Video: 'Man Snorts Powdered Alcohol' To Prove Misinterpretations of The Science Behind It
Empty Lighthouse is a reader-supported site. This article may contain affiliate links to Amazon and other sites. We earn a commission on purchases made through these links.
Just when you think you've seen everything that you could see snorted, one man takes it another step further by snorting powder alcohol to prove that there are many misinterpretations about the science behind it.
(Video Below)
Brent Rose of Wired couldn't get his hands on the real powdered alcohol substance because it's not available for sale, but that hasn't stopped a push to ban the product before it's scheduled release for this summer. Rose's article states that he reached out to "Palcohol," the major company responsible for manufacturing the product, however they declined.
So like the folks back in the days of the prohibition did, Rose and his team made their own batch.
"So we were indeed forced to make our own, using this handy recipe posted by Popular Science last year," wrote Rose in his Wired article. "It calls for 100 grams of a maltodextrin made from tapioca flour and 30 grams of the strongest booze you can get your hands on.
In California, the most potent spirit that consumers can legally buy is 151 proof, or 75.5 percent alcohol. In other (lucky) states the proof can get into the 190s."
Rose began by mixing and consuming the alcohol which seemed to have a worst taste than normal alcohol judging from the facial reactions given as he pounded them back.
The experiment was conducted to prove some of the many worries parents and consumers had about the product even though it hasn't been released.
"Notes: Let's state the obvious here: this is not the commercial version of powdered alcohol," read the large caption of Rose's YouTube video.
"It's a very DIY version that was suggested by Popular Science (see link below). The version that is slated to go on sale this summer will almost certainly use a higher proof alcohol (151 is as high as we could legally get in California), so it'll be a bit more efficient. There's also a strong chance that it will use a cyclodextrin powder instead of the maltodextrin we used. Cyclodextrin is essentially a ring of sugar molecules that can trip liquids inside.
Right now food-grade cyclodextrin is very difficult to find for consumers and it's quite expensive, so we went with maltodextrin. We acknowledge that there's a chance that cyclodextrin would dissolve a bit faster, but we maintain that it would still be prohibitively slow for spiking a drink.
Everything else basically holds true. For the snorting section, for instance, that is the real quantity you would need to get one drink's worth."
It's probably not wise to snort anything but for the sake of science, what the heck right? Check out the results of the experiment below.