Time to destroy another kava myth

[kavamehameha]

In fact, I observed that using the AluBall I get an equally strong brew with less root powder compared to traditional prep. It's not quite logical, but for me it's an empirical fact. However, I never heard of someone confirming this experience.

 

[TheKavaSociety]

In fact, I observed that using the AluBall I get an equally strong brew with less root powder compared to traditional prep. It's not quite logical, but for me it's an empirical fact. However, I never heard of someone confirming this experience.

Do you use one or two balls?

 

[Groggy]

In fact, I observed that using the AluBall I get an equally strong brew with less root powder compared to traditional prep. It's not quite logical, but for me it's an empirical fact. However, I never heard of someone confirming this experience.

It's certainly less messy. the aluball(s) have a 80 micron mesh whereas the strainer I use is a 75 micron, it's possible that because the aluball is slightly larger, it lets more particles through and thus a stronger result with less material. Last night I used coconut water instead of plain water. @Palmetto what is your take on that vs regular water, from a scientific pov?

 

[kavamehameha]

@Henry Only one ball at a time.
@KrunkyMonkey That's possible. I didn't even know that the AluBall has a 80 micron mesh, thanks for clarifying that.

 

[Groggy]

@Henry Only one ball at a time.
@KrunkyMonkey That's possible. I didn't even know that the AluBall has a 80 micron mesh, thanks for clarifying that.

I have recently started using 2 aluballs and the results are excellent compared to traditional prep. I usually use 1/3 of a cup of root on a traditional prep and with 2 aluballs about 5 tbs (just shy of 1/3 of a cup).

 

[Palmetto]

Aluball increases agitation, and I suspect dissolves more starch, but I've never used one. The whole purpose is to shake it, right? That's agitation, just like a blender, but gentler.

 

[Kojo Douglas]

I have recently started using 2 aluballs and the results are excellent compared to traditional prep. I usually use 1/3 of a cup of root on a traditional prep and with 2 aluballs about 5 tbs (just shy of 1/3 of a cup).

Yep. I always plan on kneading, but end up AluBallin'

 

[moff000]

I tried using a "nutribullet" but to little effect compared to the "aluball" Not sure why that would be?

 

[verticity]

Sure @Henry that explanation sounds fine. I hope @verticity is still around to provide some feedback. I think he may have been offended a little while back.

I'm doing my sciency thing at http://kavascience.org now..

 

[Rick.Sanchez]

I agree with most of your points, but Im curious about why you think starch plays such a large role in the kinetics of kavalactone solubility. Sugars are still very polar, and if it's occupying hydrogen bonds, it's more likely to decrease the aqueous solubility of other solutes. by your logic, adding starch or sugar would theoretically increase the solubility of kavalactones. Also, it will not decrease the polarity of water. That is an inherent property.

The reason why nonpolar colloids, micelles, and liposomes can increase the solubility of kavalactones is because the nonpolar molecules are directly interacting with the kavalactones to solubilize them.

As far as why subsequent washes don't give you as much kavalactones as the math you suggested, it's due to solvation kinetics and cell biology. Some of the kavalactones are probably in a less accessible part of the cell or they could be protein bound. Also, the kinetics for dissolution are dependent on the concentrations of your solute and solvent. As you decrease the concentration of your kavalactones, you will dissolve them more slowly.

I promise I'm not trying to be an A-hole and I agree with most of your points! I'm just not following your logic for why starch is so important for increasing the aqueous solubility of kavalactones.

 

[Kojo Douglas]

I just make the stuff and don't really worry about all the chemistry behind it. I find that my reaction to Kava has more to do with variables at my end - when I last ate, how much caffeine I've had that day, what my stress levels are like, how much sleep I've had, what my plans are for the evening, etc. Whether I knead or AluBall I usually end up getting the same rather subjective result.

One thing to keep in my mind is that if you already have a routine, then you probably also have a threshold. If you find some super method that doubles the kavalactones, then you can surely spread out your Kava. But at the same time, you might find yourself twice as krunked which can mean nausea and other side effects.

 

[Groggy]

I just make the stuff and don't really worry about all the chemistry behind it.

It's interesting but I agree.

But at the same time, you might find yourself twice as krunked which can mean nausea and other side effects.

Dermo is a bitch!

 

[Palmetto]

Generally, the more efficient your extraction method is, the heavier the kavalactone profile is, because the headier kavalactones tend to extract more easily. I think it's a major reason why there is such a wide spectrum of chemotypes for the same cultivars. If there was one standard way of extracting the KLs from a powder, then the same proportion of KLs should be fairly consistent. I believe True Kava uses a high extraction process before assaying. Deleted User's method extracts more KLs than most drinkers would obtain, so the goal should be to extract around the amount the average drinker does before assaying.

 

[Rick.Sanchez]

I just make the stuff and don't really worry about all the chemistry behind it. I find that my reaction to Kava has more to do with variables at my end - when I last ate, how much caffeine I've had that day, what my stress levels are like, how much sleep I've had, what my plans are for the evening, etc. Whether I knead or AluBall I usually end up getting the same rather subjective result.

One thing to keep in my mind is that if you already have a routine, then you probably also have a threshold. If you find some super method that doubles the kavalactones, then you can surely spread out your Kava. But at the same time, you might find yourself twice as krunked which can mean nausea and other side effects.

There are so many variables that we can only speculate without empirical evidence. And like you said, the kavalactone extraction is only one part of a very complicated process that ultimately results in a subjective experience.

Honestly, I would even question the relevance of solubilized kavalactones to the efficacy of the brew. Kava preps normally end up with a lot of sediment that is not dissolved. That sort of loops back to what palmetto was saying about micronized kava

 

[Groggy]

It is also important to remember that chemotype alone is not a very precise means of describing a sample of kava. A minuscule change between kavalactones changes their order in the chemotype, and adjacent kavalactones could be very close to equal in content or widely separated. Chemotype was never meant to be used as we do, it's much more useful to compare individual KL percentages.

Out of curiosity, when do you plan on updating the test results on your website? All your tests still have dates well over a year old.

 

[kasa_balavu]

why is such emphasis placed on "Look for this label" when it's, one, not up to date and two, as you put it "chemotype alone is not a very precise means of describing a sample of kava."

Obviously I don't speak for @Deleted User, but:

1. He has said before that info on the website for TK certified vendors is outdated. He tests every batch.
2. The TK Certified label says nothing about chemotype, only nobility.

 

[kasa_balavu]

I know the label itself doesn't show the chemotype.

OK, sorry. Maybe I misunderstood. Based on the words you typed, it seemed to me that you were asking why we should care about a label certifying nobility, when a chemotype is not a good reflection of the effects one will get from kava. It seems to me that these two things have nothing to do with each other.

why is such emphasis placed on "Look for this label" when... as you put it "chemotype alone is not a very precise means of describing a sample of kava."

 

[Groggy]

OK, sorry. Maybe I misunderstood. Based on the words you typed, it seemed to me that you were asking why we should care about a label certifying nobility, when a chemotype is not a good reflection of the effects one will get from kava. It seems to me that these two things have nothing to do with each other.

I am all for nobility. His tests emphasize the KL 1-6 breakdown which points to a specific chemotype, but he just said;

It is also important to remember that chemotype alone is not a very precise means of describing a sample of kava. A minuscule change between kavalactones changes their order in the chemotype, and adjacent kavalactones could be very close to equal in content or widely separated. Chemotype was never meant to be used as we do, it's much more useful to compare individual KL percentages.

So I ask, how can that alone be used to determine nobility?

There have also been older threads (in his folder) suggesting that older tests should not be looked at as valid results, so why do I as a consumer, should take his word that every batch is tested when the last test was done 14+ months ago? (per his website)

 

[kasa_balavu]

I am all for nobility. His tests emphasize the KL 1-6 breakdown which points to a specific chemotype, but he just said;

So I ask, how can that alone be used to determine nobility?

The chemotype is not used to determine nobility. It's just used to give us a rough idea of the effects one might expect from a given kava product. See http://kavaforums.com/forum/wiki/kava-chemotypes/ for more info.