Peat Safe Cookware?

marcar72

Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2013
Messages
660
Location
Tucson, AZ
I prefer Corning Visions or whatever it's called; glass cookware made by Corning back in the 1990's and earlier. It's not on the market anymore because too many peeps were doing crazy stuff with it like taking it out of the freezer then microwaving it. Caused some of them to blow up due to thermal shock. Use them normal and with some common sense though and they're awesome! I got a 10" skillet with lid and like a 2 or 3 quart pot with lid. That's all I need.

I'm making some Hamburber Hash in them as I speak... :D
 

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,263
djrachman said:
Le Creuset makes a model but it's super expensive. The Lodge makes one that's nearly as good at 1/6 the price. http://www.amazon.com/Lodge-EC6D43-Enam ... ql_qh_dp_t

Thanks for your research.
Concerning The Lodge, i've read some of the negative comments on Amazon, and it seems there's a reason it's sold at such low price...
 

BingDing

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Messages
976
Location
Tennessee, USA
I read that study quite awhile ago, it was more on point than anything I had found. I'm not gonna second guess RP based on that post, though. Ignoring the several illogical statements in it, the abstract from this study shows that nickel is leached from stainless steel.

And even if food does contain some nickel, ingesting more of it doesn't make a lick of sense to me.

Chromium is a trace element that we need, it is important in glucose/insulin metabolism. I have no idea if chromium from cookware is usable biologically.

My 18/00 pot that I boil water in every day is showing some rust. I found one reference that says it is the ferric form, not ferrous, and unavailable to the body. I have to do more research on it.
 

sm1693

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2014
Messages
176
marcar72 said:
I prefer Corning Visions or whatever it's called; glass cookware made by Corning back in the 1990's and earlier. It's not on the market anymore because too many peeps were doing crazy stuff with it like taking it out of the freezer then microwaving it. Caused some of them to blow up due to thermal shock. Use them normal and with some common sense though and they're awesome! I got a 10" skillet with lid and like a 2 or 3 quart pot with lid. That's all I need.

This glass cookware marcar has recommended is the cat's pajamas. It's true what they say, once you go glass, you'll never go back.
 

zztr

Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2016
Messages
295
Just don't use the stove and this isn't much of a problem. Ceramics or pyrex in the microwave and in the oven. Problem solved.

I never cook anything on the stove top. Eggs cook fine in the microwave. I put two in a bowl, scramble them a bit and add a piece of cheese, and micrwave on 3 for six minutes. They come out fine. No pan cleanup, either, just toss the bowl in the dishwasher.
 

DaveFoster

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
5,027
Location
Portland, Oregon
I searched the whole internet to find the answer to this, as surprisingly, nobody here gives the full answer. Finally I found it, so I thought I'd come back here and post my findings.

First of all, Peat's information to buy stainless steel that sticks with a magnet is nothing but provacative and is frustratingly uninformative. 18/10 (300 series) and 18/0 (400 series) cookware both stick to magnets (they're made that way to work on induction cooktops), however the 400 series sticks much stronger because of the lack of nickel. Because of Peat's concern for nickel, you'd assume he means to get the 400 series, which has 0% nickel, instead of the 300 series, which is 10% nickel. However, after significant research, I'd get the 300 over the 400.

Here's what you need to know:
Probably the safest cookware isn't Stainless Steel- it's enameled cast iron. Enameled Cast Iron is perfectly safe as long as the interior of the dish is white - the lack of color very likely indicating a lack of lead in the enamal (colored enamels more often have lead). Le Creuset makes a model but it's super expensive. The Lodge makes one that's nearly as good at 1/6 the price. http://www.amazon.com/Lodge-EC6D43-Enam ... ql_qh_dp_t

Second best option is Stainless Steel. Obviously you can't buy the cheapo 200 series, which releases a bunch of metal. So you're left choosing between the 300 (18/10) and 400 (18/0) series. The 400 series can have as low as >1% Nickel, which sounds like a great option. But here's the problem... it's much more corrosive than the 300 series, and although there's no nickel to leach in the 400 series, it has higher total release rates of metal than the 300 series, with the vast majority of the release being iron. (This info can be found in page 30 of the study provided in the forthcoming link.) Lastly, it's very hard to find pans that are 18/0 on the exterior and interior. Typically they'll be 18/0 on the exterior (for induction) and 18/10 on the interior. The only one I found that MIGHT be 18/0 on the inside and out is the Farberware Millenium Set, but honestly I don't care. A good quality 300 series (like All-Clad) is a better option. Once the sets are scratched, pitted, corroded and damaged, the release rates of metals is much higher. A quality 300 series set could last multiple lifetimes with little wear. The 400 series isn't likely to last 10 years without damage.

The remainder of my response is lifted from the comments section of gnowfglins.com's article on The Scoop on Stainless Steel Cookware, written by user Holly Gates. It sums it all up nicely:

300 series stainless is generally speaking more corrosion resistant than 400 series, meaning that less of the metal would get into your food).

Here is a very pertinent survey conducted by the government of Finland in 2010:

http://www.ttl.fi/en/publications/elect ... _steel.pdf

The study, titled “Review on Toxicity of Stainless Steel” is 87 pages long, with several dense pages of references at the end. For each potential area of concern with stainless affecting human health in every situations, the findings of numerous scientific studies are assessed and evaluated in light of EU guidelines for toxic material exposure. Whether or not you put any stock in the EU guidelines, the amounts and types of material which are found to transfer from stainless to food are interesting to think about.

As pointed out by others here, the main constituents of the stainless steels used in foodware are (300 and 400 series) are iron, nickel, and chromium. The materials of potential concern would be the nickel and chromium. In these alloys, the availability of nickel is found to be less than 0.1% of what it would be from a similar proportion of bulk nickel metal. The exception is alloy variants with sulfur added, typically to enhance machinability. These are not used for foodware. Even people hypersensitive to nickel (i.e. skin allergy) experience no reaction from intimate and lengthy contact with 304 or 316 stainless.

The availability of chromium however is approximately equal to what would be predicted given its proportion of the alloy. The question is how much chromium is coming off the metal during typical food preparation and storage activities.

The Finnish report finds that for medium to high pH range, even at cooking temperatures and with prolonged storage, essentially nothing transfers from the stainless to the food. Low pH materials result in some transfer.

One study cited in the report looked at storage of pickled lemon in stainless, which is lower pH than almost anything else you would think of using in the kitchen (pH 2.1). Kombucha is 3-4, pure white vinegar is 2.4. Other studies looked at prolonged boiling of low-ish ph foods in stainless. What was generally the result was that while some chromium and nickel transferred to the food, the actual amount was something like 10 times less than typical intake of these metals from the food itself (25ug/kg food is typical).

Exceptions are with the first few uses of new pots, and with some types of welds.

Many surgical implants and medical devices are made from 316L. This is because it is among the least reactive materials with biological systems that can be produced and worked at a reasonable cost.

To me, knowing that my food itself contains 10x the amount of what is coming off my pot makes me feel quite comfortable with the safety of my 304 stainless.

------

I hope this lays this issue to bed once and for all. For those of you wondering, here's the set I wound up purchasing: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00421 ... UTF8&psc=1
Great insight. Thank you for sharing.

HOMI CHEF has nickel-free 18/0 stainless steel cookware, and they have the best prices.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 10, 2015
Messages
548
i read here in the forum but having a hard time finding the post about luminarc that is made from france is much better because of the different material use than other luminarc sold in the other countries?

how do you know if its made from france?
 

smith

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Messages
386
Would be nice if there were nickel-free WOKS or just safe large, deep and smoothly-curved pans that existed, rather than these shallow skillets and weird 90 degree-angle edge pans. Really difficult to stir-fry 2 cups of rice and veggies in a steep 8-inch pan that's 2 inches high or a skillet with no curve, but it's not impossible i guess
 
Last edited:

smith

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Messages
386
Corning Visions or whatever it's called; glass cookware made by Corning back in the 1990's and earlier. It's not on the market anymore because too many peeps were doing crazy stuff with it like taking it
It's back on the market, though there is some suspicion that the USA versions have tested positive for lead, while the French (and obviously original) versions are lead-free.
I searched the whole internet to find the answer to this, as surprisingly, nobody here gives the full answer. Finally I found it, so I thought I'd come back here and post my findings.

First of all, Peat's information to buy stainless steel that sticks with a magnet is nothing but provacative and is frustratingly uninformative. 18/10 (300 series) and 18/0 (400 series) cookware both stick to magnets (they're made that way to work on induction cooktops), however the 400 series sticks much stronger because of the lack of nickel. Because of Peat's concern for nickel, you'd assume he means to get the 400 series, which has 0% nickel, instead of the 300 series, which is 10% nickel. However, after significant research, I'd get the 300 over the 400.

Here's what you need to know:
Probably the safest cookware isn't Stainless Steel- it's enameled cast iron. Enameled Cast Iron is perfectly safe as long as the interior of the dish is white - the lack of color very likely indicating a lack of lead in the enamal (colored enamels more often have lead). Le Creuset makes a model but it's super expensive. The Lodge makes one that's nearly as good at 1/6 the price. http://www.amazon.com/Lodge-EC6D43-Enam ... ql_qh_dp_t

Second best option is Stainless Steel. Obviously you can't buy the cheapo 200 series, which releases a bunch of metal. So you're left choosing between the 300 (18/10) and 400 (18/0) series. The 400 series can have as low as >1% Nickel, which sounds like a great option. But here's the problem... it's much more corrosive than the 300 series, and although there's no nickel to leach in the 400 series, it has higher total release rates of metal than the 300 series, with the vast majority of the release being iron. (This info can be found in page 30 of the study provided in the forthcoming link.) Lastly, it's very hard to find pans that are 18/0 on the exterior and interior. Typically they'll be 18/0 on the exterior (for induction) and 18/10 on the interior. The only one I found that MIGHT be 18/0 on the inside and out is the Farberware Millenium Set, but honestly I don't care. A good quality 300 series (like All-Clad) is a better option. Once the sets are scratched, pitted, corroded and damaged, the release rates of metals is much higher. A quality 300 series set could last multiple lifetimes with little wear. The 400 series isn't likely to last 10 years without damage.

The remainder of my response is lifted from the comments section of gnowfglins.com's article on The Scoop on Stainless Steel Cookware, written by user Holly Gates. It sums it all up nicely:

300 series stainless is generally speaking more corrosion resistant than 400 series, meaning that less of the metal would get into your food).

Here is a very pertinent survey conducted by the government of Finland in 2010:

http://www.ttl.fi/en/publications/elect ... _steel.pdf

The study, titled “Review on Toxicity of Stainless Steel” is 87 pages long, with several dense pages of references at the end. For each potential area of concern with stainless affecting human health in every situations, the findings of numerous scientific studies are assessed and evaluated in light of EU guidelines for toxic material exposure. Whether or not you put any stock in the EU guidelines, the amounts and types of material which are found to transfer from stainless to food are interesting to think about.

As pointed out by others here, the main constituents of the stainless steels used in foodware are (300 and 400 series) are iron, nickel, and chromium. The materials of potential concern would be the nickel and chromium. In these alloys, the availability of nickel is found to be less than 0.1% of what it would be from a similar proportion of bulk nickel metal. The exception is alloy variants with sulfur added, typically to enhance machinability. These are not used for foodware. Even people hypersensitive to nickel (i.e. skin allergy) experience no reaction from intimate and lengthy contact with 304 or 316 stainless.

The availability of chromium however is approximately equal to what would be predicted given its proportion of the alloy. The question is how much chromium is coming off the metal during typical food preparation and storage activities.

The Finnish report finds that for medium to high pH range, even at cooking temperatures and with prolonged storage, essentially nothing transfers from the stainless to the food. Low pH materials result in some transfer.

One study cited in the report looked at storage of pickled lemon in stainless, which is lower pH than almost anything else you would think of using in the kitchen (pH 2.1). Kombucha is 3-4, pure white vinegar is 2.4. Other studies looked at prolonged boiling of low-ish ph foods in stainless. What was generally the result was that while some chromium and nickel transferred to the food, the actual amount was something like 10 times less than typical intake of these metals from the food itself (25ug/kg food is typical).

Exceptions are with the first few uses of new pots, and with some types of welds.

Many surgical implants and medical devices are made from 316L. This is because it is among the least reactive materials with biological systems that can be produced and worked at a reasonable cost.

To me, knowing that my food itself contains 10x the amount of what is coming off my pot makes me feel quite comfortable with the safety of my 304 stainless.

------

I hope this lays this issue to bed once and for all. For those of you wondering, here's the set I wound up purchasing: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00421 ... UTF8&psc=1
not sure if advertisement
 
Last edited:

Dave Clark

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
1,978
I used to use Corning Visions until one day cooking something the pot exploded like a bomb. Good thing I was not hit by the glass. When I looked into the problem it turned out this had happened to other owners of Visions. I am once bitten twice shy now to use it again, but before that I really liked the pots. Maybe someday I will try them again, but I want to look into that issue first.
Another thing I own and like is the VitaClay cooker, which is an automatic cooker that uses a natural clay pot, so no chemicals to be leached.
 

postman

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
1,284
I used to use Corning Visions until one day cooking something the pot exploded like a bomb. Good thing I was not hit by the glass. When I looked into the problem it turned out this had happened to other owners of Visions. I am once bitten twice shy now to use it again, but before that I really liked the pots. Maybe someday I will try them again, but I want to look into that issue first.
Another thing I own and like is the VitaClay cooker, which is an automatic cooker that uses a natural clay pot, so no chemicals to be leached.
Doesn't clay get its red color from iron? That can't be good. Were you doing anything funny to your visions cookware or did it just explode for no reason
 

Dave Clark

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
1,978
Doesn't clay get its red color from iron? That can't be good. Were you doing anything funny to your visions cookware or did it just explode for no reason
On the Visions, no, I was just cooking as usual and bam, it was like a bomb went off. That was years before the internet, but since that time I had read that other people were experiencing that problem. I really like the Visions and was disappointed, maybe the problem has been corrected, I should look into it. From the information I had read, the clay is inert and doesn't leach anything into the food, but I don't have extensive knowledge about that, and maybe I should dig a bit deeper into that question. I would assume that the VitaClay, if it did have iron, it would have much less than cast iron cookware.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom