วีดีโอ

you can try vaccum packing and freezing

@@sciencebehindfoods If I want to store it on ambient temperature, What can be done?

Thank you🙏🙏🙏

Arradda ni

Ninte vappa

Skibidi funde🥲

Ninte daddy ​@@hbxhudhud1021

@@ath_ul8565athu undo avn

Microfiltration at home without a machine can be challenging but possible with some basic tools and materials. Here’s a simple method you can try: Materials Needed Filter materials: Cheesecloth or muslin cloth: These are fine enough to remove larger particles. Coffee filters: These are finer than cheesecloth and can help in the filtration process. Activated charcoal: Used for further purification. Containers: Two clean containers, one for the unfiltered liquid and one for the filtered liquid. Rubber bands or string: To secure the filters over the containers. Funnel: To direct the liquid into the filters. Steps to Microfilter Prepare the Containers: Place the cheesecloth or muslin cloth over the first container and secure it with a rubber band or string. On top of the cheesecloth, place a coffee filter. This will provide an additional layer of filtration. Pouring the Liquid: Slowly pour the liquid you want to filter through the funnel into the container with the filters. This will remove larger particles and some smaller impurities. Secondary Filtration: For an additional layer of filtration, you can use activated charcoal. Place a layer of activated charcoal in another coffee filter and pour the liquid through this filter into the second container. The charcoal will help remove finer impurities and improve the quality of the filtration. Repeat if Necessary: If the liquid still appears cloudy or has impurities, you can repeat the filtration process multiple times, changing the filters as needed. Tips for Effective Microfiltration Patience: The process can be slow, especially if you are filtering a large quantity of liquid. Take your time to ensure the liquid passes through the filters properly. Clean Filters: Make sure your filters are clean and in good condition. Clogged or dirty filters will reduce the efficiency of the filtration process. Layering: Using multiple layers of filtration materials can help improve the quality of the filtered liquid. For example, you might start with cheesecloth, then a coffee filter, and finish with activated charcoal. This method can be effective for small-scale filtration at home, although it may not achieve the same level of purity as industrial microfiltration systems.

If we think the experiment is to measure the protein content of 5 g of meat, You need following data set(here I am giving values for the example) The amount of HCL for the titration= 3ml The amount of HCL for blank titration = 1ml Normality of HCL = 0.1 N Weight of the sample=5g use the equation to calculate N % it will be 0.0056 g then you can calculate protein % use the equation. ( coversion factor of meat is 6.25) 0.035% is the final answer.

Thank you

Thank you

Thank you for your comment and for raising an important point about the microbiome. While it's true that radiation can affect living organisms, it's essential to understand the context. The levels of radiation used in food irradiation are carefully regulated and are not at levels that would harm beneficial bacteria in our bodies or in the food itself. Food irradiation is a scientifically proven method that helps to improve food safety by reducing the risk of foodborne illnesses and extending shelf life. It targets harmful bacteria, parasites, and pathogens that can cause foodborne diseases, without significantly impacting the nutritional content of the food. Maintaining a healthy microbiome is indeed crucial for overall health, and there are various ways to support it, such as consuming a diverse range of fiber-rich foods, fermented foods, and probiotics. While it's understandable to have concerns, it's important to rely on evidence-based information when evaluating the safety and benefits of food processing methods like irradiation. If you have further questions or concerns, I'm more than happy to discuss them. Thanks again for engaging with my content.

Thanks for such a nice reply to my poorly voiced concern about hearing “ you won’t get radiation sickness from irradiated food.” That was never a concern in my mind, but bennificial bacterial quality, diversity, and quantity is. I am sorry for how I worded my first post. Can you point me to a peer reviewed, unbiased NIH study that shows that it “only kills bad bacteria and leaves the beneficial bacteria unharmed? That seems a little hard to believe without seeing supporting documentation from a quality study by a university not paid or receiving funding, equipment, etc, by the irradiation industry. Bennificial bacteria is easily destroyed. I am not against food irradiation for certain uses as long as it does not touch organic foods, in general. I actually see irradiation as a positive tool in food safety, but not for everything. I would prefer to see food cultivation, packaging, transporting, and distribution processes improved to become safer to avoid contamination in the first place, so irradiation is not always necessary. I mean, if wild pigs get into a lettuce farm, defecate on the produce, and cause a deadly parasite, irriiadate so the food can still be safe and useful. That is how I would prefer it be used. FYI, I think Albertsons use’s irradiation on their conventional parsely and cilantro, and now it only lasts three days in my fridige. It used to last 2 weeks, so I fear it has allowed them to abuse the transportion and distribution system and the shelf life did not benefit us the consumers, but rather the seller. If you want consumers to accept irradiation, I would work on preventing what ever is causing our produce from going bad so fast in our fridge. From where I sit, thing have gotten worse, not better. This is a friendly FYI, not an accusation, or a statement against food irradiation.. @@sciencebehindfoods

I am sure you are very busy, but could you direct me to a few published, peer reviewed study, not funded by the food industry that supports your statement? “The levels of radiation used in food irradiation are carefully regulated and are not at levels that would harm beneficial bacteria in our bodies or in the food itself.” Basically, you are saying that it kills the bad stuff, but leaves the good stuff intact.

Thank you for your question and interest in the alcohol test for milk quality featured in my video. Ensuring the accuracy and reliability of this test is crucial, and I'm glad you raised this point. To address your concern, it's important to note that the alcohol test is a simple yet effective method to detect the presence of added water or adulterants in milk. However, it's essential to take certain control measures to ensure the test results are accurate: Source of Milk: The quality of milk used for testing is paramount. We sourced our milk samples from reputable suppliers known for their adherence to quality standards and regulations. Storage and Handling: Proper storage and handling of milk samples are crucial to prevent contamination and maintain integrity. We ensured that all milk samples were stored at appropriate temperatures and handled with care throughout the testing process. Testing Procedure: Following standardized testing procedures is essential for consistent and reliable results. We strictly adhered to established protocols for conducting the alcohol test, including the correct measurement of milk and alcohol proportions. Calibration and Validation: Before conducting the test, we calibrated our equipment and validated the testing procedure to ensure its accuracy and reliability. This involved testing known samples with predetermined alcohol levels to verify the sensitivity and specificity of the method. Quality Assurance: Regular quality checks and internal controls were implemented to monitor the consistency and reliability of our testing process. Any deviations or anomalies were thoroughly investigated and addressed. By implementing these control measures, we aimed to minimize potential errors and ensure the integrity of the alcohol test results. Transparency and accountability are fundamental principles in our testing process, and we are committed to upholding the highest standards of quality and accuracy. I hope this addresses your concerns. If you have any further questions or require more information, please feel free to ask. Thank you for engaging with my content.

Thank you for your question! Both the duo-trio test and the triangle test are commonly used sensory evaluation methods, but they have distinct purposes and methodologies. Duo-Trio Test: In the duo-trio test, also known as the two-out-of-three test, panelists are presented with three samples: two of them are identical (the reference sample and one of the test samples), while the third sample is different (the alternate test sample). Panelists are asked to identify the sample that matches the reference sample. This test is typically used to determine whether a sensory difference exists between two products. Triangle Test: The triangle test, on the other hand, is another discrimination test where panelists are presented with three samples: two of them are identical (the reference sample) and one is different (the test sample). Panelists are asked to identify the odd sample, the one that is different from the other two. This test is used to determine whether there is a detectable sensory difference between two samples. The main distinction between the duo-trio test and the triangle test lies in the task assigned to the panelists. In the duo-trio test, panelists must choose the sample that matches the reference, while in the triangle test, they must identify the sample that is different from the others. Both tests are valuable tools in sensory evaluation, allowing researchers and product developers to assess differences in sensory attributes and determine whether those differences are perceptible to consumers. I hope this clarifies the distinction between the duo-trio test and the triangle test. If you have any further questions or need additional information, please feel free to ask.

Thank you for your comment and for sharing your experience. I understand that every dog is different and may have varying sensitivities to certain foods. While it's possible that your dog didn't show any immediate symptoms after consuming chocolate, it's essential to recognize that chocolate can be harmful to dogs in the long run, even if they don't display immediate symptoms. Chocolate contains substances like theobromine and caffeine, which are toxic to dogs and can lead to symptoms ranging from mild gastrointestinal upset to more severe issues like seizures and even death, depending on the amount ingested and the size of the dog. Even if your dog didn't show any apparent signs of illness after consuming chocolate, it's still best to avoid giving chocolate to dogs altogether to prevent any potential risks to their health. I made this video to raise awareness about the dangers of feeding chocolate to dogs and to help pet owners make informed decisions about their furry friends' health and well-being. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to reach out. Thank you for engaging with my content.

Certainly! Solar drying and drying using a dehydrator are two methods employed to remove moisture from food items, preserving them for longer-term storage. Here's a comparison of both methods: 1. **Principle of Operation**: - **Solar Drying**: Relies on the sun's energy to heat up and evaporate moisture from the food. Food items are typically spread out on trays or racks and placed under direct sunlight. - **Dehydrator**: Utilizes electric power to generate heat and air circulation to remove moisture from the food. Food is placed on trays inside the dehydrator, which blows warm air over the food. 2. **Control**: - **Solar Drying**: Largely dependent on weather conditions such as sunlight intensity and ambient temperature. It's less controllable as it relies on environmental factors. - **Dehydrator**: Offers precise control over temperature and airflow, allowing for consistent drying results regardless of external conditions. 3. **Speed**: - **Solar Drying**: Drying time can vary greatly depending on weather conditions. It may take longer compared to using a dehydrator, especially on cloudy or humid days. - **Dehydrator**: Typically, faster due to controlled conditions. It can dehydrate food relatively quickly, often within hours. 4. **Energy Efficiency**: - **Solar Drying**: Utilizes renewable solar energy, making it environmentally friendly and cost-effective once the initial setup is in place. However, efficiency can vary depending on location and weather conditions. - **Dehydrator**: Relies on electricity, which may not be as environmentally friendly depending on the source of electricity. However, modern dehydrators are designed to be energy efficient. 5. **Quality of Dried Food**: - **Solar Drying**: Generally, produces good quality dried food with a more natural taste. The slow drying process can help retain nutrients and flavors. - **Dehydrator**: Provides consistent results and faster drying times, which can help preserve colors, flavors, and nutrients effectively. 6. **Space and Portability**: - **Solar Drying**: Requires outdoor space with exposure to direct sunlight. It may not be suitable for urban or indoor settings unless a dedicated solar dehydrator setup is available. - **Dehydrator**: Compact and can be used indoors, making it suitable for various settings including homes, apartments, and commercial kitchens. Some models are designed for portability. 7. **Cost**: - **Solar Drying**: Initial setup costs may include trays or racks, mesh screens, and possibly a dedicated solar dehydrator. However, operational costs are minimal once the setup is established. - **Dehydrator**: Requires an upfront investment in the appliance, but operational costs are tied to electricity usage, which can vary depending on energy rates and usage. In summary, both solar drying and using a dehydrator are effective methods for food preservation, each with its advantages and limitations. The choice between the two methods often depends on factors such as availability of space, desired drying speed, control over drying conditions, and environmental considerations.

Here are the advantages and disadvantages of both solar drying and drying using a dehydrator: Advantages of Solar Drying: 👈 Cost-Effective: Once the initial setup is in place, solar drying is relatively inexpensive as it relies on free solar energy. Environmentally Friendly: Solar drying uses renewable energy, reducing reliance on electricity and lowering carbon footprint. Natural Preservation: The slow drying process helps retain nutrients, flavors, and colors in the food, resulting in a more natural end product. Suitable for Off-Grid Living: Ideal for areas with limited access to electricity, making it suitable for off-grid living or remote locations. Traditional Method: Solar drying has been used for centuries, offering a traditional approach to food preservation that connects with cultural heritage. Disadvantages of Solar Drying: 👈 Weather Dependency: Drying time and efficiency are heavily dependent on weather conditions, such as sunlight intensity, temperature, and humidity. Space Requirements: Requires ample outdoor space with exposure to direct sunlight, which may not be feasible in urban or indoor settings. Slower Drying Time: Compared to dehydrators, solar drying can take longer, especially on cloudy or humid days, prolonging the time required for food preservation. Risk of Contamination: Exposing food outdoors may increase the risk of contamination from pests, dust, or airborne pollutants. Limited Control: Lack of control over drying conditions may result in inconsistent drying outcomes, affecting the quality of the dried food. Advantages of Drying Using a Dehydrator: 👈 Controlled Drying Conditions: Provides precise control over temperature and airflow, ensuring consistent and efficient drying results. Faster Drying: Typically dries food faster compared to solar drying, reducing overall processing time. Convenience: Can be used indoors, making it suitable for a variety of settings including homes, apartments, and commercial kitchens. Compact Design: Dehydrators are available in compact sizes, saving space and offering portability for storage or transportation. Versatility: Some dehydrator models offer adjustable settings and multiple trays, allowing for drying a variety of foods simultaneously. Disadvantages of Drying Using a Dehydrator: 👈 Electricity Dependency: Relies on electricity, increasing operational costs and environmental impact compared to solar drying. Initial Cost: Requires an upfront investment in the appliance, which may be a barrier for some users. Limited by Power Source: May not be suitable for off-grid living or areas with unreliable electricity supply. Less Natural: Some argue that the rapid drying process of dehydrators may result in a loss of nutrients and flavors compared to solar drying. Maintenance: Requires regular cleaning and maintenance of the appliance to ensure optimal performance and longevity. In conclusion, both solar drying and drying using a dehydrator offer distinct advantages and disadvantages, and the choice between the two methods depends on factors such as availability of space, desired drying speed, control over drying conditions, and environmental considerations.

Uhm yes they do, study more

You learn new things every day.

Plants have genders. If you went to high school you learn this in biology 🧬