Hot water in nalgene bottles
- This topic is empty.
Mar 16, 2012 at 11:21 am #1287229Dale CaldwellSpectator
@dalemcLocale: Coastal Georgia
Is it safe to drink hot beverages from BPA-free polycarb/lexan bottles? I understand that BPA isn't an issue but are there not issues with other types of leaching at high temps?Mar 16, 2012 at 11:28 am #1854776
You can put boiling water into a Nalgene without problems. My experience using it on multi-month travel trips:
1. I wash my bottle at the end of each day with soapy water and rinse.
2. Initially, water will remain fresh tasting throughout the day.
3. After 2-3 days of use (with daily washing/rinsing) — water acquires funky taste after just a few hours!
4. Washing/rinsing plus a final rinse with boiling water returns bottle to the state of #2.
Not sure why washing with soap and water alone just isn't enough??Mar 16, 2012 at 12:19 pm #1854796
"Is it safe to drink hot beverages from BPA-free polycarb/lexan bottles? I understand that BPA isn't an issue but are there not issues with other types of leaching at high temps? I understand that BPA isn't an issue but are there not issues with other types of leaching at high temps"?
Might depend how one defines "safe". No one knows with any certainty what is leaching out of what and how it can affect us, short or long term. Who knows what will be discovered next? It wasn't that long ago scientists discovered that BPA leached….
After familiarizing myself with the US chemical regulatory process then reading the US Government Accountability Office's reports on the matter, I decided to stop ingesting all wet substances from plastic. Of course I do at times, such as yogurt, otherwise, I have held fast to this rule for 5+ yrs and have felt no ill affects;-)Mar 16, 2012 at 1:48 pm #1854824
One person's prudence is another's recklessness. And then the same prudence is viewed by a third as paranoia! You just can't win.
For me — perhaps for the sake of my own sanity — I just view government advice (and those of respected companies) as "good enough".Mar 16, 2012 at 2:10 pm #1854829Mobile CalculatorSpectator
…Mar 16, 2012 at 3:00 pm #1854852
> since plastic is essentially made from petroleum, a little bit will get diluted into the water
What a sweeping statement! And generally false as well.
Yes, there have been problems in the past with a few manufacturing processes, and they needed fixing, but to tar all plastics like this is simply wrong. Polyethylene, nylon, polyester, acetal, …
> how will your kidneys and neighboring organs deal with a half teaspoon of chemicals for
> the life of the bottle
'Half a teaspoon'? That is likely to be a very wild exageration.
> he said it was important to get the 20 yr old silver fillings out of my teeth and replace
> with porcelain, because that silver had mercury.
> in 20 years, I would have ingested all the mercury from the silver fillings, there would
> be none left by now.
The whole mercury amalgam 'problem' thing is another urban myth thing. Yes, there is mercury in amalgam, but it is there as a very stable alloy, and it does NOT leach out at any significant rate. Ditto for the elements chromium, nickel and molybdenum in stainless steel: these elements can be very toxic too, but how many people use stainless steel saucepans all their life?
Current dental research is showing that amalgam fillings are still superior for the population than all other forms. Plastic was touted as a replacement for a while, but it simply does not last and it lets bacteria in under the filling. A sad case of political correctness bandwagon I am afraid.
> its a cosmetic thing I guess to keep the economy moving.
Ah well, you might be right here! The dentist's economy …
CheersMar 16, 2012 at 3:03 pm #1854855
> 4. Washing/rinsing plus a final rinse with boiling water returns bottle to the state of #2.
> Not sure why washing with soap and water alone just isn't enough??
Apparently your 'washing' is not removing the bacteria your mouth is leaving on the rim of the bottle. Boiling water is sterilising the bottle and killing the bacteria.
Try an experiment. Wash the bottle with boiling water carefully, then only use it to carry water. To drink, pour the water into a cup instead; do not drink from the bottle. See how well the bottle lasts like this.
CheersMar 16, 2012 at 3:19 pm #1854871
Could well be, Roger. The rims do make it trickier to wash. What I've done is soaping up the rim (but of course impossible to coat every surface entirely) — then rinse under a tap. I then fill the bottle and treat with Steripen. However, after a few days of wash-and-use as described above, the foulness isn't just felt when drinking — it seems to emanate as soon as I uncap the bottle! So I suspect the water too, and not just the rim area.Mar 16, 2012 at 3:37 pm #1854881
These type of posts, concerning things that may be hazardous or not considered "healthy", always bring about the same responses; wild guesses and lots of speculation. The fact is, in the whole scope of things, we really know very, very little about these sort of things…and this becomes painfully obvious once we understand the chemical regulatory process and investigate all scientific findings, not just the ones we want to view.
I think it's oftentimes difficult for humans to admit to not knowing…or being wrong. I see some really well written posts on BPA and similar subjects here and else where that are obviously done by highly intelligent folks. The crunching of numbers, calculating probabilities, etc is impressive….but, how ever well intended it is, it's still based around the assumption that our regulatory system is sound. If it were not, we wouldn't have anything to grab on to and base our intelligence around…and that's not a comfortable place to be for everyone.
Re amalgams and mercury, myth or not, Denmark, Sweden and Norway have banned their use and in my state, the DEQ classifies them as toxic waste. Does "NOT leach out at any significant rate"??? What is considered "significant" enough to start creating problems for those of us who have them or for those in the womb of those who have them? Yes, that's right: no one knows for certain.
One of my favorite quotes on the subject comes from past Health Canada epidemiologist:
"We should not be arrogant or ignorant. Arrogant in the sense that we think we know a lot about the significance of these contaminants, or ignorant in not admitting what we don't know. And there's a lot we don't know."Mar 16, 2012 at 4:01 pm #1854890Dale WambaughBPL Member
@dwambaughLocale: Pacific Northwest
We get exposed to all kinds of chemistry at home and work and in-between. There is off-gassing from all kinds of plastics, carpeting, construction materials and so on. Almost everything we eat has been stored or transported in some sort of plastic. Canned goods have plastic liners and the food is cooked inside. All our frozen food is sold in plastic containers (and heat sealed). Keep in mind that the BPA levels we're talking about are a few parts per BILLION. Glass and metals will leach in tiny amounts too, and the water we drink already has all sorts of trace elements which we glug down with nary a care, never looking into the analysis of what we are eating and drinking in large quantities. I'm certain that we all got more contaminants thrown at us during our commuting in the last week from air pollution than in all the water bottles we have used in a lifetime. Of course, the KIND of contaminants are important, but I think you can see my point.
Contaminants deserve caution and respect, but in our current world, there is no escape. We cringe at one source and go happily about completely ignoring others. It is a funny world we live in. I remember when the first reports that came out regarding nitrates in barbecued meat, and someone asked the researchers what they did with the leftovers from their research: they ate them :)Mar 16, 2012 at 4:37 pm #1854914
"Contaminants deserve caution and respect, but in our current world, there is no escape. We cringe at one source and go happily about completely ignoring others. It is a funny world we live in".
You're correct. There is no escape. Toxins are ubiquitous. No way to eliminate our exposure….but there are 100's of ways to minimize them…and some people have dedicated a great deal of time learning how.Mar 16, 2012 at 5:11 pm #1854934
> the foulness isn't just felt when drinking — it seems to emanate as soon as I uncap the bottle!
You know, that does sound very much like the rim and thread area, doesn't it?
It's not new: we have known about it for a long time.
CheersMar 16, 2012 at 5:13 pm #1854937
> These type of posts, concerning things that may be hazardous or not considered
> "healthy", always bring about the same responses; wild guesses and lots of speculation.
I think you may be short-changing a lot of the BPL Members here. More than a few have professional qualifications in these and other related areas.
CheersMar 16, 2012 at 6:13 pm #1854971Dale CaldwellSpectator
@dalemcLocale: Coastal Georgia
I appreciate the responses. I thought that I was going to just get a bunch of responses telling me I was crazy! Though there is no escape, I agree that we can (sometimes) take responsibility for our health by minimizing ourselves to exposures regardless of what we are told by companies and governments. I prefer to look to science.
Are there any "healthy" lightweight alternatives besides titanium cups? I haven't gone this route assuming that I would be more likely to burn my lips and because of the cost of these cups.Mar 16, 2012 at 6:38 pm #1854978John NausiedaBPL Member
When the Delaney clause hit the Pesticides industry it more or less illustrated the difference between scientific detect-ability and policy. If you are looking for a Carcinogen or other suspect chemical you can surely detect it with modern analysis.But if you are looking for ANY TRACE you've gone through the Looking glass. But if you outlaw the chemical without regard for the status of established agriculture you can end up with orchards turned under and seeking whole new crops ten years out. Manufacturers of a chemical will bail out even if it's the only known remedy.But on the flip side for critical reasons to hunt down a problem then this ability helps.
http://news.yahoo.com/honeybee-deaths-linked-corn-insecticides-221639948–abc-news.htmlMar 16, 2012 at 7:44 pm #1855004Tim ZenSpectator
The guys I know in India drink from bottles without touching the rim to their mouth.
They pour the water in to their open mouth so they can share water bottles.
It takes some practice. Easier out doors then in the office.Mar 16, 2012 at 9:12 pm #1855044James holdenBPL Member
if its now OK everybody who uses em in winter or in the hills is screwed … and that means every mountaineer, winter camper, etc …
cause we all use em or something similar
so i wouldnt worry about it, were all going kaput anyways ;)Mar 16, 2012 at 9:25 pm #1855049M BBPL Member
our use and exposure to myriad of chemicals is ever increasing
so is our life span
Overall, they dont seem to be doing us a great deal of harm do they.
Everything is toxic. Its just a matter of quantity. If you read a chemical MSDS for table salt, you would cringe. Even water can kill you if you ingest too much at one time.
Some things have been made examples of.
Our goverment is paid for by, and operates for, big business. A great deal of legislation has to do with someone making money thru requiring new products, etc.Mar 17, 2012 at 9:18 am #1855173
"our use and exposure to myriad of chemicals is ever increasing. so is our life span. Overall, they dont seem to be doing us a great deal of harm do they".
Life span numbers have been skewed because infant mortality is down, not because people are living longer.
Take a look at the number of respiratory and heart diseases, the various reproductive and pregnancy complications, thyroid issues, neurological disorders and in particular, the many cancers. These issues are afflicting an increasingly younger generation and children born to seemingly “healthy” families. Many, many health issues are occurring with no explanation.
We're not talking about someone kicking the bucket or getting sick from something as simple as drinking some BPA here. That's sillyness. Old methodologies focused on acute toxicity and the model for testing was based on full-grown adults. Little thought was given to how chemicals might effect embryogenesis and children. These old testing procedures, combined with the many unexplained health issues, has a growing number of professionals believing that an entire generation of science used to study the safety of chemicals to have been misguided giving a false sense of security. (look at the chem regulatory process and GAO reports… and take a peek at Theo Colborn's etal research).
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I'll say it again. In reality…and in the whole scope of things from human beginnings to the ecological side, very little is known about the varying effects chemicals can have. Just having a very rudimentary understanding of what a single chemical can do is profoundly complex. Making an accurate long-term safety assessment of multiple chemicals in combination is an impossibility. There are simply too many variables and too many chemicals. But, if one wants to drink out of a bottle containing BPA, that's their prerogative. :-)Mar 17, 2012 at 10:10 am #1855183
"Life span numbers have been skewed because infant mortality is down, not because people are living longer."
Going on a tangent… but the fact is that infant mortality is down and people are also living longer. Unlike in the past, most adults now can expect to live significantly beyond 65 — something that the designers of social security didn't anticipate back in the 1930's.Mar 18, 2012 at 10:11 am #1855523
"I think you may be short-changing a lot of the BPL Members here. More than a few have professional qualifications in these and other related areas."
Thanks, Roger. I'm sorry. I reread my post and to me, I come across as a pompous butt. I don't intend to nor do I intend to short-change anyone. That is not my true character. It may be that I'm letting my close interest of these issues get the better of me. I stand by what I say though…just not how I say it. My apologies to all.Mar 18, 2012 at 12:46 pm #1855583Jeffs ElevenBPL Member
Should be OK, so long as there's no red meat in it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Our Community Posts are Moderated
Backpacking Light community posts are moderated and here to foster helpful and positive discussions about lightweight backpacking. Please be mindful of our values and boundaries and review our Community Guidelines prior to posting.