Sanitation in the "old days"?

Any idea how sanitation was done without Star Sans or other industrial chemicals?

my guess would be boiling water

alcohol could be used too.

People are clever. When they find out about bacteria etc, they find ways to deal with them. If they don't know about bacteria, they wouldn't sanitize, but I'm sure they cleaned really well.

-a.

How far back are you referring to when you mean old days???....remember most of the "scientific" understanding of microbes and sanitization didn't really come into understanding til Pasteur's findings on germ theory...Or Snow's realization that Cholera was water born and him having the pump handles in London removed or locked during the 1854 Cholera outbreak...

Prior to that it was pretty much conjecture, without understanding....People knew much further back that boiling water and/or adding sugars to water and fermenting with it was safer than drinking from the streams, but they didn't really inderstand why...and fermentation was still pretty hit and miss.

They may have realized that boiling water killed whatever was making them sick, but it wasn't til Napoleons time that the idea of boiling things (like jars and utensils) in water did what we now would call sterilization....In other words you could still boil water, but if you stored it in an unsanitary container you were then re-infecting it....

If you go back to the earliest brewing....Ancient Babylon...there was next to nothing to our understanding, that would have constituted "sanitization" except for the making of the alchohol itself, if by chance you greated the habitable environment, where the "good" yeasts (which were usually wild) out preformed the "bad" things like lactobacilus & acetobactor.

For the homebrewer though...the pre-starsan and iodophor method would have been bleach/water....

Or, they drank alot of semi-infected beer, wine and mead. I know many people who still have sour-ish wines and think it's normal.

YooperBrew said:

Or, they drank alot of semi-infected beer, wine and mead. I know many people who still have sour-ish wines and think it's normal.

Click to expand...

Yup!!!! And called it "Heineken"

Seriously, think about the "intentionally" sour styles of beers around today (I don't know if there are any intentionally soured wines...except to make vinegars)...They weren't at first done on purpose...someone actually choked some down and said..."hey this isn't bad...American beer snobs a hundred years from now will be paying big bucks for this, and sticking table legs in their carboys!"

Yea I think there was a lot of infected beer / wine in the old days. remember IPA was made with higher alcohol / hops to prevent infection in oak barrels on the way to India, and that wasn't even very long ago. As long as they are protected form light it wouldn't be an issue in modern times.
Also homebrewing was commonplace years ago because the well / river water made people sick without the boiling / alcohol / hops. people knew what tasted good and kept them from getting sick but didn't seem to have much of an understanding of sanitation / sterilization.

k1v1116 said:

Yea I think there was a lot of infected beer / wine in the old days. remember IPA was made with higher alcohol / hops to prevent infection in oak barrels on the way to India, and that wasn't even very long ago. As long as they are protected form light it wouldn't be an issue in modern times.

Click to expand...

Yup, but even the IPA was a product of the 18th century and an understanding of the preservative/antibacterial properties of hops.

Early shipments to India contained bottled porters, the favorite beer in London, which generally arrived flat, musty, and sour. The answer to the great beer problem finally came from a recipe created by George Hodgson at the Bow Brewery in East London. India ale was a variation of his pale ale, which Londoners had been drinking since the mid-1750s. Hodgson took his pale ale recipe, increased the hop content considerably, and raised the alcohol content. The result was a very bitter, alcoholic, and sparkling pale ale that could survive the challenges of travel and shelf life in India. IPA reached India in an enjoyable condition and Hodgson's success became legendary. Hodgson began shipping Hodgson's India Ale during the 1780s. By 1784 advertisements were appearing in the Calcutta Gazette for "light and excellent" pale ale.

Click to expand...

Thank you George Hodgson!!!!

I have read from numerous sources that the fermentation of grain was (possibly) the reason that homo-sapiens began the practice of grain cultivation, agriculture, and thus civilization.

Of course there is a lot of grey area in that assertion. I wouldn't say that early humans didn't understand "germ theory." They just understood it in a different way than we do today.

But regardless of the causes for agriculture (they are many and complex) why would we choose to substitute the easily spoilable beer for the stregnth and preservability of mead? I can't imagine that people went to great legnths to create something so unpalatable when there were clear alternatives that they were surely aware of.

On the surface it seems that even wine is more stable than beer, though that came later.

Perhaps there were deeper social reasons or spirtual reasons for the cultivation of grain for beer? Or is there some scientific explanation for it?

jay075j said:

alcohol could be used too.

Click to expand...

Are you referring to spirits?

brewmonger said:

I have read from numerous sources that the fermentation of grain was (possibly) the reason that homo-sapiens began the practice of grain cultivation, agriculture, and thus civilization.

Of course there is a lot of grey area in that assertion. I wouldn't say that early humans didn't understand "germ theory." They just understood it in a different way than we do today.

But regardless of the causes for agriculture (they are many and complex) why would we choose to substitute the easily spoilable beer for the stregnth and preservability of mead? I can't imagine that people went to great legnths to create something so unpalatable when there were clear alternatives that they were surely aware of.

On the surface it seems that even wine is more stable than beer, though that came later.

Perhaps there were deeper social reasons or spirtual reasons for the cultivation of grain for beer? Or is there some scientific explanation for it?

Click to expand...

Beer is/has been historically recognized to be the oldest fermented beverage, even older than meads, ciders and wines...even though one could argue that the funeral drink found in the tomb of King Midas, and subsequently re-created by Dogfishead was a combination of what we would think of as Beer, Wine AND mead...So that does fuzz up a few things....

Not to mention the brewing of "beer" in ancient China, and Egypt, which I haven't got around to researching yet.

The most common theory is that grain was of course harvested and raised for bread. It was accidentally soaked...it sprouted ("malted" you might say) and as it sat in the liquid, wild yeast caused it ferment and some fool drank it and it made him feel all warm and fuzzy inside...

The earliest recorded recipe for beer is in the Hymn to Ninkasi;

he Hymn to Ninkasi, inscribed on a nineteenth-century B.C. tablet, contains a recipe for Sumerian beer.)

Translation by Miguel Civil

Borne of the flowing water (...)
Tenderly cared for by the Ninhursag,
Borne of the flowing water (...)
Tenderly cared for by the Ninhursag,

Having founded your town by the sacred lake,
She finished its great walls for you,
Ninkasi, having founded your town by the sacred lake,
She finished its great walls for you

Your father is Enki, Lord Nidimmud,
Your mother is Ninti, the queen of the sacred lake,
Ninkasi, Your father is Enki, Lord Nidimmud,
Your mother is Ninti, the queen of the sacred lake.

You are the one who handles the dough,
[and] with a big shovel,
Mixing in a pit, the bappir with sweet aromatics,
Ninkasi, You are the one who handles
the dough, [and] with a big shovel,
Mixing in a pit, the bappir with [date]-honey.

You are the one who bakes the bappir
in the big oven,
Puts in order the piles of hulled grains,
Ninkasi, you are the one who bakes
the bappir in the big oven,
Puts in order the piles of hulled grains,

You are the one who waters the malt
set on the ground,
The noble dogs keep away even the potentates,
Ninkasi, you are the one who waters the malt
set on the ground,
The noble dogs keep away even the potentates.

You are the one who soaks the malt in a jar
The waves rise, the waves fall.
Ninkasi, you are the one who soaks
the malt in a jar
The waves rise, the waves fall.

You are the one who spreads the cooked
mash on large reed mats,
Coolness overcomes.
Ninkasi, you are the one who spreads
the cooked mash on large reed mats,
Coolness overcomes.

You are the one who holds with both hands
the great sweet wort,
Brewing [it] with honey and wine
(You the sweet wort to the vessel)
Ninkasi, (...)
(You the sweet wort to the vessel)

The filtering vat, which makes
a pleasant sound,
You place appropriately on [top of]
a large collector vat.
Ninkasi, the filtering vat,
which makes a pleasant sound,
You place appropriately on [top of]
a large collector vat.

When you pour out the filtered beer
of the collector vat,
It is [like] the onrush of
Tigris and Euphrates.
Ninkasi, you are the one who pours out the
filtered beer of the collector vat,
It is [like] the onrush of
Tigris and Euphrates.

Click to expand...

It is also mentioned in the Epic of Gilgamesh, in which the 'wild man' Enkidu is given beer to drink. "...he ate until he was full, drank seven pitchers of beer, his heart grew light, his face glowed and he sang out with joy."

Also The Code of Hammurabi (Codex Hammurabi), the best preserved ancient law code has sections governing the brewing and trafficking of beer...

As to the "why's " besides the afore mentioned health, there is quite a tie in to religion and spirituality (again, probably because beer makes you warm and fuzzy inside.)

This is on my shelf and I've only begun skimming it.



My ex girlfriend was working on a book on Goddess ritual and found many more tie ins to beer and sacredness.....she was working on the arcane or spiritual meanings of the inclusion of the ingredients in certain of the beer recipes, like Ninkasi's and the Midas brew...taking the historian's "what was in it" and looking at the ritualistic "why" it was added...But since I'm ignoring her, I haven't a clue as to what more she discovered....Some of the info I shared on several threads here in the winter, some of her work, and some of mine....

As to what you said about Germ theory...yes there was some ancient wisdom /knowledge in those days, like I said they knew boiling water did something good though they didn't necessarily know "why." If you look at the old testament, many of the Jewish prohibition, such as those of on eating pork and shellfish, were for health reasons (though they were wrapped around mythology) without knowing about trichinosis, they knew that eating undercooked pork made people deathly ill....So they set up a prohibition against it...most of the Old Testament "laws" were actually based on rudimentary scientific/public health understandings...a lot of the understandings, thought they would be loathe to admit it, came from the Islamic Mystics and Alchemist...Who were later persecuted by the Jews and early Christians driven out of places like Spain.

BUT I still maintain that, what we would consider "modern" methods of sanitization and Preservation (like the IPA) came about through the work of Pasteur and Snow....and the Preservation of food (look up the history of canning) during Napoleon's time....

The common misconception though is that Brewing was a huge part of Early America...Even though people did make beer at home, according to Maureen Ogle it really was rare, Malt-able barley were not easy to come buy and too much emphasis on was placed on plants for survival...so it was more than likely that Ciders and Rum (fermented from Molases) was much more prevalent than beers...And Ben Frankin never said what we think he said about beer....

http://www.ambitiousbrew.com/

I actually am familiar with the book "Sacred Herbal Healing Beers." If you haven't read it already, I highly recommend it. I have an ongoing email dialogue with the author.

One Warning: It will definetly clash with some of the dogmas about the superiority of hops & modern brewing science, which many home-brewers adhere to.

And one correction to your previous email: From what I understand, mead is almost certainly the earliest fermented beverage. Mead pre-dated beer perhaps by as much or more than 30,000 years.

In fact, in my experience, adding honey to the boiling wort for beer is a good way to prevent the spoilage/souring the beer by bacteria, especially given the conditions which existed in the middle ages and before. Two reasons:

1) Honey is a natural anti-septic. Even when diluted by water, it slows or inhibits the growth of bacteria and molds.
2) Honey will raise the alcohol content of the brew, which also acts as an anti-septic.

One word of warning, though (speaking from experience). Honey can also serve as a major source of microbial contaminants, since it contains many wild bacterias and molds in a state of suspended animation, trapped in the honey. This isn't always a problem with straight mead, particularily when fermented strong (upwards of 12-15% ABV) but with a weak beer, some of them will begin to feed off the complex-carbs and protiens from the grain, souring the beer.

When using honey in beer, it is a good idea to make sure it is boiled for sufficient time to make sure all such organisms are killed. I usually try to minimize the boiling time with the honey, because I don't want to lose all the delicate floral aromas present in it, but I have learned my lesson the hard way on the contimants which it contains.

Unless you are fermenting something very strong, its is best not to take chances with the raw honey. But if you follow that simple rule (I usually add it 20 minutes before flame-out) adding honey to beer is a great way to add preservative quality to the beer.

That's the great debate, which came first, mead vs beer. The Tale of the "Honeymoon" vs the Hymn to Nikasi

I lean obviously towards the beer side..

In order to make mead one has to gather the honey, integrate it with water to thin it out and then ferment it...Since to my knowledge you don't normally gather honey and mix it with water, (And I don't believe you can just put yeast on the honey and have it ferment, it has to be diluted somehow) whereas you could easily have a bowl of grain sitting there where it could get soaked and the resulting mash could get hit with wild yeast and spontaneously ferment.

I think it comes down to which was more apt to sponatneously ferment in it's storage environment.

And which was cultivated as a foodstuff first, grains or honey...

We'll never truly know. (I think Maureen Ogle was the one that said that the whole mead came first idea was just another way to steal beers thunder )

I've skimmed some of the recipe in the heaing beers book...let's just say that as a anthropology treatise it looks all well and good, but I don't think I will be doing many if any of his recipes.

I don't think it needs to be a competition or debate over which came first. I have fermented all of the above (mead, wine, cider, & beer) and can appreciate the qualities of each one, though beer is my preffered drink of choice.

However, we have to be honest with ourselves. Brewing beer is a very complicated process. Making mead, wine, and cider, on the other hand, is considerably simpler. The sugars in honey and fruit are freely available and don't have to be converted and extracted through a long and labor-intensive malting, grinding, mashing, and lautering process.

The anthropological evidence for the brewing of mead dates back at least 40,000 years, while we know that barley was first domesticated in the fertile crescent roughly 10,000 years ago.

I'm not trying to knock beer. I like it.

Hey so back to the original topic of the thread...

Do you think that perhaps sulfur was used for santition in beer-brewing vessels, much as it has been used to kill off spoiling bacteria in winemaking for centuries?

Speaking of the DFH Midas Touch, I just picked up some this past weekend. It's a really unique creation and combination of flavors. You can taste the malt, grapes and honey all at once.

Big10Seaner said:

Speaking of the DFH Midas Touch, I just picked up some this past weekend. It's a really unique creation and combination of flavors. You can taste the malt, grapes and honey all at once.

Click to expand...

I've put the clone recipe up a few times...It's on my "to brew" list that and the Maltose falcons take on the ninkasi beer. I was going to do them as for my ex's research...now I'll just brew them for fun, later.

Revvy said:

That's the great debate, which came first, mead vs beer. The Tale of the "Honeymoon" vs the Hymn to Nikasi

I lean obviously towards the beer side..

In order to make mead one has to gather the honey, integrate it with water to thin it out and then ferment it...Since to my knowledge you don't normally gather honey and mix it with water, (And I don't believe you can just put yeast on the honey and have it ferment, it has to be diluted somehow) whereas you could easily have a bowl of grain sitting there where it could get soaked and the resulting mash could get hit with wild yeast and spontaneously ferment.

I think it comes down to which was more apt to sponatneously ferment in it's storage environment.

And which was cultivated as a foodstuff first, grains or honey...

Click to expand...

Hmmm.... how would the starches have converted, though? Maybe someone cooking a porridge or something and leaving it out? Wet grain isn't going to make beer on its own.

the_bird said:

Hmmm.... how would the starches have converted, though? Maybe someone cooking a porridge or something and leaving it out? Wet grain isn't going to make beer on its own.

Click to expand...

If it was stored wet in an ceramic container where the ambient temp reached near mashing temps? In a warm climate perhaps? And open so wildyeasts took hold. I didn't make up the theory...And from what I've read it probably wasn't totally converted, just enough sugars in the starch for it to become somewhat alcoholic (like our BAP attempts.)

A not very appealing drink possibly, that's why I remarked earlier in this thread that the guy who guzzeled it for the first time had to be mildly retarded to begin with

Beer was first dammnit.

Seriously though, beer history is amazing in itself. I too liked the DFH Midas Touch despite all of the bad reviews I had heard about it. The concept of brewing a beer that "might" have been similar to a several thousand year old drink is amazing. As for how beer came to be back then, I think the aliens probably had something to do with it, or zombies perhaps.

McKBrew said:

Beer was first dammnit.

Seriously though, beer history is amazing in itself. I too liked the DFH Midas Touch despite all of the bad reviews I had heard about it. The concept of brewing a beer that "might" have been similar to a several thousand year old drink is amazing. As for how beer came to be back then, I think the aliens probably had something to do with it, or zombies perhaps.

Click to expand...

It's been weeks...WEEKS since I got to do this

One of the central thesis of "Sacred Herbal Healing Beers" is that the discovery of fermentation was NOT merely an "accident" (i.e. a bucket of grains getting wet and warm and innoculated with a wild yeast, turning into the first beer).

Rather, the knowledge of fermentation by the ancients was often accompined by mythology about the knolwedge being a gift given to humans by gods or by the spirits of the plants themselves.

Even from a more scientific standpoint, I also disagree with the oft-suggested "accidental discovery" scenerio. I think that fermentation of grains, of honey, of fruit was an intentional act by the ancients.

Ancient peoples, even without modern scientific understanding, surely knew that 1) sweet things could be fermented into alcohol, 2) when grains germinated they became sweeter.

I've tried the Midas Touch. Wasn't real impressed to be perfectly honest. Important to note that the ancient brew wouldn't have contained hops which I'm assuming (perhaps wrongly) that the DogFishHead version has. The concentration of alcohol from all the sugar sources would have more likely been the primary preservative. Couldn't really taste the saffron either. The Author of "Sacrded Herbal Healing Beers" talks about Saffron as a highly enebriating herb, which enhances the inebriating effects of the alcohol because it "contains an essential oil that has phychoactive and stimulating effects and evokes long, distinctive orgasmic sensations."

Kind of wandered away from the Sanitation topic here. I guess the reason I brought it up was because I saw an old thread where a guy got mobbed for suggesting that washing with dishsoap and letting the equipment dry thoroughly was sufficient sanitation -- https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=61832

brewmonger said:

One of the central thesis of "Sacred Herbal Healing Beers" is that the discovery of fermentation was NOT merely an "accident" (i.e. a bucket of grains getting wet and warm and innoculated with a wild yeast, turning into the first beer).

Rather, the knowledge of fermentation by the ancients was often accompined by mythology about the knolwedge being a gift given to humans by gods or by the spirits of the plants themselves.

Click to expand...

As a theologian/minister, who has studied both ancient/primitive spirituality and contemporary religions, I don't buy that premise, I never have...Man creates religion, religion doesn't "create man." Actually, I should clarify before I get mobbed by fundamentalists and athiests alike...Man creates the rituals, and usually the mythology surrounding the worship of the deity that they believe created them.

In many of my papers in seminary and in ministry I wrote the "god created man, but man created God." The unamed, unknowable supreme source created man, then man in turn gave it a name, God, Allah, *******, The great Creator, etc, ad nauseum....and then we created "religion" to honor it....

Meaning that most of the "mythos" no matter which religion are a result of learned, passionate humans trying to come to terms with the "unexplainable."

A rock crashes on the earth a million years ago..."Primitive" Man doesn't understand "outer space" or asteroids...and therefore tries to come to terms with this thing out of his (and his culture's ) understanding...So he mythologizes it. Explains that the rock came from "god" or whatever supernatural being he or his culture believed in...if they didn't have one then, as soon as this paradigm shifted, they created one.

Jesus casts out "demons" in the New Testament...2000 years ago no one knew anything about mental illness, schizophrenia and mpd in particular...So it was explained in the language of the day....

Same thing with, like I mentioned earlier, the "use" of Judaic Religious mythology/law to prevent people from dying from eating undercooked pork and shellfish. People were getting sik and dying, so the religious l leaders of the day then decreed it was "un holy" to eat of it...

In order for there to be a ritual, or a mythos, or a religion about something, that something has to exist first (except in the case of the church of Scientology, the Church of All Worlds, or Discordianism, all based on Sci-fi novels.)

So in order for a ritualistic/spiritual belief about fermentation (whether it was, beer, wine, or mead) fermentation had to exist first...Intentionally created or otherwise...

I still believe in the notion of spontaneous first fermentation, no matter if it was grain, honey or grape juice...Since we didn't KNOW that if we added yeast to wort or must, it had to have been observed occurring in nature....and some idiot actually drank it...(Then it made him see the face of God. )

This to me lends more credence to the ritualistic nature of brewing or meadmaking....it was something, that to the early people happened "invisibly" (I would say "spontaneously" in nature...wild yeast falling onto whatever sugar/water was first available.) Since it was invisible it had to have come from the gods/god/grand creator of the universe.

BTW, when I use the term "Mythology" or "myth" in my work, I'm not referring to the idea of "A fiction or half-truth," rather I use it as the "stories we tell to define a particular thing, or idea." In my definition then, the creation myths of a particular culture are just as valid as the "creation myths" of Islamo/judeo/christianity... To me the bible is a collection of myths (stories) about Christianity as is the bhagavad gita is a collection of stories about the hindu pantheon.

As to the soap thing...well I wrote something in my first blog about it...that beer couldn't have been that foul initially (without modern sanitization methods) to have survived so long....so I posited that even our most basic human sanitization methods like simply bathing regularly put us leagues ahead of the early brewers, who didn't understand about germs....So I guess one would argue that soap and water is better that what the ancient had, and is better than nothing....but starsan and iodophor is better than soap and water....

Sanitation was basically boiling. Beers were brewed, fermented and drunk. New beer meant the fermentation was done and not much more. If they went sour, you drank sour beer and/or mixed it with new beer. The sour cut the green taste.

Side note on ciders: That's how Johnny Appleseed made his money, selling trees for making cider and to a lesser extent baking. Eating apples weren't common. You crushed the apples, made cider & fed the pulp to the pigs.

Revvy said:

American beer snobs a hundred years from now will be paying big bucks for this, and sticking table legs in their carboys!"

Click to expand...

I think I'll go put a gym sock in my primary. the fact is that you're probably right. good thing i'll be gone by then. :rockin:

eschatz said:

I think I'll go put a gym sock in my primary. the fact is that you're probably right. good thing i'll be gone by then. :rockin:

Click to expand...

Well, I curently make my living selling cheese, the best (and most expensive) of which smells similair to gym socks, bad breath, rotting broccoli, and other such things.

No shame here. I hate cryo-vaced cheese. It tastes like plastic. Just like Miller--Pabst--Bud tastes like piss. I like my cheese to have natural rinds. Yeah, they are full of molds, bacteria, yeasts, and stuff that modern science doesn't even completely understand. But that's what makes them wonderful. They don't taste like plastic.

If craft brewing is going survive, its going to need to get past this barrier. Its too bad that many you anal-retnentive techno-science-fanatics folks don't see this.

I don't fear the microbes, and I don't depend on hops. I'd rather understand them than fight them. And I'd rather use fresh herbs in my beer than stuff from half a world away, if possible.

I don't mean to insult anyone. I just don't understand the irrational dogmas that surround home-brewing. They are counter-productive and harmful to the movement.

brewmonger said:

I don't think it needs to be a competition or debate over which came first. I have fermented all of the above (mead, wine, cider, & beer) and can appreciate the qualities of each one, though beer is my preffered drink of choice.

However, we have to be honest with ourselves. Brewing beer is a very complicated process. Making mead, wine, and cider, on the other hand, is considerably simpler. The sugars in honey and fruit are freely available and don't have to be converted and extracted through a long and labor-intensive malting, grinding, mashing, and lautering process.

The anthropological evidence for the brewing of mead dates back at least 40,000 years, while we know that barley was first domesticated in the fertile crescent roughly 10,000 years ago.

I'm not trying to knock beer. I like it.

Hey so back to the original topic of the thread...

Do you think that perhaps sulfur was used for santition in beer-brewing vessels, much as it has been used to kill off spoiling bacteria in winemaking for centuries?

Click to expand...

My guess is that it's possible/probable that apple cider would be the first "fermentable" drink. After all, you mash up the apples, strain out the juice, and the wild yeast on the apple skin will make cider. With mead, you're dealing with pissed off bees who don't like you attacking their homes. My guess is that the first alcohol derived from storing whatever into the winter months, cracking a cask or clay pot open, taking a swill, and getting your buzz on. Hence the long association between booze and staying warm!

As far as sulfur was concerned, it's possible, but what information I've read indicates that most ales (beer without hops in it, as late as the early 1600s in England) were made quick and dirty, in a big-ass cook pot, was boiled to help the mash, and was poured into an oaken barrel to age. This barrel might have been burned on the inside to char for either color or flavor, or even to help sanitize/clean things up, or it might have been left natural. Wood itself is rather a special material as it does have slight antibacterial properties, which is why wooden cutting boards are still considered superior to the artificial ones.

What I have also found conflicting reports on are aging times. I've read that beer was brewed in the spring, casked, and left to age for a year, resulting in a lot of skunked and undrinkable beer. I've also read that it was brewed and drank quickly, with very little carbonation either way due to the nature of wooden casks at the time.

I've also read that you'd sparge your mash repeatedly, and used the second runnings and so on to make smallbeers, moreso to spread out the liklihood of making a drinkable beer.

Even as early as Hippocrates infections were understood to be related to cleanliness and "sanitation". Soap was used for millennia. I imagine a good scrubbing with soap made from lye and rendered animal fat, and possibly even a scrubbing with lye itself would do a pretty hardcore job cleaning. I'm not sure what *does* survive in lye and water.

The techniques for brewing varied depending on the region and the time period. So all the techniques you mentioned were probably used at one time or another in some region.

One of the reasons I bring up the sanitation issue is because I share a concern with the guy from the thread I linked to above.

I don't know if I like the idea of having Star Sans in my beer. While I recognize the need for good sanitation, I am also very skeptical of industrial chemicals and modern "scientific" dogmas.

I recently purchased some Star Sans, but I don't know how to use it correctly or what its benefits and detractions are.

brewmonger said:

I don't know if I like the idea of having Star Sans in my beer. While I recognize the need for good sanitation, I am also very skeptical of industrial chemicals and modern "scientific" dogmas.

I recently purchased some Star Sans, but I don't know how to use it correctly or what its benefits and detractions are.

Click to expand...

Well if that's what you are looking for here's some info for you to help you make a decision as to whether or not you want to use starsan, iodophor or something else....I was nicknamed the "yoda of sanitzation" on here for awhile, because I had a lot of info on this stuff..primarily because I did a lot or research before deciding what to use...

First stuff comes from the "horses mouth" I-views on Basicbrewing radio.

March 29, 2007 - Sanitizing with Bleach and Star San
Charlie Talley from Five Star Chemicals tells us best practices in using household bleach and Star San in sanitizing equipment.
http://media.libsyn.com/media/basicbrewing/bbr03-29-07.mp3


March 22, 2007 - Sanitizing with Iodophor
Murl Landman of National Chemicals talks to us about sanitization techniques in general and using Iodophor specifically.
http://media.libsyn.com/media/basicbrewing/bbr03-22-07.mp3

Click to expand...

A good discussion on santizers in general https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=54932

This is the best resource I have found on food safety and sanitization, Basic Elements of Equipment Cleaning and Sanitizing in Food Processing and Handling Operations, University of Florida.


Although I don't use it, starsan is one of the best and most benign sanitizers around for brewing, any left in the carboy or bottles is converted to yeastfood...It's also good for septic fields, were you to dump it there.....Several people, including CHarlie Talley, and at least one member of this forum, has even drank the dilluted solution.

So, use the info and make up your mind as to what works for you, and down the road, if you have a "sanitation failure" then try something else...I use bulk dairy Iodphor sanitizer from the local farm and feed, I get it for 20 bucks a gallon...but if i ever have a problem, then I'll switch to something else...probably starsan...since Iodophors and starsan are the two best ones for brewing out there, and the only 2 so far, that are FDA certified as sanitizers.

Did you guys hear about the drunk moose that was in the news? Apparently it ate some yeasted apples and bit some girl.

Big10Seaner said:

Did you guys hear about the drunk moose that was in the news? Apparently it ate some yeasted apples and bit some girl.

Click to expand...

No, but that happens alot....Any animal that will eat fallen fruit, runs that risk...heck, even some insects....When I was a kid we had pear trees, and one year we were gone on vacation and when we got back a ton of them had fallen in a storm and rotted/fermented on the ground...we had a ton of drunk yellowjackets buzzing erratically around them...and a few wasps..My one and only wasp bite came that day...*shudder*

brewmonger said:

The techniques for brewing varied depending on the region and the time period. So all the techniques you mentioned were probably used at one time or another in some region.

One of the reasons I bring up the sanitation issue is because I share a concern with the guy from the thread I linked to above.

I don't know if I like the idea of having Star Sans in my beer. While I recognize the need for good sanitation, I am also very skeptical of industrial chemicals and modern "scientific" dogmas.

I recently purchased some Star Sans, but I don't know how to use it correctly or what its benefits and detractions are.

Click to expand...

The FDA has extremely stringent requirements on food-grade sanitation products, safety included. In fact, Saniclean, which is basically a non-foaming starsan, doesn't even qualify as a food-grade sanitation solution, but is essentially the same stuff as starsan. As has been said before multiple times, people have drank diluted starsan without issue, me included. The amount I consumed was far, far higher than the residue that finds it's way into beer. Let's break it down. One ounce of starsan to 5 gallons of water, or 1 ounce to 640 ounces of water. That makes it .2% solution. I *might* have a total of what, 2 ounces of solution, including foam (and I'm being overly generous here) that makes it's way into the beer, which is, once I'm done with the calculator, .003 of an ounce of pure starsan in your *entire* 5 gallon batch of beer. If you're bottling into 12 ounce bottles, thats... 6 times 10^-5 ounces of starsan concentrate in each bottle. That works out to what, .000006 ounces or so. We're talking trace amounts here, and we're not even considering that once inert, starsan is eaten up by yeast anyway. However this is "scientific dogma" so you may want to discount everything I've just said. You probably consume more toxins though by an order of magnitude with a hamburger from McDonalds.

If you're really *that* paranoid, just rinse out the containers, though this defeats the concept of no-rinse sanitation. You'll have to anyway if you want to use bleach. If you're paranoid about using bleach, you'll probably have to stop drinking your local water supply anyway, so you've got bigger problems on your hands.

At this point, you have a few options. Use bleach. Use a sanitizer you feel "okay" using (though this is doubtful, they're all similar). Autoclave heat is an option. Or you could do what everyone else used to do for centuries, and just except frequent, ruined beer as a part of life.

Big10Seaner said:

Did you guys hear about the drunk moose that was in the news? Apparently it ate some yeasted apples and bit some girl.

Click to expand...

The people responsible for the credits have just been sacked.

/God I hope this isn't obscure.

TheFlatline said:

The people responsible for the credits have just been sacked.

/God I hope this isn't obscure.

Click to expand...

I got it. "A moose bit my sister once". :cross:

TheFlatline said:

The FDA has extremely stringent requirements on food-grade sanitation products, safety included.

Click to expand...

Well, see I don't really trust the FDA's opinion for a variety of reasons.

i.e. While they allow Genetically Modified, toxic, carcinogenic and just generally unhealthy stuff into our food supply, they also ban wholesome healthy foods like raw milk, raw almonds, and require the irradiation of otherwise healthy food in the name of "food saftey."

In fact, Saniclean, which is basically a non-foaming starsan, doesn't even qualify as a food-grade sanitation solution, but is essentially the same stuff as starsan. As has been said before multiple times, people have drank diluted starsan without issue, me included.

Click to expand...

People have consumed pharmicuticals, GMO's, MSG, and transfats without issue, me included. That doesn't mean that I think they are safe, even though the FDA does.

The amount I consumed was far, far higher than the residue that finds it's way into beer. Let's break it down. One ounce of starsan to 5 gallons of water, or 1 ounce to 640 ounces of water. That makes it .2% solution. I *might* have a total of what, 2 ounces of solution, including foam (and I'm being overly generous here) that makes it's way into the beer, which is, once I'm done with the calculator, .003 of an ounce of pure starsan in your *entire* 5 gallon batch of beer. If you're bottling into 12 ounce bottles, thats... 6 times 10^-5 ounces of starsan concentrate in each bottle. That works out to what, .000006 ounces or so. We're talking trace amounts here, and we're not even considering that once inert, starsan is eaten up by yeast anyway. However this is "scientific dogma" so you may want to discount everything I've just said. You probably consume more toxins though by an order of magnitude with a hamburger from McDonalds.

Click to expand...

That is exactly one of the reasons that I never eat at McDonalds.

If you're really *that* paranoid, just rinse out the containers, though this defeats the concept of no-rinse sanitation. You'll have to anyway if you want to use bleach. If you're paranoid about using bleach, you'll probably have to stop drinking your local water supply anyway, so you've got bigger problems on your hands.

Click to expand...

I'm not paranoid. I'm more a skeptic. Simply because 99% of the homebrewing community accepts these santizers doesn't mean that they're right.

I know that there is chlorine in my local water supply because I can taste it in the tap water, and which is why I use a water filter. Its more an issue that I just don't like the taste of unfiltered tap water. Its nasty.

I really am looking for more understanding of exactly what StarSans is, besides just the scientific names of the compounds that it contains. (I'm not a chemist.) How is it actually yeast food, because this just strikes me as propoganda? In other words, if I add a few drops of starsans to a stuck fermentation, will it help it along?

At this point, you have a few options. Use bleach. Use a sanitizer you feel "okay" using (though this is doubtful, they're all similar). Autoclave heat is an option. Or you could do what everyone else used to do for centuries, and just except frequent, ruined beer as a part of life.

Click to expand...

Again, I don't think that frequent ruined beer was a part of life in the old days, or else beer brewing simply would not have been a practical or desirable way of making alcohol, in comparison to mead, cider, or wine. I think they learned techniques to deal with the problems and resources they had. i.e. old-time sanition techniques discussed earlier in the thread, and adding honey to the wort because of its inherint anti-septic qualities and the increased final stregnth of the brew. Wormword is also a powerful anti-septic herb. (It derives its name from its ability to expel worms from your digestive tract)

I have been using heat (boiling water) to sanitize my equipment for the last few brews, and haven't had any infections. Before that I was using one-step, and had some problems. Of course the problem with heat sanitizing is that its rather laborious and takes quite a bit of time and fuel, which I'd rather not waste if at all possible.

I'm also curious about oxyclean. What does it contain and how does it work? How should it be used for brewing? Where does one go about obtaining Oxyclean? Would it simply be found at a local grocery store or hardware store?

brewmonger said:

I'm also curious about oxyclean. Where does one go about obtaining that? Would it simply be found at a local grocery store or hardware store?

Click to expand...

Oxyclean is available all over the place, most big box stores these days also have their own generic brands. If you are a member of costco or sam's club they have big boxes of oxyclean (I believe it was 10 or 15 pounds) for $14.95.

Oxyclean is simply sodium percarbonate.

I bought some generic from Dollar General yesterday for $3.50 for 5 pounds. It is not as noticeably fizzy as oxyclean, but it did the job getting a thick ring of krausen off the top of a plastic carboy, so I'm not complaining.

I have herad from other people that the walmart generic works great.

Revvy said:

Oxyclean is available all over the place, most big box stores these days also have their own generic brands. If you are a member of costco or sam's club they have big boxes of oxyclean (I believe it was 10 or 15 pounds) for $14.95.

Oxyclean is simply sodium percarbonate.

Click to expand...

Is it any different from one-step?

I bought some generic from Dollar General yesterday for $3.50 for 5 pounds. It is not as noticeably fizzy as oxyclean, but it did the job getting a thick ring of krausen off the top of a plastic carboy, so I'm not complaining.

I have herad from other people that the walmart generic works great.

Click to expand...

Is it effective as a santizing/sterilizing agent? How long is contact required?

Does it require rinsing -- in other words would it create off-flavors in the beer if it got into it, as chlorine bleach supposedly does? Does it leave behind a protective coat as Star Sans supposedly does?

brewmonger said:

Is it any different from one-step?



Is it effective as a santizing/sterilizing agent? How long is contact required?

Does it require rinsing -- in other words would it create off-flavors in the beer if it got into it, as chlorine bleach supposedly does? Does it leave behind a protective coat as Star Sans supposedly does?

Click to expand...

It's used as a cleaner not a sanitizer (and technically onestep is not a sanitizer either.)

It is like PBW, professional brewery wash, only much cheaper. The fizziness really helps break stuck on gunk free in every aspect of brewing, it's really good for dried krauzen rings in fermenters, and a soak anywhere from 2 hours to overrnight will remove most labels from bottles....

You have to rinse thoroughly, since it is "soap" afterall.

starsan doesn't leave a coating, nor does it leave off flavors at the proper concentration, any remainder (which like iodophor there should be remainder since they are both "wet contact" sanitizers) becomes yeast food.

If starsan or iodophor were "bad" for brewing (because they affected the taste of the beer, for instance) then why would the majority of the brewers on this site, and professional craft brewers use and recommend both of them so highly?

Damn, this thread has really "evolved" over the last few days. In regards to the safety of Star san, McDonalds, genetically modified whatever, I believe faithfully in the logic "That which does not kill me, will only make me stronger". Seriously, I'm pretty anal when it comes to cross-contamination/food handling while cooking and when sanitizing to make beer, but I'm not going to worry about the miniscule risk coming from the sanitizer I might be using at the time.

How can you worry about the small risk from brewing sanitizer and not be concerned about the alcohol in your 9% imperial IPA?

Revvy said:

It's used as a cleaner not a sanitizer (and technically onestep is not a sanitizer either.)

It is like PBW, professional brewery wash, only much cheaper. The fizziness really helps break stuck on gunk free in every aspect of brewing, it's really good for dried krauzen rings in fermenters, and a soak anywhere from 2 hours to overrnight will remove most labels from bottles....

Click to expand...

Wow! That is good to know. I will try it out on my carboy next time. Sounds much better than using a bottle brush.

Q: Is it corrosive to metals?

You have to rinse thoroughly, since it is "soap" afterall.

Click to expand...

Its a "soap." Does that mean it is the saponified salt of a fatty acid? Is so, what fatty acid is it derived from, and what is the process for producing it?

starsan doesn't leave a coating, nor does it leave off flavors at the proper concentration, any remainder (which like iodophor there should be remainder since they are both "wet contact" sanitizers) becomes yeast food.

If starsan or iodophor were "bad" for brewing (because they affected the taste of the beer, for instance) then why would the majority of the brewers on this site, and professional craft brewers use and recommend both of them so highly?

Click to expand...

Again, the whole "yeast food" thing strikes me as propoganda. I'm not denying that it might be true in certain circumstances, but the fact that 99.999999% of craft/homebrewers approve of it does not impress me. If anything, it makes me more spetical. But I am willing to withhold judgement until I know the facts.