This is not the answer I was expecting. I'll give you that point.Prof. Wagstaff wrote:lysander wrote:
Ok, I've heard the "if there's alcohol in it, it must be a freaking antiseptic" argument ad naseum. If that's the case, you'd drink your beer after I spit in it, right?
Sure, if it's on the house. But don't expect a tip.
True, you never explicitly said antiseptic, you just implied that the alcohol would sterilize the beer.Prof. Wagstaff wrote:I certainly never used the word "antispetic", now did I... Straw Man etc.
Ok, I'll kind of give you that one too. There's lots of dirty things in a bar, but few of those things make their ways into my beer, unless the bartender takes the head off by stirring the beer with fingers.Prof. Wagstaff wrote:I'm just sayin' this is yet another example of the human mind's utter inability to accurately assess risk. The risk of getting sick from a spigot seems exceedingly small compared to all the other sources of dank in the average bar and yes, that includes the hands of the bartender who has been touching money all night, one of the most disgusting, germ-ridden things on the planet.
Prof. Wagstaff wrote:lysander wrote:
No, germs grow just fine in beer. I've seen proof.
Please elaborate, oh cryptic one.
No problem. Take a tap beer, set it somewhere for a few days, and see if there's any fuzzy stuff growing in it. I have, it does. I haven't done any petri dish experiments yet, but I'd wager that beer does not prohibit bacterial or fungal growth in any measurable form. I would be interested to find out for sure, though.