Talk:Applejack

Isn't there a dance called the Applejack?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.10.47 (talk) 08:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

There should probably be a disambiguation for this word.

Having read the below statements, it is obvious that the author(s) of this article do indeed lack any knowledge of the chemical processes of zymurgy or ethanol distillation. It is well documented that there is in fact no methanol produced during fermentation whilst utilizing Saccharomyces cerevisiae. This is also true of products produced by fractional crystallization and normal distilation. There are various fusels that may be formed during fermentation. These however, are not toxic at the concentrations found in normal fermentations, even by wild yeasts. At most, excess fusel oils will result in a worse than normal hangover, certainly no worse than cheap Tequila. Also, it should be noted that the most common antidote for methanol poisoning is in fact ethanol. This is administered in amounts much lower than the ratio of ethanol to methanol even in a horrendously botched batch of applejack (I still don't see how you could, but we'll say you can for the sake of argument). In fact the only feasible way introduce toxic levels of methanol to applejack without possessing a distillation apparatus capable destructive distillation, these are usually rather large industrial stills built expressly for the rendering of methanol from the byproducts of the logging industry, would be to flavor denatured alcohol with apples.

Ignorance of chemistry & thermodynamics, as in article freeze distillation as well. Don't hesitate to fix these before i get to them. --Jerzy(t) 22:30, 2004 Dec 23 (UTC)

"Freeze distilling can concentrate methanol and fusel alcohols (by-products of fermentation that true distillation separates out) in applejack to unhealthy levels. As a result, many countries prohibit such applejack as a health measure."

Am I the only one who is somewhat confused by this? If these fermentation by-products are so dangerous, why are they allowed to exist in the non-distilled product? It seems to me like the danger should be equal in both cases. For example, let's say (for the sake of argument) that a pint of regular hard cider is equivalent to a shot of applejack. Let's also say that I require 4 drinks to get me to my "happy place." It doesn't matter whether I'm drinking the cider or the applejack--I'll be consuming the same amount of "methanol and fusel alcohols" either way. To put it another way, freeze distillation only reduces the amount of water present--it doesn't affect the ethanol/harmful byproducts ratio at all, nor does it increase the overall level of harmful byproducts. Is there some particular reason why the water/harmful byproducts ratio is important? Simply saying that the harmful byproducts become "more concentrated" is disingenuous, because drinkers will consume a (roughly) proportionally smaller portion of the harder liquor-- in fact, if the overall level of actual intoxication remains the same, then so will the amount of (consumed) harmful by-products remain the same.

Why do these byproducts only become a health concern after freeze distillation? --Lode Runner

Having read the above, and having some very modest passing knowledge of chemistry, I would say that manufacture of applejack, or other liquors, by distillation done under very stringently controlled conditions can keep the fusel oil out. But when we are talking about moonshiners, we are, perhaps unfortunately, talking about people whose idea of industrial hygiene is right down there with meth cooks ["What the _____? You are seriously equating alcohol distillers with people who create a "product" for consumption using powerful solvents - methanol most likely - and strippers like sodium hydroxide - lye? That is pretty ignorant" - Kenji Fuse]. We're talking about mixing a batch of something or other in a rusty washtub and distilling it through an old car radiator without first bothering to rinse out the antifreeze [In 1928, maybe!]. And if this is not universally true, then it is true often enough that it motivated the US government to regulate liquor manufacture in the name of public health.

There are many subtle things that can go wrong during fermentation and many more during the distillation process, that can result in a product that looks and smells more or less normal yet is quite horribly poisonous, even if the moonshiner isn't doing the old sawdust trick to increase the yield. For example, accidental contamination of the fermenting mash by certain bacteria, like Clostridium acetobutylicum, can result in a significant portion of the sugar being converted to acetone, butanols, and higher alcohols.

This is the reasoning behind the liquor manufacturing license system, at least in the US. The fees are high to ensure that only a large enterprise can get into this business, because a small-time operator in the back woods probably can't afford to hire a staff of chemists and chemical engineers.[Oh dear Lord, this is either paranoid, absurd, or an apology to illegitimate power]

"Applejack is also the name of a Hasbro My Little Pony. Created in 1983-1984 as an Earth Pony, Applejack is orange with yellow hair and green eyes. Her symbol is a group of red-orange apples with green leaves, and she has white freckles on her cheeks. Applejack and Bow Tie were the first and only adult ponies (in the U.S.) to have those white freckles on their faces. They were also the first two ponies to stand with their heads turned to the side which became a common pose. A slightly different version (same pose) of Applejack was one of a line of ponies made in Italy, as noted on her hoof. Also, sold outside the U.S., there were also different versions of Applejack and Bow Tie with their heads straight in the Collector Ponies' pose. There is also a Baby Applejack and Baby Bow Tie who were not sold in the U.S."

''Are you kidding me? LMAO.''

Titles on pages
I moved the information on the beverage to "Applejack (beverage)" and tagged "Applejack" as a disambiguation page. Should we keep it like that or should we move "Applejack" to "Applejack (disambiguation)" and then "Applejack (beverage)" to "Applejack"? If we keep it like it is now, the links to "Applejack" needs to be checked and some needs to point to "Applejack (beverage)" instead. --Bensin 09:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)