Slashdot Mirror
Powdered Alcohol Banned In Six States
HughPickens.com writes Rachel Abrams reports at the NYT that six states have passed legislation to ban Palcohol, a freeze-dried, powdered alcohol developed by Mark Phillips who he says was inspired by a love of hiking but a distaste for carrying bottles of adult beverages uphill. "When I hike, kayak, backpack or whatever, I like to have a drink when I reach my destination. And carrying liquid alcohol and mixers to make a margarita for instance was totally impractical," says Phillips, who hopes to have Palcohol on store shelves by the summer. One packet of Palcohol equals one shot with each packet weighing 1 ounce and turning into liquid when mixed with 6 ounces of water. Phillips has vigorously defended his product, called Palcohol, saying it is no more dangerous than the liquid version sold in liquor stores and plans to release five flavors: vodka, rum, cosmopolitan, powderita (which is like a margarita) and lemon drop.
Critics are concerned people may try to snort the powder or mix it with alcohol to make it even stronger or spike a drink. "It's very easy to put a couple packets into a glass and have super-concentrated alcohol," says Frank Lovecchio. Amy George, a spokeswoman for Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said MADD did not typically take a stand on the dangers of specific alcohol products, but MADD is concerned about the colorful or playful packaging of such products that can sometimes appeal to children. Phillips dismisses concerns saying that they don't make sense if you think it through. "People unfortunately use alcohol irresponsibly. But I don't see any movement to ban liquid alcohol. You don't ban something because a few irresponsible people use it improperly," says Phillips. "They can snort black pepper. Do you ban black pepper?"
Critics are concerned people may try to snort the powder or mix it with alcohol to make it even stronger or spike a drink. "It's very easy to put a couple packets into a glass and have super-concentrated alcohol," says Frank Lovecchio. Amy George, a spokeswoman for Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said MADD did not typically take a stand on the dangers of specific alcohol products, but MADD is concerned about the colorful or playful packaging of such products that can sometimes appeal to children. Phillips dismisses concerns saying that they don't make sense if you think it through. "People unfortunately use alcohol irresponsibly. But I don't see any movement to ban liquid alcohol. You don't ban something because a few irresponsible people use it improperly," says Phillips. "They can snort black pepper. Do you ban black pepper?"
The states are: Alaska, Louisiana, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont and Virginia
Not sure why this couldn't be in the summary.
Cool!
So... critics are also concerned people may:
a) Carry lighters which might provoke burn if mix with alcohol
b) Drink alcohol itself because they can spill it on the eye and be blind
c) Carry two different *kinds* of alcohol, 'cause if they mix it then it will be even stronger
d) Etc., etc., etc.
Seriously, it's a good idea to carry powered alcohol for safety; though I'd never buy it (I have no need for such thing).
If they wanna ban it, let 'em
You can make it yourself
First, the link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_powder
Then you pay a visit to your friendly pharmacy to get some cyclodextrin - it's a form of sugar, totally legit stuff
And then, get yourself some pure grain alcohol (one brand name is Everclear, but there are generic brand ones), but remember, only get pure GRAIN alcohol, because the other type of alcohol, the WOOD ALCOHOL, is deadly !
All you need to do is to mix the two --- the cyclodextrin would soak up the alcohol - and if you put enough of it into the alcohol the whole thing will 'dry up' leaving you ... tada ! ... powdered alcohol !
Well alright then! To the spice rack!
Palcohol is based on cyclodextrins as a carrier. Cyclodextrins are used for similar food/pharma engineering, such for making dry (and even water-soluble) forms of vitamin D.
"They can snort black pepper. Do you ban black pepper?"
Oh, crap, you know they're going to try now...
They can snort black pepper
Wait a minute, does that work?
Just got a whole new meaning :-D
Most of the arguments are poor, but the concern over colorful packaging enticing children is valid. Colorful packaging does attract children, and if there's a likely modality for them to hurt themselves, than much like other CPSC decisions, there should be reasonable regulation of the packaging. Besides, if he wants to take it camping, the pretty colors are useless.
You cannot "freeze dry" alcohol because alcohol is a pure liquid at room temperature and to make it solid you would need a temperature of -78C which is a little on the cold side for anyone not Canadian. Powdered alcohol is actually alcohol absorbed by something else as desribed here and if you want to make it yourself the instructions are here... just don't do this if you happen to live somewhere where you are now not allowed to do it anymore!
In this story we see perhaps the purest example of what happens to disruptive products that are a little... too disruptive. Questions of "Morality" or "Safety" come to the fore. Resist, and you will be accused of supporting terrorism, date rape, paedophilia, etc.
Pro-tip Nerds: Technology is always trumped by social position, legislative forces, and entrenched interests.
Obviously the inventor failed to pay off the right liquor lobby.
I wonder how much of this objection has nothing to do with the vasty overstated risks but instead is of a commercial nature. Alcoholic beverages are extremely expensive in a lot of places (stadiums, bars, restaurants, events) and sneaking your own in is inconvenient or impossible.
I woner if the real opponents of this aren't people who make money charging $10 for cocktails to captive audiences. How much money do they stand to lose when people start bringing a half-dozen packets to the big game?
How is the drinking control regime threatened when you can't restrict alcohol because of its bulk and liquid nature?
Some idiots will no doubt overconsume it, but they are probably the same idiots that do it now.
Instead of carrying seven ounces for one unit of alcohol why not just bring grain alcohol and get 14 units for the same weight?
Anyone that thinks this stuff makes any sense at all is merely ignorant.
Here is the thing, alcohol is a liquid. The most compact state for alcohol to be in is a liquid. The only way to have powdered alcohol without adding a lot of filler to it that will make it take up MORE space and more weight would be to freeze it and then smash up the frozen alcohol into a powder and then keep that at freezing temperatures.
Sound practical? Me neither.
What they're obviously doing is adding a chemical, probably a sugar of some description, and allowing that substance to absorb the alcohol.
while you CAN do that, why would you want to do that? It will take up MORE space and weigh MORE per unit of weight or volume.
So what the fuck is the point? People keep talking about powdered alcohol like people are going to be able to compress 2 liter vodka bottles into little pouches where you just add water and you get a strong alcoholic drink.
You won't though... unless you have something like 10 liters of powder to dissolve in the water.
the amount of alcohol you'll actually be able to store in any sugar crystal going to be miniscule. And sugar molecules are often quite large... so you're talking about a lot of mass invested into containing a very small amount of alcohol. Why?
Get yourself some 200 proof booze, put it in a flask, and if you want drink, then mix that with some amount of water because you really don't want to drink 200 proof booze straight unless you're completely crazy.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
If regular alcohol was discovered as a "beverage" today, it would be banned too.
Since the powder is 50% abweight and everclear is 96% abweight, maybe they should ban the latter first?
The only 'advantage' -- and I say it in quotes, since it won't always be an advantage -- is that the powder is dry (ish).
Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
Perhaps you didn't see the states involved:
Alaska, Louisiana, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont and Virginia
Only ONE of those states "might" be considered anything "lefty" The other 5 are rather conservative. So if anything it is "righty-totalitarian".
50 percent alcohol has been publicly sold for centuries. Why would people suddenly start snorting it? Ethanol is a small molecule, it can enter the blood stream easily through the digestive system.
Maybe the beer companies are trying to kill off the competition.
MADD is today's WCTU. Drunk driving is just a cover for their temperance movement. Heck, they even sell virgin drinks with their branding now.
Stop giving them money unless you really believe in prohibition, please.
... and let the black market begin.
The problem is not the weight of the liquid alcohol. The problem is the "hike, backpack or whatever". Anyplace where carrying a fifth is too difficult is not worth going to.
I mean, how good can freeze-dried Ardbeg Uigeadail taste, anyway?
You are welcome on my lawn.
Hmm... the vast majority of the pro-powdered-alcohol comments in the article come from the inventor himself -- who stands to make a lot of money if this is legal everywhere. And the sole, somewhat-pro, comment by an M.D. was pretty lukewarm about the stuff. IMHO, it's a solution looking for a problem. Celebrations in the woods? Pretty lame argument in favor.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
Keep in mind that liberal means freedom. The liberal left which is the flavor we have in the good ol' USA (no marxists here) has traditionally been on the side of more freedom, while the right has traditionally been against it.
There are exceptions, but people on the right who like freedom are called libertarians and they are generally not welcome in the GOP which is driven by totalitarian social conservatives and pro-industry members of congress who love nothing more than providing subsidies and protections to monopolies.
And trying to impose ban on everything they don't like is against the Constitution.
Well, not this one.
21st Amendment, Section 2:
"Section 2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited."
Pretty much implicitly states that States can have laws regarding intoxicating liquors. Which this clearly is, and no, you can't wank around it by claiming it is merely a powder.
DAMM - Drunks Against Mad Mothers
In all seriousness, I'm against irresponsible/dangerous conduct such as drunk or impaired driving. That said, the argument made by the idiot from MADD is reactionary and illogical.
Just another day in Paradise
"You don't ban something because a few irresponsible people use it improperly"
Of course not... unless it's any psychoactive substance or plant that isn't alcohol.
The right is always on the side of "more freedom" for "people" ... where "freedom" is defined as "no regulations" and "people" is defined as "huge corporations".
They are also always in favor of "the Constitution" when "Constitution" is defined as "whatever we like" and definitely not defined as "the Bill of Rights", particularly Amendments 4, 5, 6 and 8. They also favor an "original" interpretation of a document that originally endorsed slavery.
I looked through the FAQs and watched the 15 min video, nothing is being said if it is possible to get 2 or more bags of this stuff and dissolve it in the same amount of water that is normally used for one packet; I believe he said it's about 5 ounces of liquid. Or maybe taking 5 ounces of vodka and dissolving the vodka powder in that. What about swallowing the stuff in powder form? How does the re-absorption of liquid affect your insides or does the various concentrations of alcohol as it goes through absorption do things to the inside of the body we don't understand yet?
Both stupid things to do I agree and it's more practical/effective using the liquid alcohol, but when has pre-adult portion of our society ever been smart when it comes to drugs? I'm not saying ban it, or stop it or anything, in fact, I think it's a novel product and could be more beneficial than we ever realize. I am just curious about forced concentration or dry consumption.
Talk with them. It's YOUR kids. Don't put the burden of raising your kids on society!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You can't protect stupid people from acting stupid.
In fact, want to make the world a better place? pass laws that make it impossible for someone stupid, that did something stupid, from using the legal system to sue anyone for their act of stupid.
I personally wish we allowed more of the stupid people to kill themselves, it would help the humanity gene pool immensely.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Don't judge individual states by the national "pinko commie lefty" vs "fascist Baptist right" rhetoric. I've lived in one of those states, and it was like living in a whole different country: the Democrats were the fiscally responsible conservatives and the Republicans were tax-and-spend liberals. State politics can be radically different from national politics: people actually know their state legislators, golf with them, etc. State legislators are people and reflect local values much more than national politicians, who are all lizard-men from another galaxy.
Alaska and Utah have populations in no way representative of National demographics on drinking: Alaska has plenty of native Americans, who have a wary attitude towards the white man's firewater, and Utah is packed with Mormons, who don't even drink coffee. Louisiana probably banned powdered alcohol so that it can be sold in prohibition-era-like conditions of exciting pseudo-secrecy to fascinated tourists while the police turn a blind eye. Virginia, the Old Dominion, actually does have some totalitarian streak, but not necessarily a Republican one -- they just have their own ways, and you conform to them or move. No clue what's up with SC or Vermont, although Vermont can be a bit like Virginia.
You completely missed the point: this stuff weighs more and takes up more room than vodka does. You are better off just carrying the bottle of vodka.
Per unit volume, this junk contrains about the same amount of alcohol as a glass of wine.
A cocktail is something served in a proper glass in a cocktail bar or upmarket hotel by stylishly dressed bar staff that you drink while slightly more stylishly dressed than you would ordinarily be. It is made from proper alcoholic beverages, probably with fruit or bitters. Drinking it makes you feel like you live a better life than you do.
It is not something you make from concentrated powders and flavourings in a hiker's drinking flask at the top of the hill. If you want to ruin your exercise by drinking alcohol at the end of it (and any sane person would!), then you carry a real drink. It's more exercise. But not much more exercise; how heavy is a couple of those half bottles of wine? How heavy is a couple of small liqueur bottles?
MADD sound, to this (generally non-drinking) englishmen, like an organisation who have a point but are also engaging in overreach. But this time they are right: powdered alcohol is about lowbrow and illicit drinking; it's about making cheap fizzy drinks into super-strong alcopops, and bulk purchase. It's crass and unnecessary , and it's probably dangerous.
Banning an alcohol product does wind Americans up though; it's fun to watch a country that has exported a global war on drugs twist itself into contortions when someone suggests banning their drug of choice.
so why not just sell a bottle of booze with a packet of this sugar crap?
It's getting hard to say with prohibition groups these days (MADD is simply a "ban all alcohol" group). Such groups used to find common cause with the right, and perhaps still do, but that spirit is aging out of the right with the Boomers, and increasingly it's the left on a jihad to "control all the things!" People Against Fun are increasing flipping left now. From banning video games to banning frat parties, it's a left thing now, and the "yes means yes" laws are one step away from outlawing premarital sex (and the right has been laughing quietly at that irony).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Have you ever hiked long distances with a bottle of vodka? I have. It's not the vodka that's the PITA, it's the bottle.
While I'm still not too keen on this product, let's not pretend that there's no reasons for preferring a powder to liquids even at the cost of some disadvantages.
Trump's plan to get rid of Mueller appears to be 'be so guilty of so many things that Mueller works himself to death.'
Declare it as a weapon. Said it is made specifically to kill. Will be allowed under your marvelous constitution. Right to bear arms.
It's called Everclear.
I'm told Senor Frogs uses it for margaritas. I am unable to tell you whether it is effective, as I have no memories of my attempted scientific tests of its potency.
If your children ever found out how lame you are, they'd murder you in your sleep
Seriously?
Go to REI, get yourself a flexible water bag... those camel packs or whatever. And then put your booze in that.
There clearly isn't enough rat poison in the municipal water system...
You're saying you have to use the liquor store bottle?
I think I'm having a stroke.... I smell toast... yep... and I'm blind in one eye now. Thanks.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
So? Just because you've just gotten laid doesn't mean that you don't need to get laid again! It's getting laid, not getting spayed!!!1! ;-)
I have a better idea, just ban Alcohols again.
Go, do it, it'll be funny.
where you can easily buy 95%AVB in large bottles, but small packets of powder are the devil and banned before you can even buy them.
Which is why 'classical liberal' == 'libertarian'.
Modern american 'liberals' are just 'authoritarian left'. The words meaning has been flipped.
'Progressive' == reactionary return to 1930s politics.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
the sale of Alcohol in public places. In my state you're liable if you serve booze to somebody until they're drunk and they go off and kill someone in their car. Pay attention sometime when you're at a sporting event. They're friendly about it but they cut you off after a few drinks.
Basically, Imagine a stadium full of soccer hooligans with 3x as much booze as they're normally allowed to have.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Like how liberals are for freedom from govt. imposed healthcare, or higher taxes and bigger government? We can't take the words liberal or conservative literally anymore or conservatives would all be environmentalists embracing climate change.
As for libertarians not being welcome in the GOP, I think it's more of a love/hate relationship. Can't live with 'em, can't live w/o 'em. The GOP has drifted away from where it was 25-30 years ago, toward the evangelicals who wish to impose their religious beliefs on abortion and other things. They would do much better ignoring that because it does nothing but lose them elections. They (and I say this as someone who's voted mostly toward the right) need to keep politics out of the bedroom and social issues, and focus on right-sizing (read: defend the boarders, deliver the mail, keep the highways repaired, and not a whole lot else) government.
Just another day in Paradise
Yes... can you believe someone might have a use for something you don't!? Holy shit, Karma, it's good that the smart people like you are here to save the rest of us SJWs and Sheeple, right? We should all just kill ourselves, we're clearly the ones with problems. Hey, where's the made up anecdotal evidence you are usually so fond of using and claiming the side of 'logic'? I bet you're the type of guy who's thinks he's a fan of comedy and funny themselves, but turns into a rage princess whenever someone laughs at you.
Nope, the Democrats while in power (Carter, Clinton, Obama) have done nothing of the authoritarian stripe. The closest we've come are right-wing inspired religious conservative laws (anti-drug laws, anti-abortion laws, anti-gay laws) and rather prominently "anti-terror" laws passed during the Bush administration, and I place "anti-terror" laws in scary quotes since their value in terror prevention is rather doubtful e.g. TSA.
This is before we get to vote-prevention laws being passed in republican states to prevent democrats from voting. How's that for totalitarian.
Having some ground rules is not the same as totalitarian. Of course it is possible to have an overregulated society which on the whole becomes totalitarian but we are not there yet.
Like how liberals are for bigger government?
Excuse me? government was smaller at the end of each of the last last three Democratic presidencies (Carter, Clinton, Obama) as % of GDP as compared to where it began while it has grown during the last three Republican presidencies (Reagan, Bush Sr., Bush Jr.).
This canard of "democrats=bigger government" stopped being true 40 years ago, but people have yet to notice that the GOP is today, without a doubt, the party of big government and deficit spending.
The only time the GOP is in favor of cutting spending is when it benefits the poor, but overall the GOP loves deficits. Clinton left a surplus and Bush Jr. first act of office was to fritter away that surplus, rather than applying it the fiscally responsible way towards paying down the federal debt, like Clinton did.
You can measure how authoritarian a government is by the % of GDP they spend/waste. Don't listen to what they say, watch what they do.
Also gun control proves you wrong on the face of your claim.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
He says he came up with this idea for his backpacking trips, and hey I totally get it. I love backpacking and I too like to take a bottle of rum or wine or whatever with me, the carry weight is for sure a bummer.
but here is where I run into problems FTFA: "One packet of Palcohol equals one shot with each packet weighing 1 ounce" wait, what? one "shot" is in fact 1 ounce, that's how you measure them. (30ml ~1fl Oz)
So in what world does his statement of saving on pack weight make sense? Quite the opposite in fact, as has been pointed out the only way to do this is to actually add some sort of filler to the alcohol to soak it up into "powder", there by making it *both* heavier and bulkier, not to mention now you're drinking the filler material as well. this is not my idea of a good backpacking strategy. you will save both space and weight just carrying a small bottle of high proof spirits.
Since when was "one shot" of booze SIX OUNCES of liquid?
- In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.
You can measure how authoritarian a government is by the % of GDP they spend/waste.
You make an excellent point. Let's do that shall we? The winner is Bush Jr. with a $1.7 trillion war against Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11.
Thanks for pointing that out.
source
100g of powder with 25cl (250ml) of water gives you 4.8%. i.e.: the content of a small can of a rather weak beer (by European standard).
Which is 12ml of pure ethanol (less than a 2cl shot). Which weights ~10g. So you need to transport a power 10x as heavy as the ethanol it self. It one of the least efficient form for transporting ethanol. And is therefore COMPLETELY STUPID.
You're better off transporting a small flask vial of pure ethanol. For reference to another item that you would probably be carrying in your backpack: an AA battery is ~8cm^3, so you need the same volume as about 1 and a half battery of pure ethanol to mix your weak-beer-like beverage small can. So the actual volume is negligible.
Whereas if you pack them with ~90mg of extra powdered sugar cyclic polymer, you'll probably need a space around roughly ~130cm^3 - that's about the volume of 1 and half deck of cards that you need to transport as extra sugar in addition to the ethanol itself, just for the small advantage to keep the ethanol trapped in a powder instead of carrying it in a small plastic liquid container.
(it's an estimation. I don't know the exact density of the specific types of powdered cycle of sugars used in palcohol, I'm doing a rough estimation using starch as a starting point).
You can't beat pure ethanol. It's a liquid. That's as densely as you can pack it at room temperature.
That's the form of pure alcohol, once you remove all the water out of it. Dried alcohol isn't a powder. It's still a liquid (just a liquid that contains no molecule of water, only ethanol). It's not like for example salt nor sugar (salt or sugar diluted in water is a liquid. Dry it, remove all the water and you get powder of NaCl or of glucose. Or crystals of them if you do the drying correctly).
Palcohol is, basically, adding huge sugar cyclic polymer to trap it into a powder. It's a huge waste of space. It's not *concentrated* alcohol (as, I presume, all the people who buy into these stupidity are thinking - by analogy of sugar or salt). It's alcohol cut with heavy space consuming sugar.
The only thing is that, getting food-grade ethanol (that is pure ethanol, not degraded ethanol) at pure concentration without a drop of water inside is heavily regulated in most countries (to avoid that people use it to make their own housemade liquor and sell these without a proper license).
The sugar-ethanol mix isn't (well in some countries. Sugar and ethanol happens to be regulated in some countries due to alcopops.) so probably some people think it's a handy way to transport alcool without needing to get the necessary license / paper work for pure ethanol ("I want to transport my booze in space convenient matter, not start a liquor factory! The paper work is over kill !") The problem is that even then, packing a water-diluted ethanol solution (strong vodka, etc.) is still more space efficient than the powdered sugar.
As a way to pack alcohol, this poweder is asinine.
As a novelty item, with the funnily simple factor ("Powdered cocktail! Just add water and instant* mojitos!!! [*- with a much weaker alcohol content than an actual mojito]") yup, maybe. (Works, because most of the other ingredients *can* be packed as solids/powder, and they can complex a bit of ethanol, specially the sugars).
But it's nothing more than an adult themed cousin of Sherbet-powder to be drank after adding water.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
1. Alcohol leaks easier than water. At least that's been my experience with it.
2. Flexible water bottles are not rated for everclear. Even if it didn't physically and visibly dissolve the seals in front of you, I'd still have concerns over it leaching chemicals out of the plastic. Moreso than with a rigid bottle, as flexible plastics generally contain plasticizers, many of which have been linked to a variety of health issues. Some flexible water containers are made of PVC, which has very bad ethanol compatibility, it embrittles it.
3. Actually, if I were to do it again, I actually would choose the liquor store bottle. At least you're guaranteed proper chemical compatibility and a cap designed not to leak when containing alcohol.
Alcohol is not water. Don't expect it to behave like it.
Trump's plan to get rid of Mueller appears to be 'be so guilty of so many things that Mueller works himself to death.'
Give up, kid ;)
You wanted an example of a bad point you made - well, the next posting of yours I've seen is one.
All these drinking bladders aren't approved for alcohol. It probably will damage the seals and the coating inside the bladder.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Oh hey, apparently a number of bladders are made of polyurethane. Yeah, have fun storing ethanol in that, it's even less compatible with ethanol than PVC. Other ethanol-incompatible materials include natural rubber, polyamide, and many types of fiberglass. Strong ethanol corrodes aluminum, too.
Again, just driving the point home: everclear and water are not the same thing. Don't treat them the same.
Trump's plan to get rid of Mueller appears to be 'be so guilty of so many things that Mueller works himself to death.'
The inventor should become a billionaire but given our nanny state, they will almost certainly ban it Two products I regularly bought were banned and I would buy this too.
All because maybe 1,000 people out of 350 million might kill themselves or someone else with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lover_Come_Back_%281961_film%29
Alcoholic candy. (Spoiler alert?) And their version was going to be banned as well.
It's pretty good if you like screwball comedies.
That's what cities like New York are trying to do. Some people believe fast food causes obesity and needs to be banned. I lost weight eating the stuff, I just made sure to eat less of it. My sister rarely goes to fast food restaurants, yet she's still fat.
On the other hand, banning additives that cause cancer or something makes sense. The consumer can't willingly choose whether to use the additive or not.
Some people seem to want to surrender all decision making to a small group of people. But a mass of people can make decisions based on information. Take smoking for example. It's way down from where it was twenty years ago. There are people who still smoke, but they're in the minority now. Completely banning cigarettes or public smoking in restaurants may not be necessary now (and may be hypocritical if marijuana ever gets legalized).
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Now don't forget about the first round of "quantitative easing". That was a huge "too big to fail" cash transfer to the wealthy to the tune of about a half trillion?
I know some was paid back but does anyone know where there are reliable numbers on what came back vs money never seen again?
I wonder if this has any medicinal uses for hiking. Being able to carry several packs of freeze-dried alcohol may be very beneficial. Imagine getting a cut on the trail all, you have to do is mix alcohol and water pour it on the wound. Or pour the powder on directly. Could be very useful.
No actually I confused the melting point of carbon dioxide (well actually a sublimation point) with that of alcohol. Talking of scientific illiteracy though you seem to be pretty good with numerology. ;-)
but since when does anyone measure density in mass/length units?
That's clear evidence of one dimensional thinking. ;-)
What about powdered toast?
It's the job of the market. If there is demand he will succeed, if there is no demand he won't. Your opinion that it's a "lame argument" is simply not relevant.
Look at these offerings they have:
Cosmopolitan
Powderita Margarita
Lemon Drop
Those are cocktails. Mixed drinks. You're just complaining about the mixes and packaging.
I agree with the author. Black pepper should be banned, the meal you save could be your own.
Yeah! The right never wants to ban anything, well except those things that the left supports. Thanks for continuing to be part of the problem.
Seriously, screw those irrational prohibitionist bitches.
Inventor and business owner thinks product is A-OK! There is no need for any restrictions, ever, under any circumstances!
"They can snort black pepper. Do you ban black pepper?"
Why stop there?
"They can snort heroin. Do you ban heroin?"
"They can fire artillery. Do you ban artillery?"
"They can catch Ebola. Do you ban Ebola?"
OK, OK, those last examples were a little gratuitous. However the sight of a business owner defending their product, NO MATTER WHAT THE PRODUCT IS, should be viewed as self-interested marketing blather. Especially when the product is alcohol. I'm not even decided upon the question of whether powdered alcohol is good or evil in the real world.
Maybe the person in question would sound a little less selfish if they at least acknowledged that alcohol can be and is abused, and this product likely has much the same issues. Therefore age limits apply, alcoholics need treatment, and all the usual cautions apply.
"For adults to enjoy responsibly" sounds like a mature marketing message. "Do you ban black pepper" sounds like a crack dealer justifying crack to their homeless, messed-up clients.
First off, what the heck is going wrong in your life that makes you feel the need to tell strangers "Suck it" and "you alcoholiic piece of shit" when talking about plastics? Even without knowing what it is, I honestly feel sorry and am worried for you.
Secondly, we're not talking about plastic milk jugs. You mentioned camelback water pouches. They're quite clearly not the same thing - one is highly rigid, the other is highly flexible. Camelback water pouches are not all made the same. Search on the net and you'll find PVC, polyurethane, and polyethylene-with-plasiticizers camelbacks - on the ones that say what they're made out of. Most don't.
I just pulled out my camelback to see what type of plastic it's made out of. It's not labeled. But there are clearly at least three different plastics (body, cap, tube) involved - they look and feel different in many regards.
It's just a very bad idea to take a camelback and fill it with a potentially corrosive liquid that it's not rated to handle, as you suggested. Of course there exist plastics that tolerate pure ethanol. Your best bet to avoid dissolution, leaching, and leaks would be precisely what I said in #3: the bottle that the alcohol itself came in (despite the fact that it's bulky and not flexible). I definitely would not advise using a camelback as you suggested.
Of course, even on that downside, while alcohol bottles are designed to handle the potentially corrosive properties of ethanol, they're not designed to handle the rigors of backpacking. I think it most cases one would survive okay, but backpacking can be pretty hard on one's supplies.
Beyond all this, though, I must stress... get some sleep, or take care of whatever else is going wrong over there. I hope you're okay...
Trump's plan to get rid of Mueller appears to be 'be so guilty of so many things that Mueller works himself to death.'
You don't ban something because a few irresponsible people use it improperly," says Phillips. "They can snort black pepper. Do you ban black pepper?"
Actually we ban every single psychologically active substance *except* alcohol and tobacco for precisely that reason, those two being the lucky winners because historically the few irresponsible ones misusing other things were typically not the white male property owners responsible for determining whose favorite substance was allowed.
Nope, the Democrats while in power (Carter, Clinton, Obama) have done nothing of the authoritarian stripe.
You're joking, right?
"yes means yes" laws are one step away from outlawing premarital sex
This is without doubt, the stupidest thing I've read all week.
You are a moron.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Oh, I'm sorry, this is the room for an argument - you want Personal Abuse, just down the hall on the left.
And pray tell me how the logical extension of the "yes mean yes" laws isn't a step away from requiring a binding agreement before witnesses that the coming night's fun is consensual, with an "I do" on both sides? Seriously, society already has a ceremony whereby all present agree that when the 2 subjects fuck, the man is not a rapist, and the woman is not a slut. The new laws don't require the lasting relationship part yet, but give it time.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
another invalid law.
2. PETE and polypropylene (the major components of single-use plastic bottles) have excellent compatibility with ethanol.
Indeed, the bottle of cheap 100 proof vodka that I have right over there says PETE on the bottom.
And separate seals aren't used anymore, AFAICT, on water bottles. The caps fit tightly enough into the neck of the bottle that additional gasketing is not needed.
So if the problem is transporting liquid alcohol in a more-convenient vessel, the solution is likely to already be in your recycling bin.
Or, you know: Stainless steel hip flask. Dissolve the soluables with a soak in strong isopropyl alcohol for a few days, wash with soap and water, install adult beverage, and insert into hip pocket.
Either way, this is a solved problem.
Kid-proof tablet..
Maybe you should actually look at the money spent by the US government over the past 16 years. It's enlightening.
Bush Jr. certainly started the problem, but Obama has taken it to a whole new level of profligacy.
Okay, lets look at the opposition step-by-step shall we?
Opponents of powdered alcohol said it could increase the chances of underage drinking and abuse
How? Assuming this is sold in the same stores where liquid alcohol is sold, then there are age checks already built into the point-of-sale system. So this is a non-issue. Big brother Zeke can buy palcohol for little brother Timmy the same as he can buy liquid whiskey.
Senator Schumer referred to the product as “Kool-Aid,”
So where is this coming from? Most politicians won't say anything for or against anything unless they are paid to do so, so who is paying him?
while others say they worry that its powdered form makes it easier to conceal
Okay, I'll grant this one, it is more store-able since it is a more-or-less flat container. But lets be reasonable here. Most pockets are not going to easily hold a 4x6 inch packet and pulling one out of your underwear, tearing off the top, and pouring it into your big-gulp at the theater is not going to go noticed. If I wanted to sneak liqueur into a theater I would use a 4 ounce hip flask, it is so much easier to conceal and can contain 190 proof Everclear if I wanted it to.
“My worry would be for children to get a hold of it,” said JoAnn Windholz, a member of the Colorado House of Representatives.
This is an emotional hot button for most people, which is why it gets over used so much. Those that use this reason are basically saying they have no reason.
Amy George, a spokeswoman for Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said MADD did not typically take a stand on the dangers of specific alcohol products, but it was generally concerned that colorful or playful packaging of such products can sometimes appeal to children.
So this http://a.abcnews.com/images/Health/ht_palcohol_powdered_alcohol_jc_150312_4x3_1600.jpg (yum, black and white is such colorful packaging) is easily confused with this https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.607995390550409589&pid=15.1. I suppose, but then again this is meaningless. All packaging of commercial products is designed to catch the eye of the consumer. Are you going to eat this http://ens-newswire.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/20130130_d-Conpackage.jpg just because it comes in a colorful package?
In March, Maryland’s comptroller, Peter Franchot, announced an agreement with alcohol industry trade groups to voluntarily refrain from distributing or selling powdered alcohol. He said consumers could create dangerous drinks by mixing multiple packets of palcohol into a single drink.
This guy is an obvious moron, you can create an even more dangerous drink by adding LEGAL 80 proof liquid vodka.
Oh, I seem to have missed the snorting bit. Go ahead and snort up an eight ounce glass of wine and tell me how that goes.
Depends. HDPE plastic is okay at the very least. There might be some others.
If you're determined to be obnoxious on the subject, get a flask. I assume a flask can handle high proof alcohol and that was the traditional method for alcoholics to take their hooch with them on the go. I don't see why that doesn't still work.
Also, this just has to be passed around so everyone gets this:
""But a packet of Palcohol is much harder to conceal" than liquid alcohol, the company making Palcohol says on its website. A packet of the substance measures 4 inches by 6 inches (10.2 centimeters by 15.2 cm), which is five times bigger than a 50-milliliter (1.7 ounces) bottle of liquid alcohol. "Alcohol in any format is subject to abuse if someone is determined to do so," the website says.""
I never claimed my posts were all perfect, but most of them are good, actually. And anyone that challenges one of my posts specifically and says SPECIFICALLY what they thought was wrong about it is likely as not to be proven wrong themselves.
I'm not stupid, sport. You might not like some of my views but those are what grown ups call "opinions" and just because mine conflict with yours doesn't mean I'm stupid or ignorant or unthoughtful. I'm just different. And not in a bad way.
We can be respectful of each other's distinctions or you can challenge me to rip your rhetorical balls out through your breathing hole... Either way. I'm game.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
in Iraq.
Albright said, well such is the price of peace.
The true evil is making drugs a law enforcement problem, and not a medical problem.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
You don't ban something because a few irresponsible people use it improperly,"
Hate to brake it to you but this is exactly what the world does.
Up next. The USA bans steaks because babies can't eat them.
So... how good is snorting black pepper anyway? I might give that a go tonight.
I like how you completely ignored the comment above yours to deflect so you can rail against the left. What's more annoying than leftist nannies, idiots on the right who immediately point the figure at the other guy. Grow the fuck up and quit deflecting. If you don't have anything intelligent to add to a conversation, shut the fuck up and educate yourself. Quit arguing like a child.
Back in the 80's, MADD was formed with the purpose of blackmailing all the states into banning alchohol sales to anyone under 21. This of course includes a good 3 years of actual voters, but fuck them, there are more over 21 than under, so we can just outvote them! Yes folks, a portion of the electorate can gang up on another portion and take their rights away. MADD has shown us the way. They accomplished this by getting Congress to threaten to take away their highway funds unless they complied. (BTW: Extra credit goes to Louisiana here for being about the last state to give in).
They got to my state just at the perfect time that the "grandfathering" of the new law assured people 1 year older than me could legally drink for 3 years while I could not. I didn't even like alcohol, but this completely pissed me off. 30 years later, and I still hold a grudge. I hate MADD with the heat of 1000 suns. Anything they are against, I'm automatically for. In 30 years, that rule has held me in good stead.
Many of the southern ones are heavily southern baptists, who shun alcohol completely:
http://www.brucesabin.com/alco...
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
So, demanding that everyone buy insurance or face a fine is not authoritarian to you?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
A war supported by a large majority of Democrats.
http://politics.slashdot.org/c...
It is disingenuous to even mention 9/11 in relation to Iraq, the Iraq war was about the real possibility of WMD in Iraq, which we now know was false, but at the time had no way to know. In the runup to the war, Saddam was refusing access to known weapons manufacturing facilities. He was threatening the Kurds and Iran with gas attacks. We now know it was a bluff, but that wasn't so clear at the time.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
I'll give you a hint, and it might help you sort through politics a bit. The president doesn't pass the budget. The president doesn't set the budget. Congress passes and creates the budget. The president has some pull, but it is not his budget.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
A state's a big place, there's less overlap between specific elements of morality and politics than you seem to think, and there is no conservative political party now, so I'm not sure what connection you're trying to insist on?
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
It's called tax and it is a practice universally applied in all first world countries, so no, it is most definitely not authoritarian.
He set the bar for totalitarianism, Bush Jr. was the one who failed.
Everything else is after the fact rationalizations because you didn't like the outcome.
Funny how that never comes up when republicans are gushing about Reaganomics all of which took place under a democrat controlled congress.
Again, you find that the data doesn't match your preconceptions and all you do is search for excuses to try to make it go away.
Except no other country does this. What other country fines, or taxes you as a penalty for not buying health insurance?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Did I have any preconceptions? I am refuting specific points of what you said, but I am the partisan hack?
Try refuting my points, not attacking me. Ad hominem is an infantile practice. :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...
I did no gushing (in either of my posts), I pointed out mistakes in your reasoning that allows you to try and state that Republicans are "TEH EBIL!", and Democrats are saints. I am pointing out that you have some false reasoning there as the president has very little control over the budget, so it is more accurate to compare congresses to the deficit if you want to claim that Democrats are fiscally conservative. You also should compare and contrast the voting records of specific people as it applies to budgets which are and are not balanced to determine if more of one type or another supports overspending.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
When you are in a hole the first step is to stop digging.
Except no other country does this. What other country fines, or taxes you as a penalty for not buying health insurance?
Except the many that do, like Canada, Germany and Switzerland.
You are not refuting anything I wrote. You are grasping at straws after someone set a very specific mark and your side failed it. So you go around digging for excuses to save your side, rather than admitting that if that's the mark for totalitarianism then Bush Jr. takes the prize.
I'm still trying to get it into my head... how do you possibly "freeze dry alcohol" - I'm not believing this at all !
Canada has socialized medicine. You are saying that in Canada, they also fine you for not going out and paying for health insurance? I wasn't aware that anyone in Canada owned health insurance, as it is not a requirement. If you go out and buy health insurance in Canada, do you then get a discount off your taxes (from your point of view, as it is a tax, not a fine...according to the SCOTUS)?
I don't believe you, link to actual information about the tax you can avoid by buying health insurance in any of these countries.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
I don't have a side in this fight. I am pointing out to you that bashing Bush for the budget is a stupid thing to do as he had no input into the budgets as the president has very little to do with the budget. I absolutely refuted your statement that Bush spent more than Obama.
Excuse me? government was smaller at the end of each of the last last three Democratic presidencies (Carter, Clinton, Obama) as % of GDP as compared to where it began while it has grown during the last three Republican presidencies (Reagan, Bush Sr., Bush Jr.).
I am refuting you, the president has nothing to do with the budget, so compare the congresses, as that will show you which side spends more. I don't know the answer, nor do I care, because I disagree with both sides on most issues, therefore usually vote libertarian.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
I think the powdered alcohol guy has had too many of his own packets.. an ounce of alcool at 120 proof would weigh pretty much the same as an ounce of powdered alcohol.. given that it's .6 of an ounce alcohol as well. So how is it lighter? Or easier to carry? Most hard alcohol comes in lighter plastic bottles now, so the glass isn't the issue...
Think about this. Almost all of us are taxpayers and too smart to drive drunk! If we can have yet another law we get much more fines in the local coffers and maybe they will leave the taxpayer alone. More laws +more fines= more money for gov't I propose Keyboard fines! every one must use Touch screens only approved by NSA! Keyboards will no longer be tolerated! ALL MUST BE POINTY!
It occurs to me that banning Palchohol will a boost to the cop and jail hotel business. Could make up for the slack created as the marijuana laws are relaxed...
As to what is going on in my life? What is going on in your life that you're going to waste an intelligent person's time with a lot of bullshit just for the petty desire to win an argument that you already lost?
Who the hell do you think you are? :D
Seriously though, I get bored and when people are saying stupid crap I can't stay interested unless I put some hot sauce in the mix and give it a stir. It isn't anything personal usually.
As to sucking it... what? You lost a point... Suck it.
And the whole thing about "what will I do about my booze on a camping trip" has become hilarious because if you knew anything about booze you'd not be asking these questions. People that are heavy alcoholics take their booze with them all time on trips and have done so for thousands of years and very very few of them would be dumb enough to think powdered alcohol was a good idea.
As to what we're talking about, we're talking about some sort of plastic container that you could bring your booze in. If the camel back doesn't work than that is too bad. But there are plenty of plastic canteens that do work. I looked it up. the ones made out of that other plastic won't dissolve.
As to the other plastics not being able to handle hiking... they're sold at camping stores for that purpose. They're not flexible but ridge... and while that isn't as cool as the camel back... you don't actually need a flexible container. Put it in your pack and stop bothering me.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
tetraethoxysilane. It hydrolyzes to ethanol and silica.
I never thought about snorting it, but I'm open minded. The sneezing might detract from any psychoactive affects, however.
, the president has nothing to do with the budget,
This pearl stands all on its own. There's nothing one needs to add to it.
Thank you for finally agreeing with me, it is always pleasant when someone's eyes finally open to the truth.
In case you are being sarcastic (as I am sure is the truth of it), here is how the budget process works:
https://www.nationalpriorities...
How Does the Federal Government Create a Budget?
There are five key steps in the federal budget process:
The President submits a budget request to Congress
The House and Senate pass budget resolutions
House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees “markup” appropriations bills
The House and Senate vote on appropriations bills and reconcile differences
The President signs each appropriations bill and the budget becomes law
Congress can totally ignore the President's recommendations on the budget, there is nothing that says they have to use his budget. At the end, the president can either sign the budget, or ignore it, or veto it, but that isn't really input, as Obama demonstrated in the budget crises.
However, the president has no input at all into taxes except sign/veto, so he ultimately has no control over the money coming in.
So, it is good to see you linking to actual information rather than spouting off about stuff you clearly don't understand and saying how horrible those Republicans are and how mean they are for picking on the poor defenseless Democrats.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Actually, getting pure 100% alcohol to drink is hard because ethanol attracts water {...} And even then, you need to protect that 100% pure ethanol from humidity because it will attract water.
Just pointing out that the *whole point* is to transport a substance E (with as much ethanol as possible inside) and dilute it before consumption.
It's not a problem that 100% ethanol attract water: you'll be throwing water in it anyway.
(But indeed: 95%-98% is probably the easiest to get, and that few 2-5% of water won't change much the reasoning).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
In which case you now have to account for the mass of a container for liquid and the potential for damage to it and the cost of that container, vs. a paper/foil packet for the powder.
That's basically a plastic bottle. It's as simple as it can get. Mass is negligible compared to the content. Comes in various size (big range of capacities. Small 100mL flask sold nearly every were as a mean to transport liquids on airplanes within allowed limits. Standard 33cL and 50cL bottle of water and soda, once empty recycle it to transport your booze). They tend to be rather solid.
Also, ethanol evaporates easily. In case you *DO* manage to damage the container (like falling with your back pack on a pointy rock) just let it dry.
(It's pratical experience transporting 60% grand-pa-distilled brandy in plain plastic bottle)
Power: you'll get either a big pack (think pack of flour or sugar) which might leak in a backpack. Or you'll get a carton with individually sealed small bags (think like individual teabags) which adds even more inefficiencies (as if the huge mass of powdered sugar isn't enough).
(Again, pratical experience with chocolate powder)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
However as others have pointed out in comments (user Rei mainly), containers used when hiking aren't designed to transport liquids that are that highly concentrated in ethanol. They're designed to be light and space-saving (i.e. thin, collapsible, plastic containers). I personally wouldn't trust anything I'd use to transport liquids (water) while hiking to be able to withstand transporting something like Everclear, especially when it's really hot outside.
Trust me, it's okay. Been there, done that. And basically any plastic bottle would to the job. If you're afraid that the space-age-plastic lining inside your collapsible sport-gear hitech bottle would react badly to ethanol, well just take a simple soda/soft drink/water/whatever bottle: any used 33cL or 50cL bottle will do the job, no problem.
Even if there were a container that can hold up to that kind of a liquid in those conditions, I'd still argue it's not the most efficient for hiking. It still contains a lot of weight for the water that it still contains.
As opposed to carrying a few kg of powdered sugar ?!? Do the math again: either you use a small plastic bottle filled with standard 40-60% booze (or 75%-95% aka 150 to 190 proof in your units - of everclear. If you live in a country where those things are easily sold).
Or you carry the equivalent of several packs of sugar powder, several kg ?!
Yup, you're not loosing volume and weight to a little bit of water that can't be used for drinking.
Instead you're losing volume and weight to a fuckton of sugar polymers cycles. Which basically are just as useless to rehydrate you as the water mixed in the alcool.
Or if you only want to take only a reasonnable amount of powder, well great for you, but that's basically equivalent of a very small plastic flask (the kind that are sold for transporting liquids in airplanes. or the kind in which you get test samples of think in drugstores). Which is really negligiable in size.
Go back to my quick math. For the equivalent of 1 AA battery worth of ethanol, you need to add a few times more volume (1 deck of card and a half) of powder.
Even if the ethanol is diluted 1:1 (because that the highest you can get, welcome in Europe), it still *way much more* space saving and weight saving than the powder. Not as in "we're a few mg better", but "it's a fraction of the place that the powder takes".
For me it's a no brainer.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Are you saying there's no tax in the third world?
Come to think of it, Palcohol shouldn't get attacked in the US in the name of protecting children from booze.
It should be attacked for false advertisment:
"Power alcohol" isn't powdered alcohol. It's a fuck ton of useless sugar powder with a tiny bit of ethanol sprinkled in.
It should be called "Powder+alcohol".
Or "Powder Sugar (may contain traces of ethanol)".
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Play dumb all you want, but just like the Deep South areas mentioned, it's all about those goddamned drunk heathens (Indians/Native Americans).
MADD is concerned about the colorful or playful packaging of such products that can sometimes appeal to children.
Children can't drive, what kind of a bullshit argument is this?
Have you ever hiked long distances with a bottle of vodka? I have. It's not the vodka that's the PITA, it's the bottle.
Buy a metal canteen.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
this stuff will be to real flavorful alcoholic drinks what powdered eggs and similar dehydrated hiking foods are to real meals. Or Kool Aid is to actual fruit juice.
any "bans" just create hype to sell the product. When in time, only the most desperate will be interested in it. Kids (okay I'm old so anyone under 30!) with no taste, alcoholics looking to sneak a stash, homeless dudes looking to increase their carrying capacity. Not really enough of a market to keep this sorta thing in business.
the more people complain, the longer until this stuff disappears from lack of interest. Streisand Effect Advertising.
Horseshit!
A lot of Democrats knew perfectly well refusing to support the Iraq Invasion, having been handed cherry-picked intelligence apparently proving what we now know was deceitful nonsense, would be an electoral death sentence. And you know perfectly well the CIA was screaming bloody murder about the phonied-up garbage coming from Bush and his neo-con chickenhawks.
Are you always this dishonest, or do you have to work at it?
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.