Ooops.. Took a while to respond there. Sorry. Dryer sheets are just a way to get the fabric softener onto clothes in the dryer rather than in the wash. Fabric softeners coat individual fibers with an oil and make them separate and stand up. They are used usually because things like perfumes, brighteners, and other insoluble material in detergents can build up on fibers. In some detergents, that extra material can be upwards of 2% of the weight of the fabric (Clemson Univ. School of Textiles AATCC Test Method #61 2A Scour). Other insoluble material can come from calcium and other minerals in the water that end up in fabric. This extra material is usually irritating and can make clothes scratchy. So many people use the dryer sheets to cover this up. An upshot to the one more chemical added in the dryer is that it kills static. Charlie's Soap has shown ability to remove detergent residues like insolubles material, alkaline residues, perfumes and fabric softeners. It's not so great at removing brighteners or limestone or rust or similar hard water buildups. When you add a dryer sheet to the wash, you will get that scent, and kill the static. It will add some oils to your clothes that Charlie's Soap will have to remove on the next wash. It does not "turn it off" or anything like that, but it does increase the amount of work it needs to do to get the clothes clean. If you add a fabric softener in the wash, however, you're trying to get a detergent to remove buildup at the same time you're trying to ADD buildup. The result is usually nothing gets clean as those two fight each other. I've told several people to dry the clothes as normal and to fight static, at the last minute (or a few minutes after the dryer stops) dry the clothes for a few minutes with a wet and wrung out facecloth. If you want scent, put a few drops of your favorite essential oil on there. That should kill the static for a time and add just enough scent to smell but not so much to be a pain to remove at wash time. As to the statement about CS removes residues, there was a test done with GoreTex, Tide and our Laundry Liquid (unnamed third party). With one wash in Tide, water would pass right through the water proof garment indicating residues. 10 washes in the CS Laundry Liquid later, the water would bead up again. Compare that to the earlier mentioned Clemson test, and it shows that the residues were removed and the fabric was allowed to perform as designed. Does that help a bit...without being a commercial?

I just used one of the small (not mini) pans on the stovetop tonight to create gravy after removing the little roast from the oven. I do have a bunch of the minis too. I had a few and ran into a bunch more at a country auction or second hand store last year for less than a buck apiece. Lars, I have never followed the sizing numbers except to note that larger numbers refer to larger pans. I wouldn't expect even a large Corning Ware to break. However, I also assume that the odds are higher (if small) for failure of the larger sizes. Therefore, I certainly wouldn't load one up with oil for frying; yow-za! I have a large one that I could use for soup to prove a point, but I have a heavy coated steel dutch oven and a couple stainless ones that are at the ready so I would not feel like risking even the small possibility of losing a whole pot of soup. I would certainly deglase that CW pot to make gravy after a large roast. BTW: most of the moderately old CW units are marked under the handle or on the bottom indicating that they may be used on the stove top. Some of the very old units don't say anything, but I believe they will all say 'pyroceram' and they are the original stove safe CW. However, if you find CW that specifically says 'oven safe' or similar, but doesn't also say stove top, then they are not for use on a stove top.

michael's...*hisssssss* ;o) if you're closer to the west coast, i've purchased from wisteria lane a couple times. because i live about 2 hrs away, the shipping was reasonable. alot of people love sfic's base but they have a high minimum of at least 250 lbs. if you can get someone to split an order with you, it's not too bad. (hi ellen!) also check out YAL...yet another link for 'compilation' of websites. it's a bit overwhelming because there're so many links but there're alot of good sites. good luck! andrea

I thought I'd chime in as a pro CP person. I've done both methods, but personally prefer CP because I like the feeling of making something from scratch. I know what goes into my soap from beginning to end, which is great for me since I have sensitive skin. CP is definitely a lot more labor intensive than M&P, but I find it relaxing and therapeutic. It's also much more complicated since you're working with lye, and ingredients that you might put into M&P soap with no problem will turn out all different sorts of ways when you introduce it to lye. It's even MORE complicated if you're interested in designing your own soap recipe because it involves balancing chemical reactions and understanding the various properties of different oils. I love it, though, because it appeals to my geeky side. And once you learn it, it's not that difficult. Anyway, I agree with Hazel. Try both and see what you personally like. You might want to start with M&P to break yourself into the whole experience. That's how I started. I later moved into CP once I'd tried M&P. Good luck!