WARNING: Plastic buckets are not safe

[thadius856]

When I was a baby, I chewed all the lead paint off my crib.

 

[cheezydemon3]

So, still no link to the study. I smell a troll.

At the least it's dredging up an oft debated topic.

Let's talk about the dangers of glass...

Garden hose is my biggie. Last I checked, they are stll made of lots and lots of lead and degrade at an alarming rate.

It is also a fun topic because people get all pissed and say "I drank tons of garden hose water as a child, and I'M OK!"
How would you know if you could have been 3% smarter or not????

 

[GrogNerd]

What you are saying is absolutely true. However we cannot equate government's inaction prior to the 1980's with the overwhelming government involvement of today. Nor should we ignore the difference brought on by increased litigation related to product safety since the 1970's. Manufacturers today simply do not operate in a vacuum.

I agree that it is possible that something might slip by all of the watchdogs. But as I have watched these flareups make the news I've learned that they are more often based on the fact that something harmful was found "in detectable amounts" where they didn't think it was before. However the root cause here is improvements in the ability to detect substances. With the huge leaps in science we can find parts per billion now when we could only find parts per million a few years ago.

The question I have to ask is, "Sure, now they can detect the presence of something in my food/utensils/air/whatever, but was it found in an amount that might be harmful?"

Dosage determines if something is going to be harmful. To illustrate the point, oxalic acid is one of the deadliest poisons known. We've known about how harmful it is for 250 years. But with improved ability to detect these substances it suddenly started showing up in some foods. Especially dark green leafy vegetables. It was a big concern until they figured out that it has been there all along. Spinach, for example, produces oxalic acid and stores it in its leaves as a natural insecticide. Is it there in amounts that are likely to be harmful to humans? Absolutely not. Should we all panic and stop eating spinach? I like spinach and will continue to enjoy it, but it is your choice.

thread winner

thank you

 

[unionrdr]

I remember the old timers in the Ford foundry in Cleveland selling oxilic(?) acid to get the brown,crystalized foundry stack crud off a car's paint. But the stuff is toxic & you had to be careful not to get it on plastic trim. I wouldn't want that stuff in my gullet.

 

[brewguyver]

This is true, however in my house, like most others in Pittsburgh, that first coat of paint was put on about 80 years ago. I have several spots that are flaking right now and have already done one major remediation.

To tie back to the original point, government inaction is not the same thing as assurance of safety. Pediatricians had been reporting on the dangers of lead paint in houses and on toys since the early 1900's. Lead paint was not made illegal until the 70's, and could still be found in gas until the early 90's.

Leaded gasoline - still my personal favorite example of lobbyists trumping health and reason.

 

[MrNatural]

If you or a loved one has developed symptoms of endocrine disrupters (ED), such as man-boobs or extra limbs, attributed to drinking beer fermented in plastic buckets, you may be entitled to share in a large monetary settlement.

Call the Sokolov Law Firm now to ensure your share of this settlement. Call 1 800 BAD-BUCKET now.

Announcement by paid typist, not an actual attorney.

 

[Schlenkerla]

While not mentioned, I wonder if they zero'd out their test material? Was the EA in it from before?

What isn't well talked about is that much of our water has this in it already and has for 40+ years. So unless they generated distilled salt water, it calls that part into question. I'm not sure about the alcohol.

I thought the same thing.... Distilled water is so pure that it has an affinity to attach itself to free molecules. Example; Running distilled or RO water through copper pipes will leak with time as the purity of the water slowly dissolves the copper. Probably does the same with PVC, PET, HDPE, etc. So tests done with distilled water will have something in them based on whatever the water comes in contact. Its like a static electricity attraction.

So float glass that's extruded on a bed of mercury probably has trace amounts of mercury in the pores of the glass. Don't lick glass. :cross:

Don't know if blow molded carboys have mercury in the processing...

Its kind of pandoras box best not learn about something that might kill you when you have no control over it.... Odds are better at winning the lottery. This BS starts needless paranoia. Most likely the level of contaminate is insignificant.

 

[TyTanium]

This BS starts needless paranoia. Most likely the level of contaminate is insignificant.

Most likely, yes, but sometimes it's not. That's why it's good to ask the question, even if it's debunked.


It seems many of you are annoyed by threads like this, but I find it extremely helpful to thoroughly and thoughtfully think through what we're using. I mean, we analyze every other aspect of brewing, certainly materials should not be excluded.

Trust me, I'm glad the OP's claims have been seemingly refuted, I love my plastic buckets, but I find more comfort in some well-thought knowledge than blind ignorance.

 

[progmac]

for class, use glass

 

[pabloj13]

Most likely, yes, but sometimes it's not. That's why it's good to ask the question, even if it's debunked.


It seems many of you are annoyed by threads like this, but I find it extremely helpful to thoroughly and thoughtfully think through what we're using. I mean, we analyze every other aspect of brewing, certainly materials should not be excluded.

Trust me, I'm glad the OP's claims have been seemingly refuted, I love my plastic buckets, but I find more comfort in some well-thought knowledge than blind ignorance.

That's fine, but I wasn't annoyed by the thread, but rather the lack of citations and/or real evidence from the OP. We SHOULD discuss safety of things here. I think it's worth doing for sure. But scaremongering garbage with no relevant citations is just silly. Plus, as has been said, dosage is everything. BPA was the big freakout recently. When I was in grad school, a nearby toxicology lab had a big grant to study effects of BPA. Upon renewal, the big ding on the grant was the super high doses she was using to see an effect. They wanted her to lower the doses used to those normally seen in human exposure. They had an impossible time seeing effects once they did that. We should do our best to avoid exposure to known toxins, but we also have to be reasonable.

 

[processhead]

Recent medical studies have shown that saliva causes stomach cancer,
but only if swallowed in small quantities over long periods of time.
- George Carlin -

I think of this and smile every time I read another "new" medical study.

 

[ktblunden]

If you or a loved one has developed symptoms of endocrine disrupters (ED), such as man-boobs or extra limbs, attributed to drinking beer fermented in plastic buckets, you may be entitled to share in a large monetary settlement.

Call the Sokolov Law Firm now to ensure your share of this settlement. Call 1 800 BAD-BUCKET now.

Announcement by paid typist, not an actual attorney.

Man, that guy will take on any case.

I had to laugh at this post, especially the phone number. There's a new Sokolov class action commercial every day it seems like.

 

[millsware]

Dosage determines if something is going to be harmful. To illustrate the point, oxalic acid is one of the deadliest poisons known. We've known about how harmful it is for 250 years. But with improved ability to detect these substances it suddenly started showing up in some foods. Especially dark green leafy vegetables. It was a big concern until they figured out that it has been there all along. Spinach, for example, produces oxalic acid and stores it in its leaves as a natural insecticide. Is it there in amounts that are likely to be harmful to humans? Absolutely not. Should we all panic and stop eating spinach? I like spinach and will continue to enjoy it, but it is your choice.

This is true, however the issue with endocrine disrupting compounds are that:
A) They are biologically active at very low amounts. 35 micrograms (0.000035 grams) of ethinyl estradiol prevents pregnancy in otherwise healthy women. This is the dose found in birth control pills.

B) Endocrine disrupting compounds usually have nonmonotonic dose-response curves. This means that the dose response does not follow a single trend, ie twice as much dose does not give twice as much of a response. In other words, if you went and ate all of your wife's birth control pills probably nothing would happen. However, if you ate one a day, you might start to notice some subtle changes over time.

 

[Schlenkerla]

It seems many of you are annoyed by threads like this, but I find it extremely helpful to thoroughly and thoughtfully think through what we're using. I mean, we analyze every other aspect of brewing, certainly materials should not be excluded.

I think people are more annoyed with this sort scare tactic employed, and not having much of facts. Not to mention not quoting a source in the OP.

In general people don't like trolls or anybody who spouts some form of health scare then fails to support the claim. More fun to make light of this than anything else. Emphasis on the fun part.

To make my point: Lets start an argument over no-rinse sanitizer... I use iodophor... tell me why I should be using star-san?

Material Safety Data Sheets on Both;

http://www.midwestsupplies.com/media/downloads/310/Star%20San%20MSDS%20Sheet.pdf

http://www.nationalchemicals.com/msds/documents/MSDSBTFIodophor5_09.pdf

 

[Schlenkerla]

BTW - The thought was about the health risk of a no-rinse sanitizer and one being better than the other.

 

[weirdboy]

This is true, however the issue with endocrine disrupting compounds are that:
A) They are biologically active at very low amounts. 35 micrograms (0.000035 grams) of ethinyl estradiol prevents pregnancy in otherwise healthy women. This is the dose found in birth control pills.

That's great! The linked study doesn't really get into the concentrations found (instead focusing on whether it was "detected" which is completely useless), but as near as I can tell they seem to be in the low parts per billion given the information provided. That is a couple orders of magnitude away from preventing pregnancy, at least.

 

[KurtB]

This is true, however the issue with endocrine disrupting compounds are that:
A) They are biologically active at very low amounts. 35 micrograms (0.000035 grams) of ethinyl estradiol prevents pregnancy in otherwise healthy women. This is the dose found in birth control pills.

Damn. I though if my wife kept drinking the beer I was making in plastic buckets in my basement it would lead to an increased chance of me getting her pregnant, not the other way around...

Guess I better switch her back to drinking margaritas.

 

[bottlebomber]

Damn. I though if my wife kept drinking the beer I was making in plastic buckets in my basement it would lead to an increased chance of me getting her pregnant, not the other way around...

Guess I better switch her back to drinking margaritas.

Would you settle for an increased chance of her getting you pregnant?

 

[Puddlethumper]

This is true, however the issue with endocrine disrupting compounds are that:
A) They are biologically active at very low amounts. 35 micrograms (0.000035 grams) of ethinyl estradiol prevents pregnancy in otherwise healthy women. This is the dose found in birth control pills.

B) Endocrine disrupting compounds usually have nonmonotonic dose-response curves.

That is very interesting. It certainly creates a different set of criteria for decision making than in dealing with economic poisons. Has there been a NOEL (no observable effect level) established for any of these compounds? More specifically, has there been a NOEL established for the compound we are concerned with in this thread?

 

[lumpher]

omg omg omg omg omg... i thought my lack of facial hair was due to my amerindian heritage... now you tell me it's because i been drinking female water beer????????????????????????

 

[Puddlethumper]

Has there been a NOEL (no observable effect level) established for any of these compounds? More specifically, has there been a NOEL established for the compound we are concerned with in this thread?

It is very educational that since someone with some knowlege of toxicology started asking specific questions about the topic the protagonists have become rather silent. Personally, I have come to the simple conclusion that, although completely irresponsible, it is still a very easy thing to yell "fire" in a crowded room.

 

[stvo]

Yikes

 

[Puddlethumper]

Yikes

Yup, so it would appear. Think I'm going to brew up another batch and ferment it in my plastic bucket this weekend. Hope ya'll do too!

 

[TheGreatFermenter]

Oh wait don't forget we heat up our cooler mash tuns with hot water that will probably leech some to...guess ill name my next beer the endocrine disrupter!!

 

[unionrdr]

Well,going on 57,my hormone levels are dropping anyway. so it'd be hard to say whether it's nature or disruptors doing the dead. but all my plastic stuff being food safe tells me this is likely a non-issue. Especially since the plastics they're made from & the mold seperating compounds are tested food safe. This does cost some money to have done,so I say trust it. Or like the old saying goes,the more you know,the more you wish you didn't know.
Just seems to me some folks worry about some supposed problems being more than they really are with a given product.

 

[Puddlethumper]

My Daddy used to call 'em "worry worts". Just not happy if they don't have something to fuss about.

 

[DrunkleJon]

My Daddy used to call 'em "worry worts". Just not happy if they don't have something to fuss about.

Judging from the number of "Is my beer ruined" threads, we worry about wort enough as it is without adding plastic man-boobs to the mix.

 

[cooldood]

It amazes me what we choose to worry about.
No one seems to worry about all the plastic coffee cups made in china that we drink HOT coffee from.
Or even ceramic coffee cups several from China fail for lead in the glazing.
Plastic coffee stirrers, forks spoons and knives.

I f the bucket companies can sell their product without incurring the test/certifying costs and the associated risk why should they?

Not to mention Glass carboys. Anyone ever test theirs for lead? Anyone ever get a certificate of compliance that there is no lead or other hazard?

If you really want to get scared start thinking what is in your wine. Wine makers do not have list ingredients on their labels. HHHMMMM I wonder why. Especially since most are imported and some from third world countries.

 

[processhead]

The public's perception of health risk is a crazy thing.

Are the folks who worry about trace levels of whatever in their beer, coffee, drinking water the same people who chat or text on their device while tooling down the road doing 75 MPH?

Statistically, which one do YOU think is more likely to kill you first?

 

[TyTanium]

The public's perception of health risk is a crazy thing.

Are the folks who worry about trace levels of whatever in their beer, coffee, drinking water the same people who chat or text on their device while tooling down the road doing 75 MPH?

Statistically, which one do YOU think is more likely to kill you first?

The one is binary (die/don't die) the other is more of a scale... it's a quality of life thing, scale of suffering from weird hormonal conditions caused by plastic.

Not defending the plastic-phobia, just validating the rationale. But I do agree people's relative risk weighting & implied probabilities are completely ridiculous.

 

[progmac]

this thread is 15 pages of people claiming that "everybody" worries excessively about exposure to certain chemicals. the continued rambling about this "everybody" boogeyman when there is pretty much only one viewpoint in this thread is somewhat hilarious.

 

[robing123456]

beer gives us ***** tits anyway!

 

[pjj2ba]

This is true, however the issue with endocrine disrupting compounds are that:
A) They are biologically active at very low amounts. 35 micrograms (0.000035 grams) of ethinyl estradiol prevents pregnancy in otherwise healthy women. This is the dose found in birth control pills.

B) Endocrine disrupting compounds usually have nonmonotonic dose-response curves. This means that the dose response does not follow a single trend, ie twice as much dose does not give twice as much of a response. In other words, if you went and ate all of your wife's birth control pills probably nothing would happen. However, if you ate one a day, you might start to notice some subtle changes over time.

previously linked article

Ok, I read the above article. I'm not sure it would have made it past my desk if I were a reviewer. My biggest complaint is that all of the samples were treated with UV light for 30 min. to make sure they were sterile. No non-UV-treated samples were looked at for comparison. So is the study looking at the affects of UV light on the release of estrogenic compounds? I see no way to rule out the effects of UV light on the plastic. Who knows what chemical changes were happening in the plastic. Was the sterilization really needed? Perhaps another method (ethylene oxide?) could have been used rather than one known to affect plastics

I find it kind of annoying that there was no attempt to actually quantify the levels of estrogenic compounds extracted. How many micrograms? What was measured was the response (cell proliferation) compared to a standard estrogenic compound. It is a bit of a leap. If the standard gave us this response and the extract gave us the same, then it must be the same stuff. In my field, if you want to say you found X, then you'd better have some direct proof, it is X, not just that it gave a response similar to X, so it must be X.

As to how relative the findings are, the extracts were made at 1 gm of plastic per 1.5 ml of liquid (saline or ethanol -100%? - it is not clearly stated, so I'm assuming) and then incubated (after the UV light) at 37 C for 72 hrs. I'd be very curious to know what the results would have been if it had been under conditions more similar to what happens in the real world. The is a big difference between can you extract the estrogenic compounds, and will you get extraction in real life situations

 

[Puddlethumper]

previously linked article

Ok, I read the above article. I'm not sure it would have made it past my desk if I were a reviewer.

you'd better have some direct proof, it is X, not just that it gave a response similar to X, so it must be X.

Hmm ... sounds like you take issue with my thinking that since my kitten jumps 2 feet and a frog jumps 2 feet, therefore my kitten must be a frog! And you dare to take issue with that logic? I'm crushed!

 

[Puddlethumper]

this thread is 15 pages of people claiming that "everybody" worries excessively about exposure to certain chemicals. the continued rambling about this "everybody" boogeyman when there is pretty much only one viewpoint in this thread is somewhat hilarious.

When people in authority are motivated by the same kind of junk science based on half-truths and fear that we viewed on this thread it can become a real problem for our society and our economy. That affects us all.

I think the part that pulled my string on this was the reality that there are people like the ones who started this thread that actually have some power. With that power, they make rules that are based on junk science and fear. And those rules tie the hands of people who are trying to accomplish something useful, sometimes vital, to society.

Example:

The city and county of San Francisco have a pesticides policy that is a complete travisty. The people who are trying to protect public health and safety in that county have their hands utterly tied by these regulations to the point that, in some cases, they simply cannot do their jobs.

Who, dare we ask, is responsible for the public policy and associated "approved products list"? The two guys who were hired to set up this "green" program are a couple of Berkely grads with PhD's. The degrees might seem impressive, except when you google the names you find that neither of these guys have ever done an honest days work in real science in their careers. They are, in fact, career political activists. One actually is the founder and paid president of an anti-pesticide "public policy action organization". When you read what these guys are writing you see exactly the same kind of half-truths designed to impress the uneducated and uninformed as we have witnessed in the opening pages of this thread.

That is the reality of doing business in America today .. and to some of us, people like these are a significant concern.

 

[progmac]

When people in authority are motivated by the same kind of junk science based on half-truths and fear that we viewed on this thread it can become a real problem for our society and our economy. That affects us all.

I think the part that pulled my string on this was the reality that there are people like the ones who started this thread that actually have some power. With that power, they make rules that are based on junk science and fear. And those rules tie the hands of people who are trying to accomplish something useful, sometimes vital, to society.

Example:

The city and county of San Francisco have a pesticides policy that is a complete travisty. The people who are trying to protect public health and safety in that county have their hands utterly tied by these regulations to the point that, in some cases, they simply cannot do their jobs.

Who, dare we ask, is responsible for the public policy and associated "approved products list"? The two guys who were hired to set up this "green" program are a couple of Berkely grads with PhD's. The degrees might seem impressive, except when you google the names you find that neither of these guys have ever done an honest days work in real science in their careers. They are, in fact, career political activists. One actually is the founder and paid president of an anti-pesticide "public policy action organization". When you read what these guys are writing you see exactly the same kind of half-truths designed to impress the uneducated and uninformed as we have witnessed in the opening pages of this thread.

That is the reality of doing business in America today .. and to some of us, people like these are a significant concern.

The day that policy makers listen to and understand the academic literature and science before making a decision will be the day that [insert expression here]

 

[Walking_Target]

I'm gonna state it again;

Hops are a natural source of estrogen mimicking compounds.

/end thread

 

[cooldood]

I was half impressed so IDK if that makes me uneducated or uniformed.

I think my brain hurts..... I will be back after a refill

 

[Puddlethumper]

I was half impressed so IDK if that makes me uneducated or uniformed.

No one can, in a lifetime, become well eductated and well informed about any more than a handful of subjects. We are all ignorant about things we haven't had to deal with and learn about. I am persuaded that the beginning of learning is the admission of ignorance.

..... I will be back after a refill

Mind if I join you?

 

[cooldood]

Have a beer with me.

If you want to have a good laugh watch those stupid morning show spewing DUMB advice.

I work in the salmon industry and watched Jillian from biggest loser on good morning america promoting her book about healthy food.

When she comes to the salmon NEVER EAT FARM RAISED cause of the chemicals, only eat wild

Some one should tell the retard that the plate in front of her was full of FARMED SALMON

But all the people who don't know fish will listen to her and buy wild.