Up & Coming Weekly

Is Silicone Bakeware Dangerous? From the Editors of Environmental Magazine Are there any health hazards associated with the use of the new silicone bake ware and cooking uten- sils? I have found information associated with the hazards/benefits of Teflon and other cookware but nothing on the use of silicone. — Jean McCarthy, Sebastian, FL With all the negative press about Teflon and about metals leaching out of pots and pans, consum- ers are on the lookout for cookware that’s easy-to- clean and doesn’t pose health concerns. Silicone, a synthetic rubber made of bonded silicon (a natural element abundant in sand and rock) and oxygen, is increasingly filling this niche. The flexible yet strong material, which has proven popular in muffin pans, cupcake liners, spatulas and other utensils, can go from freezer to oven (up to 428 degrees Fahrenheit), is non-stick and stain-resistant, and unlike conven- tional cookware, comes in a range of bright and cheery colors. In 1979 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration determined that silicon dioxides — the basic elements in silicone cook- ware — were generally recognized as safe to use even in food- grade contexts. Image “thousand_names,” courtesy Flickr. las) didn’t start to show up on store shelves until a decade later, and the FDA hasn’t conducted any follow-up studies to determine whether silicone can leach out of cookware and potentially contami- nate food. For its part, Canada’s health agency, Health Canada, maintains that food-grade silicone does not react with food or beverages or produce any hazardous fumes, and as such is safe to use up to recommended temperatures. Consumer advocate Debra Lynn Dadd, who steers clear of Teflon due to health concerns, is bullish on silicone cookware after investigating potential toxicity. “I tried to find some information on the health effects of silicone rubber, but it was not listed in any of the toxic chemical databases I use,” she reports, adding that she also sampled material safety data on several silicone rubbers manufactured by Dow Corning (which makes some 700 variations). “All descriptions I read of But some wonder if there is dark side to silicone cookware. Anecdotal re- ports of dyes or silicone oil oozing out of overheated silicone cookware pop up on Internet posts, as do reports of odors lingering after repeated washings. Also, silicone’s image may be forever tainted by problems associated with sili- cone gel breast implants — some women with earlier generations of these im- plants experienced capsular contracture, an abnormal immune system response to foreign materials. And while theories about silicone implants’ link to breast cancer have since been debunked, the damage to silicone’s reputation lives on. It’s sad to say, but since the use of silicone in cookware is fairly new, there has not been much research into its safety for use with food. Back in 1979 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) determined that silicon dioxides — the basic elements in silicone cookware — were generally recognized as safe to use even in food-grade contexts. But the first silicone cookware (silicone spatu- silicone rubber describe it as chemically inert and stable, so it is unlikely to react with or leach into food, nor outgas vapors.” She adds that silicone “is not toxic to aquatic or soil organisms, it is not hazardous waste, and while it is not biodegradable, it can be recycled after a lifetime of use.” So while most of us will probably not have a problem with silicone cook- ware, those with chemical sensitivities might want to stay away until more de- finitive research has been conducted. In the meantime, cast iron and anodized aluminum cookware remain top choices for those concerned about harmful ele- ments leaching into their cooked foods. CONTACTS: FDA, www.fda.gov; Health Canada, www.hc-sc.gc.ca; Debra Lynn Dadd, www.dld123.com; Dow Corning, www.dowcorning.com. SEND YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS TO: EarthTalk, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php. Who’s Paying for ObamaCare? by JOHN HOOD With budget deficits, recession and both chambers of the General Assembly up for grabs this fall, North Carolina voters have a lot to think about. But right now, it looks like the single- biggest factor shaping state politics will be the U.S. House vote to nationalize health-care. Most North Carolinians didn’t want it. Most North Carolinians would have preferred that Congress and the Obama administration focus on measures to enhance economic growth, rather than socking the economy in the jaw. Most North Carolinians motivated to come to the polls in November will want to hear how their elected officials will repeal ObamaCare and re- place it with real health-care reform that respects America’s tradi- tions of federalism, individual liberty and competitive markets. They aren’t going to like what they hear from Democratic candidates. Liberals in other states and in safe seats may feel good about what has happened in Washington. But many Democratic politicians in North Carolina feel a sense of dread. They’re not dumb. Never before has Washington been so out of step with the country on a domes- tic-policy matter of such import. Never before has Congress driven itself to such depths of public disapproval for the sake of indulging left-wing fanaticism. But once before, a Democratic president did seek to nationalize health-care through a complex array of new federal taxes and regulations. Bill Clinton failed. His effort led to a Republican takeover of Congress, and of the North Carolina House. But at least he failed, which meant that he had room to change the subject and pivot to the center to save his presidency in 1996. Barack Obama “succeeded,” and won’t be able to shed the issue in time for his reelection campaign. My anger at the House’s decision to destroy consumer-driven health-care — including my own health plan — has been alternating with a different feeling, the one you get when watching a slow-motion film of a car crash, or maybe an episode of Cops. You want to yell, “Look out, you’re about to drive into a tree!” or “Dude, don’t bother telling the cop the weed isn’t yours, he’s not buying it!” But you know that it won’t make any difference. So you watch, open-mouthed and, somewhat WWW.UPANDCOMINGWEEKLY.COM guiltily, entertained. Congressional leaders think that by shoving this idiotic, unpopular bill down our throats, they’ve finished the job. They keep thinking the massive tree in front of them is a mirage, or that the skeptical cop will buy their nonsensical version of events. They’re deluded. It’s sad but fascinating to watch. It’s become trite to say that this vote is only the beginning of the health-care debate, not the end. But observations often are trite because they are so obviously true. Since major por- tions of Obamacare don’t come into effect for several years, there’s plenty of time for repeal legislation — and any future Republican Congress and president should feel entirely justi- fied ignoring filibusters and other procedural roadblocks to repeal, given the way Democrats have handled the legislation. Congressional repeal won’t be the only way for lovers of liberty to challenge ObamaCare. More than a dozen state at- torneys general have filed a lawsuit to challenge the constitu- tionality of the new federal mandate that all Americans do business with politically favored health insurers. State legislatures can also take a stand by authorizing a constitutional amendment to clarify that Congress has no power to intrude on the private health-care arrangements of American citizens. Until ObamaCare is repealed, every time a health insurer raises premiums or denies a claim, Democrats will be blamed. As with the stimulus issue, Democrats will claim that things would have been worse without their bill, but few will believe them. Ceteris paribus claims are hard enough to argue when they’re true. Theirs won’t be. Tired of hearing about health-care? Sorry, but it will be a dominant political issue for years to come, much to the Democrats’ regret — especially those running for competitive legislative seats in North Carolina. They didn’t pass ObamaCare. But now they’re in the way of an angry electorate. JOHN HOOD, Columnist. COMMENTS? 484-6200 ext. 222 or editor@upandcomingweekly.com MARCH 31-APRIL 6, 2010 UCW 17

• Cover