"Chemistry" news and stories

NYU chemistry professor Kent Kirshenbaum. Photo: Jeff Potter

Like many inquisitive scientists, Kent Kirshenbaum regularly scans the ingredient list of prepared foods to uncover the chemical composites lurking within. The substance that most recently piqued the New York University chemistry professor's curiosity is liquid smoke. "My immediate thought was that it was a horrible mix of chemicals," he told us.

After distilling the concentrated smoke and liquid mix (often sold at the grocery store by the bottle to enhance barbecue) down to its roots of water and more than 400 chemical compounds, the scientist (who in person comes across as one part Einstein, one part Malcolm Gladwell) learned that liquid smoke is actually "safer [for human ingestion] than untreated wood smoke."

Kirshenbaum discussed his discovery last week during a monthly gathering of the Experimental Cuisine Collective -- food nerds who love to make things like edible foam. We caught up with him to chat smoke, bongs and homemade liquid smoke.

What is liquid smoke?
Liquid smoke is very simply smoke in water. Smoke usually comes as a vapor, but there are ways to condense it and turn it into liquid and that liquid can then be carried in water.

When I was in high school, I had a love-hate relationship with science classes. Geology was fine, biology was okay, and chemistry...well, chemistry was hell. Mrs. Olech, the troll who taught the class, regularly flunked half her students and had a teaching manner that made Alan Greenspan seem bouncy and exciting.

Ironically, while I flunked chem, I aced my cooking classes. Even at the time, I thought that this was a little weird; after all, what is cooking if not a chemical process? The subtle adjustment of flavors, the cultivation of certain bacteria, the measured combination of leavening chemicals are all, basically, a mix of applied chemistry and biology. However, cooking class captured my imagination and attention in a way that chemistry didn't.

Reading a recent profile of Alton Brown, I realize that the problem lay with Mrs. Olech and her ilk. The simple fact is that science can be a lot of fun, if it is applied in a way that is relevant and exciting. I was surprised to learn that, like me, Brown found his science classes "boring beyond words." Even now, as he has built his own store of scientific knowledge, he admits to having discarded academic journals and scholarly papers because of their inability to engage his interest.

A recent Newsday story looks at overeating from a neurological perspective, likening it to other forms of addiction. One study cited in the article found that drug abusers and overeaters had similarly low numbers of dopamine receptors, which are partly responsible for feelings of satisfaction and fullness. Other studies have found that some obese people's brain chemistry contributes to heightened feelings of pleasure from food. Experts cited in the article are hesitant to formally categorize overeating as an addiction, however. Still, many feel that examining it from that angle may help develop more effective treatment methods.

Researchers at Nottingham University are exploring the ways our brains respond when we eat fatty foods. The goal, in part, is to learn why certain foods are pleasing and then hopefully design more healthful foods that still provide the pleasure and satisfaction of fatty ones. Along with fat content, taste, texture and smell are all factors in how and why someone enjoys a food, so researchers are giving test subjects milkshakes with varying fat contents and examining their responses via MRIs. Researchers will also examine how the brain responds to fatty foods when they are eaten versus when they are delivered directly to the stomach through a tube.

Source