Kava Science The physics of kava preparation

[Jean]

There are a lot of discussions about the best way of making kava, from the starting material to the water temperature and the various possible additives to improve the yield or the taste of the kava drink.

Even if cooking is an art, it is also a physical and chemical process. This is also true for kava preparation. In the following, some basic principles in chemistry and physics used or appearing during the preparation of kava are discussed.

Suspension versus solution

The chemically active molecules in Kava are the so called kavalactones. Kavalactones like other natural molecules, e.g., cannabinoids, are poorly soluble in water (hydrophobic) but highly soluble in fat (lipophilic). On the opposite caffeine from coffee or the K@’s alkaloids are soluble in water (hydrophilic).
However, the similarity in solubility between the kavalactones and cannabinoids does not mean at all that the same physics is behind cannabis edibles and kava drink.
In cannabis, the CBD, or any other molecule of interest, is extracted by solubilization in a lipophilic medium like fat or alcohol. It means that the molecule as such is extracted from the plant and is solubilized in fat or alcohol.
A similar kind of extraction is also possible with the kavalactones of kava, but it is not what is done in the kava drink even if fat or water insoluble molecules are added in the water for the preparation of kava.
Indeed, the purpose is noted to solubilize the kavalactones but to obtain a so-called suspension.

A suspension is a material that is “swimming” in another medium and distributed more or less evenly in form of small particles. Fog is made of water droplets swimming in the air. Milk is made of fat particles swimming in water. The kava drink is made of small kava root particles in water.
Hence, the kavalactones remain in the kava root particles and are not solubilized in water.
And this is why kava size matters.

First of all, the smaller and the lighter the particle, the slower the sedimentation: the effect of gravity, directly linked to the mass of the particles, draws the particle toward the bottom of the bottle.
If the particle is sufficiently small, below the micrometer, the particle is subject to the so-called Brownian motion: the particle is moving randomly in any direction. However, even micronized kava is too big in size to “fly” randomly in the surrounding medium.

Secondly, the smaller the particle, the higher the surface/volume ratio. This is important since all the forces that allow the dispersion of the particle in the medium are acting on the surface of the particle. Hence, you want the biggest surface for the smallest volume.
If you have a cubic box with an edge of 3 meters, the surface is 6 faces at 9 square meters for a volume of 27 cubic meters (about the volume of a large U-Haul truck), hence a surface/volume ratio of 54/27 = 2
If you have a smaller cubic box with an edge of 2 meters, the surface is 6 faces at 4 square meters for a volume of 8 cubic meters, hence a surface/volume ratio of 24/8 = 3.
So, decreasing the size increases the surface/volume ratio.

Hence, the first effect of the strainer is to select the particles in such a way that they are small enough for the surface of the particles to play a role.

Well, but what happens at the surface?

The kava root particles are made of plant material. This material is made of long particles, like a chain of sugar-like units linked to each other (called polysaccharides), that are torn together in fibers. Those fibers, without being soluble in water, like nevertheless water (but not enough to be fully soluble) and swell at the surface of the particle: when you let your kava soak a while in water a crown of polysaccharide acting as float balls build up.
The number of “float balls” is directly proportional to the available surface. When the surface is large compared to the volume, it increases the “floatability” of your particle.
In fact, the polysaccharide at the surface acts as soap molecules. A soap molecule has a part that likes water, the other not. The part that does not like water sticks on the surface of the dirt particle while the other is in contact with water. Thanks to the part that is like water, the dirt particle can float in water and be washed away.
When lecithin or milk is added when preparing your kava drink, it is not the kavalactones that are solubilized, but the lecithin or some sugars or proteins in the milk that act as soap molecules, adsorb on the surface of the kava particle, and increase the “floatability”.

This has huge consequences for the bioavailability of the kavalactones in the body. Indeed, the kavalactones are absorbed by the digestive tract much more in the same way nicotine is absorbed from smoke by the lungs. It is of course harmless in the case of kava, since no carcinogenic molecules are built by burning.

Tobacco smoke is made of tar and ashes particles containing nicotine (i.e., a solid suspension of particles in a gas), those particles go in the lungs and nicotine is absorbed by contact of those particles on tiny blood vessels. Only part of the nicotine is absorbed. The smaller the particles, the higher the surface of exchange between the particle and the blood vessel: it explains why “light” cigarettes are strongly addictive, the filter provides smaller particles with an increased surface compared to the volume, increasing at the same time the bioavailability. In other words, there is apparently less nicotine, but from the nicotine present, more is absorbed.

The same is expected for kava in the digestive tract, the smaller molecules deliver the most kavalactones.

And here comes a question to which I have no answer:
the ratio of kavalactone absorbed in the digestive tract and the ratio remaining in the particle is not only a function of the surface of the particle, but also of the specific affinity of a given kavalactone for the particle against the affinity of the kavalactone for the digestive tract.

This ratio should be different for each kavalactone. Hence, when the analysis of a kava root gives, let say, 30% of the chemotype 2 and 50% of the chemotype 4, this does not mean at all that indeed in the body the ratio of the kavalactones in blood will be 30:50. If the chemotype 2 is “at ease” in the digestive tract and completely absorbed in the body while the chemotype 4 is more “at ease” in the particle and only half of it is absorbed in the gut, the effective ratio in the blood is 30:25. It may therefore well be that a kava with a chemotype starting with 24 acts in the body like a 42.
Has this question been studied?

 

[The Kap'n]

There are a lot of discussions about the best way of making kava, from the starting material to the water temperature and the various possible additives to improve the yield or the taste of the kava drink.

Even if cooking is an art, it is also a physical and chemical process. This is also true for kava preparation. In the following, some basic principles in chemistry and physics used or appearing during the preparation of kava are discussed.

Suspension versus solution

The chemically active molecules in Kava are the so called kavalactones. Kavalactones like other natural molecules, e.g., cannabinoids, are poorly soluble in water (hydrophobic) but highly soluble in fat (lipophilic). On the opposite caffeine from coffee or the K@’s alkaloids are soluble in water (hydrophilic).
However, the similarity in solubility between the kavalactones and cannabinoids does not mean at all that the same physics is behind cannabis edibles and kava drink.
In cannabis, the CBD, or any other molecule of interest, is extracted by solubilization in a lipophilic medium like fat or alcohol. It means that the molecule as such is extracted from the plant and is solubilized in fat or alcohol.
A similar kind of extraction is also possible with the kavalactones of kava, but it is not what is done in the kava drink even if fat or water insoluble molecules are added in the water for the preparation of kava.
Indeed, the purpose is noted to solubilize the kavalactones but to obtain a so-called suspension.

A suspension is a material that is “swimming” in another medium and distributed more or less evenly in form of small particles. Fog is made of water droplets swimming in the air. Milk is made of fat particles swimming in water. The kava drink is made of small kava root particles in water.
Hence, the kavalactones remain in the kava root particles and are not solubilized in water.
And this is why kava size matters.

First of all, the smaller and the lighter the particle, the slower the sedimentation: the effect of gravity, directly linked to the mass of the particles, draws the particle toward the bottom of the bottle.
If the particle is sufficiently small, below the micrometer, the particle is subject to the so-called Brownian motion: the particle is moving randomly in any direction. However, even micronized kava is too big in size to “fly” randomly in the surrounding medium.

Secondly, the smaller the particle, the higher the surface/volume ratio. This is important since all the forces that allow the dispersion of the particle in the medium are acting on the surface of the particle. Hence, you want the biggest surface for the smallest volume.
If you have a cubic box with an edge of 3 meters, the surface is 6 faces at 9 square meters for a volume of 27 cubic meters (about the volume of a large U-Haul truck), hence a surface/volume ratio of 54/27 = 2
If you have a smaller cubic box with an edge of 2 meters, the surface is 6 faces at 4 square meters for a volume of 8 cubic meters, hence a surface/volume ratio of 24/8 = 3.
So, decreasing the size increases the surface/volume ratio.

Hence, the first effect of the strainer is to select the particles in such a way that they are small enough for the surface of the particles to play a role.

Well, but what happens at the surface?

The kava root particles are made of plant material. This material is made of long particles, like a chain of sugar-like units linked to each other (called polysaccharides), that are torn together in fibers. Those fibers, without being soluble in water, like nevertheless water (but not enough to be fully soluble) and swell at the surface of the particle: when you let your kava soak a while in water a crown of polysaccharide acting as float balls build up.
The number of “float balls” is directly proportional to the available surface. When the surface is large compared to the volume, it increases the “floatability” of your particle.
In fact, the polysaccharide at the surface acts as soap molecules. A soap molecule has a part that likes water, the other not. The part that does not like water sticks on the surface of the dirt particle while the other is in contact with water. Thanks to the part that is like water, the dirt particle can float in water and be washed away.
When lecithin or milk is added when preparing your kava drink, it is not the kavalactones that are solubilized, but the lecithin or some sugars or proteins in the milk that act as soap molecules, adsorb on the surface of the kava particle, and increase the “floatability”.

This has huge consequences for the bioavailability of the kavalactones in the body. Indeed, the kavalactones are absorbed by the digestive tract much more in the same way nicotine is absorbed from smoke by the lungs. It is of course harmless in the case of kava, since no carcinogenic molecules are built by burning.

Tobacco smoke is made of tar and ashes particles containing nicotine (i.e., a solid suspension of particles in a gas), those particles go in the lungs and nicotine is absorbed by contact of those particles on tiny blood vessels. Only part of the nicotine is absorbed. The smaller the particles, the higher the surface of exchange between the particle and the blood vessel: it explains why “light” cigarettes are strongly addictive, the filter provides smaller particles with an increased surface compared to the volume, increasing at the same time the bioavailability. In other words, there is apparently less nicotine, but from the nicotine present, more is absorbed.

The same is expected for kava in the digestive tract, the smaller molecules deliver the most kavalactones.

And here comes a question to which I have no answer:
the ratio of kavalactone absorbed in the digestive tract and the ratio remaining in the particle is not only a function of the surface of the particle, but also of the specific affinity of a given kavalactone for the particle against the affinity of the kavalactone for the digestive tract.

This ratio should be different for each kavalactone. Hence, when the analysis of a kava root gives, let say, 30% of the chemotype 2 and 50% of the chemotype 4, this does not mean at all that indeed in the body the ratio of the kavalactones in blood will be 30:50. If the chemotype 2 is “at ease” in the digestive tract and completely absorbed in the body while the chemotype 4 is more “at ease” in the particle and only half of it is absorbed in the gut, the effective ratio in the blood is 30:25. It may therefore well be that a kava with a chemotype starting with 24 acts in the body like a 42.
Has this question been studied?

Careful, you keep writing like this and I may end up slapping a "Fact of the Day" sticker on it

What an interesting read. This is a topic that I keep coming to, but putting on the backburner for my lack of ability to describe. Excellent writeup.

 

[The Kap'n]

This ratio should be different for each kavalactone. Hence, when the analysis of a kava root gives, let say, 30% of the chemotype 2 and 50% of the chemotype 4, this does not mean at all that indeed in the body the ratio of the kavalactones in blood will be 30:50. If the chemotype 2 is “at ease” in the digestive tract and completely absorbed in the body while the chemotype 4 is more “at ease” in the particle and only half of it is absorbed in the gut, the effective ratio in the blood is 30:25. It may therefore well be that a kava with a chemotype starting with 24 acts in the body like a 42.
Has this question been studied?

I'm copying this from some unpublished work by Dr. Schmidt.

1.2.1 Pharmacokinetic studies

The examination of plasma levels after intake of kava extract demonstrated the bioavailability of the kavalactones as the major active constituents of kava.



Duffield et al. (1989) identified seven major and several minor kavalactones in human urine of healthy male subjects following the ingestion of one litre of kava beverage (prepared by traditional extraction of 450 g of “commercial” kava powder in three litres of water, with no specifics given). Kavain, dihydrokavain, desmethoxyyangonin, tetrahydroyangonin, dihydromethysticin, 11-methoxytetrahydroyangonin, yangonin, methysticin and dihydromethysticin were detected unchanged in human urine. Metabolic transformations included the reduction of the 3,4-double bond and/or demethylation of the 4-methoxy group of the kavalactone ring. 12-Hydroxy-12-desmethoxyyangonin was also detected, it may have been formed by demethylation and C12-hydroxylation of yangonin. Other than in rats, no dihydroxylated metabolites of the kavalactones or products from ring opening of the lactone system were identified in human urine.

(Duffield et al., 1989)



Johnson et al. (1991) performed a single-blind pharmacodynamic cross-over study with EEG measurements after one week on placebo, on 3 x 100 and on 3 x 2 x 100 mg ethanolic kava extract (Laitan, WS 1490)4. A part of this study was the determination of plasma levels of kavain, dihydrokavain and dihydromethysticin. Tmax was three hours, and Cmax for K, DHK and DHM were 70, 160 and 130 ng/ml after intake of 200 mg kava extract.

(Johnson et al., 1991)



The Draft “Assessment Report on Piper methysticum G. Forst., rhizoma” (EMA/HMPC/450589/2016) mentions a statement by Hänsel and Woelk (1995), as to which approximately 80 % of a single oral dose of 200 mg (±)-kavain is absorbed in humans, of which 98 % is metabolised, mainly to p-hydroxykavain on first pass through the liver (Hänsel and Woelk possibly refer to the subsequently described study). Maximum plasma levels of the sulphate conjugate (50 ng/ml) and kavain (18 ng/ml) are obtained within 1.7-1.8 hours. The elimination half-life of p-hydroxykavain is about 29 hours, while elimination of kavain shows a biphasic pattern with half-lives of 50 minutes for the first phase and approximately nine hours for the second phase.

EMA/HMPC/450589/2016



Köppel and Tenczer (1991) identified 10 urinary metabolites when (±)-kavain was given to five healthy volunteers as an oral dose of 200 mg. The major metabolite was phydroxykavain. Hydroxylation of the phenyl ring, reduction of the 7,8-double bond, hydroxylation of the lactone ring with subsequent dehydration, and opening of the lactone ring appeared to be the main metabolic pathways. The metabolites were mainly excreted in the form of their conjugates.

(Köppel and Tenczer, 1991)



Tarbah et al. (2003) developed a high-performance liquid chromatographic (HPLC–DAD) assay method for the simultaneous determination of kavain and its main metabolites phydroxykavain, p-hydroxy-5,6-dehydrokavain and p-hydroxy-7,8-dihydrokavain) in serum and urine. The main metabolite was p-hydroxykavain, found in serum and urine in its free form (approximately 10 % in serum) and its conjugated forms as glucuronides or sulphates.
Further metabolisation takes place to p-hydroxy-7,8-dihydrokavain and to 5,6-dehydrokavain.The latter compound is then hydroxylated and demethylated to desmethyl-hydroxy-5,6-dehydrokavain. The metabolites are mainly excreted in the form of their conjugates. All kavain metabolites were detectable in serum and urine, except for p-hydroxy-7,8-dihydrokavain, which was found in urine only. Confirmation of the results and identification of the metabolites were performed by LC–MS or LC–MS–MS. Kinetics of kavain and its metabolites in serum were investigated after administration of a single oral dose (800 mg kavain). Within 1 and 4 h after uptake, the serum concentrations ranged between 40 and 10 ng/ml for kavain, 300 and 125 ng/ml for p-hydroxykavain, 90 and 40 ng/ml for o-desmethylhydroxy- 5,6-dehydrokavain, and 50 and 30 ng/ml for 5,6-dehydrokavain. p-Hydroxykavain appears in serum in free and conjugated forms with a lag tome of 0.25 hours and peaks after 0.75 hours. The half-lives of free and conjugated forms range between 0.7 and 1.9 hours indicating that kavain metabolites can be found up to 10 hours in serum samples.

(Tarbah et al., 2003)



Zou et al. (2005) described the synthesis of 6-phenyl-3-hexen-2-one (6-PHO), a proposed metabolite of kava, its reactivity with glutathione in vitro, and its isolation and identification as its mercapturic acid adduct using LC/MS/MS, in the urine of two human subjects (one male, one female) following ingestion of 10 g of dry kava powder mixed with water. The kavalactone concentration in the kava root material was reported with 13 %, with an individual kavalactone distribution of DHK7.57 % > K 2.98 % > DHM 1.71 % > M 0.49 % > DMY 0.27 % > Y 0.005 %. A mercapturic acid adduct of the metabolite was detected in urine, albeit in very low quantities. The authors assume that 6-PHO is formed by ring opening of dihydrokavain (DHK), followed by demethylation and oxidation, with DHK possibly formed from kavain (K). However, the authors admit that the finding of 6-PHO might also be an artefact from sample preparation.

(Zou et al., 2005)

 

[Jean]

Very interesting, I note that contradictory results by different authors are presented for, e.g., the ring opening of the lactone (Duffield versus Köppel and Zou). And the question arises if some of the metabolized kavalactones molecules are not more active than the starting kavalactones or even are the truly active molecules at all. It could also mean that the "hangover" experienced with kava (or some kinds of kava) is very individual and even may be linked to the ethnicity of the drinker ( like it it the case with alcohol with the metabolization to acetone).

 

[Jack3]

According to a book on the neuroscience of addiction called Never Enough, numerous studies attempting to find a chemical or genetic difference between First Nations people and European Americans have shown no ethnic difference between Europeans and other ethnic groups. The author is Judith Grisell.

Renown addictionologist, Dr Gabor Maté, points to a mountain of evidence in neuroscience that trauma is a much more relevant and substantiated explanation. The prevailing theory on dermo has to do with the CYP450, though, which may be so. This may also be involved with the absorption of kavalactones. I don’t know if there is an ethnic difference here.

 

[fueledbykava]

I've dabbled with using various lipid rich substances to increase bio-availability of kava, including almond milk and lecithin; both seemed to produce a much greater effect overall with the same amount of medium grind kava.

My concerns lie around the current unknowns as to which kavalactones(if any) this may selectively increase the bioavailability of and whether this is still safe to consume, given that without scientific testing, we don't know what this equates to in terms of an amount of fat to its equivalent water-extracted dose of kava without a fat, and if it is selective or generalized to all kavalactones equally. The concerns for me include having way too much kavalactones in a sitting or too many of any one (or multiple but not all) which may have undesirable effects.

Anecdotally, I have become extremely nauseous before using a fat with kava extraction, so clearly some (if not all) kavalactones are being extracted more efficiently with the fat source, but given that the tried and true method is water extraction (in terms of personal health/safety), that's all I've felt comfortable using on a regular basis until more research is done showing the safety of using various lipid-based extractions/extracts.

 

[Henry]

Good write up, thanks for taking the time to ponder these matters and then share them here

I'd agree with most points, but this bit got me thinking "the kavalactones remain in the kava root particles ". To me this implies that effectively there's no difference between ultra fine micro and well squeezed kava, in the end, we end up with the same "small particles" containing insoluble fibre and kavalactones?

I might be mistaken, but I think it would be fairer to say that kavalactone resin (or droplets of it), stick to other particles (starches, etc), or together (just as droplets) and they get suspended in the liquid when we prepare kava traditionally? The kava sediment is quite starchy. Well filtered kava has no visible fibres and the sediment at the bottom of the liquid looks, feels more like a thick layer of starchy goo than any anything made with cellulose.

 

[Palmetto]

Jean,

A few comments:
Tobacco smoke is inhaled deeper into the lungs if the particle sizes are smaller. This is an effect caused by reduction of impaction against the mouth, throat, and bronchial tubes. Aerosols are also designed to have smaller particles for better drug delivery efficiency.

Kavalactones are semi polar substances tending toward low polarity. Micellization of kavalactones has been tried by many, myself included. I was about to try polysorbate 80, until I decided that the process wasn't worth it. Lecithin was used by many, but it is not as good a choice of emulsifiers for kavalactones as polysorbate 80. Milk colloidal particles are better than lecithin as well.

Alcohol is a solvent suited for KL extraction, but many worry about the liver effects, which I won't go into. CO2 extraction is expensive, so only worth it for dealers in general.

The issue is how much cost, effort, and loss of quality to balance the ideal kava prep. Adding emulsifiers can cause diarrhea, reduce flavor, and cost more. Enzymatic lysis of lignase or cellulase woud be a more extreme path to go that would reduce stomach discomfort and increase KL release, but has cost and time factors. Sonication of medium grind does not increase KL release much, from my own experiments. Perhaps you could sift out the smaller particles, as some dealers do to obtain their "micronized" samples, then use a special pulverizer to grind up the larger particles into a "micronized" particle size (yes, I'm using the word incorrectly, because that's how others use it.) Then suspend the new micronized powder into water. I believe this method would be the most cost effective in the long run.

You can also use the "Palmetto Plunge" method for simple results. It was developed by a brilliant, strong, and handsome kava afficionado. There is a video on Kava forums on how to do it.

 

[Henry]

Jean,

A few comments:
Tobacco smoke is inhaled deeper into the lungs if the particle sizes are smaller. This is an effect caused by reduction of impaction against the mouth, throat, and bronchial tubes. Aerosols are also designed to have smaller particles for better drug delivery efficiency.

Kavalactones are semi polar substances tending toward low polarity. Micellization of kavalactones has been tried by many, myself included. I was about to try polysorbate 80, until I decided that the process wasn't worth it. Lecithin was used by many, but it is not as good a choice of emulsifiers for kavalactones as polysorbate 80. Milk colloidal particles are better than lecithin as well.

Alcohol is a solvent suited for KL extraction, but many worry about the liver effects, which I won't go into. CO2 extraction is expensive, so only worth it for dealers in general.

The issue is how much cost, effort, and loss of quality to balance the ideal kava prep. Adding emulsifiers can cause diarrhea, reduce flavor, and cost more. Enzymatic lysis of lignase or cellulase woud be a more extreme path to go that would reduce stomach discomfort and increase KL release, but has cost and time factors. Sonication of medium grind does not increase KL release much, from my own experiments. Perhaps you could sift out the smaller particles, as some dealers do to obtain their "micronized" samples, then use a special pulverizer to grind up the larger particles into a "micronized" particle size (yes, I'm using the word incorrectly, because that's how others use it.) Then suspend the new micronized powder into water. I believe this method would be the most cost effective in the long run.

You can also use the "Palmetto Plunge" method for simple results. It was developed by a brilliant, strong, and handsome kava afficionado. There is a video on Kava forums on how to do it.

Here's the video Palmetto is referring to, I think: https://kavaforums.com/forum/thread...od-for-kneading-kava-easily.16299/post-184506

 

[Henry]

Jean,

A few comments:
Tobacco smoke is inhaled deeper into the lungs if the particle sizes are smaller. This is an effect caused by reduction of impaction against the mouth, throat, and bronchial tubes. Aerosols are also designed to have smaller particles for better drug delivery efficiency.

Kavalactones are semi polar substances tending toward low polarity. Micellization of kavalactones has been tried by many, myself included. I was about to try polysorbate 80, until I decided that the process wasn't worth it. Lecithin was used by many, but it is not as good a choice of emulsifiers for kavalactones as polysorbate 80. Milk colloidal particles are better than lecithin as well.

Alcohol is a solvent suited for KL extraction, but many worry about the liver effects, which I won't go into. CO2 extraction is expensive, so only worth it for dealers in general.

The issue is how much cost, effort, and loss of quality to balance the ideal kava prep. Adding emulsifiers can cause diarrhea, reduce flavor, and cost more. Enzymatic lysis of lignase or cellulase woud be a more extreme path to go that would reduce stomach discomfort and increase KL release, but has cost and time factors. Sonication of medium grind does not increase KL release much, from my own experiments. Perhaps you could sift out the smaller particles, as some dealers do to obtain their "micronized" samples, then use a special pulverizer to grind up the larger particles into a "micronized" particle size (yes, I'm using the word incorrectly, because that's how others use it.) Then suspend the new micronized powder into water. I believe this method would be the most cost effective in the long run.

You can also use the "Palmetto Plunge" method for simple results. It was developed by a brilliant, strong, and handsome kava afficionado. There is a video on Kava forums on how to do it.

What's your take on what's actually "suspended" in the liquid? Kavalactone "resin" (just pure droplets), kavalactones attached to starches and other compounds, or kavalactones sticking to micro fibre particles?

 

[Palmetto]

It is known that KLs have affinity to certain carbobydrates, as one example of molecules that can help emulsify KL particles. Since KLs are semipolar, some would directly dissolve into water in a nonsuspended state, possibly in water clathrate structures. But the majority of a strong grog, I suspect, is van der Waals bound/emulisified to more amphipathic molecules, such as carbohydrates (think dissolved pulpy molecules), milk globules (if milk is used), surfactants (such as lecithin), or whatever is used to increase the solubility. The powder itself has enough carbohydrates to provide a good bit of assistance.

The other factor everyone subconsciously knows is that when you particle size increases, your KL intake also increases. Ignore the stomach issues for a minute. Small powder particles can be suspended in water, unless chilled. Those small particles carry embedded KLs. Since the particles are small, it is easier for them to be released by the digestion process and available for intestinal uptake. This is why I will eventually buy a good pulverizer. Sift for the fine particles to use first, then grind the remainder until they become digestible for better absorption.

 

[kavaro]

Hi guys, following the thread of the post I wanted to ask you a question.
As you mentioned I tried to emulsify my drink with soy lecithin using about 1tbsp of granules dissolved in water beforehand, all blended with my kava once already extracted.
It seems to emulsify correctly but once it starts to cool it tends to separate the particles and fall to the bottom as usual.
I have also tried to mix it with some tang powders containing (citric acid, E341, vit C, vit A, folic acid, B2, Phelanin...).
This seems to cut it even more and make it clumpy even though I try to stabilize it all with guar gum or gum arabic.
I would like to be able to make a drink that is cold stabilized and tasty at the same time.
You seem to be very knowledgeable on the subject. Any clues as to what I am doing wrong? (I imagine several things)

Thanks.

 

[The Kap'n]

Hi guys, following the thread of the post I wanted to ask you a question.
As you mentioned I tried to emulsify my drink with soy lecithin using about 1tbsp of granules dissolved in water beforehand, all blended with my kava once already extracted.
It seems to emulsify correctly but once it starts to cool it tends to separate the particles and fall to the bottom as usual.
I have also tried to mix it with some tang powders containing (citric acid, E341, vit C, vit A, folic acid, B2, Phelanin...).
This seems to cut it even more and make it clumpy even though I try to stabilize it all with guar gum or gum arabic.
I would like to be able to make a drink that is cold stabilized and tasty at the same time.
You seem to be very knowledgeable on the subject. Any clues as to what I am doing wrong? (I imagine several things)

Thanks.

Kava being defined as an emulsion, and not an extraction will always see larger pieces of root material making through your strainer bag. This is the good stuff. Any prepared traditional kava will separate when given enough time to sit. Stir and drink!

 

[kavaro]

Kava being defined as an emulsion, and not an extraction will always see larger pieces of root material making through your strainer bag. This is the good stuff. Any prepared traditional kava will separate when given enough time to sit. Stir and drink!

Yes, maybe I have expressed wrongly.
The intention is that after having extracted the kava, to mix it with the components such as the citric acid that I mentioned and to emulsify it and stabilize it.

 

[Palmetto]

I mistyped above. I meant to say as your particle size decreases, your KL uptake increases.

As an emulsifier, I long ago hypothesized about using polysorbate 80 (food grade). I would strictly avoid strongly solubilizing surfactants, for the sake of avoiding stomach issues. Lecithin doesn't do much of anything. Don't overdo the emulsifier, unless you want diarrhea. Whey particles may/might not help. Worth a try, if you don't mind whey in your kava.

 

[Jean]

Very interesting ideas here !
Concerning the presence of KL droplets not linked (or embedded) in the particles, I have big doubts, the KL solubility in water is low and the only possibility of having kavalactones not linked to anything allowing them to swim in water is to have kavalactone micelles. If somebody has any information on the micellization of kavalactones, please share the information.
Hence, in my opinion, the answer to Henry´s question (message #7) is “yes” (roughly, thinks are never as simple).
About the use of emulsifiers, I agree that there is a risk of sorting the kavalactones or increasing the availability of kavalactones that are less available in pure water, and by this way introducing more “bad” kavalactones. The choice of the emulsifier is also of concern (e.g. allergy) and it is also theoretically not excluded that the emulsifier may have a negative effect on the absorption/digestion/metabolization of the KL. This being said, most of the emulsifiers, synthetic or natural, used in the food industry are pretty safe. I don’t thing that your put your life at stake while playing with kava and food grade emulsifiers.
I agree with Palmetto, strongly solubilizing surfactants (short cationic or anionic for most of them) should be avoided and in general are not food grade. Longer neutral surfactants like polysorbat or food grad PEG (food grad PEG is an alternative to PPG in some e-liquids) may do the job. Otherwise, they are plenty of natural emulsifiers : who want to try kava with an egg yolk ? Kavaro (message #12) ?

 

[kavakarma]

I keep my kava in glass jars with aluminum lids, in the fridge, and shake before drinking. I would like to say that I am very sensitive to acids such as citric acid, lactic acid, malic, or industrial ingredient additives such as polysorbate 80. I have an antibacterial dishsoap with 2.00% lactic acid as the only ingredient setting it aside from regular sulfate containing liquid soap and I wonder how a seeingly small quantity (20ml/L by volume) of lactic acid does any bacterial killing. The way I can tell if these are added to my jarred olives, potato chips, or prebottled blacktea is it makes my teeth squeaky, even more so if I were to drink a cola with phosphoric acid.

How would this be measured for effect? I could mix cornstarch and dishsoap and brew kava in that and likely extract more KL's but it would not be drinkable. If that is what we are going for. Main thing I want to learn about is brownian motion.

When I stir kava, I like to do it in a dumping motion towards me, away, and to both sides, and sometimes again with a quarter turn. This is also a ritual blessing of the four directions, and really gets the kava stirred up. If I am using a finger or a stick to stir my kava, even in the time it took me to wash my strainer, put the roots away, and come back to my freshly made shell, it needs stirring. The stick feels like it passes through sludge and then once you have gone back and forth in all directions you can feel the floor of your bowl and drink quickly while the "tiny particles are moving in any random direction". Interesting stuff! What about the impact of club soda on kava brewing?

 

[kavaro]

According to your comments, the best alternative to emulsify the extracted kava in water is polysorbate 80 or a similar component.
The other would be to make an extract and emulsify it, right?
It's funny Jean, the only way I have been able to stabilize it is with egg yolk, but it doesn't sound very appetizing.

 

[_byron]

According to your comments, the best alternative to emulsify the extracted kava in water is polysorbate 80 or a similar component.
The other would be to make an extract and emulsify it, right?
It's funny Jean, the only way I have been able to stabilize it is with egg yolk, but it doesn't sound very appetizing.

egg yolk!! And people think I was nuts for mixing it with okra slime but seriously try mixing it with the slime from okra. It is similar to the sea hibiscus mucus that they use to make sakau in Pohnpei

 

[Jean]

I believe that any macromolecule suitable for the stabilization of colloids will do the job : those long hydrophilic (but not necessarily soluble in water) molecules adsorb at the surface of the particles and build a crown with parts of the long molecules weakly linked to the surface, the other parts forming loops. The natural macromolecules able to do this are in general “slimy”or “sticky” : proteins from egg, gelatine (animal or vegetal origin, from pork or beef or agar agar), starch …
However, what is really tricky, is that the action of the macromolecules used for the dispersion is dependent from both the concentration of particles to be dispersed and the the concentration of macromolecules. Hence if a low concentration may disperse the particles, higher concentration may lead to the formation of a so-called flocs, an aggregate of water swollen particles and macromolecules that rapidly sinks at the bottom (this floculation technic is used for cleaning pools or in wastewater treatment). Hence, indeed, the only possibility to find the good mix is by trial and error both for the quantities and the chosen macromolecules. And indeed, it should also be drinkable… By the way, such macromolecules can be extracted from the kava wood, and indeed it happened involuntary to me : if you put your kava in a blender with hot water for enough time, you will break some cells and starchy macromolecules will escape. If you let this kava in the fridge, after 1-2 days your kava is viscous and not really appealing. I diluted it with more water, drunk it. No negative side effects, but the taste was absolutely disgusting. I remember that other people have reported a similar experience on this forum, if I ´m not wrong it is in the discussion about kava preparation.