PubMed · 13644730
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
B JOSEPHSON, E SANDEGREN. 1959-04-16. [On beer].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/13644730/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: Premix alcohol products (also known as ready-to-drink beverages) are a rapidly expanding alcohol category and frequently marketed using 'better for you' claims (e.g., 'Low sugar', 'Natural'). Little is known about the extent to which these products are ultra-processed or whether marketing claims align with ultra-processed status. This study aimed to address this evidence gap by auditing ingredient disclosure on premix products, assessing the ultra-processed status of these products, and determining the prevalence of 'better for you' claims with a particular focus on claims relating to ultra-processed status. METHODS: 534 premix alcohol products sold in major Australian retail outlets were assessed. Products were evaluated for compliance with mandatory ingredient disclosure, classified according to ultra-processed status based on the presence of indicators of ultra-processing (additives and other industrial ingredients), and analysed to determine the prevalence and types of 'better for you' marketing claims. RESULTS: Only 79% of assessed products displayed an ingredients list. Among compliant products, 98% contained at least one additive or ingredient indicative of ultra-processing, most commonly flavours, carbonating agents, colours, and sweeteners. One-third (33%) of products containing an ultra-processing indicator displayed a claim suggesting naturalness or minimal processing. Substantially higher proportions of ultra-processed products than non-ultra-processed products carried health-related claims. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Premix beverages available in Australia are overwhelmingly ultra-processed, yet many are marketed in ways that may mislead consumers about their composition and healthfulness. Stronger regulatory oversight of ingredient disclosure and marketing claims in this sector is urgently needed to support informed consumer decision-making.
The volatile congener analysis of 52 commercialized whiskeys (24 samples of single malt Scotch whiskey, 18 samples of bourbon whiskey, and 10 samples of Irish whiskey) was carried out by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry after liquid-liquid extraction with dichloromethane. Pattern recognition procedures were applied for discrimination of different whiskey categories. Multivariate data analysis includes linear discriminant analysis (LDA), k nearest neighbors (KNN), soft independent modeling of class analogy (SIMCA), procrustes discriminant analysis (PDA), and artificial neural networks techniques involving multilayer perceptrons (MLP) and probabilistic neural networks (PNN). Classification rules were validated by considering the number of false positives (FPs) and false negatives (FNs) of each class associated to the prediction set. Artificial neural networks led to the best results because of their intrinsic nonlinear features. Both techniques, MLP and PNN, gave zero FPs and zero FNs for all of the categories. KNN is a nonparametric method that also provides zero FPs and FNs for every class but only when selecting K = 3 neighbors. PDA produced good results also (zero FPs and FNs always) but only by selecting nine principal components for class modeling. LDA shows a lesser classification performance, because of the building of linear frontiers between classes that does not apply in many real situations. LDA led to one FP for bourbons and one FN for scotches. The worse results were obtained with SIMCA, which gave a higher number of FPs (five for both scotches and bourbons) and FNs (six for scotchs and two for bourbons). The possible cause of these findings is the strong influence of class inhomogeneities on the SIMCA performance. It is remarkable that in any case, all of the methodologies lead to zero FPs and FNs for the Irish whiskeys.
A new precise and sensitive method was used for the quantification of aliphatic aldehydes from C5 to C11 in highly ethanolic beverages such as freshly distilled spirits. Carbonyl compounds were derivatized using 3-methylbenzothiazolin-2-one hydrazone (MBTH) and then separated and detected by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Selective mass spectrometric detection of molecular ions of derivatives was performed to obtain a good sensibility (0.2-1.2 microg l(-1)) and a good selectivity. For a concentration of 20 microg l(-1), relative standard deviations were lower than 10% except for heaviest compounds (decanal and undecanal) where RSD were between 11 and 13%. The concentrations of aliphatic aldehydes were determined in nine samples of freshly distilled Calvados and two samples of freshly distilled Cognac with highest concentrations reported for 3-methylbutanal (from 170 to 1220 microg l(-1) in Calvados and from 1540 to 5500 microg l(-1) in Cognac). 3-Methylbutanal and hexanal, due to their low detection thresholds, could be important olfactive markers of these two products. Less than 1h30 is required to quantify the nine studied aliphatic aldehydes in freshly distilled spirits.