Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Powdered Alcohol Approved By Feds, Banned By States

Posted by timothy on from the nanny-states-plural dept.

StikyPad writes Powdered alcohol was approved for sale by the U.S. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, but that hasn't stopped several states from introducing their own legislation to ban the substance, including Alaska, Louisiana, South Carolina, Vermont, New York, Virginia, Ohio, and Iowa. The utility of powdered alcohol is said to be in weight reduction, particularly for transport on foot when hiking and camping, but lawmakers cite fears about the potential of abuse by minors and spiked drinks.

39 of 190 comments (clear)

  1. Becasue... the children! by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 3, Informative

    I for one am sick of the fucking children. No, its not good enough that you need to be a certain age to purchase this stuff. Nope. Must deny it to the legal adults becuase little Johnny just might snap some up while nobody is looking.

    NANNIES

    1. Re:Becasue... the children! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's not the real reason, they don't want anyone sneaking booze into place where they'd otherwise spend money on beer and drinks. Like stadiums, concerts, etc.

      Don't believe everything a politician tells you, they get money from Bud, Coors, and Jack Daniels.

    2. Re:Becasue... the children! by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 2

      That's not the real reason, they don't want anyone sneaking booze into place where they'd otherwise spend money on beer and drinks. Like stadiums, concerts, etc.

      Don't believe everything a politician tells you, they get money from Bud, Coors, and Jack Daniels.

      then why don't Bud Coors and Jack Daniels just make their own branded powdered alcohol.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    3. Re:Becasue... the children! by duck_rifted · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Because that's not the real reason either. The bans on powdered alcohol followed stories about people doing really stupid stuff with it, like snorting it, trying to smoke it, seasoning food with it (and getting more drunk than expected, later than expected), etc etc. It's not worry about kids; it's worry about simpleton adults who like to experiment with stuff before knowing anything about it.

      In Louisiana, another reason is that the ban might create another way to arrest people. Louisiana wants as many inmates as possible for slave labor.

    4. Re:Becasue... the children! by mcl630 · · Score: 3, Informative

      They weren't actually stories of people doing those stupid things, the maker (Palcohol) suggested doing those things on the website:

      http://www.theverge.com/2014/4...

    5. Re:Becasue... the children! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      FWIW, all sorts of crazy stuff is already happening with cannabis edibles in Colorado. Here's the fear and loathing article that made the rounds...

      Maybe there's a good reason to pause given the public doesn't really know how to handle this stuff yet...

      The former argument doesn't lead to the latter. People have been using Cannibis in its various forms for at least several hundred years. It simply isn't true that we don't know what to do with it. The information is everywhere.

      Morons will be morons, no matter what tools they use to demonstrate it. That should NOT be a restriction on the rest of us.

    6. Re:Becasue... the children! by duck_rifted · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There are four ban triggers that I can think of. In places with very high population density, letting people freely access stuff that not only can they do really stupid things with but probably will isn't a great idea because it will probably hurt, kill, or otherwise negatively impact more people. That makes New York an easy one.

      Louisiana is an easy one too. Most of the people in Louisiana who aren't conservatives are felons, whether they're criminals or not. It just sort of seems to end up that way here, but we can probably guess that the process has some help. When I say "conservatives," what I mean is, "either rich of deeply theocratic." It's not so much that the constituency demanded the ban as they would have been out for legislator blood the first time some stupid stuff happened and Little Johnny Farmer Baptist got hurt.

      Alaska is an easy one too. It's still mostly unsettled, and it's an effing cold place. Alcohol is a vital commodity out in the cold because it's an antiseptic, a painkiller, and it can make a person feel warm when they're not. So, two things about that. First, we can probably guess (though it isn't said) that the alcohol industry has a lot of pull in Alaska. Second, when you live in a place that can get stupidly dangerous due to natural factors that can be an everyday thing, doing more stupid stuff with chemicals is stupid^2.

      Three states, three influences. I have no idea about South Carolina, but I have one more idea about a ban trigger: constituency pressure. It would be hard to guess how much of the influence was actual pressure from voters versus anticipated pressure, but I bet it's a similar situation as in Louisiana (though probably for totally different reasons).

      If I'm right, then California will ban it after scientifically proving it's unhealthy for reasons none of us have thought of, Texas will ban it if they're paid to, Florida will ban it if the GOP says it should, and New Jersey will eventually make Powdered Alcohol Day a state holiday. Every other state will probably shrug and ignore it -- except for beverage manufacturers. You know, the only people who have a really good reason to buy the stuff to begin with.

    7. Re:Becasue... the children! by fafalone · · Score: 2

      I don't see them banning liquid alcohol because some raging jackasses inject it and suitcase it.

    8. Re:Becasue... the children! by cptdondo · · Score: 3, Informative

      You don't backpack much, do you? Carrying a liter of alcohol in a backpack is a huge weight, no matter what condition you're in. The less weight you have, the more fun it is.

      And yes, most of use use some sort of poowdered sports drink, often to hide the taste of the water we get from streams and lakes, even after filtering.

      As a backpacker I really support this. There's nothing like sitting arond dinner at night, nad having a drink under the stars.

    9. Re:Becasue... the children! by Jon_S · · Score: 3, Informative

      You carry the same amount of alcohol whether you carry the dehydrated stuff or a bottle of grain alcohol. Actually, the dehydrated stuff is heavier since you also are carrying the polysaccharide to which the alcohol is adsorbed.

      If you want to get drunk in the woods, you need the millions of molecules of C2H5OH which weighs the same no matter if you bring it in pure (well, the 95% azeotrope probably) or adsorbed to sugar.

    10. Re:Becasue... the children! by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 2

      We've had hash, which is concentrated resin (where all the psychoactive chemicals are) for hundreds of years, and just because the feds were testing ditch weed doesn't mean the actual good stuff didn't exist (ask any old hippie about proper thai stick, or acapulco gold).

      --


      He tried to kill me with a forklift!
    11. Re:Becasue... the children! by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      and really. is it really that bad to try to keep dangerous products out of the hands of kids?

      As a PARENT - no, it is the right thing to do.

      As a government? no, thats the parents job

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  2. Following instructions? by thieh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wonder how many people will actually follow the instructions in mixing these things back to booze. Somehow I am inclined to believe people do not want to follow the instructions and swallow the stuff with as little water as physically possible.

    1. Re:Following instructions? by reboot246 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I plan on mixing it with dehydrated water.

    2. Re:Following instructions? by ralphsiegler · · Score: 4, Informative

      it's just a polysaccharide with alcohol in it, the particular one they use can absorb 60% its weight in alcohol. You're still going to only get the alcohol of a standard drink whether you eat the starchy stuff straight up or put it in a quart of water.

    3. Re:Following instructions? by vux984 · · Score: 2

      You must have never seen someone shotgun a beer.

      I've seen a LOT more people down a flight of shooters than shotgun six beers in a row though.

      And for this powder... i dunno... I could see people just eating it straight and letting it dissolve in their stomachs... or getting it moist and shoving it up their asses.

      And I can definitely see them sneaking it it into schools, onto planes, into sports venues etc ... not that any of these things don't happen with alcohol now. But if you make it easier it will happen more.

      People are stupid.

    4. Re:Following instructions? by sumdumass · · Score: 2

      Only if you consume the starchy stuff at a rate as slow as consuming the amount of water you are intended to put it in

      Possibly but likely not. The problem or possible stumbling block is that the body doesn't take up the alcohol equally and has gag reflexes if too much is detected. I'm not aware of this powdered stuff defeating any of that.

      Anyways, the stomach is very poor in absorbing alcohol where the intestines are much more efficiency. I forget the actually percent, but I believe its 80% or better of the alcohol is absorbed by the intestines rather than the stomach. Now, if you have ever eaten before or during drinking you will find you don't get as drunk as quickly as if you started drinking on an empty stomach. This is because the stomach determined food is present and processes it before allowing it to pass to the intestines. It locks the alcohol into the less efficient system until such time the stomach releases the food and then the intestines will absorb quickly.

      It's also why in most states, there is a time limit between getting pulled for a DUI and when they give biological tests to determine the exact levels (breath or blood or urine or whatever is in vogue now) even though most areas ignore the time limit and if a cop asks if you have anything to eat, some will likely fumble around past the time limit in order to ensure your stomach releases and you have absorbed more alcohol into your system.

      Sorry about that tangent, but the starch will likely lock the stomach up like food would where the water or liquid would pass through in a shorter period of time. So in essence, it will likely either be the same as if you ate something or quicker with the liquid as it passes through to where it can be absorbed more readily. You may however, avoid the gag reflex with the powdered stuff until the body actually absorbs it and actually consume more without knowing it which is where I suspect one of the concerns might be.

      And no, that is not a complete theory of operation and I am not a PHD or anything, I just studied ways to get drunk faster years ago in college. There may be flaws in my understanding but the principles of the operation should be close enough for layman's terms.

    5. Re: Following instructions? by gman003 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ever since I heard the "dehydrated water" joke, I thought it would be a brilliant name for a water-purification powder, like the stuff you use while camping.

      Instant water, just add water - but the water you add doesn't have to be clean, and the water you get is drinkable. Memorable brand if nothing else.

    6. Re:Following instructions? by slew · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I plan on mixing it with dehydrated water.

      Unsurprisingly, they also have powered water...

    7. Re:Following instructions? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Informative

      The stomach is very bad at absorbing, due to the fairly smooth and acid-proof lining, but small molecules can slip through. Like ethanol or water.

  3. Re:legitimate use by Gizan · · Score: 2

    You go to bars where they actually measure the alcohol they serve you? Wow you are getting ripped off.

  4. Spiked drinks? by gurps_npc · · Score: 4, Insightful
    How exactly are you supposed to stick this thing in someone's non-alcoholic drink and them not notice the taste? Or are they talking about adding more alcohol to my martini - in which case, yes please.

    They only people that need to worry about this are the teachers at a high school dance. And we all know how effective they are at stopping kids from drinking....

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    1. Re:Spiked drinks? by flopsquad · · Score: 2

      You know what? I think you're right.

      I was about to launch into this counter story, "Well, one of our high school teachers actually had her coffee spiked with ecstasy and wigged out" etc etc. Then it occurred to me that this didn't actually happen on our watch.

      It was some apocryphal account of events that had happened "a few years ago"... looking back, it has the same hazy mythical quality as the one about the goat that those "sometime in the late 70's" seniors actually got on the roof, and the one about the mechanical whiz kid who actually took apart our principal's car and rebuilt it in the courtyard.

      Like for real. Really happened, dude, my older brother knew the guy.

      --
      Nothing posted to /. has ever been legal advice, including this.
  5. Re:Imagine the burn... by Gizan · · Score: 2

    "Can I snort it? We have seen comments about goofballs wanting to snort it. Don't do it! It is not a responsible or smart way to use the product. To take precautions against this action, we've added volume to the powder so it would take more than a half of a cup of powder to get the equivalent of one drink up your nose. You would feel a lot of pain for very little gain. Just use it the right way." From the maker.

  6. Marketing Hype. by painandgreed · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You could get even lighter and easier transportability by taking Everclear or some other near 200 proof alcohol and adding flavoring to add to your water. Palcohol is just the same thing that is bound to a powder, most likely tapioca maltodextrin. Similar process is already used in some cooking recipes. You can already make it yourself. It's not some neat way to make alcohol any lighter or more compact.

    1. Re:Marketing Hype. by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 2

      So you could take more than 2 oz. through TSA? Sounds like a win.

      --
      "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
  7. Re:Dangers by reboot246 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Alcohol was invented so that even ugly people could have sex.

  8. Re:Imagine the burn... by trout007 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Hits you fast, right in the face.

    We named that "drink" The Chris Brown.

    --
    I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
  9. Can you get this in concentrated form? by ChumpusRex2003 · · Score: 2

    Never mind the powdered form, what about getting the liquid in concentrated form?

    "Palcohol" is not ethanol, but the highly intoxicating 2-methyl, 2-butanol, which is about 30x as potent at causing intoxication as ethanol. Despite being termed one of the "toxic alcohols", it probably has lower chronic toxicity than ethanol, as being a tertiary alcohol, it cannot be oxidised to toxic aldehydes/ketones.

    1. Re:Can you get this in concentrated form? by ChumpusRex2003 · · Score: 2

      It is possible to sorb ethanol into a dextrin. The problem is that the volume/mass of sorbent is much larger than the amount of alcohol that can be bound.

      So, if you want to bind 10 ml of ethanol (approximately 1 shot), then you may need 100 grams of powder. Which makes the product of limited value.

      If, however, you want something iso-intoxicating to 10 ml of ethanol, you can reasonably safely do that with about 500 ul of 2-methyl, 2-butanol, which could be sorbed in 5 grams of powder. The latter is a practical product which meets the description of "palcohol"

  10. Re:Try doing some research... by Immerman · · Score: 2

    On the other hand kool-aid and vodka in a sugary drink bottle will go unnoticed almost anywhere.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  11. Re:Dangers by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    America has stupid alcohol laws because Americans are stupid about alcohol.

    Or perhaps the reverse - Americans are stupid about alcohol because America has stupid alcohol laws....

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  12. Re:Imagine the burn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    You can also pour that powder directly into your ass. We called that drink the Richard Gere.

  13. Re:Imagine the burn... by trout007 · · Score: 2

    Only those of us over 40 will get that.

    --
    I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
  14. Pat Traver's said it best by Archfeld · · Score: 2

    Now I can finally snort whiskey and drink coke...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S... (Pat Travers Band)

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  15. Several thousand years by aepervius · · Score: 2
    "People have been using Cannibis in its various forms for at least several hundred years."

    It dates to much longer than that. Cannabis usage in the "western" world date back to 400+ years, but in Asia minor and neighbor region it is much longer :

    The oldest written record of cannabis usage is the Greek historian Herodotus's reference to the central Eurasian Scythians taking cannabis steam baths.[40] His (c. 440 BCE) Histories records, "The Scythians, as I said, take some of this hemp-seed [presumably, flowers], and, creeping under the felt coverings, throw it upon the red-hot stones; immediately it smokes, and gives out such a vapour as no Grecian vapour-bath can exceed; the Scyths, delighted, shout for joy."[41] Classical Greeks and Romans were using cannabis, while in the Middle East, use spread throughout the Islamic empire to North Africa.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  16. Re:California wins! (So far.) by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 2

    You're better with 98% alcohol. It's impossible to get pure alcohol by freezing or distillation alone, and for the sake of that 2% water, you end up adding some pretty nasty substances to entrap the water.

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  17. Re:Imagine the burn... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

    It doesn't burn at all, you should try it. Hits you fast, right in the face.

    Erm, so *why* should I try it exactly? It sounds like you get drunk fast without any of the flavour or other pleasant sensations.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  18. Re:California wins! (So far.) by painandgreed · · Score: 2

    Hopefully they won't ban it - I think the concept is pretty darn cool, and had been looking forward to trying it since I heard about the company like a year ago.

    I've been hearing about it since college (which was farther back than I care to admit). If you want to try it just google "make powdered alcohol" and look up the recipe. It's going to tell you to go on Amazon, buy some tapioca maltodextrin and some Everclear, mix, and sift. Ta da! Powdered alcohol. Experiment to your heart's content.