A pint of Guinness. Strong opinions.

BeerNut

BaZmO* wrote: »

Why aren't all these additives/chemicals listed on the label?

I suspect no other reason than it would discourage people from buying the product. Yes, really

The European Beer Consumers' Union is campaigning for mandatory ingredients listing throughout the EU, which I think is a fantastic idea. But as groups of lobbyists go, Drinkers vs. Big Booze is David vs. Goliath.

Boycotting anything that doesn't list ingredients might be a good place to start.

tba

I get hangovers from eating to many sweets or processed foods, so I would say that the additives can't be helping.

guildofevil

You can have a bad reaction to any substance, be it naturally occurring or an artificial additive. It all depends on your own body and how it deals with certain substances. Some people are allergic to peanuts, others to monosodium glutamate. The fact that monosodium glutamate us an added chemical does not mean that additives cause a bad reaction, as the peanut allergy sufferer can eat stuff with monosodium glutamate in it without problem, but peanut oil, a natural substance, will cause a bad reaction.

It is possible that there is, for example, a foaming agent used in many industrial lagers, which gives some people a headache if they drink a lot of it. That could be why they get nasty hangovers when they drink these lagers. It is equally possible that those same industrial lagers use a similar yeast strain, which produces a chemical which is causing the reaction. That would be a naturally occurring chemical giving you a headache.

If beer ingredients had to be listed on the label, you might actually be able to figure out which additive is causing the problem, if it is indeed an additive. You might notice that if drink beers containing Hydroxyalkyl carboxymethyl cellulose you get a headache. That would mean you could avoid those beers in future. If however you have a bad reaction to isoamyl acetate, you will still be in the dark, as that particular chemical is added to the beer by the yeast, not the brewer.

Never forget that the most common hangover causing chemical is Alcohol and everyone is susceptible to it to one degree or another.

the beer revolu

I'm still convinced that there are a lot more factors than alcohol involved in a hangover (but, yes, alcohol is the main factor in every case).

UK Stella, Paulaner and Coors have been the worst offenders in my case.
I wonder if there's anything common in all of them - apart from alcohol?

tba

I'm well aware that alcohol gives you a hangover but I try not to get to that stage, but that's not what I'm taking about. Might I start by saying that I agree, and as I said, if I may quote myself.

tba wrote: »

Guinness is the best of a bad crop. I say that because I still think they use very little additives in it and it negates the morning over chemical head.

Now I don't test it in a multi spectrometer so I can only guess. I never said that I got a hangover, I get a "chemical head" (this happens to me too with processed foods, in particular ones with high levels of preservatives in them, jelly sweets are the worst).

I initially thought it was the alcohol but that would mean that all drinks would get me. This is not the case, pure vodka is fine, as an example, as are craft beers, and Guinness.

I thought it was the larger too until recently when I had a similar reaction to a red wine. As such I still stand by the statement that when in a bad spot Guinness is the safer option for me despite that fact that it tastes like sooty water.

BeerNut

the beer revolu wrote: »

UK Stella, Paulaner and Coors have been the worst offenders in my case.
I wonder if there's anything common in all of them - apart from alcohol?

I can't imagine there'd be anything in all three that isn't in dozens of other mass-produced beers.

And Paulaner will be brewed to the Reinheitsgebot, so if there's anything nasty in there, it's going to be naturally-occurring.