6 ms·

> what is sold as truffle flavor is 2,4-dithiapentane, an organosulfur compound that is naturally found in truffles and > it can be extracted from oil. [...]

> what is sold as truffle flavor is 2,4-dithiapentane, an organosulfur compound that is naturally found in truffles and > it can be extracted from oil. [...] Liters of this petroleum-derived product, the colorless 2,4-dithiapentane liquid, are sourced for a few euros... We've discussed this in chemistry classes. The compound is the compound. Why does it matter where it's sourced? Anyone who's heard about the rarity of Actual Truffles can reason out that they can't possibly be squeezing enough "truffle oil" from Proper Truffles to supply the world. They're obviously recreating something. So they identified the tasty (smelly?) chemical that identifies with Real Truffles, and source it elsewhere. It reminds me of the every-decade story about how Twinkies are made, and the myriad of scary chemicals in them. The recipe has changed a bit over the years (actually getting safer...) and the last article I read on the subject was all "OMG THEY ARE USING INDUSTRIAL CLEANER IN TWINKIES" then continued to have a food scientist explain that they discovered the Actual Food ingredient cleaned better than the Chemical Cleaner, so switched from Chemical Cleaner to Actual Food Ingredient Cleaner.

Mistletoe 4y ago
It matters because I’m sure there are other compounds in truffles that make the flavor well rounded and unique. The same way watermelon and grape and blueberry flavor in candy don’t really taste anything at all like the real thing.
- phil21 4y ago
  Absolutely. I always thought I hated truffles until I was more or less forced into trying a few dishes while visiting Italy. Real truffles taste almost nothing like the fake truffle flavor you seem to get in most dishes. I think you made a great comparison to fake watermelon flavor vs. the real thing. It's only in the vague ballpark. I now will have a truffle dish if it's done at a very high end establishment that deals with those ingredients on a consistent basis. I still absolutely cannot stand the fake stuff (like truffle fries) to this day.
- icambron 4y ago
  The article definitely conflates these ideas: 1. there are real truffles that in his opinion are much better than the artificial flavor (fair) 2. the food industry is deceptive about real vs artificial truffle flavor (fair) 3. the artificial flavor is harmful because it is derived from petroleum (silly) The problem with the article is that 1 is interesting but just, like, your opinion man, and also like a thousand dollars. And 2 is business as usual. So if you want people not to just say “Sure, but I personally really like artificial truffle flavor” (which I did, several times, while reading) you need to convince them there’s something sinister about it that there isn’t about, say, artificial watermelon flavor. But 3 is a huge miss.
  - newZWhoDis 4y ago
    It’s not silly. The petroleum derived product is probably loaded with carcinogens that they’re failing to detect/filter out.
    - thedrbrian 4y ago
      If it’s the same chemical how can it be loaded with carcinogens?
      - bitcurious 4y ago
        Water from the pond is the same as water from my tap - they are both H20. Kind of like that, I imagine.
        ch4s3 4y ago
        Water from a pond and tap water are both heterogeneous mixtures of things dissolved and suspended in H2O, they are in fact very different. A synthesized chemical will be identical to the same chemical produced in a plant. The synthetic counterpart will just be in a mixture with distilled water or a neutral food grade oil.
        4y ago
- jagged-chisel 4y ago
  I don't think the fake fruit flavors are based on the same compounds found in the actual fruit. I'm pretty sure it's a combination of Whatever Can Be Sourced Cheaply to "emulate" the fruit flavor. I'll agree that an actual truffle, with all the fabulous fungus intact, is going to give a completely different experience. But if the claim is that the truffle-extracted compound is somehow different from the oil-extracted compound, that's a lie equivalent to claiming Real Truffles are flavoring your truffle fries.
  - ethbr0 4y ago
    Strawberries and oranges seem the most obvious offenders. Red and orange taste just isn't close.
- GordonS 4y ago
  Vanilla extract is another good example - sure, it tastes like vanilla, but real vanilla is so much more complex.
- s0rce 4y ago
  That's a bit tangential, I agree most simulated flavors with a single compound don't capture the complexity of a natural version with many compounds and more variation, however, that doesn't make them bad and in some situations, like vanillin in a baked good, its likely imperceptible.
boudin 4y ago
You don't have to be a scientist to know that twinkies are not a healthy thing. Pretty much all ultra-processed food is bad for you, however the industrial cleaner used is claimed to be safe. And if you taste a real truffle you'll know that it's a much more complex thing that this one compound, it just doesn't taste the same.
- jagged-chisel 4y ago
  > ...twinkies are not a healthy thing. You don't have to be an English major to see that I didn't claim they are. > ... the industrial cleaner used is claimed to be safe. Did you miss the point that it was a food ingredient before it was a cleaner? Kind of like discovering (theoretically) that corn meal scours better than Comet - of course we'll switch to corn meal! No one wants Accidental Comet lunch, we can eliminate that purchase altogether, and we can get a bigger quantity discount on corn meal! > ...it's a much more complex thing that this one compound Indeed! But I'm discussing the article's specific claims about the smelly compound.
thedrbrian 4y ago
Because you can’t be richer than thou if you’re eating or using the industrial chemical. It’s got to be the artisanal version See H Enfield:Richer than thou https://youtu.be/U8Kum8OUTuk https://youtu.be/U8Kum8OUTuk
chubot 4y ago
Are you saying there’s only one chemical compound that matters in the taste or nutrition of truffles? What about sweet potatoes or lamb? Can they be represented by a chemical?
- jagged-chisel 4y ago
  Nope. But that seems to be a claim in the article. And that the various sources of an identical chemical make for drastically different experiences. If the article were just "truffles are more than this one chemical compound, and you're being lied to about truffle flavoring on your fries," I would have commented differently (or maybe not at all.) But the article is too busy being elitist to make a reasonable argument like "truffles are more than this one chemical compound..."
  - chubot 4y ago
    The article doesn’t claim that; it’s closer to the opposite
wokwokwok 4y ago
Outside of the simplification of class, it turns out molecules are actually quite complicated. Significantly more complicated than “this one single molecule is the flavour X, and therefore indistinguishable from an actual X”. This reminds me of https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2019/09/solving-the-longstanding-mystery-of-how-friction-leads-to-static-electricity/ https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2019/09/solving-the-lo... > Greek philosopher Thales of Miletus first reported friction-induced static electricity in 600 B.C. After rubbing amber with fur, he noticed the fur attracted dust. > “Since then, it has become clear that rubbing induces static charging in all insulators — not just fur,” Marks said. “However, this is more or less where the scientific consensus ended.” Of course, you get taught in class that when you rub things together you pull free electrons off one and that magically makes static electricity. …of course, that’s a gross simplification and also wrong (read the article). Ie. it’s a fair suggestion that what you learnt in class was not domain specific to taste and organic chemistry; and, wrong. Pure chemical flavours are not equivalent to natural equivalents, because they are: - not chemically equivalent (the natural product is a mixture of many molecules) - probably not chemically pure (since they’re cheap ass imports) - probably contain contaminants from the chemical process they were produced by, if they have obvious (eg. a smell) differences from the natural product. So… yes, a chemical, in its pure form is just a chemical, no matter where it comes from. …but that’s an ideal, not reflected, most likely either the source natural ingredient, or the cheap ass petroleum products you can buy for a few bucks / liter.
- jagged-chisel 4y ago
  The article author spends much time focused on this one chemical compound. They should have made their argument about the complexities of truffles versus the simplicity of chemical compounds.
piskerpan 4y ago
You’d make a good point if the result was the same. It isn’t. Truffles (or anything we eat) is not a single chemical, it’s a dance of every molecule that creates it. I don’t particularly dislike truffle-flavored products, but I know they’re nothing like the real thing. Same exact thing goes for wasabi. Some “wasabi” products are just vile.
oppositelock 4y ago
This is one chemical that is a major part of the scent and flavor, but there are countless others. As an analogue, citric acid is the main "sour" flavor in lemons, but it's not very representative of a lemon, is it?
- s0rce 4y ago
  I agree with you but citric acid is a bit different as its not a volatile aroma compound in a lemon, its only sour and you taste it. I couldn't find a specific flavor compound responsible for lemon flavor in a quick google search but limonene appears to be responsible for the aroma of oranges...
amelius 4y ago
> We've discussed this in chemistry classes. The compound is the compound. Why does it matter where it's sourced? Because the purity might not be 100%. There might be some petroleum left in the end product. Especially given that suppliers have a financial incentive to not care about safety that much.
8note 4y ago
Im sure you wouldn't be okay with me soaking said oil into a piece of dog poop feeding it to you as a real truffle And of course, charging you the price of real truffles for it

Mistletoe 4y ago

It matters because I’m sure there are other compounds in truffles that make the flavor well rounded and unique. The same way watermelon and grape and blueberry flavor in candy don’t really taste anything at all like the real thing.

phil21 4y ago
Absolutely. I always thought I hated truffles until I was more or less forced into trying a few dishes while visiting Italy. Real truffles taste almost nothing like the fake truffle flavor you seem to get in most dishes. I think you made a great comparison to fake watermelon flavor vs. the real thing. It's only in the vague ballpark. I now will have a truffle dish if it's done at a very high end establishment that deals with those ingredients on a consistent basis. I still absolutely cannot stand the fake stuff (like truffle fries) to this day.
icambron 4y ago
The article definitely conflates these ideas: 1. there are real truffles that in his opinion are much better than the artificial flavor (fair) 2. the food industry is deceptive about real vs artificial truffle flavor (fair) 3. the artificial flavor is harmful because it is derived from petroleum (silly) The problem with the article is that 1 is interesting but just, like, your opinion man, and also like a thousand dollars. And 2 is business as usual. So if you want people not to just say “Sure, but I personally really like artificial truffle flavor” (which I did, several times, while reading) you need to convince them there’s something sinister about it that there isn’t about, say, artificial watermelon flavor. But 3 is a huge miss.
- newZWhoDis 4y ago
  It’s not silly. The petroleum derived product is probably loaded with carcinogens that they’re failing to detect/filter out.
  - thedrbrian 4y ago
    If it’s the same chemical how can it be loaded with carcinogens?
    - bitcurious 4y ago
      Water from the pond is the same as water from my tap - they are both H20. Kind of like that, I imagine.
      - ch4s3 4y ago
        Water from a pond and tap water are both heterogeneous mixtures of things dissolved and suspended in H2O, they are in fact very different. A synthesized chemical will be identical to the same chemical produced in a plant. The synthetic counterpart will just be in a mixture with distilled water or a neutral food grade oil.
        4y ago
jagged-chisel 4y ago
I don't think the fake fruit flavors are based on the same compounds found in the actual fruit. I'm pretty sure it's a combination of Whatever Can Be Sourced Cheaply to "emulate" the fruit flavor. I'll agree that an actual truffle, with all the fabulous fungus intact, is going to give a completely different experience. But if the claim is that the truffle-extracted compound is somehow different from the oil-extracted compound, that's a lie equivalent to claiming Real Truffles are flavoring your truffle fries.
- ethbr0 4y ago
  Strawberries and oranges seem the most obvious offenders. Red and orange taste just isn't close.
GordonS 4y ago
Vanilla extract is another good example - sure, it tastes like vanilla, but real vanilla is so much more complex.
s0rce 4y ago
That's a bit tangential, I agree most simulated flavors with a single compound don't capture the complexity of a natural version with many compounds and more variation, however, that doesn't make them bad and in some situations, like vanillin in a baked good, its likely imperceptible.

boudin 4y ago

You don't have to be a scientist to know that twinkies are not a healthy thing. Pretty much all ultra-processed food is bad for you, however the industrial cleaner used is claimed to be safe. And if you taste a real truffle you'll know that it's a much more complex thing that this one compound, it just doesn't taste the same.

jagged-chisel 4y ago
> ...twinkies are not a healthy thing. You don't have to be an English major to see that I didn't claim they are. > ... the industrial cleaner used is claimed to be safe. Did you miss the point that it was a food ingredient before it was a cleaner? Kind of like discovering (theoretically) that corn meal scours better than Comet - of course we'll switch to corn meal! No one wants Accidental Comet lunch, we can eliminate that purchase altogether, and we can get a bigger quantity discount on corn meal! > ...it's a much more complex thing that this one compound Indeed! But I'm discussing the article's specific claims about the smelly compound.

thedrbrian 4y ago

Because you can’t be richer than thou if you’re eating or using the industrial chemical. It’s got to be the artisanal version See H Enfield:Richer than thou https://youtu.be/U8Kum8OUTuk https://youtu.be/U8Kum8OUTuk

chubot 4y ago

Are you saying there’s only one chemical compound that matters in the taste or nutrition of truffles? What about sweet potatoes or lamb? Can they be represented by a chemical?

jagged-chisel 4y ago
Nope. But that seems to be a claim in the article. And that the various sources of an identical chemical make for drastically different experiences. If the article were just "truffles are more than this one chemical compound, and you're being lied to about truffle flavoring on your fries," I would have commented differently (or maybe not at all.) But the article is too busy being elitist to make a reasonable argument like "truffles are more than this one chemical compound..."
- chubot 4y ago
  The article doesn’t claim that; it’s closer to the opposite

wokwokwok 4y ago

Outside of the simplification of class, it turns out molecules are actually quite complicated. Significantly more complicated than “this one single molecule is the flavour X, and therefore indistinguishable from an actual X”. This reminds me of https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2019/09/solving-the-longstanding-mystery-of-how-friction-leads-to-static-electricity/ https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2019/09/solving-the-lo... > Greek philosopher Thales of Miletus first reported friction-induced static electricity in 600 B.C. After rubbing amber with fur, he noticed the fur attracted dust. > “Since then, it has become clear that rubbing induces static charging in all insulators — not just fur,” Marks said. “However, this is more or less where the scientific consensus ended.” Of course, you get taught in class that when you rub things together you pull free electrons off one and that magically makes static electricity. …of course, that’s a gross simplification and also wrong (read the article). Ie. it’s a fair suggestion that what you learnt in class was not domain specific to taste and organic chemistry; and, wrong. Pure chemical flavours are not equivalent to natural equivalents, because they are: - not chemically equivalent (the natural product is a mixture of many molecules) - probably not chemically pure (since they’re cheap ass imports) - probably contain contaminants from the chemical process they were produced by, if they have obvious (eg. a smell) differences from the natural product. So… yes, a chemical, in its pure form is just a chemical, no matter where it comes from. …but that’s an ideal, not reflected, most likely either the source natural ingredient, or the cheap ass petroleum products you can buy for a few bucks / liter.

jagged-chisel 4y ago
The article author spends much time focused on this one chemical compound. They should have made their argument about the complexities of truffles versus the simplicity of chemical compounds.

piskerpan 4y ago

You’d make a good point if the result was the same. It isn’t. Truffles (or anything we eat) is not a single chemical, it’s a dance of every molecule that creates it. I don’t particularly dislike truffle-flavored products, but I know they’re nothing like the real thing. Same exact thing goes for wasabi. Some “wasabi” products are just vile.

oppositelock 4y ago

This is one chemical that is a major part of the scent and flavor, but there are countless others. As an analogue, citric acid is the main "sour" flavor in lemons, but it's not very representative of a lemon, is it?

s0rce 4y ago
I agree with you but citric acid is a bit different as its not a volatile aroma compound in a lemon, its only sour and you taste it. I couldn't find a specific flavor compound responsible for lemon flavor in a quick google search but limonene appears to be responsible for the aroma of oranges...

amelius 4y ago

> We've discussed this in chemistry classes. The compound is the compound. Why does it matter where it's sourced? Because the purity might not be 100%. There might be some petroleum left in the end product. Especially given that suppliers have a financial incentive to not care about safety that much.

8note 4y ago

Im sure you wouldn't be okay with me soaking said oil into a piece of dog poop feeding it to you as a real truffle And of course, charging you the price of real truffles for it