"Operation Swill" and the "True Spirit Authenticator"

[bisnettrj2]

http://nj.gov/oag/newsreleases13/pr20130523b.html

Today (May 23, 2013), it has come to light that the State of New Jersey, in association with the International Federation of Spirits Producers, conducted a raid on 29 bars and restaurants in light of claims that these establishments were serving low-quality liquor as "top-shelf". It turns out that at least one bar had substituted a rubbing alcohol and caramel color mixture for scotch.

My reason for posting is the claim that 150 liquor samples have been subjected to testing on the "True Spirit Authenticator", an unexplained piece of technology that purportedly can deduce the identity of the particular type of liquor being tested. Does anyone have an idea on what this might be? My first thought is headspace GCMS with some sort of fingerprint matching setup in a library for the majority of commercially sold liquors. Anyone have any other ideas?

[Peter Apps]

I vaguely recall something on inorganic fingerprinting (trace metals by ICPMS ??) and isotope patterns - which vary with region of origin, having been used for beverage authentication. Carbon 13 abundance differs between grape alcohol and grain alcohol due to different plant metabolism.

Peter

[skunked_once]

One would need to do both an instrumental test and a "taste test" on the 150 samples to confirm the results.

[Peter Apps]

One would need to do both an instrumental test and a "taste test" on the 150 samples to confirm the results.

You LIKE drinking rubbing alcohol ??

Peter

[Prim]

True Spirit Authenticator - Taa Daa

[skunked_once]

Peter,

You LIKE drinking rubbing alcohol ??

Not all of the samples will be adulterated. There must be some quality stuff in the sample group. Of course one would do the instrumental analysis first to ID the "bad" samples then one could follow up with the taste test on the "good" samples. Experimental design is always important.

[jubilukian]

"Truespirit Authenticator Instrument is a portable ultraviolet spectro photo meter that can be used on-site. It works with clear, golden and brown spirits, detecting if the liquid is adulterated or counterfeit; and it can do so in 30 seconds."
http://www.beveragemedia.com/wp-content/themes/bevnetwork/flipbook/bm0812/files/assets/basic-html/page6.html

I assume a follow-up technique would be required for confirmation.

[Peter Apps]

Peter,

You LIKE drinking rubbing alcohol ??

Not all of the samples will be adulterated. There must be some quality stuff in the sample group. Of course one would do the instrumental analysis first to ID the "bad" samples then one could follow up with the taste test on the "good" samples. Experimental design is always important.

I like your thinking. I once took a headspace sample from a bottle of 5-star brandy using 2 needles slid down the side of the cork. "Organoleptic evaluation" followed in due course.

Peter

[bisnettrj2]

"Truespirit Authenticator Instrument is a portable ultraviolet spectro photo meter that can be used on-site. It works with clear, golden and brown spirits, detecting if the liquid is adulterated or counterfeit; and it can do so in 30 seconds."
http://www.beveragemedia.com/wp-content/themes/bevnetwork/flipbook/bm0812/files/assets/basic-html/page6.html

I assume a follow-up technique would be required for confirmation.

Your Google-fu is strong, I couldn't find anything online about this. As for all you taste-testers, I hope I could tell the difference between isopropanol and soda versus scotch and soda, but I doubt I could tell the difference between Grey Goose and Smirnoff vodka, which I think was the true aim of this study. I'm not saying I wouldn't be willing to give it a shot (or two), though....

[Peter Apps]

There's a Catch 22 here. If someone orders the upmarket brand, gets served a cheapy and is happy because they can't tell the difference between an upmarket brand and a cheapy anyway, the cynic in me says that they are simply paying a legitimate posers tax due from all those who taste by looking at the label. I would guess that the bars who routinely substituted had a pretty good feel for the sophistication of their customers' palates. I wonder who blew the whistle - the customers or the distributors of the upmarket brands whose sales were suffering ?

Peter

[jubilukian]

So would the same logic apply to people who buy olive oil cut with canola oil, pomegranate juice diluted with grape juice, or cheap whitefish sold as red snapper? I respectfully disagree. Fraud is fraud regardless of the sophistication of the buyer.

[Peter Apps]

So would the same logic apply to people who buy olive oil cut with canola oil, pomegranate juice diluted with grape juice, or cheap whitefish sold as red snapper? I respectfully disagree. Fraud is fraud regardless of the sophistication of the buyer.

No, the logic is different. Olive and canola oil are different, cheap vodka and expensive vodka (to use bisnettrjs's example) are both aqueous ethanol.

I agree that to pass one thing off as another is fraud - but people who are willing to pay a premium only because of brand (not because they can actually tell the difference), and companies that market premium-priced branded products that are the same as cheap ones are painting a target on their own backs.

Peter

[bisnettrj2]

No, I agree that fraud is fraud if there is a price difference between well and top-shelf, which of course there is. I just think they were not expecting to see something OTHER than ethanol-based substitutions - like Smirnoff for Grey Goose. In terms of fraud, if I agree to the price premium, I should get the product I paid for, regardless of my level of sophistication. That's why this country has consumer protection laws - to make sure no one gets taken advantage of, or possibly injured due to fraudulent practices (like selling rubbing alcohol as booze, or fake medicine as discount pharmaceuticals).

As for who tipped them off, the article I read said "consumer complaints" and "confidential informants" made up the basis for the operation. My bet is on disgruntled former employees, specifically bartenders or management, who would have to be involved directly in the fraud for it to be carried out.

[Peter Apps]

Here's a conundrum.

Suppose there is a glut of potatoes. An entrepreneur buys a thousand tons of potatoes and ferments them into alcohol, which he then distills off. He now has 10000 litres of potato alcohol. He sells half of it to company A and half to company B. Company A bottles it as "Rutgot" Vodka at a dollar for a litre bottle. Company B bottles it as "Vanczy" vodka at $7 for 450 ml. An enterprising bartender serves "Rutgot" to customers that order "Vanczy". Where along this chain has fraud occurred ?

Peter

[bisnettrj2]

Technically, yes. In actual practice, they would be indistinguishable from each other, so no one would be able to discern whether a fraud had actually occurred. In this case, the alcohols were sent to the labs of the manufacturers to discern whether the alcohol was theirs or not.

I get what you're saying - if you don't know you're being lied to and you're happy, does it matter? In the vast majority of cases, I bet no one was the wiser. However, there were consumer complaints in some of these cases that prompted the investigation. So, at least some people weren't fooled by the lower-tier booze. The moral of the story? If you don't know how to tell if you're drinking good booze versus cheap booze, be a friend to your wallet and drink the swill (and if you're drinking it mixed with soda or fruit juices or other booze, then only buy the cheap stuff). However, you should at LEAST be getting ethanol, and not isopropanol (or dirty water, as was the case in another bar from this investigation).