Subscribe Contribute Advertise Facebook Twitter Instagram Forums Newsletter
Beer Cans being used as cooking pots.
Display Avatars Sort By:
Denis Hazlewood
(redleader) - MLife

Locale: Luxury-Light Luke on the Llano Azul
Re: stove for can on 12/12/2008 17:20:05 MST Print View

Brett,
There are two fairly current threads on the MYOG forum. I was looking at them yesterday. One used a Heineken can pot.

Roger Caffin
(rcaffin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
Re: Re: Re: Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/12/2008 18:51:32 MST Print View

Ehh Mark

> OPPORTUNITY!!
You know, that aspect did not occur to me!
But it seems obvious now you have raised it.

And thanks for the URL.

Cheers

Dan Yeruski
(zelph) - MLife

Locale: www.bplite.com
Re: Re: Re: Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/12/2008 21:08:38 MST Print View

Hi Mark, great information in the link to Nalgene Outdoor.

Let me just post this for this evening. One of the organizations that Nalgene was waiting on was Health Canada with their findings. Here is what I found in a quick google search:

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=e81a7270-aec9-48cb-aad3-b74df38feec0

October 16, 2008 Sarah Schmidt, Canwest News Service, published: October 16, 2008.......

OTTAWA - Canada on Saturday will become the first country to formally declare bisphenol A hazardous to human health and officially inform the baby-product industry it will no longer be able to use the chemical in baby bottles.

Canada's announcement comes six months after Health Minister Tony Clement surprised the chemical industry by announcing the government's plan to place bisphenol A on its list of toxic substances and ban its use in baby bottles.

In unveiling the "precautionary and prudent" move, Clement proposed a limited ban of the widely used chemical, also found in hard plastic sports bottles and the lining of food cans.


This is just for starters, I'll be back tomorrow with other comments.

Happy Trails

Dan

Mark Hurd
(markhurd) - M

Locale: South Texas
Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/12/2008 23:37:23 MST Print View

Dan,

You must have accidentally left out the very next paragraph in that article, but I will put it in here so you won't have to:-)

"Most Canadians "need not be concerned" about the health effects of bisphenol A, Clement said at the time. "This is not the case for newborns and infants."

Of course this is what I said in my first post including the issue with newborns and infants if you read my post.

I think it is a good thing for them to discontinue the use of BPA. Maybe with the clout of the Canadian government other governments will jump on board. I wish the beer can liners were BPA free so there would be no worry for people like you who are apparently concerned with even the slightest exposure. Something I also addressed in my first post.

I think that somehow you believe that I am an advocate for BPA which is not true. I am an advocate for reasoned choices and "reason" seems to be in short supply. I hope you are happy with your choices. I am with mine.

This is just for enders. I won't be back tomorrow with other comments.

And Dan, Happy Trails to you. ;-) (with apologies to Roy Rogers)

-Mark

Addendum: Dan- After I wrote the above I visited your site: bplite.com and looked at your "Plastic lined beer cans as pots" thread. I am truly disappointed. This whole thing is not really about BPA, plasticizers, or reasoned choices--its about Tinny and MiniBullDesigns. Very sad.

Edited by markhurd on 12/13/2008 00:02:09 MST.

Dan Yeruski
(zelph) - MLife

Locale: www.bplite.com
Re: Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/13/2008 09:24:54 MST Print View

Here is the finalized report from the NTP:

September 2008: NTP Finalizes Report on Bisphenol A
Since You Asked - Bisphenol A (http://www.niehs.nih.gov/news/media/questions/sya-bpa.cfm)
NTP Finalizes Report on Bisphenol A

Current human exposure to bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical used in many polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins, is of “some concern” for effects on development of the prostate gland and brain and for behavioral effects in fetuses, infants and children, according to a final report released today by the National Toxicology Program (NTP).


The NTP Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction (CERHR) conducted the BPA evaluation. The CERHR follows a formal process for review and evaluation of nominated chemicals that includes convening panels of scientific experts to review the world’s scientific literature on the chemical being studied and a peer review process, as well as numerous opportunities for public input. For a summary of the NTP evaluation of BPA, please see http://www.niehs.nih.gov/news/media/questions/sya-bpa.cfm#4.

This information is submitted for your review and considertion. It is what Nalgene was waiting for to be finalized. We now see what Canada and the United States has made final in regards to BPA.

Lynn Tramper
(retropump) - F

Locale: The Antipodes of La Coruna
Re: Re: Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/13/2008 12:46:11 MST Print View

It seems without question that feeding BPA to infants is bad practice. I did not think that was the issue here, unless there are unsuspecting parents who boil their baby's formula in old beer cans!

FYI, I just noticed that Camelbak bottles now come with a large advertisment claiming they are BPA free.

And I agree with Mark that the linked thread was more about bashing Tinny than anything reasoned or scientific. Tinny is certainly not the only one selling or using recycled beer cans to cook in, and there is still no evidence to show that the BPA from beer cans is particularly toxic to adult humans in the doses likely administered from this use.

Edited by retropump on 12/13/2008 12:49:28 MST.

Dan Yeruski
(zelph) - MLife

Locale: www.bplite.com
Re: Re: Re: Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/13/2008 17:27:46 MST Print View

The beer can subject came up in a bunch of comments in regards to a video that was posted on YouTube. The video shows a bios2 stove made by tinny overflowing. Tinny and friends gathered and spammed the comment section while I made my comment giving my opinion of why the stove was having the problem. The spam was deleted by the one that posted the video so you won't see all that when you view the video and read the comments. Take the time to read the comments. You'll see that someone brings up the subject of the lining in beer cans. That's where the subject started and drifted over into bplite.com On bplite there are three threads that are related to tinny and his tactics. His guys came into bplite and sent spam through out the site. They sent their spam via Personnal Messages to countless members. The threads are in the "General" forum and are locked at the top of the forum. You can view all three. You can see in the threads that there is someone that brings up the subject of Lining in Beer Can Pots. I thought the information about bpa was interesting and deserved it's own thread. Just by coincidence, Tinny sells beer can pots and was brought into the subject. Tinny has a way of getting people attracted to his site, one way or another. The two of you can call it bashing and that's ok. I call it informing the Joe The Plumbers's out there what tinnys all about. The guy had a problem with the bios2 and I gave my opinion what could be causing the problem. Tinny and his group took command of the comment section and the rest is history. For every action there is a reaction.

Watch the video and read the comments. Then we can get back to the subject of this thread. Mark and Allison, Remember, I didn't bring up the subject of Tinny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anN0HU-9IKU

.

Edited by zelph on 12/13/2008 17:33:45 MST.

Brian UL
(MAYNARD76)

Locale: New England
Re: Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/13/2008 17:41:08 MST Print View

"I am an advocate for reasoned choices and "reason" seems to be in short supply. I hope you are happy with your choices. I am with mine."

What in the world is reasonable about knowingly ingesting toxic chemicals (no matter how small) when there is absolutely no reason at all to be doing so?

Johnathan White
(johnatha1) - F

Locale: PNW
Beer Cans being used as cooking pots on 12/13/2008 20:20:21 MST Print View

I assume everything in our world today is toxic. LOOK AT OUR AIR. We can live without a lightweight beer can pot, but no breathing and what is in the air is far worse! I am sticking with my Heini!

Matthew Robinson
(mcjhrobinson) - F

Locale: Waaay West
beer cans on 12/14/2008 00:39:54 MST Print View

this seems to be a circular post.

-we all know beer cans have toxic linings
-we all know we interact with toxins everyday

is using a beer can as a pot safe?

-its safer than a lead bucket
-its not as safe as deep sea water pockets

how about we all go hiking tomorrow instead of finding the safest, lightest, bestest cook pot.

2cents

Rog Tallbloke
(tallbloke) - F

Locale: DON'T LOOK DOWN!!
Re: Re: Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/14/2008 04:21:47 MST Print View

One thing which puzzles me about this thread is that when I have roughed up the inside of beer cans with emery paper to provide a key for glueing, I don't get any trace of plastic on the emery paper, just aluminium dust which shakes off. If there is a coating, it must be microscopically thin. Also, when I send flames up the inside of one of my beer can kelly kettles, there is no trace or smell of any peeling or burning plastic.

Are we sure the inside of beer cans are coated?

Lynn Tramper
(retropump) - F

Locale: The Antipodes of La Coruna
Re: Re: Re: Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/14/2008 12:24:48 MST Print View

They are definitely coated Roger, it's just that, as you surmised, the coating is infinitesimely thin. So thin that I wouldn't be surprised if most of the BPA leached out in the first couple of boils, but I have no way of testing this! This is quite different to a drink bottle made from 100% polycarbonate. Such a bottle would have a much larger 'reserve' of BPA to leach.

As for Tinny's tactics, I have not been exposed to this, and I don't have video capability on my computer, so I will leave that subject alone, except to say that some of the comments at BPlite.com outright accused Tinny of knowingly and illegally selling toxic chemicals to the public. This is untrue IMHO. Uless you are going to promote the 'pots' for boiling infants formula, there is not much evidence that there is a health issue, and it's certainly not illegal where I live....

Edited by retropump on 12/14/2008 12:25:43 MST.

Lynn Tramper
(retropump) - F

Locale: The Antipodes of La Coruna
Re: Beer Cans being used as cooking pots. on 12/14/2008 12:39:25 MST Print View

October 23rd, 2008

Bisphenol A Found To Have No Reproductive And Developmental Effects At Low Doses

Bisphenol A, a chemical predominantly used in the production of polycarbonate plastic and epoxy resins, has recently been the subject of public and scientific scrutiny regarding potential reproductive and developmental effects. People are exposed to minute levels of bisphenol A, mostly through the ingestion of food in contact with such products as water bottles, baby bottles, and food containers made of polycarbonate plastic and food and beverage cans coated with epoxy resins.

Recently, an expert panel led by scientists at Gradient Corporation in Cambridge, Massachusetts completed an extensive scientific review of the reproductive and developmental effects of bisphenol A. Based on its review of all the relevant scientific literature, the panel found no consistent evidence of reproductive or developmental effects of bisphenol A at typical human exposure levels. The review considered all studies published through July 2008 that examined reproductive and developmental toxicity in animals at low bisphenol A doses. No studies were excluded based on study design or source of funding.

According to Dr. Lorenz Rhomberg, the senior author of the review, "The hypothesis that the low levels of bisphenol A to which people are exposed could disrupt reproduction and development is not supported by coherent, consistent, or compelling evidence."

Government agencies from the US, the European Union, and Japan have also concluded that bisphenol A is not harmful at the low amounts to which people are normally exposed. Most recently, in a draft report, the US Food and Drug Administration concluded that the trace amounts of bisphenol A that leach out of food containers are not a threat to infants or adults. These conclusions are partly based on the results of several large studies of the effects of bisphenol A in rats and mice that were dosed with bisphenol A continuously over multiple generations. In these studies, animals were exposed during all life stages from conception through adulthood and reproduction. Bisphenol A had no effects on these animals at doses including those similar to human exposure levels.

There is agreement among these panels and government agencies that effects of bisphenol A only occur at exposures approximately 100,000 times higher than a person would typically ingest. In addition, people are better at excreting ingested bisphenol A than are rats and mice. In people, bisphenol A in the body is converted to a metabolite that does not have estrogen-like activity, and is rapidly eliminated in the urine. Despite the media attention suggesting otherwise, to date, the overwhelming majority of government and academic scientific panels have concluded that bisphenol A is safe at the very low amounts that people normally ingest.

The panel included Gradient scientists Drs. Lorenz Rhomberg and Julie Goodman, as well as Dr. Glenn Sipes of the University of Arizona and former president of the Society of Toxicology, Dr. Ernest E. McConnell, formerly of the National Toxicology Program, and Dr. Raphael Witorsch of the Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine. The full report has been published in the peer-reviewed journal Critical Reviews in Toxicology and is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408440802157839. A summary of the report is also provided in the most recent issue of the Gradient Risk Sciences Bulletin, available here or upon request.

Dan Yeruski
(zelph) - MLife

Locale: www.bplite.com
Re: Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/16/2008 11:59:40 MST Print View

Dr. Mark Hurd suggested that I must have accidently left out the next paragraph of the Canadian news article that informed us of the Canadian governments decision on BPA. I like Dr. Hurds' comments especially the one about Roy Rogers.

I think it prudent that I let you read the entire article that Dr. Hurd wanted you to read.
The article goes on to say "new evidence continues to pile up, pointing to the detrimental health effects of bisphenol A on adults."



Most Canadians "need not be concerned" about the health effects of bisphenol A, Clement said at the time. "This is not the case for newborns and infants."

The government's final decision will appear in the Canada Gazette, which publishes the official regulations of the government.

Rick Smith, executive director of Environmental Defence and co-author of the forthcoming book Slow Death by Rubber Duck: How the Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Life Affects Our Health, said the expected declaration is a "good start."

But he said new evidence continues to pile up, pointing to the detrimental health effects of bisphenol A on adults.

"There's new science coming out on a weekly basis pointing to this chemical being a health concern for adults. Baby bottles are a good start, but the government now needs to take a look at getting this chemical out of the lining in cans."

The latest research, the first large BPA study in humans published last month by the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association, found a "significant relationship" between exposure to the ubiquitous estrogenic chemical and heart disease, diabetes and liver problems.


Meanwhile, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is under fire after determining last month in a draft report that BPA was safe for food storage. On Thursday, the Washington Post published an editorial arguing the FDA's final recommendation, expected this month, could be "seen as less than fully independent."

The influential newspaper cited the recent donation of $5 million to the University of Michigan's Risk Science Center from Charles Gelman, the retired head of a medical device manufacturing company and outspoken proponent of bisphenol A.

The acting director of the university centre is Martin Philbert, a toxicologist who is also head of the FDA advisory panel poised to deliver its risk assessment of BPA.

Philbert did not disclose the gift to the agency as part of the disclosure process when he was appointed to the panel; he told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel he did not need to, since he does not stand to gain from it. The FDA is looking into a possible conflict of interest.

Edited by zelph on 12/16/2008 12:17:00 MST.

Dan Yeruski
(zelph) - MLife

Locale: www.bplite.com
Re: Re: Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/29/2008 16:26:03 MST Print View

You might be interested, a quote from bplite.com

More Heineken info
by hoz on Mon Dec 29, 2008 12:16 pm

I wrote Heineken Customer Care about using their cans as cooking/heating pots, this is theri reply:

Dear XXXX

Thank you for making Heineken aware of the use of our cans in a
nontraditional manner. According to our packaging engineers, the inner
lacquer coating of beverage cans are not intended to be used at high
temperatures. The specific coating in our beer cans is suited for contact
with beer only at pasteurizing temperature, which is well below cooking
temperature. We will be contacting this company directly but wanted to
share with you our instruction that Heineken cans should be recycled and
not re-used.

Regards,

Consumer Affairs - Heineken USA
Enjoy Heineken Responsibly

Please reply to heineken@qualitycustomercare.com

Greg Mihalik
(greg23) - M

Locale: Colorado
Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/29/2008 17:08:14 MST Print View

Dan,
Thanks for the info.
Good to know I can boil water without any problems.

te - wa
(mikeinfhaz) - F

Locale: Phoenix
beer cans on 12/29/2008 18:11:40 MST Print View

what? i thought Pasturizing was much hotter than boiling. This makes little sense to me.

Lynn Tramper
(retropump) - F

Locale: The Antipodes of La Coruna
Re: Re: Re: Beer cans used as pots on 12/29/2008 18:29:35 MST Print View

>But he said new evidence continues to pile up, pointing to the detrimental health effects of bisphenol A on adults.

First question worth asking is "who is Rick Smith", aside from the author of an very silly titled book and poltitical lobbyist? He certainly hasn't published anything in a PEER reviewed scientific journal about BPA, (or anything else health-related for that matter).

>"There's new science coming out on a weekly basis pointing to this chemical being a health concern for adults. Baby bottles are a good start, but the government now needs to take a look at getting this chemical out of the lining in cans."

We have already agreed that boiling your babies fromula in an empth Heine can is ill advised...

>The latest research, the first large BPA study in humans published last month by the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association, found a "significant relationship" between exposure to the ubiquitous estrogenic chemical and heart disease, diabetes and liver problems.

Have you actually read and understood that JAMA article. Nowhere does it say that BPA causes metabolic disorders. It was merely an epidemiological study, and they didn't even have data for exposure to BPA. Also, the study could be more easily interpreted as "people who eat the most canned and processed foods are at most risk for metabolic disorder due to poor dietary choices", and even more condemning is the associated elevated GGT and ALP enzymes which are the classic markers of excessive alcohol consumption (can you say "too many cans of beer")? It may even be the case that people with alcoholic liver disease are less able to detoxify BPA from their beer cans, so they have higher levels than nonalcoholics. An association is a looong way from a causation, and Occam's razor, along with the complete lack of any causative studies in adults, would have me state there is categorically no *evidence* that you or I should be concerned. Of course, I am a scientist and not a lobbyist, so I guess if I had a different agenda I could put any spin I want to on a study.

All that aside, I still think it's a move in the right direction to find alternatives to BPA coatings, as the total load in the environment is a concern on many levels.

James B Ford
(jimford) - F

Locale: DFW
Beer Cans being used as cooking pots on 12/29/2008 20:19:34 MST Print View

"What? I thought Pasturizing was much hotter than boiling."

You're probably thinking of sterilization. While sterilization's goal is to kill all the little bugs, pasteurization's goal is just to get their numbers down real low, so they won't be much of a problem. As a result, pastuerization occurs at a lower temperature than boiling. And since most folks cooking with a beer can pot are going to boil the water (not just get it warm), that's where the perceived problem lies, since it's these higher temperatures that would cause the lining to leach.

I personally don't think cooking with a beer can pot would have any appreciable health effect, as the coatings in the can would likely be removed after a few vigorous boils, which could be done before using it for actual cooking duty.

Folks should take alot of this info with a grain of salt. Some 20+ years ago I worked for a large chemical plant back east (one of them superfund cleanup sites you hear about), and I was privy to a bit of the results of their environmental testing (both onsite and independent testing). This company did extensive testing of their effluent (the stuff that got treated, diluted, and then pumped out into the ocean), to ensure it did not impact the environment. Election year. "What - you pump this stuff into the ocean?" the politicians cried (having known about it for the past 30 years), rallying public support to their cause. And rally the public did, with the plant ultimately closing from what I heard. The part that got very little attention was that the cities all along the shoreline were pumping 20 times as much sewage into the ocean, with very minimal testing/treatment. Many times the urgency of an issue has more to do with garnering support for a particular viewpoint, and not as much about a realistic and measureable impact from the issue.

If you think it's a legitimate risk, then by all means, seek an alternative cooking method. The alternative to these coatings could be spoiled beer - and we can't risk that, can we?

Lynn Tramper
(retropump) - F

Locale: The Antipodes of La Coruna
Re: Beer Cans being used as cooking pots on 12/30/2008 07:29:45 MST Print View

>You're probably thinking of sterilization. While sterilization's goal is to kill all the little bugs, pasteurization's goal is just to get their numbers down real low, so they won't be much of a problem. As a result, pastuerization occurs at a lower temperature than boiling. And since most folks cooking with a beer can pot are going to boil the water (not just get it warm), that's where the perceived problem lies, since it's these higher temperatures that would cause the lining to leach.

Correct. Sterilisation is not only *much* hotter than pastuerisation (121 celcius for sterilisation versus 72 celcius for example in milk), but also at higher pressure. Both these treatments could increase leaching of chemicals from the container.

>I personally don't think cooking with a beer can pot would have any appreciable health effect, as the coatings in the can would likely be removed after a few vigorous boils, which could be done before using it for actual cooking duty.

Totally agree. The lining of an individual can is microscopically thin. Does anyone know what the total amount of BPA is in a single Heine can. Not much is my impression, and most of that should leach out in the first boils. I don't hear anyone standing up to say that boiling water in unlined aluminum cans is any safer, and certainly unlined tin cans are not without peril, so this whole arguement smacks of bored people looking for a 'cause' that is no more a cause than any of the other now known to be nasty habits us humans indulge in. Again, I will wager money that the beer in the questionable cans is a greater endocrine disruptor (especailly to males) than any minor lining ingredient. It also happens to be a greater risk to family, social and driving injuries. And that's not just specualtion, but cold hard fact. Excess alcohol is a known and measurable killer. BPA lined cans are not.

>If you think it's a legitimate risk, then by all means, seek an alternative cooking method. The alternative to these coatings could be spoiled beer - and we can't risk that, can we?

Agree. You are the consumer and you make your choices, hopefully well informed. But my experiences indicate that most consumer choices are not well informed, and scare-mongering, intrigue, and speculation with little scientific evidence is so much more sexier to the average un-informed media/consumer relationship than evidence based science.

Plus there are alterantives to spoilt beer and other canned goods. Glass is considered to be a G.R.A.S. method of containing most things,at most temps, but I am not willing to accept that the risks from cooking in aluminum/titanium/stainless/cast iron outweigh the weight and fragility issues of carrying glass on my hikes.

We all balance our assesment of risk versus benefit. I happen to balance my risk by using as much evidence-based sience as I can get my hands on. As such, I will not be reading the rubber duckybook for my information source as it is not evidence based in humans in any relevant way except sensationalism. I will, however, continue to support moves away from adding potential edocrinic chemicals to our supply and rubbish chain as I am also a conservatationist greeny at heart. But I also take HRT, which gives me something around a billion more estrogenic molecules to my body than a very high dose of BPA would do. And my HRT is maybe 1000 times more potent than BPA. I am not worried about my Heine can!!!!!