Whisky Made From Diabetics' Urine

It's doubtful that any other distillery will come up with a whisky that tastes like Gilpin Family Whisky because of its secret ingredient: urine. Researcher and designer James Gilpin uses the sugar rich urine of elderly diabetics to make his high-end single malt whisky. From the article: "The source material is acquired from elderly volunteers, including Gilpin's own grandmother, Patricia. The urine is purified in the same way as mains water is purified, with the sugar molecules removed and added to the mash stock to accelerate the whisky's fermentation process. Traditionally, that sugar would be made from the starches in the mash."

So what is the purpose of this?

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no explanation for why anyone would want to do this other than to "accelerate the fermentation process", which distillers typically do with just normal sugar.

What's so special about diabetic sugar?

Personally I don't think this is a very good idea. Consider this is human waste which means lots of potential for undesired interaction in other humans. With all the drugs and pathogens that might be in this, there is no way to guarantee that the filtering process works 100%. I mean Mad Cow disease is an example of one of those things that popped up that we had no idea how to handle.

Re:Still not as good as my "Orphan Blood Rum"

[camperslo]

Next up: brewing in zero-G

This ties in with the space junk story "The space age has filled Earth's orbit with all manner of space junk, from spent rocket stages to frozen bags of astronaut urine..."

Re:How is this news?

[retchdog]

I don't personally like Yuengling, but that's hardly relevant.

It's quite clear that "American beer" generally refers to the product of megabreweries, which is the common face of beer in America. The criticism of American beer is properly understood, whether you agree or not, as a criticism of mainstream American taste for accepting such crap. I think that whatever one's tastes, there will be an American beer (perhaps very obscure) that comes pretty close to satisfying it. The same cannot be said of other countries, where the unified national taste dictates the product.

Now personally, I think American budweiser just completes the commodification and blandification of beer pioneered in Plzen (i.e., birthplace of Pilsner) some centuries ago. Once again America finishes what Europe starts.

I'll pay a premium for and appreciate good ale; stout; gueuze; barleywine; &c., but if I want something `smooth' I'll go all the way with an ice-cold Natty, Coors or Budweiser rather than go half-cocked with Pilsner Urquell or similar. Fortunately it's also a cheaper option.

Pure BS

[gregor-e]

The only time there is glucose in the urine is when blood glucose levels exceed the ability of the kidneys to resorb the glucose back into the blood - a threshold level that is typically quite high (200 ml/dl). People with diagnosed diabetes typically have their blood sugar under control, and therefore do not excrete glucose in their urine. Even in cases where people do excrete glucose in their urine, it is around only 1 gm per liter. When sugar ferments, roughly 50% of its mass is given up in carbon dioxide. Also, when making whiskey, only about half of the alcohol from a run is kept, that being the middle part of the run, known as the "hearts", while the "heads" and the "tails" of the run are discarded. So of each gram of piss-sugar collected (assuming 100% harvesting efficiency), only about 1/4 gm of ethanol ends up in whiskey. To make a 750 ml of 80-proof would require over 300 gm of alcohol, which would require 1200 gm of piss-sugar, which would require over 1200 liters (over 317 US Gallons) of piss. Adult humans produce an average of 1-2 liters of urine per day. So, to make an average bottle of average strength whiskey, they'd have to collect 100% of the sugar from the urine of a diabetic with uncontrolled blood sugar for the better part of a year. Sorry, that's just BS.

Re:How is this news?

[russ1337]

I hear you. I went to a music festival in the DFW and they had a sign saying "local beers $3, Imported beers $4". I asked for a shiner bock and the chick said "that'll be $4". To which i replied "but local beers are $3, how is that imported when it's made right here in Texas?" She said "its imported, its $4".

It's not the dumbest thing I've had a Texan say though.