5 ms·

Ok… is there some kind of educated reasoning that leads you to believe that people drank beer because it was safer?

defrost 3y ago
In Ye Olde Days: Beers and Ales used hops and boiled water. Drinking water near large population centres were not boiled or treated. People that mostly drank wines, beers, and ales likely suffered fewer bouts of dysentry and worse.
- klodolph 3y ago
  That’s some very D-grade, armchair history work here. Straight out of the D&D handbook, perhaps. Around the D&D table is where I most heard the myth that people, historically, drank beer because it was cleaner than water. Here’s a competing theory—people liked beer, and drank a lot of it. If we want to get past armchair history, we need something more than a patchwork of unfounded speculation. We want something that would lead us to believe that one explanation was better than the other, or perhaps both are good, or neither.
  - defrost 3y ago
    Ohhhhhh, you're putting the stress on because. There's no need to be a tosser (see HN guidelines), it's an argument that comes straight out of Medieaval recipe books for make beers and ales, straight from the time of the great miasma, and from the mouths of many UK historians.
    - klodolph 3y ago
      Can you provide some clues or hints so I can find these UK historians that make these claims? It’s frustrating, because I’ve been told off for asking for evidence, even though I didn’t ask for evidence. Every time I try get an answer, all the resources I find contradict the claims here. Water was the most common drink. Communities were built around wells or other water sources. The Romans built massive systems of aqueducts so they could have more water. I did a Google search and found a page full of results directly contradicting the claim that people drank beer because it was cleaner.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - ffhhttt 3y ago
      If boiling is enough what’s the point of “wasting” grain if your only goal is to make the water safe to drink? Also medieval authorities to great effort to keep water sources unpolluted with outright draconian punishments for those who did that. Of course they didn’t always succeed.. but still.
      - defrost 3y ago
        > if your only goal is to make the water safe to drink? The point of medieval beer and ale making exercises was to make beer and ale, (which required boiling water as part of the common recipes of the day).. which very likely created a notable difference between those drinking mostly large amounts of low alcohol beer | ale made from boiled water compared to those that mostly drank unboiled liquids.
        ffhhttt 3y ago
        You’re implying that it wasn’t common knowledge that boiling water made it somewhat safer to drink? > which very likely created a notable difference between those drinking Well I suppose they were somewhat more drunk most of the time and also more well off since they could afford it? Also again, you can make assumptions but I’m not aware that there is substantial evidence that this was the case.
      - code_duck 3y ago
        It also turns the water and grain into a something nourishing. Beer has carbs and vitamins.
flangola7 3y ago
Alcohol kills pathogens.
- klodolph 3y ago
  Beer does not have a strong enough alcohol content to be used as a disinfectant. In order to make beer, you actually have to have clean water, as an input.
- ffhhttt 3y ago
  Do you also believe in homeopathy? 5% ABV does not kill much. You’d need distilled spirits for that.
  - ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago
    I'd image yeast produces alcohol to gain some advantage over over microbes
- NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
  We went around with this at the beginning of the pandemic, when Christians debated whether it was safe to offer the Most Precious Blood as Holy Communion. While silver and other noble metals have antimicrobial properties, the percentage of alcohol in altar wine is way too low to make a difference. When transubstantiated from wine to blood, it retains the accidents of wine, and those accidents will infect you with a disease just as any other. That's the miracle of the Eucharist; our feeble senses can't distinguish it, nor could a microscope or science lab point out which is Eucharist, and which is ordinary wine. Almost all Western churches suspended distribution under the species of wine, even though the odds were very, very low. The Eastern Orthodox couldn't do this, however, and it led to several Greek bishops insisting that no disease could come from this Holiest of Mysteries, and that it is uniquely special and don't worry about COVID-19.

In Ye Olde Days: Beers and Ales used hops and boiled water. Drinking water near large population centres were not boiled or treated. People that mostly drank wines, beers, and ales likely suffered fewer bouts of dysentry and worse.

klodolph 3y ago
That’s some very D-grade, armchair history work here. Straight out of the D&D handbook, perhaps. Around the D&D table is where I most heard the myth that people, historically, drank beer because it was cleaner than water. Here’s a competing theory—people liked beer, and drank a lot of it. If we want to get past armchair history, we need something more than a patchwork of unfounded speculation. We want something that would lead us to believe that one explanation was better than the other, or perhaps both are good, or neither.
- defrost 3y ago
  Ohhhhhh, you're putting the stress on because. There's no need to be a tosser (see HN guidelines), it's an argument that comes straight out of Medieaval recipe books for make beers and ales, straight from the time of the great miasma, and from the mouths of many UK historians.
  - klodolph 3y ago
    Can you provide some clues or hints so I can find these UK historians that make these claims? It’s frustrating, because I’ve been told off for asking for evidence, even though I didn’t ask for evidence. Every time I try get an answer, all the resources I find contradict the claims here. Water was the most common drink. Communities were built around wells or other water sources. The Romans built massive systems of aqueducts so they could have more water. I did a Google search and found a page full of results directly contradicting the claim that people drank beer because it was cleaner.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - ffhhttt 3y ago
    If boiling is enough what’s the point of “wasting” grain if your only goal is to make the water safe to drink? Also medieval authorities to great effort to keep water sources unpolluted with outright draconian punishments for those who did that. Of course they didn’t always succeed.. but still.
    - defrost 3y ago
      > if your only goal is to make the water safe to drink? The point of medieval beer and ale making exercises was to make beer and ale, (which required boiling water as part of the common recipes of the day).. which very likely created a notable difference between those drinking mostly large amounts of low alcohol beer | ale made from boiled water compared to those that mostly drank unboiled liquids.
      - ffhhttt 3y ago
        You’re implying that it wasn’t common knowledge that boiling water made it somewhat safer to drink? > which very likely created a notable difference between those drinking Well I suppose they were somewhat more drunk most of the time and also more well off since they could afford it? Also again, you can make assumptions but I’m not aware that there is substantial evidence that this was the case.
    - code_duck 3y ago
      It also turns the water and grain into a something nourishing. Beer has carbs and vitamins.

flangola7 3y ago

Alcohol kills pathogens.

klodolph 3y ago
Beer does not have a strong enough alcohol content to be used as a disinfectant. In order to make beer, you actually have to have clean water, as an input.
ffhhttt 3y ago
Do you also believe in homeopathy? 5% ABV does not kill much. You’d need distilled spirits for that.
- ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago
  I'd image yeast produces alcohol to gain some advantage over over microbes
NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
We went around with this at the beginning of the pandemic, when Christians debated whether it was safe to offer the Most Precious Blood as Holy Communion. While silver and other noble metals have antimicrobial properties, the percentage of alcohol in altar wine is way too low to make a difference. When transubstantiated from wine to blood, it retains the accidents of wine, and those accidents will infect you with a disease just as any other. That's the miracle of the Eucharist; our feeble senses can't distinguish it, nor could a microscope or science lab point out which is Eucharist, and which is ordinary wine. Almost all Western churches suspended distribution under the species of wine, even though the odds were very, very low. The Eastern Orthodox couldn't do this, however, and it led to several Greek bishops insisting that no disease could come from this Holiest of Mysteries, and that it is uniquely special and don't worry about COVID-19.