HOMEBREW Digest #3110 Sat 14 August 1999

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com

  Re: CO2 measurement (John_E_Schnupp)
  mint in stout (?) (darrell.leavitt)
  It's The Worry That Makes You Sick ("Phil and Jill Yates")
  Crack inside a Gott! (bjm)
  re:Yeast Lifespans (RCAYOT)
  Is it Malty, or is it Oxydized? AND Fault Line Brew Pub ("Alan McKay")
  Pumping - I did - now I don't (Demonick)
  Pressure Cookers ("Charles R. Stewart")
  waste water, water wasting ("Jim Clayton")
  Pumps/Fermentability/loose ends of tubing ("Stephen Alexander")
  Old Bottle Caps (Chuck Cubbler)
  Social Commentary ("Eric R. Theiner")
  Maybe not ("Eric R. Theiner")
  pCooking ("Stephen Alexander")
  variable pump control (AKGOURMET)
  The Zone Beer Diet ("Brian Dixon")
  RE: Pumps/Fermentability/loose ends of tubing (Kirk.Fleming)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * The HBD now hosts eight digests related to this and a few other hobbies. * Send an email note to majordomo at hbd.org with the word "lists" on one * line, and "help" on another (don't need the quotes) for a listing and * instructions for use. * Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!! To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org. **SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail! Contact brewery at hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow" Back issues are available via: HTML from... http://hbd.org Anonymous ftp from... ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer AFS users can find it under... /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org (Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org. Digests CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer. COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source in any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items originally appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is exempt from the above. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...) JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 23:39:32 -0700 From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com Subject: Re: CO2 measurement Matt said he did his calculations based on bubbles. >I estimated how many bubbles per second (BPS!) I observe <snip> >So how much volume is each airlock bubble? I decided about >2 mL. This leads to a little over 300 g and about 170 L of gas. The >calculations all depend on the value you use for 'volume of an airlock >bubble' and how many bubbles you get during a fermentation. Brings a method to mind. Why not put a blow off tube in tall beaker, say 500 mL and use an ultra sonic sensor to count the bubbles. I'm assuming all of the bubbles from the hose (at the bottom of the beaker) would be the same size (much the same way at all the drops from a dropper are basically the same size). Of course maybe the bubble stream would be too great to get an accurate measurement of each bubble passing the sensor during the really serious fermentation. Sounds like an experiment to me. John Schnupp, N3CNL Dirty Laundry Brewery Colchester, VT 95 XLH 1200 Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 06:17:28 -0500 (EST) From: darrell.leavitt at plattsburgh.edu Subject: mint in stout (?) Recently someone mentioned mint in a stout,...and I am considerring it. If I find fresh mint....what to do? Boil and put in like hops, or, put into the seondary? Any experience with this would be appreiated. ..Darrell <Terminally INtermediate Home-brewer> Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 21:42:08 +1000 From: "Phil and Jill Yates" <yates at flexgate.infoflex.com.au> Subject: It's The Worry That Makes You Sick Dear Dr Panther, It seems you have become a victim of your own obsessive behaviour. >No, the bleeding ulcer and gout did that! I am currently into virtual brewing and virtual drinking. Much healthier for the temple that is my body than the real thing.< Considering your intense approach to brewing I am not surprised you have an ulcer or two. Nitrogen filled sheds for storing grain is one thing, hey each and every one of us at least does that. But spaying the stuff into your mash tun? Just not necessary Doc. I appreciate you making the effort to respond, I do not appreciate your personal interpretation of Australasian history. >I prefer the story about Captain Cook being a homebrewer. He was under the misapprehension that beer prevented scurvy. So he brewed for his crew all the time. Of course, all his seamen knew that beer had nothing to do with scurvy prevention, but nobody ever told him. Would you?< It is true that Captain Cook brewed beer and insisted that his crew drink it, but it was seen more as a punishment than a cure for any diseases. The good Captain was a lousy brewer and he knew it. It is documented that some crew opted for a keel hauling rather than drink the dreadful stuff! The question of Sir Edmund's brewing is a sensitive one and I would caution you not to be flippant here. In Kiwi land the men are men.....and the sheep are very nervous. Don't push your luck on this one. Your suggestion that the HBD be beamed into space for the benefit of aliens demonstrates your poor grasp on reality. The HBD is beamed to us from space for the benefit of earthlings. You can't seriously believe what you read in here is coming from mere mortals! Doc, take it easy and get yourself well. Worry will make you sick. By the way, ulcers do not do well in a nitrous gaseous environment. Perhaps a squirt of that stuff down your throat before bed instead of into your mash tun will do you the world of good. Cheers Phil Yates. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 08:42:49 -0500 From: bjm at roisysinc.com Subject: Crack inside a Gott! While cleaning my Gott cooler / mash tun earlier this week, I noticed a small crack in the plastic. It is a vertical crack about 2 to 3 inches long. My cooler has been used for about 15 batches. I do add boiling water to get the mash temp up to mash-out. Has anyone else who uses a Gott cooler as a mash tun gotten a crack? If so, did anyone try to seal the crack? If you did seal it, what did you use? I'm very happy with the Gott as a mash tun. I had hoped they would hold up to the higher temps. Maybe I've got a bad one. TIA Brad Manbeck Burlap Shack Brewing Private emails are OK Bjm at roisysinc.com Return to table of contents
Date: 13 Aug 1999 08:52:34 -0400 From: RCAYOT at solutia.com Subject: re:Yeast Lifespans David Lamotte asks about yeast lifespans, to this I would add only what I remember from reading something somewhare (pretty sloppy huh?). Yeast cells have a scar on the cell surface from wheere they have budded off. When yeast have gone through enough generations that too much cell surface is scarred, I think they are no longer viable, or at least can no longer bud. I also think that cell wall components are diluted by the budding process, so subsequent generations have less and less of the critical components of the cell wall, and become less robust, less able to ferment, etc. I think that because the critical cell wall components metabolism requires oxygen, that the repitching of yeast indefinitely without aeration causes problems, I think that is why breweries that re-pitch use oxygen infusion when they re-pitch in order to allow yeast to remake those critical cell wall components. At least that is my understanding, others may come up with charts and graphs, cell counts, viability tests, optimum pitching rates, etc. Roger Ayotte Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 09:31:25 -0500 From: "Alan McKay" <amckay at nortelnetworks.com> Subject: Is it Malty, or is it Oxydized? AND Fault Line Brew Pub Hi folks, Here's a good one for the science types on the digest : Are there any chemical similarities between malty and oxydized. Here's why I ask : I'm pretty sure I know what oxydized tastes like. About a year ago I let half of a 10 gallon batch sit in a carboy at room temp for about 8 months, and the beer ended up tasting quite different from the half that didn't sit around. It was horrible, and I'm pretty sure that it was oxydized. I just got back from a short business trip to San Jose / Santa Clara, where I got to try a few new beers. For lunch one day I went to Togo's (Sandwich Shop) across from the Nortel campus (next to Great America). There I had a Sierra Nevada Pale Ale (which was good - for an "Americanized" Pale Ale, that is - waaaaayyyyyy overhopped). Then I had a Gordon Biersch, which I think is local to San Jose. Sorry, Togo's couldn't tell me which Gordon Biersch it was, but it was darker than the SNPA, and was less hopped. I also know it was not the GB Maerzen, since I had one of those at a different place (very good beer). Though I did have something called a "Hump Back" at the hotel. I didn't catch the name of the brewery, but they said it was a local San Jose beer. It was similar in colour to the horrible Gordon Biersch - anyone know who makes "Hump Back"? Anyway, the unknown Gordon Biersch was horrible. I left the glass 3/4 full. It was the same horrible flavour that I remember from the 5 gallons which sat for 8 months. At this point I was thinking simply that it was oxydized. But the next day I went to the Fault Line Brew Pub and sampled a number of their beers - including an Alt which they bill as being "very malty". Well, low and behold it was that same horrible flavour - though not quite as pronounced as it was in the Gordon Biersch from the day before. I couldn't finish it, either. I asked the waitress to take it away and get me a Best Bitter. I find it difficult to believe that the Fault Line would be serving oxydized beer (but who's to say - maybe their quality control isn't the best). So this is why I ask if there is an chemical similarity between the two flavours. Of course, at the same time I've drunk other malty beers and they never tasted anything at all like this. Maybe it's "dark and malty" (both the Alt and the Biersch were pretty dark), or perhaps the whole lot of them really were oxydized. BTW, the Fault Line Koelsch was pretty good. Not quite a real Koeslch - a little too much citrus, for one thing - but still a great beer. Their Hefeweizen was extremely good (but served with a slice of lemon - which I personally have never seen in my 2 years in Germany, though I understand that others have). The Best Bitter was also extremely good. But that Alt - ugggghhhh - what a horrible beer! I've had real Alt, and I can tell you that it doesn't taste like THAT! In a related question, what are your experiences with The Fault Line? Could it be that the Alt I had really was oxydized? cheers, -Alan - -- Alan McKay OS Support amckay at nortelnetworks.com Small Site Integration 613-765-6843 (ESN 395) Nortel Networks All opinions expressed are my own Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 08:15:49 -0700 From: Demonick <demonick at zgi.com> Subject: Pumping - I did - now I don't A few years ago I decided that pumping wort/beer around my "brewery" (laundry room) would be efficient and easier than siphoning. Cooler too. So I picked up a little magnetic drive hot liquid pump from McMaster, and medical grade quick disconnects and lots of tubing. I used it to pump hot wort from the kettle through the CFC and into the carboy. I used it to pump green beer from the primary to the secondary. And, I used it to pump from the secondary into the keg. I used it on about 10 or 12 5 gallon batches. I experienced a number of problems and annoyances. First, the little pump was not self-priming. It had to be filled with liquid before it would pump. How do you do that? Well, you can prefill all the tubing. You can suck on the output, or blow into the source. Basically, you are starting a siphon ... Second, the pump cavitated like crazy, particularly with green beer with CO2 in solution. The CO2 comes out of solution and causes all sorts of gurgling and serious cavitation, at times breaking the liquid flow so that the pump no longer pumped. The solution? Turn off the pump and let the natural siphon action clear the bubble. Third, it was more stuff to sanitize and clean, more tubing, more hardware, it was just more stuff to deal with, more stuff to worry about. Finally I realized that the pump wasn't making anything easier, in fact it was making brewer harder. I never noticed any change in the quality of the brew, even between identical brews made with and without the pump. No change in flavor. No change in foaming quality. No evidence of "foam only once proteins". No FOOP problems. My REAL problem was starting siphons, and the pump was not the solution. The solution to starting siphons, for me, YMMV, was to get over my paranoia of blowing into the "other" tube of the orange carboy cap. For those times when sucking is the only solution, I got a 4 foot length of big tubing, into which the transfer tubing can be stuffed. This 4 foot tube gets sanitized, the "mouth" end marked with felt pen, then it is used as a suck extension. The point? You need enough volume in the extension to really get a huge suck to get enough flow going the first time. Also if some of your tubing still has sanitizer in it you need enough "suck buffer" to avoid a mouthful of iodophor or bleach, though the iodophor isn't that bad. I've never used the pump again. Were I to go back to pumping for some reason, I would pony-up the extra bucks and get a high quality, low volume, self-priming, adjustable flow pump. Cheers! Domenick Venezia Venezia & Company, LLC Maker of PrimeTab (206) 782-1152 phone (206) 782-6766 fax orders demonick at zgi dot com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 11:29:34 -0700 From: "Charles R. Stewart" <Charles at TheStewarts.com> Subject: Pressure Cookers Scoot Moore wrote looking for larger pressure cookers. A quick search on e-Bay (www.ebay.com) produced dozens, and in all sizes. Chip Stewart Charles at TheStewarts.com http://Charles.TheStewarts.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 11:48:27 -0500 From: "Jim Clayton" <jim at iowacity.net> Subject: waste water, water wasting Take a minute to think about all the water consumed/wasted in the brewery. Cooling water could be hosed into the washing machine for the load that's always waiting. (Your spouse will love a brewery/laundry room combination.) Sanitizer solutions can be used as weed killer on gravel drives and in the cracks of poured cement. Bleach water will lose its' chlorine if it is kept in an open container for a couple of days. It could be used right away for white loads of wash or wait to de-chlorinate and then use it on the garden or flower beds. Some parts of the country are under water restrictions this year. How about some creative recycling of our waste water? Any other ideas? Jim Clayton Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 12:32:13 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Pumps/Fermentability/loose ends of tubing Kirk is concerned about pumps >What I've READ (and I can't cite the source) is that these pumps have a >shear effect of the beer, and in particular proteins, and change the >character of the beer for the worse. 'Handbook of Enzyme Biotechnology', Alan Wiseman Ed., Halstead Press, 2ed ed, 1990(?) section 2.4.2 and 'Protein Biotechnoloy: Isolation, Characterization and Stabilization', Felix Franks Ed, Humana Press, 1993 ~pp398... both speak to the issue. Even modest shear forces can denature enzymes. This occurs as a result of irreversible conformational changes to tertiary structure. The same sort of changes must occur to other proteins. This means they fold differently, but probably are not divided. As a result I expect little direct flavor impact - tho' an impact due to enzyme denaturing is possible. In practice the RIMSers teach us this isn't a significant problem. Pumping and shear forces are an important issue in certain commercial enzymatic processes, but apparently not in home brewing with RIMS type equipment. Perhaps if an extra few minutes, or an extra percent of extract were important and reliably measurable it would be a concern. >All that said, my next RIMS system will be based on either diaphragm or >peristaltic pumps You may well reduce the shear levels in the pump itself that way, but the shear losses in a tube in turbulent flow is proportional to (L/D)^(b) Where L is length D is the diameter, and 'b' is a coefficient which is dependent on pH and temperature and specific to the particular enzyme. You are better off keeping the tubing short and the diameter large, which argues against most peristaltic pumps. === === === In private email, someone noted, related to my post on enzymes, that Siebel had posted ... >Experience with North American malts is >that a temperature of 158F for saccharification still gives a lot of >fermentable sugar, about 65 to 68% wort fermentability, and that you have to >go quickly to saccharification at about 165F to get a significant increase in >non-fermentable sugars. And states this matches his experience of little difference in fermentability at mash temps of 65C vs 69C. First there is no contradiction here. The beta amylase present in the (presumably) British PA malt in some of the papers I have cited is almost certainly a bit lower than for US malts, and even then the British malt had about 3.5X the amount of beta-amylase necessary for a complete reduction to maltose - under ideal circumstances in a 1hr, 65C mash. The problem of course is that ideal conditions don't obtain, and we only get a fraction of the BA activity that is potential. As for the "165F [74C] to get a significant increase in non-fermentable sugars." comment by Siebel. I think that this must be considered further. 'Enzyme Technology, Tauber (a rather old American book) gives the following table (adapted): 64C 73 % fermentability 66C 71.5 68C 67.6 70C 65.8 72C 63.7 Muller (presumably using British PA malt) gives (at 1.25qt/lb) : 70C 70% fermentability 75C 53% 80C 28% 85C 21% The table by Hall in M&BS for ~1.28qt/lb shows fermentability of: 60C 76.1% fermentability 65.6C 71.2% 68.3C 65% - --- Many of the difference between tables may have to do with variables in the mash thickness, pH and especially the mash time. So what is a *significant* increase in non-fermentables ?. I personally would be very concerned if my attenuation limit dropped from 75% to 65%, as well it might when pushing the mash temp from 64C to 70C. If I didn't know the cause I'd certainly be concerned about a stuck fermentation. I'm also pretty sure I wouldn't want to have a well attenuated style (like a British ale) with only 65% apparent attenuation. Not a disaster, but certainly not the goal either. OTOH if you wish for truly low fementability and high dextrins, then temps beyond 70C are indicated. ====== RogerA seems very confused ... >a problem waaaay in the beginning [...] I said, >>The original equations were, as usual, unitless (not >>dimensionless) referring to the pressure equation: >>dP = [ C' * (Length/Diam) + k ] * [ (rho * vbar * vbar)/2 ] which was the unitless "original equation", "waaaay in the beginning". >Excuse ME? If you don't put the units in Explicitly, then the >coefficients don't work do they? Yes, they do for the unitless "ORIGINAL EQUATION" above. - -- >if they are really unitless, then will the coefficients >work for any dimension of L? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You don't understand the distinction between units and dimensions. L has fixed DIMENSIONS of length, but arbitrary units in the eqn above. - -- Roger misinterpreted my statement about 'unitless' as applying to the resulting practical equation: >>dP = L (in feet) * 0.56psi + 0.43 psi [1/4" ID ...] how it is possible to make this association when three units are mentioned in the very line (feet, psi, psi) is beyond me.. >NO NO NO, the drop in pressure would not be for instance 0.56psi >per light year or something would it? Given your serving tube length in light years, inches and in meters how would these be expressed in an equation that calls for length as "L(in feet)" ? Gosh-golly they are all the same numerically, and the unit becomes irrelevant to the numerical result. When I state "your height in meters is your height in inches divided by 39.37", I do not need to write "39.37 inches/meter" since the required units have been explicitly stated, and no confusion should be possible. - -- >as for the V squared, hey, I just said I didn't see it No, you asked for a source and a case - derivation as, > [...] where does this come from? >[...],you just don't make a case like that! So you requested a derivation then snidely reply ... >good for you, you can do algebra, I can do the tensor analysis too, but that won't help you solve basic word problems, nor remember your own requests. I gave the v^2 result w/o algebra, YOU both asked for the derivation and then complain when it includes algebra. Perhaps when you said, "where does this come from" you expected Rennerian coordinates ? -S Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:26:02 -0400 From: Chuck Cubbler <chuck at maguire.com> Subject: Old Bottle Caps Hey all, Thought I had sent this a few days ago. Apparently not. Please forgive if it posts twice.... I came across some old bottle caps. Cork gasket instead of rubber. Foil-like disk in center, where it would contact bottle contents. I believe these are from the late 1960s. Two types, Budweiser and Stroh's Bohemien. Two questions, are they worth anything as collectible? If not, how might I sanitize them for my own use, considering that I normally boil caps before bottling?. Presumably, this would destroy the cork. Thanks, Chuck Brewing in NJ this Sunday (in the rain I hope) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 14:05:40 -0700 From: "Eric R. Theiner" <logic at skantech.com> Subject: Social Commentary I have been thoroughly enjoying some of the less serious posts in the HBD from certain subscribers. (At least I hope they are lest serious-- otherwise we have a few lunatics in our midst.) It was only today that I began to wonder if they are actually poking fun at certain of our more serious subscribers (I particularly wonder that since I see open baiting now). An interesting social commentary on the state of uptightness on our beloved forum. Cool. Rick Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 14:06:07 -0700 From: "Eric R. Theiner" <logic at skantech.com> Subject: Maybe not Or maybe I'm just reading too much into this. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:50:07 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: pCooking Eric Panther says ... >Well I made several batches which were p-cooked in this monster. The taste >was not so much malty as cooked caramel. Caramelization does occur in the pCooker too (as it does in a decoction boil, or a boiler) but the rate is rather low, yet dependent on lot of factors like sugar concentration and pH, metal ions (copper is not such a good idea). To confuse the matter further some Maillard product to smell like caramel, and the initial steps in sugar caramelization are the same as those for Maillard reactions. All I can say to Eric is that if his flavor difference before and after pCooking is primarily throaty-hot sharp caramel - then he's getting a different result than I am. I get caramel notes too and moreso on higher gravity longer pCooks. I still think it much more effective in enhancing maltiness than decoction (which is a pretty weak method for the effort IMO), tho' I'm sure that the attempt to reach the 'malt sandwich' will create more caramel flavors and darker colors than desired. >PS. Hey, the beergod Narziss (I am so surprised he does not contribute to >this most excellent forum - the world's best! Maybe nobody has told him >about it?) I've never seen LudwigN write anything directly in English. Maybe it's the lack of umlauts that keeps him away. >does not recommend overheating wort either, for you science >geeks. Just for the science geeks ? What odd advice. For what reason and at what temp does he consider it overheating ? It's normal (to about 219F) in internal boiler systems and extreme (3+ bar) systems around 300F and even higher are described in Kunze and elsewhere. 250F is pretty tame by comparison. == In a related note Phil Yates says ... >[Steve], I just hope you aren't going to tell us all you don't drink >beer either! Never. Yeast asexually reproduce in it, cats p*ss in it. Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 17:09:46 EDT From: AKGOURMET at aol.com Subject: variable pump control Matt in HBD# 3109 asked about using a dimmer switch to control a RIMS pump. I use one on my 2-tier RIMS and it works great. It's a ceiling fan controller rated for 5 amps that cost about $12. The mag. pump only draws about 1.3 amps, if I remember correctly. I usually recirculate for 30 minutes and then do a 30 minute sparge with the pump running at 1/2 - 3/4 speed. I also use a valve on the output side to regulate the flow. The pump barely gets warm to the touch. I also like the way the switch allows the pump to start slowly and gradually increase the flow . ============== Mint in beer: I did this with a Christmas Ale several years back. The base beer was porter/dark ale style to which I added cinnimon, nutmeg, ginger and mint. I added a whole bottle of dried, crushed mint leaves, which is only about .2 ounces. I think it was Schilling brand -- the standard size spice bottle you buy in the grocery store. Added it right to the boil. 5 gallons, by the way. The flavor was barely perceptible in the finished beer, but it had a nice cooling effect on the tongue. Kind of like a peppermint patty. I liked it. ============== Did I hear(read) Rob say that its preferable to store dry yeast frozen? Freezing won't kill it? I assume it's not a good idea to put frozen yeast into 105f. water to rehydrate. Any idea what an acceptable warming rate is? Bill Wright Juneau, Alaska Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 18:44:08 -0700 From: "Brian Dixon" <mutex at proaxis.com> Subject: The Zone Beer Diet I haven't been around here too much in the last few months 'cuz I've been dieting ... dropped 43 lbs so far, and have about 15 to go. I've been doing it on the Zone diet (see New York #1 top seller by Dr. Barry Sears "Enter the Zone"). No affiliation, yadda, yadda, yadda. I'm just a non-hungry, fully satisfied, weight losing customer ... that Dr. Sears dude knows his stuff (in spite of the flashy 'used car sales' book cover.) In any case, the beer drinkers in the crowd might want to know that the beer belly effect can be reduced! For reasons of hormone control, specifically the glucagon/insulin axis, Dr. Sears recommends eating and snacking with particular ratios of the macronutrients (protein, carbohydrate, fat). It works. The ratio is for each 7 grams of protein, eat 9 grams of carbohydrate and 1.5 to 3 grams of fat. In calories, each meal and snack should be 30% protein, 40% carbohydrate, and 30% fat. Any higher in the carbs and you increase your insulin response, which in turn reduces blood sugar by moving sugars into fat store and locks up fat store so that you can't utilize it. Since maltose has a glycemic index even higher than pure sucrose, beer is an especially effective way to mess up your insulin response and to gain (and keep) fat ... hence the beer belly. I'm 43 lbs (out of 58 that I needed to lose) into proving that Dr. Sears is right. If you are interested, check out http://www.zoneperfect.com. In the mean time, move that beer drinking closer to a 'zone' meal by consuming protein/fat before and during the beer consumption. Those clever folk in the crowd already see why I'm so excited ... hmmmm, maltose is absorbed especially fast and fat acts as a regulator to slow that absorption. And you've got to have protein to go with the carbs in the beer. And by transitive deduction, it'd be best if the protein source included an appropriate level of fat. Are you there yet? For each 12 ounces of microbrew type beer (go by average specific gravities), you should eat about 1.5 to 2 ounces of meat (or eggwhite or tofu or soy protein etc.) and about 3 to 6 grams of fat. But since maltose is utilized so fast some extra fat, for regulation purposes, is not a bad thing. As Dr. Sears points out, it's not fat that makes us fat, it's carbohydrates (what do you fatten a cow with ... oily hay? Nope! Lots of grain and sweet feed!). So what protein source meets the requirement of having a high enough level of fat to regulate all that nasty maltose? You can figure out your own answer, but hey ... I'm heading off to the bar for summer sausage and beer! (The only downside here is that only two 12 ounce beers and 3 or 4 ounces of the sausage would be our limit ... more than that and the extra calories in themselves cause the insulin response and fat gain again.) I'm sure Dr. Sears would not suggest this as your normal diet, but I actually DO have sausage and beer like this about once or twice a week and it has NOT reduced my rate of fat loss (1.5 to 2 lbs per week). Life is good! Brian PS: I just figured that if anyone out there is tending to be on the 'portly' side like I was, that they'd like this good news ... lose weight and still drink beer and eat meat! Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 00:10:13 -0500 From: Kirk.Fleming at born.com Subject: RE: Pumps/Fermentability/loose ends of tubing ...but I certainly wouldn't expect turbulent flow using a peristaltic pump, and in fact, I'd be very surprised if even my centrifugal pumps drive the flow turbulent in my system. It certainly LOOKS laminar based on visual observation of small particles at or near the tubing wall (5/8" ID). Kirk Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 08/14/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96