Talk:Microwave oven/Archive 1

message: The second half of point 2 and point 4 of the hazard list sound like attempts to scare people. See for example the phrase: "Microwaved food contains both molecules and energies not present in food cooked in the way humans have been cooking food since the discovery of fire...". That is not a scientific argument to assess the safety of microwaved food. The point about energies is utter nonsense. The point of the molecules sounds dramatic, but in fact, every new vegetable contains hundreds of chemical compounds that are not present elsewhere. And this phrase: All foods that were processed through the microwave ovens caused changes in the blood of the volunteers.. It is not claimed that the changes were larger or more dangerous than after consumption of other foods.
What happened to Hertel is not nice, but "freedom of expression" is an issue different from "scientifically correct".
I will remove section 4. If you want to revert it, present it as NPOV with counter arguments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hankwang (talk • contribs) 10:51, 17 March 2004
: I have removed most of the scare talk and replaced it with (I believe) a short NPOV paragraph. -- Hankwang 12:25, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV? 

message: Some note should be made under the safety list about the potential danger of microwaving metal. Nerd65536 23:50, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metal 

message: Since this is tagged, but with no discussion, I'll start it. Gene Nygaard 14:20, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merger 

message: The links to Microwaving directs back to here...So I went a head and removed them...--64.114.83.91 02:19, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  empty links? 

message: There isn't any information here about the notion of whether microwaving foods in certain containers can cause carcinogens to the leech from the plastic into the foods. Whether or not this is supported by any evidence I don't know, but it's certainly a source of worry to some people, and so should probably be mentioned. — Asbestos | Talk  (RFC) 16:36, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carcenogenic containers 

message: I was watching an episode of myth busters on discovery channel and they address the issue of distilled water exploding as a result of super heating and they mention that distilled water would explode if you put a spoon in it or add other molecules and I think that the part of the article that notes the super heated explosion of distilled water as a myth should be changed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.45.19.20 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 12 January 2006
: The myth is that only destilled water can be superheated - all water can be superheated. The article is correct. Mossig 18:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Right, the "distilled" requirement is a myth.  Don't forget that the main problem with superheating involves explosions of very impure water: coffee or instant soup.  It's not distilled water that causes explosions, explosions result from overheating of bubble-free water.  Water which lacks any microbubbles as "nucleation centers" will not boil unless raised several tens of degrees C above 100C.  Vacuum packed liquids such as canned soup or tomato sauce will lack microbubbles, and will tend to explode rather than boil normally.  So will coffee or tap water if it has been de-gassed by being boiled and cooled previously. --Wjbeaty 06:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  explosion of distilled water  

message: The acute dangers part of the article is clearly B.S..  I am not truying to be rude, but the dangers are greatly exaggerated, and the overall tone of that section is hilarious, funny, and not encyclopedic.  Could this be rewritten? --67.49.215.174 02:22, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it could. Just click the "edit" link. --Heron 19:23, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acute Dangers