35 guides and brand reviews · last checked 1 September 2026
Written from manufacturers’ own documents, published lab certificates, statutes and peer-reviewed research — all linked, so you can check us. We don’t run lab tests, and we say where the evidence runs out.
If a study says something alarming and turns out to be wrong, we say that too — even when the alarming version would get more clicks. Several of the guides below exist specifically to correct a story that travelled further than the evidence behind it.
Short, answer-first pages with the products we score, the photos and the sources. Written October 2026.
Four uncoated stainless sets tie at 85/100. Cast iron and Australian iron follow.
Inert at normal heat. The real risk is an empty pan on high heat, and PTFE is itself a PFAS.
Stainless hides nothing. Ceramic coatings keep their recipe secret. Solid ceramic is different again.
No coating and no PFAS. It does add iron to food, and enamel is the unknown.
The uncoated leaders, ranked on what their makers publish.
Stainless ridges over a non-stick coating whose chemistry is never stated.
Only one states it has no food-contact coating.
Where the stainless actually is, and where it isn’t.
A glass container with a coated plate under the food.
Glass is inert. The cap your mouth touches is the real question.
Plain steel or glass, and a lid whose plastic has a name.
The glass is rarely the issue. The lid is.
No PTFE, but no maker publishes what is in the enamel.
One states no coating at all. Three name PTFE.
18/8 steel, a plastic lid and straw, and a lead seal under the base.
Steel body, a plastic lid you drink through, and a lead-free solder claim.
Enamelled cast iron. The enamel recipe is not published.
Two enamelled cast iron makers, scored side by side.
Ceramic non-stick, no PTFE, and what the coating claims rest on.
One-piece seasoned iron, made in Sydney.
Which Fissler pans are bare steel, and which are PTFE.
Two contamination stories that get told separately — and one material that belongs to both. Written September 2026 from the current literature.
A PTFE flake is both at once, by definition. But no study has ever measured particles and fluorinated chemicals off the same pan, and the best one that looked found no chemical migration.
The “spoonful of plastic” study now has duplicated images, a formal rebuttal in the same journal, and a specialist arguing the method mistakes brain fat for polyethylene.
One material, two categories of concern, two separate news cycles. Once you see it, most of the labelling in this aisle stops making sense.
Targeted PFAS testing missed over 85% of the organic fluorine actually present. There is a test that catches all of it, and two regulators already use it.
We went looking for the number and it does not exist. What does exist points somewhere else — an awkward finding for a site that rates cookware.
What the words on the box are actually claiming — and what they leave out.
Three claims that look interchangeable and aren’t. One has applied to the big fluoropolymer producers since 2015.
The word is doing enormous work on packaging and almost none of it is defined. Including the part the marketing skips: PTFE is a PFAS.
A true claim about one molecule. BPS and BPF replaced it, appear on no label, and the 2025 evidence does not support calling them safer.
It is not a certification and no agency issues it. The two real standards behind the phrase, plus one test you can do at home for free.
Studies people quote at you, read properly — including the ones that got weaker on inspection.
Every “switch to wood” article cites the same 2023 paper. That paper found wooden boards shed four to twenty-two times more particles than plastic ones.
NSF/ANSI 401 certifies microplastic reduction with a test for particles 0.5 to 1 micron. Its own definition of a microplastic starts at 1 micron.
A consumer water test costs $598 and will not tell you what the plastic is. The lab’s own page says the most abundant particles are the hardest to detect.
We read the pages for 56 air fryers. Most either name no material at all or admit a coating exists and never say what it is.
Pyrex sold in Australia is two different glasses under one name. Ten years means French borosilicate; two years means American soda-lime.
We scored 72 products from Australia’s biggest retailers on materials. The online discounter beat the shops with the big names.
The study that made people bin their spatulas was corrected twice. The chemicals are real; the exposure figure was wrong by about forty-fold.
The “two billion nanoplastics” figure is a real measurement, quoted almost everywhere without the limitations its own authors listed.
It is genuinely PTFE-free. It is also not really ceramic, and the recipe is a trade secret.
Recycled plastic carries whatever was in the plastic it used to be. The UN said so in May 2026. The concern is specific, not general.
Statutes, bans and labelling duties — with the dates checked against the law rather than someone’s summary.
Some states banned the sale. Others only require a label, which keeps it on the shelf. Most roundups blur the two, and several have Vermont’s date wrong.
It revoked 23 permissions in 2022 — because industry had already stopped using them. Nine remain. A May 2026 proposal is the first real movement since.
What we’d actually do, in a real kitchen, this week.
Those pale toddler plates are melamine with bamboo powder mixed in. A national regulator has told people to stop using them. They are still on sale here.
Nearly every page answering this is written by someone who sells pans. Flaking means replace. Scratched but intact usually doesn’t.
Applies only to vacuum-insulated bottles, sits outside the inner chamber, and two barriers separate it from your drink. How to check yours in thirty seconds.
Six things to read on the box, in the order that narrows the choice fastest.
The same rubric, one brand at a time — what each company publishes, and what it won’t.
Five plies, named alloys, a thickness in millimetres. Almost nobody else describes the object that precisely, and it is why an uncoated pan outscores the coated ones.
A $25 pan whose safety claim is boring and obviously true. The only point we docked is about an unnamed seasoning oil.
More forthcoming than most on chemistry, then it writes the headline as “PFAS-free … made without intentionally added PFAS”. Those are two claims, not one.
A named laboratory and a report you can open — rare in coated cookware. The limit is that a test only finds what somebody thought to look for.
The strongest non-toxic marketing in the category attached to the thinnest published file. 2/10 and 3/10, and not because anything is known to be wrong.
The only brand publishing dated certificates from a named lab. Also the one with the most awkward independent finding, which we are not going to bury.
It names both steel grades, including the less flattering one, and explains why. That sentence is most of the reason it scores 90/100.
8/10 against 4/10, and not for the reason you would expect. One bottle sidesteps the lead question by design; the other answers it with a legal filing.
Work nobody else has done, because it is tedious and nobody pays for it.
Every product on the site, and what each one is actually made of. Price and materials quality correlate negatively - paying more does not buy better materials.
We read the documentation for every product on the site. Exactly one publishes a named laboratory and a dated report you can open.
In rough order. If you want one of these sooner, email and say so.
New guides, corrected scores, and any rule change that affects what you’re allowed to buy. The list isn’t open yet — email us and we’ll add you when it is.