That’s if you limit the comparison to just Bromine. You are ingesting recycled plastic from TVs and Tires, which also contains; Phthalates, Bisphenols, Polyvinyl Chloride, Styrene, PFAS, and several other chemicals shown to cause cancer or have an unlinked but possible cause of cancer (we don’t know yet but there are alternative utensils not made of black plastic that we do know that don’t have the big ?)
>which also contains; Phthalates, Bisphenols, Polyvinyl Chloride, Styrene, PFAS, and several other chemicals shown to cause cancer or have an unlinked but possible cause of cancer (we don’t know yet but there are alternative utensils not made of black plastic that we do know that don’t have the big ?)
You're probably ingesting all of that on a daily basis already, even without black utensils. Without a sense of scale, it's impossible to make a rational determination on what to do next. PFAS is in tap water as well. Should you stop drinking water?
You’re right that many of these chemicals are already present in our daily environment. But that doesn’t mean every source of exposure is equivalent or that we should stop caring about reducing it where we can. Think of it this way: if you know you’re going to be exposed to some harmful substances, it still makes sense to lower your overall intake whenever possible. It’s not about achieving total elimination, which might be impossible, but about minimizing unnecessary risks.
Eliminating known sources of contamination by (1) using safer utensils or (2) using water filters are straightforward steps that decrease the amount of these harmful chemicals you consume.
Even if we can’t quantify the exact benefit to the last decimal place, making such changes generally comes at low cost and might offer meaningful advantages over time. Why not err on the side of caution when the trade-offs are so small and the potential health benefits may be substantial?
That makes complete sense. For me, the time investment is totally neutral. I would buy a water filter anyway to mitigate other harms. Using stainless steel utensils vs plastic ones doesn't cost me any time at all. So I have risk reduced with 0 time investment.
Thank you for sharing that information about aluminum and brass cookware; I wasn’t aware of those details before.
The study you referenced does confirm the findings for aluminum and brass, but it also notes that no stainless steel cookware tested released enough lead to exceed childhood or adult Interim Reference Levels (IRLs). The testing involved placing vinegar—an acidic substance—and leaving it there for 24 hours, yet even under these conditions, stainless steel did not surpass IRL thresholds for lead.
I think what you are saying here is that avoidance of lead even below threshold is important and that plastic or silicone could have even lower amounts of lead in it. Which is fair and I think important to realize there is no perfect answer here.
In terms of cooking utensils silicone or bamboo might be a better choice than stainless steel. I don't think I've ever seen brass cooking stuff. I've often seen brass bowls with stickers warning that they aren't food safe.
> I've often seen brass bowls with stickers warning that they aren't food safe.
That’s mostly because acidic foods will accelerate corrosion and the patina forms a bunch of tough to clean nooks and crannies for bacteria to fester. It’s more about the risk of food poisoning than anything leaching into food (although zinc can leach into food from brass).
My spouse had already mostly eliminated black plasticware from our kitchen long before this article came out anyway.
From a usability and quality perspective I would suspect that many on HN could afford the marginally more expensive, higher-end alternatives that will last longer anyway.
The idea that we should have ever turned recycled electronics, tires, and other non-food safe materials into food related implements has always been dubious on its face. It’s a scourge.
