchen - crepe pans for
example.

There is no reason to prefer non-stick for crepes. You might note that there are
no non-stick commercial crepe makers. All I do on my commercial crepe makers is
use clarified butter, and there is never the slightest sticking or build-up.

However, Non stick woks do not.

I would point out that no less a chef than Ming Tsai often uses a non-stick wok.

FoodTV personalities cook whatever and with whatever their sponsors
(the people who pay them) mandate. Professional kitchens are nothing
like FoodTV cartoon kitchens.

My wife is a working cook (her management calls her a "chef" but she
calls herself a cook) and always gets a laugh when she see TV chefs
wearing kitchen-unsuitable "chef costumes."
Especially those with long and wide sleeves designed to pick up
everything they flap against.

--Vic

On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 03:14:03 -0400, Cape Cod Bob
wrote:

On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 12:10:29 -0400, Peter A
wrote:

You are just being silly. Claiming that a gas stove is necessary for
good cooking and that nonstick pans don't have a place in the kitchen
just shows your ignorance.

Non stick pans have a definite place in t he kitchen - crepe pans for
example. However, Non stick woks do not.

Not sure which ng you're in, so I'm replying to all. I use my cast
iron pan for crepes, but use a nonstick pan interchangeably with cast
iron for all types of eggs... omelets, scrambled, over easy. But back
in the day when my cast iron pan wasn't as well seasoned, I preferred
nonstick for eggs (and I used it a few times for crepes too).

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first

Somebody wrote:

It makes as much sense cooking with cast iron
cookware in 2008 as it does commuting to work in a cart with wooden
wheels pulled by a yoke of oxen.

We may ALL be commuting to work in carts, soon enough. BAD metaphor.
Bad bad bad.


--
Steal This Blog!
http://www.gay-bible.org/steal

On Apr 14, 2:04*am, aspasia wrote:
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:48:33 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"

wrote:
In article
,
Sheldon wrote:

The only reason folks buy cast iron cookware is because it's cheap,
and they are too poor or miserly to buy real cookware or they enjoy
playing pilgrim.

You don't have kids or a wife, do you.

It's a great way to get iron into the diet.

You couldn't HIRE me to use those non-stick coatings which migrate
into the user's system with bad consequences. *Feh!

Do you have a citation to a refereed scientific journal that describes
those
bad consequences?

Cindy Hamilton

On Mar 5, 10:18Â*pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
Sheldon wrote:
Lou Decruss wrote:

Sheldon wrote:

Kenneth wrote:

I've used cast iron happily for about 50 years, but have
always thought the whole seasoning thing to be, well, (for
want of a better word), silly.

In terms of sticking, I could not detect a difference
between a brand new, unseasoned pan, and one that I had
carefully seasoned for years.

Then, a few years ago, Consumer's Reports tested cast iron
cookware.

Among other aspects of their testing, they asked staff
members to contact elderly relatives to see if they could
find generations old, super-well seasoned pans, for
comparison.

As has been my experience, they could detect no difference

Except the elderly could no longer lift them.

That's how I got some of mine.

I don't know why anyone needs cookware from the iron age, it's a
kitchen for cripe's sake... you wanna pump iron join Gold's Gym.

Maybe some of us are younger and stronger than you shemp. �

Thanks for proving my point... those of us with real life experience
and measurable IQs don't need to work as fork lifts. Â*My momma taught
me that no one pays much for jackass labor. Â*That said I have no doubt
I can out muscle two of you.

The only reason folks buy cast iron cookware is because it's cheap,
and they are too poor or miserly to buy real cookware or they enjoy
playing pilgrim. Â*It makes as much sense cooking with cast iron
cookware in 2008 as it does commuting to work in a cart with wooden
wheels pulled by a yoke of oxen. Â*I've yet to see a professional
kitchen that uses cast iron pots and pans. Â*Cast iron cookware makes
steel wheel roller skates and wooden golf clubs seem like state of the
art. Â*Cast iron cookware went out of vogue before the Wright Brothers
flew at Kitty Hawk, before Edison's light bulb.

Two advantages to cast iron:

1) thermal mass. Â*Sometimes that's a benefit, sometimes it's not, but
sometimes you want even cooking over the ability to heat/cool quickly.

2) you have to work very, very hard to render a cast iron skillet
unusable. Â*You have one, you have a skillet for life. Â*That appeals to
my chea^H^H^H^Hfrugal side.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.http://members.cox.net/njnagel- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

also, they make a fine weapon.

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:59:26 -0700, z wrote:

wheels pulled by a yoke of oxen. Â*I've yet to see a professional
kitchen that uses cast iron pots and pans. Â*Cast iron cookware makes

One of the kitchens I worked in used cast iron as a back up when the
griddle failed.

The primary advantages of cast iron are indestructibility and even heat
distribution. Those can useful characteristics.

I use primarily no-stick stuff, but I get annoyed with the durability
issue. Sometimes I want to be able to use a nice this metal spatula. On
those occasions I'd like to have a cast iron pan, but not with my current
stove, which just sucks. Cast iron and gas stoves are a nice
combination.

glen stark wrote in message ...
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:59:26 -0700, z wrote:

wheels pulled by a yoke of oxen. I've yet to see a professional
kitchen that uses cast iron pots and pans. Cast iron cookware
makes

One of the kitchens I worked in used cast iron as a back up when the
griddle failed.

The primary advantages of cast iron are indestructibility and even
heat
distribution. Those can useful characteristics.

I use primarily no-stick stuff, but I get annoyed with the durability
issue. Sometimes I want to be able to use a nice this metal spatula.
On
those occasions I'd like to have a cast iron pan, but not with my
current
stove, which just sucks. Cast iron and gas stoves are a nice
combination.


And you can't beat a well broken in and seasoned cast iron pan for
non-stick. I love them for eggs and things like that.

Cheri

On 14 Apr 2008 23:26:09 +0200, glen stark
wrote:



The primary advantages of cast iron are indestructibility and even heat
distribution. Those can useful characteristics.

Howdy,

"Even...?"

Put a cast iron pan on a gas flame for a few bit, and then
put some water in the pan.

You can see the pattern of the burner below.

There may be virtues of cast iron, but I would not put "even
heat distribution" on the list.

All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

aspasia wrote in message ...

My cast iron pans served my late mother for her lifetime,
and have done the same for me, and I hope my children
will use them after I'm gone. Indestructible!

My favorite cast iron pan was my 85 YO mother's mother's pan.

Talk about seasoning.

I don't use it for everything but I love cast iron.It browns thing much
better than non-stick. And the clean up is surprisingly easy.

bonnie

On Apr 15, 8:13*pm, aspasia wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 09:51:00 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton





wrote:
On Apr 14, 2:04*am, aspasia wrote:
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:48:33 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"

wrote:
In article
,
Sheldon wrote:

The only reason folks buy cast iron cookware is because it's cheap,
and they are too poor or miserly to buy real cookware or they enjoy
playing pilgrim.

You don't have kids or a wife, do you.

It's a great way to get iron into the diet.

You couldn't HIRE me to use those non-stick coatings which migrate
into the user's system with bad consequences. *Feh!

Do you have a citation to a refereed scientific journal that describes
those
bad consequences?

Cindy Hamilton

I hope you don't mind if I suggest you do your own research. *I've
seen a great deal on-line and in hard media over the years attesting
to the damage done to people by fumes from these pans. *But that
material may not rise to the scientific level of assurance you
require.

Actually, the only things I've seen that seemed remotely credible was:

1. When heated to excess, some types of nonstick coatings can release
fumes that are toxic to birds.

2. If you don't use the nonstick pan like an idiot, you're in no
danger.

I'm really looking for a citation in the New England Journal of
Medicine,
the Lancet, or peer-reviewed toxicology journals. Perhaps I'll see
what I can
find. It seems to me that the burden of proof is on the person making
the
claims, however.

Cindy Hamilton

Cindy Hamilton wrote:

On Apr 15, 8:13 pm, aspasia wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 09:51:00 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton

wrote:
On Apr 14, 2:04 am, aspasia wrote:
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:48:33 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"

wrote:
In article
,
Sheldon wrote:

The only reason folks buy cast iron cookware is because it's cheap,
and they are too poor or miserly to buy real cookware or they enjoy
playing pilgrim.

You don't have kids or a wife, do you.

It's a great way to get iron into the diet.

You couldn't HIRE me to use those non-stick coatings which migrate
into the user's system with bad consequences. Feh!

Do you have a citation to a refereed scientific journal that describes
those
bad consequences?

Cindy Hamilton

I hope you don't mind if I suggest you do your own research. I've
seen a great deal on-line and in hard media over the years attesting
to the damage done to people by fumes from these pans. But that
material may not rise to the scientific level of assurance you
require.

Actually, the only things I've seen that seemed remotely credible was:

1. When heated to excess, some types of nonstick coatings can release
fumes that are toxic to birds.

2. If you don't use the nonstick pan like an idiot, you're in no
danger.

I'm really looking for a citation in the New England Journal of
Medicine,
the Lancet, or peer-reviewed toxicology journals. Perhaps I'll see
what I can
find. It seems to me that the burden of proof is on the person making
the
claims, however.

Cindy Hamilton

I don't know if this is pertinent or not, but five years ago a
co-worker, who works as a scientist in environmental engineering and
science, shared with me an article from USA Today written by Elizabeth
Weise, "Posted 4/23/2003 10:08 PM - Updated 4/24/2003 1:24 AM". The
title of the article is, "Out of the frying pan, into a fire." I won't
post/share the entire article here because that would be an infringement
of copyright. But for reference, here are a couple of paragraphs quoted
from the article that may help, or perhaps not:

"Last week the Environmental Protection Agency announced concerns
about a widely used chemical called perfluorinated acid. Tests in rats
have shown reduced fetal weight of pups, delays in maturation and kidney
problems - and 92% of Americans tested had trace amounts of it in their
blood. That's because so-called PFOA or its byproducts are used in the
manufacturing process for Teflon and Gore-Tex and can be released as the
original Scotchguard and Stainmaster break down. PFOA also has other
industrial uses."

"This month a paper in the journal Current Biology reported that a
commonly used plastic ingredient called bisphenol A caused abnormal
pregnancies in mice and might cause reproductive problems in people.
Last year a Swedish study found that a flame retardant used in TV sets,
computer circuit boards and casings, foams and fabric called
polybrominated diphenyl ether, or PBDE, is rapidly accumulating in human
breast milk. The chemical is thought to cause thyroid cancer and
possibly neurodevelopmental problems in test animals."

Hope this helps you to find appropriate citations for particular studies
and papers if you're so inclinded.

Sky, who is no scientist and has no "environmental engineering and
science" background -----disclaimer!

--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice

"Cindy Hamilton" wrote in message
news:dfde542c-db10-

Actually, the only things I've seen that seemed remotely credible was:

1. When heated to excess, some types of nonstick coatings can release
fumes that are toxic to birds.

2. If you don't use the nonstick pan like an idiot, you're in no
danger.

I'm really looking for a citation in the New England Journal of
Medicine,
the Lancet, or peer-reviewed toxicology journals. Perhaps I'll see
what I can
find. It seems to me that the burden of proof is on the person making
the
claims, however.

Cindy Hamilton

*********************************************8

Unless, of course, if you value your health and your families health.

Bob F wrote:

"Cindy Hamilton" wrote:

Actually, the only things I've seen that seemed remotely credible
was:

1. When heated to excess, some types of nonstick coatings can
release fumes that are toxic to birds.

2. If you don't use the nonstick pan like an idiot, you're in no
danger.

I'm really looking for a citation in the New England Journal of
Medicine, the Lancet, or peer-reviewed toxicology journals. Perhaps
I'll see what I can find. It seems to me that the burden of proof is
on the person making the claims, however.

Unless, of course, if you value your health and your families health.

I see. You can also protect your family's health by eating 1 pound of
raw fish, half a pound of rice and 4 ounces of raisins per day AND
NOTHING ELSE because all other food is poison. Why? Because I said so.
I don' need no steenkin' peer review. Eating anything else puts you and
your family in deadly jeopardy. You've been warned.

My rice cooker has a teflon pot. Crazy people have non-teflon
rice-cooker pots.

Bob, see if you can fix your mail software to provide quote marks. I
put them in myself for Cindy's comments just to make sure that people
knew what YOU wrote, but we shouldn't have to do that. See to it.

--
Cheers, Bev
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
If you're ever about to be mugged by a couple
of clowns, don't hesitate - go for the juggler.

On Apr 16, 7:27*pm, Sky wrote:
Cindy Hamilton wrote:

On Apr 15, 8:13 pm, aspasia wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 09:51:00 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton

wrote:
On Apr 14, 2:04 am, aspasia wrote:
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:48:33 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"

wrote:
In article
,
Sheldon wrote:

The only reason folks buy cast iron cookware is because it's cheap,
and they are too poor or miserly to buy real cookware or they enjoy
playing pilgrim.

You don't have kids or a wife, do you.

It's a great way to get iron into the diet.

You couldn't HIRE me to use those non-stick coatings which migrate
into the user's system with bad consequences. *Feh!

Do you have a citation to a refereed scientific journal that describes
those
bad consequences?

Cindy Hamilton

I hope you don't mind if I suggest you do your own research. *I've
seen a great deal on-line and in hard media over the years attesting
to the damage done to people by fumes from these pans. *But that
material may not rise to the scientific level of assurance you
require.

Actually, the only things I've seen that seemed remotely credible was:

1. *When heated to excess, some types of nonstick coatings can release
* * *fumes that are toxic to birds.

2. *If you don't use the nonstick pan like an idiot, you're in no
danger.

I'm really looking for a citation in the New England Journal of
Medicine,
the Lancet, or peer-reviewed toxicology journals. *Perhaps I'll see
what I can
find. *It seems to me that the burden of proof is on the person making
the
claims, however.

Cindy Hamilton

I don't know if this is pertinent or not, but five years ago a
co-worker, who works as a scientist in environmental engineering and
science, shared with me an article from USA Today written by Elizabeth
Weise, "Posted 4/23/2003 10:08 PM - Updated 4/24/2003 1:24 AM". *The
title of the article is, "Out of the frying pan, into a fire." *I won't
post/share the entire article here because that would be an infringement
of copyright. *But for reference, here are a couple of paragraphs quoted
from the article that may help, or perhaps not:

* * *"Last week the Environmental Protection Agency announced concerns
about a widely used chemical called perfluorinated acid. Tests in rats
have shown reduced fetal weight of pups, delays in maturation and kidney
problems - and 92% of Americans tested had trace amounts of it in their
blood. That's because so-called PFOA or its byproducts are used in the
manufacturing process for Teflon and Gore-Tex and can be released as the
original Scotchguard and Stainmaster break down. PFOA also has other
industrial uses."

PFOA is used in Teflon manufacture. This doesn't seem to say anything
about Teflon use.

* * *"This month a paper in the journal Current Biology reported that a
commonly used plastic ingredient called bisphenol A caused abnormal
pregnancies in mice and might cause reproductive problems in people.
Last year a Swedish study found that a flame retardant used in TV sets,
computer circuit boards and casings, foams and fabric called
polybrominated diphenyl ether, or PBDE, is rapidly accumulating in human
breast milk. The chemical is thought to cause thyroid cancer and
possibly neurodevelopmental problems in test animals."

Also nothing to do with using Teflon-coated pans.

Hope this helps you to find appropriate citations for particular studies
and papers if you're so inclinded.

Sky, who is no scientist and has no "environmental engineering and
science" background -----disclaimer!

I'll continue to use my Teflon pans for the tasks for which they're
suited,
my stainless-steel pans for their tasks, and my cast iron when it's
suitable.

Cindy Hamilton

"I'll continue to use my Teflon pans for the tasks for which they're
suited,
my stainless-steel pans for their tasks, and my cast iron when it's
suitable.

Cindy Hamilton"

It's a free country.

The BIG danger in using them is when you accidentally overheat them. The
fumes that come off can do a JOB on your lungs. That's happened to me WAY
back when I was single. I ended up with a "cold" that resulted in my
missing a week of work.

I do a lot of cooking. While I wish I had some good iron pans, the SS pans
(with Al sandwich or Cu bottom) serve quite well for most things.

I still use a smal "non-stick" for omlets. My SS "omlet" pan just doesn't
even come close to the "non-stick".


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Apr 17, 3:02*pm, wrote:

They had to take Scotchguard off the market while they created a new
formulation due to this problem. It has long been known by those who
keep birds that teflon cookware gives off fumes that even in tiny
amounts will kill all of their birds

I remember that. When I heard it was going off the market, I went out
and bought a bunch of Scotchgard.

Cindy Hamilton

"John Gilmer" wrote in
:


"I'll continue to use my Teflon pans for the tasks for which they're
suited,
my stainless-steel pans for their tasks, and my cast iron when it's
suitable.

Cindy Hamilton"

It's a free country.

The BIG danger in using them is when you accidentally overheat them.

You mean like getting drunk and deciding to cook and "rest" while it's
heating?

The fumes that come off can do a JOB on your lungs. That's happened
to me WAY back when I was single. I ended up with a "cold" that
resulted in my missing a week of work.

I do a lot of cooking. While I wish I had some good iron pans, the
SS pans (with Al sandwich or Cu bottom) serve quite well for most
things.

I still use a smal "non-stick" for omlets. My SS "omlet" pan just
doesn't even come close to the "non-stick".


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Cindy Hamilton wrote in news:81b7167b-ad89-
:

On Apr 17, 3:02*pm, wrote:

They had to take Scotchguard off the market while they created a new
formulation due to this problem. It has long been known by those who
keep birds that teflon cookware gives off fumes that even in tiny
amounts will kill all of their birds

I remember that. When I heard it was going off the market, I went out
and bought a bunch of Scotchgard.

Cindy Hamilton


Just in case someone decided to come home with a bird for a pet?

The Real Bev wrote:
Bob F wrote:

"Cindy Hamilton" wrote:

Actually, the only things I've seen that seemed remotely credible
was:

1. When heated to excess, some types of nonstick coatings can
release fumes that are toxic to birds.

2. If you don't use the nonstick pan like an idiot, you're in no
danger.

I'm really looking for a citation in the New England Journal of
Medicine, the Lancet, or peer-reviewed toxicology journals. Perhaps
I'll see what I can find. It seems to me that the burden of proof is
on the person making the claims, however.

Unless, of course, if you value your health and your families health.

I see. You can also protect your family's health by eating 1 pound of
raw fish,

Depends on the source. Alabama started doing their own testing of
imported fish. Half the fish from China are rejected, due to high levels
of various chemicals.
These (artificially-fattened)farm-raised fish, especially salmon, are
not a good alternative. They're loaded with PCB's, dioxins, toxaphene,
dieldrin, , lindane, heptachlor epoxide, , , Mirex, endrin ,DDT, maybe
even STP, too (??)


half a pound of rice and 4 ounces of raisins per day AND
NOTHING ELSE because all other food is poison. Why? Because I said so.

Imo, just stuff yourself with (organic) brown rice & broccoli every day.


I don' need no steenkin' peer review.

Ditto! Peers are sorta like "manchurian" scientists.

They all learn (and don't learn) the same things.

aspasia wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 09:51:00 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton

I hope you don't mind if I suggest you do your own research. I've
seen a great deal on-line and in hard media over the years attesting
to the damage done to people by fumes from these pans. But that
material may not rise to the scientific level of assurance you
require.

All I could find was dead birds.
Imo, scientific or not, if you've found some convincing evidence, it's
your responsibility to share it with less-enlightened peeps.

On Apr 17, 11:36Â*pm, Red Green wrote:
Cindy Hamilton wrote in news:81b7167b-ad89-
:

On Apr 17, 3:02�pm, wrote:

They had to take Scotchguard off the market while they created a new
formulation due to this problem. It has long been known by those who
keep birds that teflon cookware gives off fumes that even in tiny
amounts will kill all of their birds

I remember that. Â*When I heard it was going off the market, I went out
and bought a bunch of Scotchgard.

Cindy Hamilton

Just in case someone decided to come home with a bird for a pet?

Just in case the new stuff wasn't worth a damn, as environmentally
correct
replacements so often are. IIRC it was not birds but the ozone layer
that
was at risk from Scotchgard.

Cindy Hamilton

On Apr 17, 11:34*pm, Red Green wrote:
"John Gilmer" wrote :



"I'll continue to use my Teflon pans for the tasks for which they're
suited,
my stainless-steel pans for their tasks, and my cast iron when it's
suitable.

Cindy Hamilton"

It's a free country.

The BIG danger in using them is when you accidentally overheat them. *

You mean like getting drunk and deciding to cook and "rest" while it's
heating?

That's just evolution in action. Culling the stupid out of the herd.
Preferably
before they breed.

Cindy Hamilton

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:26:54 -0500, JonL wrote:

All I could find was dead birds.
Imo, scientific or not, if you've found some convincing evidence, it's
your responsibility to share it with less-enlightened peeps.

Agreed -- assuming you can find any.

-- Larry

"The Real Bev" wrote in message news:sKANj.105

I'm really looking for a citation in the New England Journal of Medicine,
the Lancet, or peer-reviewed toxicology journals. Perhaps
I'll see what I can find. It seems to me that the burden of proof is
on the person making the claims, however.

Unless, of course, if you value your health and your families health.

I see. You can also protect your family's health by eating 1 pound of
raw fish, half a pound of rice and 4 ounces of raisins per day AND
NOTHING ELSE because all other food is poison. Why? Because I said so.
I don' need no steenkin' peer review. Eating anything else puts you and your
family in deadly jeopardy. You've been warned.

If one has to have multiple peer-reviewed articales in front of them before
considering potential health risks, good for them. My criteria are a little less
restricting, as my health is important to me.


My rice cooker has a teflon pot. Crazy people have non-teflon
rice-cooker pots.

Bob, see if you can fix your mail software to provide quote marks. I put them
in myself for Cindy's comments just to make sure that people knew what YOU
wrote, but we shouldn't have to do that. See to it.

My quotes work fine, except for posts grom google-groups. If you know how to fix
that, please let me know.

I did put in a row of *** to seperate my response.

"Red Green" wrote in message
The BIG danger in using them is when you accidentally overheat them.

You mean like getting drunk and deciding to cook and "rest" while it's
heating?

Says the man who has never burned anything in a pan?