Fine, in what ways is PTFE not so inert then? If you are going to say if you overheat it then I have absolutely no idea what your point is.
You asked to see research re: problems with teflon used to coat pans
No, I asked to see a specific person's research to illustrate education doesn't make you immune to tinfoil hat syndrome.
Teflon is not the perfectly inert substance it was once touted to be
Teflon was never touted to be "perfectly inert" by the inventors. What some others may have claimed without evidence says more about what they would like to believe than anything else. As always, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Also being "inert" isn't a measure of safety or toxicity, oxygen is one of the least inert substances known. Go check out some insecticides inert ingredients and see if you would want to be exposed to them.
Wow, are you telling me if I abuse something it could be harmful? That's not pretty!
I'll also note if you abuse your traditional non non-stick pan with cooking oils at similar temperatures you will kill birds and sicken yourself and expose yourself to carcinogens. So keep that tinfoil real tight lest bad knowledge get into your mind.
I'd love to see her research.
The issue has never been about GMO itself
Of course it has insomuch as any other thing which is beyond their immediate comprehension. There are oodles of people who will not consume food cooked on a non-stick skillet, yet go to a quack chiropractor believing the chiropractor cured them of MS using a foot bath. Others will spend their life savings investing in things like oil extracts believing it will prevent/cure things like nearsightedness and pretty much any other malady or the fake African currency years before the Internet became widespread. Still others have their sickly elderly parents drink silver water "for good health" and this on the heels of sending them to ER because they took St. John's wort(from the same child) in conjunction with HBP. Some claim to know people who were assassinated by the government because they knew the secret to make gasoline engines 100x more efficient. Others think the moon landing was a hoax. These are only examples from within my own extended family and I haven't even gotten to the crazy shit yet. Anyone else heard the "Obama is hoarding
People who are susceptible to conspiracy theories need no reason other than they don't understand it so it must be bad. And there is no need for them to understand it, as they see it -- poison in, poison out. Period. These people have already condemned themselves to perpetual indentured servitude and I have long ago given up on any hope of trying to use logic with them.
I think *any* has a pretty clear definition but maybe that's just me.
Oh boy, that's hilarious. You really got them good there.
Non-smartphone not vulnerable to smartphone attack.
News at 11.
Not that I believe the claims of this company to begin with though. Probably like the ADE 651.
On more on point than ever:
Who are your accomplices then?
My RDBMS balls clang/llvm when I walk, boy.
If it's taking you weeks to figure out how to profile Postgres, that's a you problem. Works for everyone else.
WTF cares about jetprofiler? I'll answer that. The people who care about jetprofiler are the exact same people who should be running mysql in the first place. Hell, systemd probably wants jetprofiler too.
For those who have graduated from the kiddie table:
I saw a pen in the front office if you need a picture.
They pretty much all are, Los Alamos, Blue Waters, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, all the medium to long term weather forecasting I know of, etc.
Generally 10,000 to 100,000+ nodes.
I see someone isn't familiar with reductio ad absurdum.
the number of people using Chrome on Vista may well be even less than Vista's marketshare
The most worthless statement I've seen today.
(Google would have those numbers, which we wouldn't).
Regarding desktop installs, Google has two main channels of getting that info. One is accessible to any webserver a chrome browser visits and the other other is an opt-in service. Both are easy to bypass/manipulate. In short, Google's metrics aren't much better than what a large site could garner or a collection of smaller sites and traffic could aggregate.
Wasn't there something about a PASCAL programmer knowing the value of everything and the Wirth of nothing?