I see that industrially produced acetic acid from petroleum precursors is not allowed in food, only naturally produced acetic acid through fermentation.
:dubious:Is there a meaningful scientific distinction here? Or is this woo woo?
My reaction is that acetic acid is acetic acid, chemically identical.
the acid is identical. other things in the liquid may not be.
Where did you see this?
Right. The objection to allowing the use of acetic acid made from petroleum in foods, is presumably that it is liable to contain toxic impurities that biologically produced acetic acid will not. It is perfectly plausible that this is a well founded concern. If you can be confident of its purity, however, then no, there is no, chemical difference between acetic acids from differnt sources.
So those bottles of non-brewed condiment (catchy name, guys!) that you see in chip shops are still made using acetic acid from fermentation? I thought the whole point was that they were totally synthetic.
It’s not allowed in food… where it’s not. There are many locations where vinegar obtained through fermentation is so rare that people find it strange, while I find their “C13-free” so-called-vinegar way too harsh.
So long as the acid has been purified correctly, the only difference should be the content of Carbon 13.
It’s not just a matter of impurities you don’t want, but also of impurities that you do want. It’s the impurities that make the difference between, say, balsamic vinegar, red wine vinegar, and cider vinegar, and you won’t get any of those tasty delicious impurities in “non-brewed condiment”.
And you Europeans say that we Americans eat stuff full of chemicals!
Seriously though… what is that? Some kind of low-rent malt vinegar substitute? Malt vinegar’s awfully cheap, even over here in the US.
So, the acetic acid from petroleum would have less C13, right? Since there’s trace C13 in the atmosphere, but it decays to C12, if I have it right. Gee, I guess that radioactive carbon must be good for us. 
(Really, just kidding.)
Another possible difference could be isomers or stereoisomers. Does acetic acid have these?
For some compounds (I think Vitamin C is an example), organic sources have a mixture of forms, whereas artificial sources may have only (or predominantly) one form. Different forms can have different biological impacts. We all know about the different sugars (both monosaccharaides and disaccharaides) having different biological effects (despite having the same caloric content).
Other examples include medicines like two I’ve used (Xopenex and Nexium), which are isomers of previous medicines, where the previous medicines have a mixture, but research showed that one isomer was more effective and had fewer side effects than the mixtures.
Not that I ascribe any particular health significance to vinegar. Just curious if it might have different forms, that people might fuss over.
I had a similar discussion at home about vanillin, pointing out that while it is artificial, it’s not “imitation”. It’ real vanilla. But it may have impurities, and natural vanilla extract has lots of other chemicals in it (and thus a more nuanced flavor, but probably a nuance I’d never notice.) Then again, that natural vanilla might have more harmful impurities than the artificial.
Well, yeah! That stuff I can definitely taste! (mmm)
Actually, I would bet money that cheaper brands of balsamic or red wine vinegar are produced by the addition of flavoring agents to distilled white vinegar – rather than being “impurities” that were carefully retained from the original fermentation. (And depending on the country of origin, the white vinegar itself may be sourced either from grains or from petroleum.)
P.S. In case anyone cares, balsamic vinegar – even the real stuff – has absolutely nothing to do with the aromatic resins of the various plants called “balsam.” The Italian word balsamico more or less means “usable as a balm,” because this style of vinegar was thought to have medicinal properties.
You can make an approximation of various sorts of vinegars by figuring out which impurities add the most flavor, synthesizing those, and adding them to white vinegar. But you’ll still be missing out on all the other, subtler, contributions to the flavor, and you won’t be able to sell the product as “Apple cider vinegar”, or the like (it’d instead be “Cider flavored vinegar”, or something of the sort). It’s the same thing with synthetic vanillin: The vanillin itself can be synthesized, but that’s not the only compound that contributes to the flavor of real vanilla, and you’d be missing out on all the others.
In principle, of course, one could also synthesize the other trace compounds, one by one, until you got so far down the list that a human couldn’t tell the difference. But there’s very little point in doing so, since at that point it’d probably be cheaper just to use the actual plants.
No.
I think you both probably mean carbon14, don’t you? Carbon14 is the stuff used in radiocarbon dating because it is radioactive and and is found in higher proportion in recently living things and their products (such as vinegar made by brewing) than in products of things long dead (such as petroleum), where it has mostly long since decayed away (to nitrogen).
Carbon13 is indeed a thing, a (rare) naturally occurring isotope of carbon, but it is not radioactive, and although its proportion compared to the most common isotope, carbon12, does vary between different carbon sources somewhat, and in a way that is informative for some purposes, AFAIK its proportion does not particularly vary between recently living and long dead sources (like natural vinegar and petroleum) the way that C14 does.
