Designing a test for the magnetic coasters...
This is the reason why I said that in my opinion the wine should be at least one year old. The nouveau category becomes vinegar overnight literaly speaking. Also, table red wines are pure chemistry in order to hold more.rebecca said:
Claus I agree with you but this is what congreslab promises that his coasters do!
So what? I saw the product I want to purchase it , if in the process of testing the claim I realize that I cannot actually do it, I will ask for Coghill to provide me his protocol, if he refuses I will call BS on him if he accepts I will buy a couple of those coasters. My maternal family consists of wine producers they will enjoy even to have those things regardless if they work or not.
Simple things.
Simple things.
roger
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 22, 2002
- Messages
- 11,466
I probably posted too hastily. My thoughts were that if the null experiment demonstrated bias (say, the A drink gets chosen at 35%) then you know the experiment has not controlled for all variables. But I think you are right that randomization of the ordering will account for this.drkitten said:
You have two easily testable and measurable claims: that they reduce surface tension and that they cause fruit to ripen faster.
Surface tension can be measured, as noted in an earlier post.
You can measure the ripening of fruit by placing them in sealed bags and measuring the rate of ethylene production.
Nothing subjective about it.
Surface tension can be measured, as noted in an earlier post.
You can measure the ripening of fruit by placing them in sealed bags and measuring the rate of ethylene production.
Nothing subjective about it.
I am sorry gentlemen but let's say that I am housewife that I have barely finished school and I do not know what magnetism is. I want to check this product and I intend to invite my equally ignorant neighbour to test the wine in a blind experiment.
What will I have to do in order to know that those things work?
Bring skepticism to the common people. I hate it when you force me to sound like a eurocommunist
Tim would you like to help Tez to perform the experiment? You must contact him.
What will I have to do in order to know that those things work?
Bring skepticism to the common people. I hate it when you force me to sound like a eurocommunist
Tim would you like to help Tez to perform the experiment? You must contact him.
JPK
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2004
- Messages
- 1,870
Cleopatra said:I am sorry gentlemen but let's say that I am housewife that I have barely finished school and I do not know what magnetism is. I want to check this product and I intend to invite my equally ignorant neighbour to test the wine in a blind experiment.
What will I have to do in order to know that those things work?
Bring skepticism to the common people. I hate it when you force me to sound like a eurocommunist
Tim would you like to help Tez to perform the experiment? You must contact him.
Test is simple. Drink a bottle of magnatised wine. Then drink a bottle on nonmagnitised wine. The reverse the order and Drink two more bottles. About now you won't be able to tell the difference.
JPK
SGT
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2004
- Messages
- 345
JPK said:
The proposal of using magnetic and non magnetic coasters of the same size seems good. Of course it is more difficult than bringing the water from another room, but it leaves no place for excuses in case of failure.
Very old wines can have some unpleasant aromas, like mercaptans. They can also have solid particles in suspension. Because of this it is usual to pour them in decanters, trying to let most of the solid particles in the bottle. The ones that pass into the decanter will fall to the bottom. In the same time most of the umpleasant odours, being more volatile, will disperse in the air.
If you leave the wine long enough in an open recipient, all aromas will disperse. Besides this, acidifing bacteria, present in the air, can turn the alcool into vinegar.
The proposal of using a cheap wine in the test is not fair. Nothing in the world can turn palatable a cheap wine. You must use at least a medium quality wine.
A decent wine protocol.
To be valid comparisons, the wine in each glass being compare MUST be from the same bottle. Even in bottles from the same case, there are frequently noticable differences from bottle to bottle.
Neither of magnetic coasters suggest that the time to get their benefits exceeds an hour.
An hour isn't an unreasonable amount of time for a red wine to decant.
Keeping all the above statements in mind......
For each bottle of wine, decant it into 2 identical decanters. Sit one decanter on a magnetic coaster and the other on the counter. On each subsequent bottle, alternate whether the magnetically treated decanter gets filled first or second, to eliminate any small chance of preference for the top or bottom of the bottle. Do this for at least 4 bottles, the more the better.
Pour a small glass from each decanter for multiple tasters. Eight tasters should do pretty well. When I say, a small glass, I really mean not much more than a good swallow for each taste. You should be able to get 2 or more tasting rounds out of each bottle. Have the glasses simply marked 1 and 2. Which glass that gets the magnetically treated wine for each taster and each round of tasting is picked at random and recorded. Have a 3rd party (who isn't aware of how the wine was distributed between the glasses) present the wine to the tasters. After the tasters have done their tasting, they answer the following multiple choice question.
"Comparing your glass of wine 1 to glass of wine 2...."
"a) You could not tell any difference between the two."
"b) Glass 1 was better than glass 2"
"c) Glass 2 was better than glass 3"
Then compare the tasters' answers to the dispersing records. Do the results line up better than would be expected by chance? Even if they consistently choose the magnetically treated wine as inferior, that would be a surprising result. It would indicate that the magnet at least did something. Or, even consider that one taster would pick the magnetically treated wine consistantly better, and another picked it as worse, that would be worth further study as well.
Then, it would probably be a good idea to rerun the test in the same manner, but eliminate choice "a" (could tell any difference) and see if forcing them to pick one or the other gives any better results.
It would a good idea to try to use the same tasters from one session to the next. By collecting more test results from each taster, you could find that if there was a difference, only one or two of the tasters had a good enough palet to discern the difference.
Run as many sessions of this as you can afford. If even 1 taster in 8 could seperate the wine by taste even 75% percent of the time over 6 or 7 runs, that would worth further investigation. Perhaps if you get one or two tasters that show promise, do additional testing rounds only with them to see if their tasting accuracy can remain statistically significant over the long haul.
To be valid comparisons, the wine in each glass being compare MUST be from the same bottle. Even in bottles from the same case, there are frequently noticable differences from bottle to bottle.
Neither of magnetic coasters suggest that the time to get their benefits exceeds an hour.
An hour isn't an unreasonable amount of time for a red wine to decant.
Keeping all the above statements in mind......
For each bottle of wine, decant it into 2 identical decanters. Sit one decanter on a magnetic coaster and the other on the counter. On each subsequent bottle, alternate whether the magnetically treated decanter gets filled first or second, to eliminate any small chance of preference for the top or bottom of the bottle. Do this for at least 4 bottles, the more the better.
Pour a small glass from each decanter for multiple tasters. Eight tasters should do pretty well. When I say, a small glass, I really mean not much more than a good swallow for each taste. You should be able to get 2 or more tasting rounds out of each bottle. Have the glasses simply marked 1 and 2. Which glass that gets the magnetically treated wine for each taster and each round of tasting is picked at random and recorded. Have a 3rd party (who isn't aware of how the wine was distributed between the glasses) present the wine to the tasters. After the tasters have done their tasting, they answer the following multiple choice question.
"Comparing your glass of wine 1 to glass of wine 2...."
"a) You could not tell any difference between the two."
"b) Glass 1 was better than glass 2"
"c) Glass 2 was better than glass 3"
Then compare the tasters' answers to the dispersing records. Do the results line up better than would be expected by chance? Even if they consistently choose the magnetically treated wine as inferior, that would be a surprising result. It would indicate that the magnet at least did something. Or, even consider that one taster would pick the magnetically treated wine consistantly better, and another picked it as worse, that would be worth further study as well.
Then, it would probably be a good idea to rerun the test in the same manner, but eliminate choice "a" (could tell any difference) and see if forcing them to pick one or the other gives any better results.
It would a good idea to try to use the same tasters from one session to the next. By collecting more test results from each taster, you could find that if there was a difference, only one or two of the tasters had a good enough palet to discern the difference.
Run as many sessions of this as you can afford. If even 1 taster in 8 could seperate the wine by taste even 75% percent of the time over 6 or 7 runs, that would worth further investigation. Perhaps if you get one or two tasters that show promise, do additional testing rounds only with them to see if their tasting accuracy can remain statistically significant over the long haul.
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Nap, interrupted.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Messages
- 19,141
Are y'all sure we want to use wine, not water?
~~ Paul
~~ Paul
patnray said:
I don't believe that either of these were
actually Coghill's claims. I think we owe
him the courtesy of testing him on the claims
he made, and not necessarily on the claims
made by some other nutcase who makes
a similar product.
JPK said:
Ahhh, this would be measuring something something tangible. We all know that these thing work in a far more scientific way. It uses magnets!!! You can't measure this! You just have to believe.
Still willing to try though.
You're right. Any objective test that fails to prove the claims will undoubtedly be countered by "moving the goal post". Can't detect any greater production of ethylene in the magnetically treated fruit? Why that's because magnets ripen fruit without producing ethylene! Can't measure the lowered surface tension? That's because it only lowers the surface tension between the water and cells!
Still the tests would be worthwhile...
drkitten said:
You are right. It was Norstar that made the claims about surface tension and ripening fruit. Coghill wisely doesn't make any claims that can be tested without subjective interpretation, leaving plenty of wiggle room.
Perhaps the taste test should include a round in which everyone knows which sample they are tasting, similar to the protocol in which dowsers first demonstrate their technique on open containers of water, to prevent claims that other factors "interfered" with the magnets...