"Nothing that can hurt you can live in beer"- Confirmed!

[HeadyKilowatt]

We've all heard it and read it, many of us have said it ourselves- your infected beer will not hurt you, as nothing pathogenic can live in beer. But I have never seen any hard data to back this up.

Which is why I was exited to see a paper being given at a regional archaeology conference this weekend in which the researcher was investigating the old hypothesis that fermentation was used historically, and dating back to ancient times, to make dirty or stagnant water potable.

The researcher made two one-gallon batches of unhopped wort with an OG of 1.054, pitched an appropriate amount of yeast, and infected one batch with E. coli. Fermentation proceeded for six days. After fermentation, he conducted two tests (which I can't really describe- I'm an archaeologist, not a biologist) for the presence of the pathogen in the infected batch. Both tests came back negative. Fermentation had killed the E. coli, or at least prevented it from establishing itself and ceased its reproductive cycle such that the colony died.

I went for a beer with the researcher later and talked about the experiment and knocked around ideas for what was happening here (is it the alcohol that "killed" the pathogen or something else in the fermentation process? and did it really "kill" it, or just out-compete it?) and ideas for future experiments that could refine the data and allow for a clearer picture of what's happening.

Anyway, even though the results are preliminary, I'm excited to see some hard data backing up the idea that nothing harmful can survive in beer (not that I ever doubted it, but it is cool to see it backed up with experimental data). I encouraged the researcher to publish his data and get it into the brewing literature in addition to the archaeology/history world, so hopefully we can all see some of this info soon. Also, if anyone is aware of any other experiments on this phenomenon that have been conducted, please post them here and I can pass them on to the fellow doing the research.

Keep on homebrewing- you never know what's in the water!

 

[BxBrewer]

Look for a video called "How beer saved the world". Cool stuff.

 

[MrNatural]

Interesting. Was a taste test also conducted?

 

[Sheldon]

Thanks for the info. It is reassuring to find there is some research to back what we have long suspected!

 

[HeadyKilowatt]

Interesting. Was a taste test also conducted?

No, he wanted to do a taste test, but apparently the folks in the biology lab he was using get all weird about people drinking stuff that's been used in pathogen experiments.

 

[homebrewdad]

Over/under on the number of posts it takes for someone to point out that, hypothetically, you could create a wort starter, infect it with botulism, then can it incorrectly, thus creating a possible beerborne pathogen (not that such has ever been observed)?

Or the fact that beer doesn't kill norovirus, so if you crap in a bottle, you could potentially contract it.


Real world: beer is perfectly safe. But somebody invariably points out that you can't say its statistically impossible, since lab conditions can create a few situations where one might get sick.

 

[Revvy]

Thanks for the info. It is reassuring to find there is some research to back what we have long suspected!

There's been a TON of research backing it up, I know, I've posted a lot of it on here through the years....

Good stuff HeadyKilowatt

 

[Revvy]

Over/under on the number of posts it takes for someone to point out that, hypothetically, you could create a wort starter, infect it with botulism, then can it incorrectly, thus creating a possible beerborne pathogen (not that such has ever been observed)?

Or the fact that beer doesn't kill norovirus, so if you crap in a bottle, you could potentially contract it.


Real world: beer is perfectly safe. But somebody invariably points out that you can't say its statistically impossible, since lab conditions can create a few situations where one might get sick.

You know it......it happens in every thread.

 

[HeadyKilowatt]

Real world: beer is perfectly safe. But somebody invariably points out that you can't say its statistically impossible, since lab conditions can create a few situations where one might get sick.

Exactly. And that's the point of the research- that under "normal" conditions, nothing harmful is going to infect beer, and that fermentation can in fact make water of suspect quality potable. It's certainly possible that you could make a beer with a harmful pathogen, but you'd pretty much have to try to do it- it's very unlikely to happen through normal brewing processes and fermentation conditions.

 

[stinkmuis]

some more proof

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f14/found-beer-treasure-394301/

 

[homebrewdad]

Exactly. And that's the point of the research- that under "normal" conditions, nothing harmful is going to infect beer, and that fermentation can in fact make water of suspect quality potable. It's certainly possible that you could make a beer with a harmful pathogen, but you'd pretty much have to try to do it- it's very unlikely to happen through normal brewing processes and fermentation conditions.

Yep. But we've seen it here time after time in these kinds of threads (I'm surprised that it hasn't happened yet), and I see it all the time on the homebrewing subreddit. It's possible under unusual/negligent/borderline criminal circumstances to possibly let some strands of bad microbes live in beer, and even though no one yet has ever managed to provide me the single documented case that I ask for, it doesn't stop them form harping on the remote possibilities.


My three homebrewing forum pet peeves (in no particular order):


1. Sure, you say that beer is safe to drink, but laboratory tests have proven that if you defecate in the bottle while being infected with norovirus, the virus will not die from the alcohol. If you throw botulism in a wort starter, then can that starter at too low of a temperature/too low of pressure, the botulism won't die and could kill you. Also, studies have shown that if you filter your break material out by using three day old roadkill, you could potentially pick up pathogens if you drink the beer very young.

2. OMG don't post about using a glass carboy! One day, when you least expect it, that glass will cut you, man... it will cut you good... but only after forcing you at knifepoint to empty your ATM. Think of the new brewers who could be swayed into harm by you posting mentions/photos of a glass carboy, YOU MONSTER!!!

3. Having problems with your bottling process? Just keg your beer!

 

[BigJack]

"Hurt" is a relative term. I recall an infected batch in my early brewing days that kept me near the porcelain throne for a day or two.

 

[jmendez29]

Yeah, but drinking beer in California will give you cancer, just like everything else. I feel sorry for all you guys out in California....

 

[wickman6]

Look for a video called "How beer saved the world". Cool stuff.

Yeah, that is a cool video. I watched it with my kids, so they have a better understanding of what beer actually is and how it has historical significance.

 

[sweetcell]

The researcher made two one-gallon batches of unhopped wort with an OG of 1.054, pitched an appropriate amount of yeast, and infected one batch with E. coli (...) Fermentation had killed the E. coli

Anyway, even though the results are preliminary, I'm excited to see some hard data backing up the idea that nothing harmful can survive in beer (not that I ever doubted it, but it is cool to see it backed up with experimental data).

ok, fine, i'll be the one to annoyingly nit-pick: this experiment proved that e. coli can't survive fermentation. while e. coli is incredibly common, we can't take this as universal proof that nothing harmful can survive in beer.

flame-proof undies are cinched tight...

 

[high5apparatus]

But somebody invariably points out that you can't say its statistically impossible, since lab conditions can create a few situations where one might get sick.

Or as was said in Zero Dark Thirty: "Fine, 95% since certainty freaks you guys out, but it's 100%."

 

[KegWrangler]

Not to put a damper on the original experiment, but e-coli only reproduces inside a host organism (think mammal or bird). It's used to indicate the presence of fecal contamination specifically because it won't reproduce in the environment. Also, most strains of e-coli are not "harmful". So this might not have been the best of experiments for our purposes.

Besides, an infection at the beginning of a ferment could create toxic by-products that last well after the organisms themselves die a horrible, drunken death.

Then again, when was the last time you heard of someone being poisoned by a bad beer? Shellfish, over-easy eggs, and under washed lettuce on the other hand...

 

[high5apparatus]

1. Sure, you say that beer is safe to drink, but laboratory tests have proven that if you defecate in the bottle while being infected with norovirus, the virus will not die from the alcohol. If you throw botulism in a wort starter, then can that starter at too low of a temperature/too low of pressure, the botulism won't die and could kill you. Also, studies have shown that if you filter your break material out by using three day old roadkill, you could potentially pick up pathogens if you drink the beer very young.

CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!

I'm going to take a crap in a bottle. What else do I need?

 

[Cathedral]

Exactly. And that's the point of the research- that under "normal" conditions, nothing harmful is going to infect beer, and that fermentation can in fact make water of suspect quality potable. It's certainly possible that you could make a beer with a harmful pathogen, but you'd pretty much have to try to do it- it's very unlikely to happen through normal brewing processes and fermentation conditions.

Unfortunately "normal" is completely subjective. I, for one, like crapping in my beer and feel it is normal to do so. I can't say why, because it just makes the beer taste like sh**.

Oh! oh! What if you're lactose intolerant and you have a beer with lactose in it?! That can hurt you! And lactose intolerance isn't so statistically improbable as to be three sigmas out from the bell curve and be rare! Gotcha! OP is lies.

 

[MrNatural]

CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!

I'm going to take a crap in a bottle. What else do I need?

Pics

 

[progmac]

there are at least three people on the board with that avatar of the guy with the long white beard and big shoes wearing a robe and taking large happy steps. i feel like he may be interested in a handshake. what gives?

 

[fuzzy2133]

No, he wanted to do a taste test, but apparently the folks in the biology lab he was using get all weird about people drinking stuff that's been used in pathogen experiments.

Two things came to my mind on this.

1 - They only tested for E.coli: Quick fast results

2 - Could E.coli have morphed into a strain they can not detect or something new never seen.

Murphys law; you would find the 0.01% that survived. :smack:

Thats enough micro biology for me to day.

RDWDHAHB

 

[MrNatural]

there are at least three people on the board with that avatar of the guy with the long white beard and big shoes wearing a robe and taking large happy steps. i feel like he may be interested in a handshake. what gives?

Dude is Mr Natural. Comic book figure from the 70's by Robert Crumb. That's why I have it, can't speak for the other guys.

 

[Cathedral]

there are at least three people on the board with that avatar of the guy with the long white beard and big shoes wearing a robe and taking large happy steps. i feel like he may be interested in a handshake. what gives?

Dude is Mr Natural. Comic book figure from the 70's by Robert Crumb. That's why I have it, can't speak for the other guys.

"uniondr" is another guy with that avatar.

 

[Ryush806]

Not to put a damper on the original experiment, but e-coli only reproduces inside a host organism (think mammal or bird). It's used to indicate the presence of fecal contamination specifically because it won't reproduce in the environment. Also, most strains of e-coli are not "harmful". So this might not have been the best of experiments for our purposes.

This is incorrect. A friend of mine is doing very cutting edge research involving what she has deemed "gene shotgunning" (as opposed to splicing). She makes batches of E. coli in much the same way we make starters.

 

[progmac]

"uniondr" is another guy with that avatar.

also the OP, "HeadyKilowatt"

that must have been a hell of a comic!

 

[homebrewdad]

CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!

I'm going to take a crap in a bottle. What else do I need?

You need an active norovirus infection (or, I suppose, a similar strain of nasty that is spread via fecal matter). After all, as dark corners of the internet could tell you, ingestion of fecal matter is not necessarily harmful in and of itself.

Dear God, I can't belive that I went there...

 

[TheLastDamnBatch]

"Nothing that can hurt you can live in beer"- Confirmed!

Mycotoxins can and do survive in beer, though they are not found at levels that are considered harmful because loads of barley brought from the farm to the maltster are screened for excess levels of these fungi and molds. Some places won't even feed cattle with reject loads of this stuff (it will kill them).

That's why such low levels of mycotoxins are found in beer today, of course it wasn't always that way.

White Labs will analyze your beer and tell you the levels of specific mycotoxins.

So it's not just the fermentation or brewing process that renders beer safe, it's the entire process from the farmer to the maltster to the brewer combined with the scientific knowledge gained over centuries (a lot of it coming from the larger beer companies).

We as homebrewers benefit from this knowledge, the modern luxurious malts it produces and the modern farming methods used to grow relatively disease free barley.

 

[Revvy]

Oh god, not the old Mycotoxins scare again...seems whenever this one comes up someone has to throw in that one....it's been pretty much shot down on here already.

We've covered everything even with some citations in this thread. Dangers of Homebrewing

And some more info here as well.

It covers all the bugaboos that new brewers wanna fear, botulism, mycotoxins, e-coli, zombies....

One of our resident brainiacs posted this the LAST TIME the bugaboo reared it's scare mongering head.

The upshot is, I would not worry about this as far as malted barley is concerned. The malsters are all up on this and every truckload of grain is being tested. Over the limit, and the maltsters won't buy it. Then if is sold as animal feed - as long as that higher limit is not exceded. The toxins are less of a problem for cows, and even less for chickens.

The mycotoxins are fairly stable and some ethanol plants have run into problems disposing of the used distillers grain (largely corn) as their processing results in an accumulation of the mycotoxins in the spent grain so there have been some issues with using that as animal feed. We know a fair bit about the fungus on wheat as we humans eat that directly. We know much less about it in corn and other crops. We need to do more research (and $$ to do said research)

The bottom line is, you can choose to freak out about it OR you can realize that there are billions of folks drinking beer on this planet, and millions of them brewing their own, AND we're all still alive, aren't we?

 

[homebrewdad]

Oh god, not the old Mycotoxins scare again...seems whenever this one comes up someone has to throw in that one....it's been pretty much shot down on here already.

We've covered everything even with some citations in this thread. Dangers of Homebrewing

And some more info here as well.

It covers all the bugaboos that new brewers wanna fear, botulism, mycotoxins, e-coli, zombies....

One of our resident brainiacs posted this the LAST TIME the bugaboo reared it's scare mongering head.




The bottom line is, you can choose to freak out about it OR you can realize that there are billions of folks drinking beer on this planet, and millions of them brewing their own, AND we're all still alive, aren't we?

Yes, Revvy, but here we go again... IF a truckload was horribly infected with mycotoxins, IF it wasn't tested, IF you got enough of that grain, it could conceivably make you sick.

Or something.