I am the proud owner of a can of collard greens, presented to me as a gag gift by a friend when I first moved out of my parents’ house, back in 1988. If I opened it up, what do you suppose the stuff inside would look like?
Probably collard greens in water. If the can isn’t bulging, then there isn’t any gas-releasing decay process occurring inside. It might even be safe to eat though I, personally, wouldn’t want to risk it.
Mind you - ** Q.E.D. ** you’re gonna need a shitload of gas to bloat a can - we’re not talking a plastic bag.
Also, the acidity could be fucking * way * off… might just be like a can of skanky green soup…
It might be collard browns by now…
Maybe it’s those springy snake things that pop out at you, after all it was a gag!
Schrodinger’s vegetables.
There is no such thing as a perfect seal. Within a few months the air inside the can was the same as the air outside the can–that assumes they were vacuum sealed and the seal was very very good. This means those greens had a limited shelf life of a few years. I would not expect them to smell bad on opening though. In my experience (parents who never threw anything away), if you were to open the can it probably wouldn’t look or smell bad, it just wouldn’t be safe to eat the stuff.
Deb wondering why the collard greens were a “gag” gift cause she likes them served with hushpuppies, mmmm 2world
The Topic…
What’s inside of a 15 year old can?
…made me think this might be a trick question.
Now had you asked, “What’s inside an 8 year old can?”
I’d have guessed… Michael Jackson?
What’s inside a 15-year old can? Nothing good.
Of course, you may be able to sell it on eBay.
I’ve opened cans that were eight years old, and it wasn’t pretty. If you really want to know, just open it. Be sure to tell us what you find. 
Ewww.
In the interest of science and knowledge, you should proceed to open the can and report back on the contents. Photos would help too.
Direct empirical evidence is the only way forward on this one. 
And remember, as Albert Einstein almost certainly never said, “If you’re not sure, just taste it.”
reminds me of that cooler thread, that which must not be opened
Just for the love of God , dont open it , hell will be unleashed from a can of collard greens, its a portal, not a can.
Declan
No offense, but I have a hard time believing this, deb. Maybe seals break down after several years (and frankly, unless they are damaged, I even doubt that) but several months? I’m not buying it.
Be very careful.
Yes it is a few months. I have seen studies that show that a hermetically sealed box (hermetically sealed box being one that has a leak rate of just a few billionth ppm or less) that show that they will be at outside air in about a year. My assumption is that the seal on this can was no where near hermitically sealed and came to a guesstimate of a few month.
That makes no more sense than to say that the box has a leak rate of six inches. Care to try again?
And I’ve had twenty-year old canned goods which were perfectly wholesome, without any of the horror stories you’uns are relating. All jars and many cans are designed with a pop-up lid to indicate that the seal is still good (depressed is a good seal, popped out means the seal has broken or something inside is outgassing). If the air inside were all leaked from outside, wouldn’t that pop the lid?
Chronos I don’t know what doesn’t make sense to you so I will try to explain the process. After hermetically sealing a package there is a machine that measure the leak rate. The measurement is in ppm (part per minute). “Hermetically sealed” is a misnomer because there is no such thing as a no leak package but ti is a term that is used. But the term means a package that has a very low leak rate. But the study has shown that even with a “hermetically sealed” package, the package will reach outside atmosphere conditions within a year or so. The benefit of “hermetically sealed” package is that it will keep out alot of the moisture and contaminates that fill the air since it takes longer to enter the package. Thus it will keep whatever is inside from degrading as quickly as if it was subjected to a more leaky seal.
If you will notice in my first post, I do not think that the contents of our can in question is nasty. I think they are not edible, but not the “hold your nose” type of stuff.
deb2world, I think chronos was referring to the “leak rate of a few billionth ppm.” For that to make any sense at all, you’d have to say something like “a leak rate of 0.001 ppm per (day/year/month/whatever.)” You’re missing an important part of the whole “rate” thing, namely the time factor. That, and the number you mentioned is definitely wonky.