The supply of foodstuffs in most developedcountries of the world today is better andmore healthful than it has ever been, and

continues to improve. That includes the depthand breadth of what is available, and its safety.

Much of this is due to the judicious use ofchemicals (pesticides and others), most of whichare synthetic and the result of man’s ability to in-novate and improve.

Yet the media carry increasing amounts ofscare headlines threatening our health from car-cinogens and poisons, supposedly an unavoid-able part of these man-made chemicals. Not justthose used in the production of food, but manyothers used to produce a wide variety of prod-ucts crucial to hundreds of industries.

Green: the good and the bad

Fortunately, the move toward a cleaner, saferenvironment continues to put pressure on thosewho continue to contaminate. Unfortunately, thereis a radical element to the “green” movementwhich can actually do considerable harm by dis-

torting the truth about chemicals.

PFOA, for example, has gotten significantpress. PFOA, an ingredient used in the manufac-ture of fluoropolymer dispersions, has been vili-fied as a serious problem in nonstick cookware,and has even been called a “likely carcinogen”by some radical environmentalists.

Those in the cookware industry know that vir-tually all the tiny amount of PFOA used is de-stroyed by the curing process. As a result, inevery test conducted under normal cooking con-ditions, no trace of PFOA has been found in anonstick pan.

The point is that, if there are trace amounts ofPFOA in nonstick cookware, they are negligible,and it is safe to assume they can do no harm.

Distorting the truth

Here’s a little-known fact (as presented by theAmerican Council on Science and Health[ACHS]). A standard American holiday dinner ofappetizers, salad, turkey, potatoes, green veg-

Chemicals and the world we live inA closer look at chemicals, PFOA and human safety

By distorting the truth, anyone can make a holiday dinner sound like a carcinogen-filled threat.

etables, wine, pie, coffee and tea is rife with ro-dent carcinogens, elements that have causedcancer in rodents when taken in sufficient dosesover long periods of time.

In fact, such a dinner includes 32 differentcarcinogens.

Does this make the dinner a health risk? Ofcourse not. But, given the inclination for the rad-cial element to distort, anyone who wished topublish a report that such a meal contained 32carcinogens would be technically correct —even if what the reader took away from the reportwould likely be a dramatically mistaken impres-sion (and a lost appetite).

The media seem to concentrate on syntheticchemicals while ignoring the many carcinogenicchemicals that occur naturally in much of whatwe eat. Yet such rodent carcinogens abound innature.

As the American Council on Science andHealth (ACSH) points out, “Human dietary intakeof nature’s pesticides is about 10,000 timeshigher than human intake of synthetic pesticidesthat are rodent carcinogens”.

When was the last time you read a report inthe media condemning exposure to nature’schemicals?

The ACSH states, “All chemicals, whethernatural or synthetic, are potential toxicants athigh doses but are perfectly safe when con-sumed in low doses”. Three examples: Limabeans contain hydrogen cyanide, often used tocommit suicide. Potatoes contain arsenic. Car-rots contain carototoxin, a nerve poison

The ACSH (to which we owe our thanks forthe information contained herein) summarizes bysaying, “When it comes to toxicants in the diet —natural or synthetic — the dose makes the poi-son” (emphasis ours).

What to doOne cannot overstate the importance of pro-

tecting our families from consuming dangerouschemicals. There have been far too many exam-ples of industry irresponsibility in the handling oftoxic chemicals. Fortunately, regulations havetoughened, as has their application.

That, however, has not stopped the media of-fensive by radical environmentalists against syn-thetic chemicals via grossly exaggerated claimsabout miniscule amounts of chemicals “poison-ing our atmosphere”.

Nor are such attacks likely to stop.

What about PFOA?

Whitford (and other reputable coating manu-facturers) have already reduced what little PFOAis used in fluoropolymers by more than 90% overthe past few years. Further, based on an agree-ment with the EPA, PFOA will disappear entirelyfrom the fluoropolymer manufacturing process inwestern nations by 2015.

In addition, Whitford (and others) have beenoffering low PFOA and, more recently, PFOA-freenonstick coatings.

The key point is: beware those who are moreinterested in eye-catching headlines than thetruth.

PFOA from nonstick coatings was never a se-rious problem. One could easily make the casethat it was never even a problem.

Nonstick coatings have been around for al-most 60 years and have been safely used byhundreds of millions of consumers around theworld. In fact, they are one of the safest productsever launched.

More information?

If you have any questions about PFOA ornonstick coatings, please contact your Whitfordrepresentative or Whitford directly (email:sales@whitfordww.com; website:whitfordww.com).

NON-WARRANTY: THE INFORMATION PRESENTED IN THIS PUBLICATION IS BASED UPON THE RESEARCH AND EXPERIENCE OF WHIT-FORD. NO REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY IS MADE, HOWEVER, CONCERNING THE ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF THE IN-FORMATION PRESENTED IN THIS PUBLICATION. WHITFORD MAKES NO WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION OF ANY KIND, EXPRESSOR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE,AND NO WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION SHALL BE IMPLIED BY LAW OR OTHERWISE. ANY PRODUCTS SOLD BY WHITFORD ARENOT WARRANTED AS SUITABLE FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE TO THE BUYER. THE SUITABILITY OF ANY PRODUCTS FOR ANYPURPOSE PARTICULAR TO THE BUYER IS FOR THE BUYER TO DETERMINE. WHITFORD ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE SE-LECTION OF PRODUCTS SUITABLE TO THE PARTICULAR PURPOSES OF ANY PARTICULAR BUYER. WHITFORD SHALL IN NO EVENTBE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. © Whitford 2010/WC10/10

Where good ideas come to the surface

AppetizersCream of mushroom soup

HydrazinesCarrots

Aniline, caffeic acid, carototoxinCherry tomatoes

Benzaldehyde, caffeic acid, hydrogen peroxide,quercetin glycosidesCelery

Caffeic acid, furan derivatives, psoralensMixed roasted nuts Aflatoxin, furfural

Lettuce, arugula salad with basil-mustard vinaigretteHallyl isothiocyanate, caffeic acid, estragole, methyl eugenol

EntreeRoast turkey

Heterocyclic aminesBread stuffing (onions, celery, black pepper, mushrooms)Acrylamide, ethyl alcohol, benzo(a)pyrene, ethyl carbamate,

furan derivatives,furfural, dihydrazines, d-limonene, psoralens, quercetin glycosides, safrole

Cranberry sauce Furan derivatives

VegetablesBroccoli spears

Allyl isothiocyanateSweet potato

Ethyl alcohol, furfural

Rolls with butterAcetaldehyde, acrylamide, benzene, ethyl alcohol,

benzo(a)pyrene, ethyl carbamate, furan derivative, furfural

DessertsPumpkin pie

Benzo(a)pyrene, coumarin, methyl eugenol, safroleApple pie:

Acetaldehyde, caffeic acid, coumarin, estragole, ethyl alcohol, methyl eugenol, quercetin glycoside, safrole

BeveragesRed, white wine

Ethyl alcohol, ethyl carbamateCoffee

Benzo(a)pyrene, benzaldehyde, benzene, benzofurancaffeic acid, catechol, 1,2,5,6-dibenz(a)anthracene, ethyl benzene, furan, furfural, hydrogen peroxide,

hydroquinone, d-limonene, 4-methylcatecholTea

Benzo(a)pyrene, quercetin glycosides

Thanksgiving Dinner: What to be thankful for(such as the 32 carcinogens you’ll ingest)