Stop drinking these beers

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I've seen something very similar by Food Babe.

I posted a few questions, but never got a reply. The one that comes to mind was why icing glass (spl?) was so terrible. Sure it doesn't sound good knowing what it is, but that doesn't make it terrible and something to avoid. Maybe it's a PETA thing.
 
I have never liked Budweiser, just one will give me an instant headache, but greenpeace knocking it almost makes me want to drink one.

--Mark F.--
 
Greenpeace, huh? I just skimmed through it to see if it was the same article I had seen a couple of months ago.

I certainly have a hard time understanding those people who put many others at risk for their beliefs or hypocritically use diesel to protest oil. You cannot perform illegal acts to support your righteous causes either.

But I greatly dislike AB/In Bevs business practices so I'd not buy a Bud anyway.

While at a local Beers, BBQ, and burgers event, which ran out of Union Jack and Sierra Nevada within maybe 45 mins, I ended up drinking red wine as I couldn't drink Bud.
 
I generally don't drink or promote the drinking of those beers, but I find these attacks on their ingredients a little silly.
I saw the other article as well, and there are some potentially good arguments made, which may or may not be debatable. I'm not educated in these ingredients enough to debate their health risks, but it appears the writers of these articles aren't either.
A lot of these things are listed as harmful, and must avoid, but with no explanation why. Isinglass in particular, as someone else mentioned. Other than the gross factor of drinking fish bladder, what exactly are the potential health risks? Not to mention, it is used as clarity agent which settles out and likely doesn't even make it to the bottle.
...But whatever, as long as they are just attacking these big commercial breweries they can make all the blanket statements they want. Maybe it'll persuade more people to try craft beer.
 
I generally don't drink or promote the drinking of those beers, but I find these attacks on their ingredients a little silly.
I saw the other article as well, and there are some potentially good arguments made, which may or may not be debatable. I'm not educated in these ingredients enough to debate their health risks, but it appears the writers of these articles aren't either.
A lot of these things are listed as harmful, and must avoid, but with no explanation why. Isinglass in particular, as someone else mentioned. Other than the gross factor of drinking fish bladder, what exactly are the potential health risks? Not to mention, it is used as clarity agent which settles out and likely doesn't even make it to the bottle.
...But whatever, as long as they are just attacking these big commercial breweries they can make all the blanket statements they want. Maybe it'll persuade more people to try craft beer.


Isinglass is made from the "swim bladder" not the "urinary bladder"
 
They mean the swim bladder. That's what they're referring to. And carrageenan is nothing but irish moss. Yet another reason the writer is retarded. Not allowed to drink any clarified beer apparently.
 
Just another fearmonger trying to scare people. Most of these would go the way of the Dodo if people wouldn't continue to bring them up.
 
Isinglass is made from the "swim bladder" not the "urinary bladder"

The article says "fish bladder." I know isinglass is the swim bladder, but does the average (non-homebrewer) reader know this? Not likely. I never even heard of a swim bladder before I started brewing.
 
Don't tell the author about golden promise variety malt. That product was created by mutating barley under ionizing radiation and selecting the best mutants based on a variety of resulting qualities. The beers in question are using GMO adjuncts, but the author fails to realize is that most barely sold to maltsers has been either cross bred, back crossed or subjected to other intensive genetic manipulations in order to provide a higher crop yield at a lower price.

I'm pretty sure Sierra Nevada and Dogfish Head both pasteurize and filter their products for both microbiological and colloidal stability, contrary to what was suggested in the article.


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew
 
Back
Top