PFAS15/ 100Bad
Overall0/ 100Bad
Vintage Ecko Baker's Secret Non-Stick Roast & Bake Pan Large 14.5 X 10.5

· Bakeware

Vintage Ecko Baker's Secret Non-Stick Roast & Bake Pan Large 14.5 X 10.5

Bad

Vintage nonstick cookware; coating type undisclosed, skip if PFAS-concerned.

Verdict · SkipVintage non-stick pan with undisclosed coating type poses moderate Teflon-type coating fume risk and coating degradation concerns; requires careful maintenance and temperature control.

This vintage nonstick roasting pan has no disclosed coating chemistry or PFAS status. Vintage nonstick cookware often used Teflon-type coating formulas, with no testing available.

The better-graded swap

Caraway Nonstick Ceramic Large Baking Sheet

Caraway

Caraway Nonstick Ceramic Large Baking Sheet

90/100 safety

90Excellent

Same rubric that flunked this product. The swap earned Excellent.

Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.

Material

Non-stick coating, unspecified type

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

Is Vintage Ecko Baker's Secret Non-Stick non-toxic? What it is made of

This is a vintage carbon steel or aluminum roasting pan with a non-stick coating of unspecified chemistry. The brand did not disclose whether the coating is Teflon-type coating (Teflon-type), ceramic, or another formulation on this product line. The gray color suggests a darkened non-stick surface typical of 1980s-2000s cookware. Age and lack of documentation mean the coating formulation cannot be verified against modern standards, and degradation risk increases significantly with older cookware.

What’s concerning

♾️

Category baseline

The starting point for this type of product, before anything specific to this product is counted.

70/ 100
♾️

No PFAS disclosure

No public statement from the brand about PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
♾️

Non-stick, chemistry undisclosed

Marketed as non-stick without stating the coating chemistry.

60/ 100
♾️

Teflon-type coating/polymer fume risk

Coating type is undisclosed on this vintage pan. If Teflon-type coating-based (common for non-stick bakeware of this era), overheating above 500°F can release fumes. No documented incidents for this model, but risk exists with any aged non-stick surface of unknown composition.

70/ 100
🫧

Coating degradation and microparticle release

Vintage non-stick cookware shows progressive loss of coating integrity over decades. Flaking or peeling particles may transfer to food, particularly with acidic or fatty foods. This product's age makes degradation likely if previously used; inspect carefully before reuse.

45/ 100
🔩

Aluminum leaching

If the base is uncoated or bare aluminum (common in budget pans), leaching into acidic foods is theoretically possible, though the non-stick layer likely provides a barrier if intact. No studies specific to this product; risk depends on base material, which is not disclosed.

70/ 100
💨

Off-gassing from aged coatings

Vintage non-stick coatings may off-gas low levels of volatile compounds over time, especially if stored in warm conditions. No specific testing available for this model; risk is theoretical but higher than modern cookware.

70/ 100

What’s reassuring

🧠

Lead

No lead or cadmium contamination has been documented in non-stick bakeware lines. However, vintage cookware from this brand era was not routinely tested for these metals by consumers. If substrate is ceramic or painted, lead risk is theoretically possible but unconfirmed.

Source, ATSDR ↗
95/ 100

The full breakdown

The brand's record and disclosure

The brand had no public PFAS disclosure policy or third-party certifications on record for vintage bakeware lines. The brand was acquired and divested multiple times; current product stewardship is unclear. No major recalls for non-stick coating hazards are documented for this specific model, but the company's transparency on material composition was minimal compared to modern standards.

How it compares in its category

Vintage non-stick bakeware from this era (1990s-2000s) typically used Teflon-type coating or silicone-based coatings with less rigorous quality control than contemporary pans. Modern alternatives offer ceramic non-stick, hard-anodized aluminum, or stainless steel options with published safety data. This pan sits in the middle-risk zone for vintage cookware, functional but with unknown coating integrity and composition.

If you buy it

Inspect the coating for chips, scratches, or peeling before use; discard if compromised. Never heat above 400-450°F to minimize fume risk from any polymer coating. Hand-wash only; avoid abrasive scrubbers and dishwashers, which accelerate coating breakdown. Replace within 5 years if used regularly, or sooner if discoloration, sticking, or flaking appears. Use on stovetop and conventional oven only, not convection or broiler.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 35% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
has made none

Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.

Better-graded alternatives in Bakeware

Caraway Nonstick Ceramic Medium Baking Sheet

Caraway

Nonstick Ceramic Medium Baking Sheet

100ExcellentPFAS grade
✓ Made Safe
  • ceramic nonstick coating
  • A third party reports verifying it as PFAS-free
  • Ceramic coating degradation over time
Caraway Ceramic Nonstick Baking Sheet Duo

Caraway

Ceramic Nonstick Baking Sheet Duo

100ExcellentPFAS grade
✓ MADE SAFE Certified
  • ceramic nonstick coating
  • A third party reports verifying it as PFAS-free
  • Coating degradation and durability

2 hazards checked on this product. See all of them.

Caraway Nonstick Ceramic Large Baking Sheet

Caraway

Nonstick Ceramic Large Baking Sheet

90ExcellentPFAS grade
  • ceramic nonstick coating
  • The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified
  • Ceramic coating degradation and particle shedding

3 hazards checked on this product. See all of them.

More bakeware grades

How we score, every product runs through the same public 0-100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.