Zip-Lock Omelets

DON'T try this at home and we will tell you exactly why. What is circulating around again is instructions on cooking omelets in Ziploc bags. This is not recommended until further research is done on cooking with plastics. There is still question about the cancer causing breakdown of plastics and their contact with food during cooking.

"We have contacted the Ziploc company and they replied by telling us that ZIPLOC® brand Bags cannot be used to boil food. They also told us that they do not manufacture a "boilable" bag.... yet.

"They do not recommend using any ZIPLOC® brand Bag in boiling water, or to "boil" in the microwave. ZIPLOC® brand Bags are made from polyethylene plastic with a softening point of approximately 195 degrees Fahrenheit. By pouring near boiling water (water begins to boil at 212 degrees) into the bag, or putting the bag into the water, the plastic could begin to melt. Might I add that eggs and cheese have fat which gets much hotter than water thus the likelihood of melting the plastic increases.

"It is so easy to start something unhealthy like the idea of a ZIPLOC OMELET. All you have to do is type it up and send it out to everyone you know via e-mail. It spreads like wild fire. The ZIPLOC OMELET instructions start out by telling you "This works great !!!" But who ever started the idea had not contacted the company who manufactures the bag to see if such cooking techniques were recommended. Therefore people receiving the instructions might just assume this idea is safe and it is not.

"The specific concern centers on the possible contamination of foods with known carcinogens that may be present in plastic containers and wraps.

"This issue is certain to generate much research to clarify the potential risks. Until this issue is fully resolved, consumers who want to take a cautious approach should not use Ziploc type bags for boiling food in water or in the microwave. People should continue making omelets the old traditional way until plastic bag manufacturers come out with an approved safe bag that while heated containing food will produce no carcinogens."

According to SC Johnson's Frequently Asked Questions page:
Can I boil in Ziploc® Brand bags?
No. Ziploc® Brand bags are not designed to withstand the extreme heat of boiling.

I also received a letter from Megan O. Maginnis, Consumer Spe******t for S.C. Johnson & Son, makers of Ziploc baggies.Megan was replying to my inquiry about boiling with baggies.
"Thank you for asking about using Ziploc bags to make omelets. While we appreciate hearing about new and innovative ways to use our products, we must be cautious that these new ideas follow label directions.

"Ziploc bags are not designed or approved to withstand the extreme heat of boiling and therefore, using Ziploc bags to make any recipe that requires the bag to be boiled is not recommended.

"Like all of SC Johnson's products, Ziploc bags cam be used with confidence when label directions are followed. All Ziploc containers and microwaveable Ziploc bags meet safety requirements of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for temperatures associated with defrosting and reheating food in microwave ovens,as well as room, refrigerator, and freezer temperatures.

"Please share these facts with others who may have this misleading information. We also encourage people to go to Food Storage Ziploc® Bags and Containers for more information on the proper use of this product."

Ziploc is a registered trademark of the SC Johnson Co . If you have concerns about cooking with Ziploc bags, you can call the SC Johnson Product Safety Department at 1-866-231-5406. They will address any questions you may have.

I totally agree with Mama Mangia. Maybe someday the product will be different, but right now the fun and convenience is not worth the risk.

Hell-fire! Maybe that explains this green hump growing out of my back and the pink hair sprouting outta the tip of my tongue! Yikes & Yozwa! Good info guys- thanks for setting me str8!

LOL - CAG - you gave me a good laugh with that one!

BTW - ditto with plastic bags period - DO NOT USE ANY PLASTIC BAGS FOR ANY FOODS, FOOD STORAGE, ETC. UNLESS THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO BE USED FOR FOODS.

No grabbing the 13-gallon white plastic can liners to hold fresh homemade breads, cakes, cleaned lettuce and greens. etc.

Something in the plastic leeches out and gets into the food - even though you are not cooking in the bag!

I think this whole thing started when wa-aa-y back in "the good ol' days" they (company) came out with frozen sandwich fixings like turkey or roast beef in gravy - in a boil-in-the-bag pouch. Just boil water, drop the pouch in and boil "X" amount of minutes, cut the bag open and deposit on your bread or rolls for a hot sammie or add a salad and veggies and have a meal for one!

So, of course, not knowing any better many felt that they can now put food items in plastic bags and heat in boiling water. And of course, information was not as available as it is today.

Give me the really good ol' days - before plastic bowls, plastic wraps, etc.

It's so kooky because I can't think of hardly any food that plastic doesn't touch- hot, cold or otherwise- even during the cooking/heating process. Just last night at work I ate Lean Cuisine Sausage & Ziti from packaging that likely had ounce-for-ounce as much plastic in the box as it did food. Nuked it in the black plastic tray with the clear plastic film folded back... Same with my spinach salad- came out of plastic that it had likely lived in since God was a boy! As I departed work this morning an arriving first-shifter had just nuked an english-muffin/egg/bacon breakfast-sammie in this neato plastic bag with these silly perforations in it to supposedly keep the muffin from getting steamy-wet.

Having been in Alaska for so many years (which admittedly- AK is usually very behind all things "trendy"...) and cooking high-volume foods mainly from scratch, I haven't seen many of these ingenius "new" things on the market. Helll- one can now even microwave plastic tubs of Campbell's Soup and Chef Boyardee Pastas- completely encased in weird little plastic coffins w/ holes poked in the top! Maybe you've all seen these items for years- but since I've been in a frozen "coma" up north for over a decade, some of these things are amazing me!

You know, Chub, your Alaskan way of life is better on so many levels. Cooking from scratch is better for you, tastes better, uses less packaging to pollute our planet, and when made with local ingredients, supports our local agribusinesses.

Piffle on food in plastic coffins, I say! I'm with Mama M. But what can I carry my PB&J to work in?

Just a sidebar on the "transference of carcinagens."

Most of this actually started in the '70s, with the search for a plastic bottle that could hold carbonated beverages (read "beer").

Most experiements were with polymers, and there was a lot of concern about the migration of free monomers.

Even though nobody knew whether or not free monomers even existed, or, if they did, if they migrated into foodstuffs, and, if they did, whether that meant anything from a health concern, by Gawd we had to be concerned. Cuz if all that did happen, by definition, free monomers were either an adulterent or an unspecified additive. Either way, and depending on which gubmint agency you listented to, it would make them an illegal and, by definition, a health hazard.

Congress even got involved, and held several hearing on the subject. Indeed, I testified at one of them.

Enter Dr. Gilbert, from Rutgers' food science school, who explains to the Congress of the United States, in all its dignity, that even if free monomers do exist, so what? They cannot migrate into the food, because Maxwell's Demons will keep them out.

Don't be alarmed, I will explain.

Dr. Maxwell was one of those 19th century "thought scientists." Most of them were German, but he happened to be Scottish. Maxwell addressed a non-problem (later, when thermodynamics became a science, it would become real---a rare instance of a thought scientist "solving" a real problem) having to do with the transference of particules through a permeable membrane. Nowadays this has to do with diffusion and osmosis, but nobody knew from such things.

At any rate, Maxwell posited that the reason movement takes place in only one direction (for instance, from greatest concentrations to least) is because if you magnified the membrane it would look like a wall full of open doorways. He called them gates. And in each gate sat a demon, directing traffic. Molecules could only move in one direction because of that.

Can you imagine. Congress hearing such nonsense? Never mind that Maxwell's Demons is a fully accepted idea in scientific circles. Congress wasn't having none of it.

In the Congressional Record, to this day, it is known as "the Gilbert effect."

No, Chubbs. The question is, do carcinagens migrate from the bologna into the red plastic.

But Seriously, Folk

I don't know as I'd even put a ziplock in the nuke. According to the box:

"Defrost & Reheat---Vent Bag 1"

CAUTION: For use in microwave, place bag on a "microwave-safe" dish. handle with care. Band and contents may be hot. Do not overheat contents as bag may melt."

At what point do we overheat the bag? You know, what it tells us not to do. There's nothing on the box to indicate what that is. Nor is there anything on the box indicating they are not safe in boiling water.

But, according to what they said in Mama's post, "overheating" is defined as 196 degrees---which is something any microwave will do in very little time.

Being as the folks at Johnson know all that, and know that stunts like the boil-in-bag omelet are widespread, it's rather irresponsible of them to not do a better job of spreading the word.

of course you will--
tadadada, "But Nan I could never play piano before" harump!!!!
the hook, the hook

(((((Kevin))))))
Nan

Yes, No. You deserve to have your hair fall out if you eat that red rubber sleeve and playing ON the piano is not playing the piano.

RE: "No, Chubbs. The question is, do carcinagens migrate from the bologna into the red plastic."

In this case, I think we need to do whatever it takes to protect the red plastic.

Let's go on the road together, Nan! I'll play piano as my arm-pit hair falls out from sucking on the red rubber sleeve that encases baloney- and you can do a dance-tease-number where you flip burgers and pickle-relish into the audience while wearing nothing but a bib-apron, fish-net stockings and a tie-dye feather boa! We'd call it the "Nan & Chub Musical Review"!

Go back to the days of waxed paper! CAG - let me know if that red rubber-sleeved bologna makes your arm put hair fall out - we women may never have to shave again! LOL -and check your leg hair too - we may be on to something!!

Anyway - you know Mama -

Sometimes the most convenient way to do things is not the healthiest. Many times fast food is used as an example. Although, it is very convenient and can take a fraction of time of making a meal from scratch, it is not ever going to be as healthy as cooking at home. Another example is using the microwave to heat every meal rather than using the stove or oven. The microwave can create free radicals which can be damaging to our system. Most recently in the news is the cancer link to a product most people use very frequently?.. Non-stick cookware.



We do not recommend using non-stick cookware and now the news regarding its questionable safety is getting more mainstream. Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency stated that there was suggestive evidence of that perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and its salts, used in Teflon (found in non-stick cookware), to be potentially carcinogenic. The EPA scientific advisory board that reviewed the agency's report concluded that PFOA, also known as C-8, is "likely" to be carcinogenic to humans.



So while the EPA and DuPont work out further testing, we stick to our original recommendation to avoid non-stick cookware. We all know how scratched up those pots and pans get after just a short use. Where do you think those bits of Teflon go? Right into your food! Although it can be more time consuming to scrub your regular pans, the little extra time to scrub your regular pans may be adding more time to your life.



Here is an excerpt from our upcoming book ?The Hauser Diet: A fresh look at healthy living!? which discusses pots and pans.



Aluminum is one of the most commonly used cookware. It conducts heat well and is lightweight. However, there are certain foods that should not be cooked in aluminum such as those containing citrus fruits, tomatoes, broccoli, or leafy vegetables. The aluminum can be absorbed into the food during heating and storage and end up in your body. Excess aluminum has been associated with conditions such as Alzheimer?s. All in all, we recommend choosing an alternative to aluminum cookware.



Copper is a choice cookware for many because it conducts heat well. Like aluminum, however, acidic foods should not be cooked using copper. ?Coated? copper cookware prevents the copper from direct contact with the food. If you are allergic to nickel, avoid this type of cookware. One of the metals used to make the coating is nickel.



Stainless Steel is the most popular cookware in North America. It is a great alternative to non-stick cookware. This is our number one pick for cookware.



Cast iron is very durable and can be used at higher temperatures than some other pans. It is also a good alternative to non-stick cookware.



Titanium cookware does not seem to pose any health risks or have adverse reactions with food while cooking or storing.



Ceramic, enamel, and glass cookware is generally safe. The level of lead that can be leached into food is controlled during manufacturing. Obviously, be sure that you do not cook with cookware that is labeled ?for decoration only.?



Non-stick surface materials, such as Teflon, should be avoided. When heated to high temperatures these surfaces emit fumes which may be harmful. Non-stick surface materials can also break apart and mix in with the food. If any of your Teflon pans are scratched, throw them away now!

I do not believe in microwaves, nor do I believe in their plastic cooking dishes and any plastic film that is used in micro waving. And don't microwave anyway. It creates free radicals -- the precursors to cancer -- in your food.

Plastic is made from petroleum.

Cling wraps are nothing but PVC (polyvinylchloride)!

Most North Americans urinate plastics. Sperm counts are at an historic per capita low. Cancer is an epidemic. Birth deformities, sex organ abnormalities and eventual cancers are becoming more common -- all traceable to certain chemical exposures to the fetus. If the human race is not driven extinct by nuclear holocaust or complete distortion of the climate, it may happen through wonderful plastic and other petrochemicals.

There are no safe plastics. All plastics migrate toxins into whatever they contact at all times. It does not matter if it is water- or oil-based; hot or cold; solid or liquid.

Clear plastic food wrap contains up to 30% DEHP [di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate]. This substance is also in intravenous blood bags. This poison was identified by the State of California for its Proposition 65 list of carcinogens and mutagens, but industry pressure got the listing weakened.

In the middle of the Pacific Ocean, it was found that 1,000,000 times more toxins are concentrated on the plastic debris and plastic particles than in ambient sea water;

Six times as much plastic per weight than zooplankton is in any given amount of sea water taken from the middle of the Pacific Ocean;

Triclosan, in plastics as well as antibacterial soaps, deodorants, toothpastes, cosmetics, and fabrics, is shown to cause health and environmental effects and compound antibiotic resistance. Researchers found that when sunlight is shined on triclosan in water and on fabric, a portion of triclosan is transformed into dioxin.

Migration from all seven categories of plastic designated with numerals on packaging, including the recyclable types 1 and 2, are (partial list): Acetaldehde, antioxidants, BHT, Chimassorb 81, Irganox (PS 800, 1076, 1010), lead, cadmium, mercury, phthatlates, and the acknowledged carcinogen diethyl hexyphosphate.

Many more such additives are often present, creating in our bodies synergisms that can be 1,600 times as strong as an estrogen imitator/endocrine disruptor/single chemical may be.

Chemicals from plastic wrap could migrate, or leach, from the plastic into fatty foods such as cheese and meat. These chemicals may interfere with the normal functioning of the hormonal system. Studies in animals show possible links between plastic wrap and reproductive problems, birth defects, and some forms of cancer. Children experience an increased level of risk as compared to adults due to the small size of children?s bodies and to the on-going development of their bodies.

Not all plastics are considered to pose the same health risks. It is important to note that plastic bags are not considered to be problematic. Of greater concern are plastic wraps and plastic containers.

Some plastic cling wraps use a plasticizer known as DEHA which has been shown to be an endocrine disrupter in rats. DEHA use has been banned in Great Britain, but not in the United States. It is often difficult to get information from suppliers about the DEHA content of their product.
Household plastic wraps made from polyvinyl chloride (PVC), such as Glad Microwave Wrap, Saran Classic (formerly Saran Wrap), and Reynolds Plastic Wrap are known to contain DEHA. Wraps made from polyethylene, including Glad Cling Wrap, Saran with Cling-Plus (formerly Handi-Wrap), and plastic bags made by Glad, Hefty, and Ziploc are free of this and other chemicals considered to be problematic.
Many plastic products carry a recycling code on the bottom of the container. By reading those codes and referring to this list, consumers can make informed choices in their use of plastics. The most common plastics, #1 PETE or PET and #2 HDPE, are considered the least harmful at this time. Also considered low risk are #4 LDPE and #5 PP.
Highest on the list to avoid, due to their ability to leach questionable chemicals into foods, are
#3 PVC or V, polyvinyl chloride
#6 Polystyrene, better known by its brand name Styrofoam, and
#7 Other, usually a polycarbonate.
Most Rubbermaid and Tupperware containers are considered acceptable with two exceptions: Rubbermaid Clear Classics container bases and Tupperware?s Rock ?N Serve containers.

and while I'm at it -

This article also pertains to the "coated" wrappers that are used by Mc Donald's, Burger King, etc. to prevent the grease from their sandwiches from coming through the wrapper.

The gentleman who worked for the company was discharged for bringing this to news for publication -

EPA Fines DuPont $16.5M for Teflon Cover-Up

By E.J. Mundell
HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, Dec. 14 (HealthDay News) -- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday ordered chemicals giant DuPont to pay a record $16.5 million in penalties for withholding health safety data on toxins linked to its lucrative Teflon group of non-stick, stain-resistant compounds.

According to the EPA, seven of the eight violations in the lawsuit involved DuPont's failure over the past two decades to report important data on perfluorooctanic acid (PFOA) -- a breakdown product of "fluorotelomer" compounds that include the Teflon brand of non-stick chemicals.

"This is the largest civil administrative penalty EPA has ever obtained under any environmental statute," Granta Nakayama, EPA's assistant administrator in the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, said at a press conference Wednesday afternoon. "The settlement sends a clear message to the regulatory community that EPA takes very seriously the requirement to submit substantial risk information about toxic chemicals."

The EPA settlement mandates that DuPont pay a $10.25 million penalty and another $6.25 million to support two EPA environmental projects, including a $5 million, three-year look at the "degradation potential" of nine of DuPont's fluorotelomer-based products to break down and form PFOA.

In a statement, Dupont noted that "the settlement closes this matter for DuPont without any admission of liability."

A second statement from DuPont senior vice president and general counsel Stacey Mobley said, "We have already cut PFOA emissions from U.S. plant sites by 98 percent, and we are committed to reducing those emissions by 99 percent by 2007."

Susan Hazen, principal deputy assistant administrator in the EPA's Office of Prevention -- Pesticides and Toxic Substances, told reporters that the jury is still out on the health effects -- if any -- of PFOA in humans.

"The agency has information based on animal studies and toxic effects in animals, [but] we have no information at this point that would lead us to believe there is a significant human health impact," she told reporters, adding that EPA-funded studies looking at PFOA's impact on human health are ongoing.

But Lauren Sucher, director of public affairs for the Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit Environmental Working Group, said that research suggests PFOA collects over time in the bloodstream and takes decades to eliminate.

"There are also studies showing harm to workers, including an increased risk of leukemia, and workers with higher cholesterol levels, which is clearly a risk factor for heart disease," Sucher said.

PFOA accumulates in the blood over time. Although the EPA has not yet labeled PFOA a human health hazard, prior studies have linked the compound to increased risks for leukemia and high cholesterol.

"Whistleblower" testimony earlier this year from Glenn Evers, a former long-time DuPont scientist, also bolstered the case that the company had withheld data for years on risks posed by PFOA.

According to a recent ABC News report, DuPont officials "strongly dispute" Evers' claims, which they labeled "personal opinions that are inaccurate."

Because of their fire-, grease- and water-repellant properties, fluorotelomers have been ubiquitous for decades in products such as Gore-Tex fabric, upholstery, carpeting, paper food containers and "Teflon" non-stick cookware.

The Environmental Working Group filed a petition with the EPA more than two years ago claiming a DuPont cover-up, which in turn helped prompt the agency's lawsuit against the company.

"We're very satisfied that the EPA acted on our petition and actually sued DuPont for covering up vital health and safety information for over two decades," Sucher told HealthDay.

But she pointed out that, under existing rules, the agency could have levied fines of up to $313 million. Even that amount would be just a fraction of the billions of dollars in revenue DuPont has made from its Teflon-related products, she said.

"Given that DuPont has profited from illegal cover-ups over the past two decades, would the maximum fine have been more satisfying and a stronger deterrent? Sure," she added.

According to Nakayama, the eight counts cited against DuPont in the EPA suit included:

* failure to submit data from 1981 on the trans-placental movement of PFOA in humans,
* failure to submit data on PFOA levels in household drinking water,
* failure to reply to an EPA request for PFOA toxicity data,
* failures to submit information on elevated PFOA levels in the blood of residents living near DuPont's Washington, W. Va. Plant;
* data withheld from PFOA-related rat studies.

Nakayama said the first count was considered the most serious.

"This is the first and only information about human placental transfer and levels of PFOA in children," he said. "Human data is very rare, and information concerning PFOA in children, much less the fetus, is extremely rare and significant in researching the potential developmental effects of the chemical."

So where does all this leave consumers, who every day touch, and dine from, products containing fluorotelomer chemicals that may degrade to form PFOA?

"It's something consumers should be concerned about, but not alarmed by," Sucher said. "We'd suggest, though, that consumers definitely take opportunities to minimize exposure to these chemicals."

Those "opportunities," she added, include staying away from Teflon cookware; microwaving take-out food on a plate rather in the potentially PFOA-emitting container it came in; avoiding water- and stain-repellant clothing; and foregoing those special "stain-guard" coatings the next time you buy a carpet or sofa.

More information

For more on PFOAs, visit the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ) .

SOURCES: Dec. 14, 2005, Environmental Protection Agency press conference, with Granta Nakayama, assistant administrator, EPA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, and Susan Hazen, principal deputy assistant administrator in the EPA's Office of Prevention -- Pesticides and Toxic Substances; Lauren Sucher, director, public affairs, Environmental Working Group, Washington, D.C.; Dec. 14, 2005, Dupont press release; Nov. 18, 2005, ABC News

According to the gentleman who exposed this - the coating on the wrappers is made by a cancer causing substance and it also causes others health-related problems.

so why should I stop now -

AND BY THE WAY - judge it all yourself and make your own choices - this is just information


The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced it will fine Teflon maker DuPont $16.5 million for two decades' worth of covering up studies that showed it was polluting drinking water and newborn babies with an indestructible chemical. It was EWG's petition that sparked EPA's lawsuit against DuPont. The fine is the largest administrative fine the EPA has ever levied under a weak toxic chemical law. However, the $16.5 million fine is less than half of one percent of DuPont's profits from Teflon from this time period, and a fraction of the $313 million the agency could have imposed. Yet another reason to strengthen our toxic chemical laws, which EWG is launching a campaign to do.


The DuPont Co.'s failure to report widespread exposures to a potentially toxic chemical used to manufacture nonstick pans, stain-resistant carpet and hamburger wrappers will cost the company $16.5 million in fines and compensatory payouts.

Environmental Protection Agency officials said the settlement produced the largest administrative, noncourt civil penalty in agency history, and would serve as a warning to industries that flout federal toxic substance control laws.

"This settlement sends a strong message that companies are responsible for promptly informing EPA about risk information associated with their chemicals," said Granta Y. Nakayama, assistant administrator for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assur- ance.

Although the action was triggered by revelations about problems at DuPont's Teflon plant in Parkersburg, W.Va., its terms require the company to spend $5 million studying how a wider variety of related chemicals and consumer products behave and break down in the environment.

Some of the chemicals covered by the research deal are handled at DuPont's Chambers Works plant in Deepwater, N.J., at the foot of the Delaware Memorial Bridge, including C-8 -- also known as perfluorooctanoic acid or PFOA -- a chemical used in the production of Teflon.

One national organization, Environmental Working Group, said the penalty highlighted the federal government's weak hand in dealing with industrial polluters.

"What's the appropriate fine for a $25 billion company that for decades hid vital health information about a toxic chemical that now contaminates every man, woman and child in the United States?" Group President Ken Cook said in a statement. "We're pretty sure it's not $16 million, even if that is a record amount under a federal law that everyone acknowledges is extremely weak."

Under its pact with the EPA, DuPont acknowledged no liability for failure to report its 1981 discovery that a compound used to make Teflon had contaminated the placenta and bloodstream of a West Virginia worker's unborn child. The agreement also settled seven other claims of company failure to disclose violations of the Toxic Substance Control Act and a related hazardous pollution control law.

Among the complaints were allegations that DuPont withheld information for years about unexpected contamination in the blood of workers, and pollution releases that eventually contaminated water supplies serving thousands in West Virginia and Ohio.

"The fact of the matter is, we could have litigated this thing. We could have paid a lot of money and been in court for several years," said DuPont Senior Vice President and General Counsel Stacey Mobley. "We made a determination that we're going to put this thing behind us."

Mobley said DuPont believes there are no human health effects associated with C-8.

More cases pending

DuPont has come under intense scrutiny in recent years with disclosures that the company's synthetic chemicals, including PFOA, have been detected in the bloodstreams of people and animals around the globe. An EPA scientific advisory panel recently recommended labeling the material a "likely" carcinogen, although the finding remains in dispute.

Earlier this year, DuPont set aside $15 million in anticipation of settling the case. Still pending is a federal criminal probe of the company's handling of federal requests for information.

The settlement requires DuPont pay $10.25 million in fines while also spending $5 million on a three-year study of the environmental breakdown characteristics of nine "fluorotelomer-based" products. The group includes soil-, stain- and grease-resistant coatings. Another $1.25 million will go to support school projects in West Virginia that reduce student exposure to harmful chemicals in science classrooms.

A former DuPont Co. engineer who lives in Hockessin recently accused the company of covering up indications that one of those chemicals escaped at higher-than-expected rates from paper coatings widely used for fast-food wrappers, microwave popcorn bags and other prepared foods.

Mobley said DuPont already has cut PFOA emissions by 98 percent at its U.S. plants "and we are committed to reducing those emissions by 99 percent by 2007."

Millions set for settlements

The company established a $108 million reserve last year to pay settlements in a West Virginia class action lawsuit involving citizen water pollution claims in Ohio and West Virginia. The settlement includes a medical monitoring agreement that could cost the company up to $235 million.

Vincent, Ohio, resident Kathy Minerd said tests had shown that she carries 480 parts per billion of PFOA in her blood, while her husband's levels are 290 ppb -- concentrations that were unknown outside of the workplace before the lawsuit forced community testing.

"At first they said it couldn't hurt you, but I'm sure it'll be a long time before they really know," Kathy Minerd said.

DuPont is the nation's only manufacturer of PFOA, although several other companies use the compound.

Company spokesman R. Clifton Webb said DuPont's experience at its Parkersburg, W.Va. plant, where emissions have fallen dramatically, would help in other pollution control efforts. He also said that the company releases at a different plant that makes PFOA in Fayetteville, N.C., were far lower than those experienced by 3M Co., DuPont's previous supplier. In 2002 3M stopped selling C-8; DuPont began producing at Fayetteville the same year, and now is investigating contamination of groundwater near the plant.




I don't microwave, I don't use Teflon, I prefer waxed paper, I don't like plastic wraps - but I have been know to use them to cover things (not to touch them) - enough of our foods are touched by plastics beyond our control. I protest fast food restaurants - haven't found one worth my time. I cook. I bake. I clean. I still like cotton. I still iron. What can I say???? Old habits - I dont' like to break I guess.

Mama is a moldy-oldie - and speaking of mold: (think I'll ever shut up?????)

Don't confuse the mold in aged cheese with the mold on old cheese

It's OK to eat mold on blue cheese, but eating moldy strawberries and nuts could make you sick.
Although reports about the risks of eating moldy food aren't new, a recent bulletin from the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service strongly cautions consumers about the dangers, warning that some molds on food can cause allergic reactions and respiratory problems. And a few molds, in the right conditions, produce mycotoxins, poisonous substances that can cause illness. These molds are found primarily in grain and nut crops, but are also known to be on celery, grape juice, apples and other produce.

Molds are microscopic fungi that live on plant or animal matter. Unlike bacteria that are one-celled, molds are made up of many cells and can sometimes be seen with the naked eye. Under a microscope, they look like skinny mushrooms.

In many molds, the body consists of: root threads that invade the food it lives on, a stalk rising above the food, and spores that form at the ends of the stalks. The spores give mold the color you see. When airborne, the spores spread the mold from place to place like dandelion seeds blowing across a meadow.

Molds have branches and roots that are like very thin threads. The roots may be difficult to see when the mold is growing on food and may be very deep in the food.
Foods that are moldy may also have invisible bacteria growing along with the mold. You see only part of the mold on the surface of food -- gray fur on forgotten bologna, fuzzy green dots on bread, white dust on cheddar, coin-size velvety circles on fruits, and furry growth on the surface of jellies.
When a food shows heavy mold growth, "root" threads have invaded it deeply. In dangerous molds, poisonous substances are often contained in and around these threads. In some cases, toxins may have spread throughout the food.

Beneficial molds
Molds are used to make certain kinds of cheeses, and can be on the surface or internal. Blue-veined cheeses such as Roquefort, blue, Gorgonzola, and Stilton are created by the introduction of P. roqueforti or Penicillium roqueforti spores. Cheeses such as brie and camembert have white surface molds. Other cheeses have both an internal and a surface mold. The molds used to manufacture these cheeses are safe to eat.

While most molds prefer warmer temperatures, they can grow at refrigerator temperatures, too. Molds also tolerate salt and sugar better than most other food invaders. Therefore, molds can grow in refrigerated jams and jellies and on cured, salty meats -- ham, bacon, salami and bologna.
Mold spores from affected food can build up in your refrigerator, or on dis***oths and other cleaning utensils. Clean the inside of the refrigerator every few months with 1 tablespoon of baking soda dissolved in a quart of water. Rinse with clear water and dry. Scrub visible mold (usually black) on rubber casings using 1 tablespoon of bleach in a quart of water. Keep dis***oths, towels, sponges, and mops clean and fresh. A musty smell means they're spreading mold around. Discard items you can't clean or launder.

When mold is harmful
Throw away luncheon meats, bacon, hot dogs, cooked leftover meat and poultry, cooked casseroles, cooked grains and pasta, and yogurt and sour cream that show any signs of mold, because foods with a high moisture content can be contaminated below the surface. Moldy foods may also have bacteria growing along with the mold.

Discard soft cheeses such as cottage cheese, cream cheese, chevre, Bel Paese, etc., and all types of crumbled, shredded and sliced cheeses. These foods with high moisture content can be contaminated below the surface. Shredded, sliced or crumbled cheese can be contaminated by the cutting instrument. Moldy soft cheese can also have bacteria growing along with the mold.

Get rid of jams and jellies with mold on them. The mold could be producing a mycotoxin. Microbiologists recommend against scooping out the mold and using the remaining condiment.

Throw away soft fruits and vegetables with high moisture content such as cucumbers, peaches, tomatoes, etc. They can be contaminated below the surface.

Toss bread and baked goods because porous foods can be contaminated below the surface. Discard peanut butter, legumes and nuts because these foods are at high risk for molds that are unsafe to eat.

Molds that can be eaten
You can use hard cheeses such as cheddar if you cut off at least 1 inch around and below the mold spot. Keep the knife out of the mold itself so it will not cross-contaminate other parts of the cheese. After trimming off the mold, re-cover the cheese in fresh wrap. Scrub mold off the surface of hard salami and dry-cured country hams. It is normal for these shelf-stable products to have surface mold.

Firm fruits and vegetables can be eaten if you cut off at least 1 inch around and below the mold spot. Small mold spots can be cut off fruits and vegetables with low moisture content (cabbage, bell peppers, carrots, etc.). It's difficult for mold to penetrate dense foods.




and while I'm at it - since I wash everything - I think you should too:

A Scary Food Danger You'd Never Suspect

You're supposed to eat five a day for good health, but beware! There could be danger in your salad bowl and fruit cup.

Illnesses linked to fresh produce are on the rise. Fruits and vegetables are now responsible for more large-scale outbreaks of food-borne illnesses than meat, poultry and eggs, reports The Wall Street Journal. Fully 12 percent of food-borne illnesses are caused by fruits and vegetables, up from 1 percent in the 1970s.

Why is lettuce more dangerous than hamburger? There are several reasons, including centralization of produce distribution, an increase in produce imports and the popularity of pre-chopped, ready-to-eat fruits and vegetables. In November 2005, 250,000 bags of Dole packaged salads were recalled due to E. coli bacteria, while in 2003, green onions imported from Mexico are thought to have caused the largest hepatitis A outbreak in U.S. history in which 500 people were sickened and three died.

The fruits and veggies causing the most problems are:

* Tomatoes
* Melons, especially cantaloupes
* Lettuce
* Sprouts
* Green onions

How do fruits and vegetables become tainted? It's tough to trace the specific origin, but it is known that once the protective skin is broken, it's easier for bacteria to enter, reports The Wall Street Journal. In the case of tomatoes, the bacteria can penetrate through the stem or cracks in the skin. Bacteria from irrigation water, manure or wildlife can seep through the cracks and crevices of a cantaloupe rind.

What can you do to protect yourself and your family? The Partnership for Food Safety Education offers these tips:

* Refrigerate all cut, peeled or cooked fresh fruits and vegetables within two hours of purchasing.
* Before and after preparing food, use hot water and soap to clean cutting boards, peelers and other surfaces and utensils that touch fruits and vegetables.
* Do not use the same cutting board for fruits and vegetables and for meat without cleaning with hot water and soap before and after food preparation.
* Cook or throw away fruits or vegetables that have touched raw meat, poultry, seafood or their juices.
* Remove and throw away bruised or damaged portions of fruits and vegetables when preparing to cook them or before eating them raw.