Available in PDF:  Eva’s Beloved Dad

Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER invented the first commercial curing brine containing sodium nitrite in Prague in the early 1900’s. As an introduction to a book on his life, his daughter, Eva Nachmüllnerová, wrote the following moving introduction. (Translated from the Czech language by Monica with minor changes by myself)

“The 2nd of April 1896 was a big day in the small Bohemian (1) town of Zlichov. The first born son of Antonin and Vilemina Nachmullner was born. Antonin was a master glass maker at the Janovske glassworks in Jenstejn, close to Panenskych Dubenek and his wife Vilemina, (maiden name Jungvirtova), was the daughter of a glass master of Dolni Bradlo close to Trhove Kamenice.

Besides the midwife Alzbeta Ecsteinova’s knowledge of the birth, the news first came to the glass makers fraternity. It spread fast among the close family of neighbours and fellow parishioners of their church in Zlichov.

Contrary to tradition, the master-tailor Zich became the boy’s godfather. The fact that Zich was not a glass-maker was a break with tradition. Antonin swore that his son would not continue in the long family line of glass-makers.

He was baptized on a Sunday with water from Bohemia’s national river, the river Vltava, in the church in Zlichov. They named him Ladislav. This was another break with tradition as old ladies whispered among them, “Only God knows after whom he was named…” This then, in short, is how my father was born.

In accordance with his father Antonin’s wishes, my father did not become a glass-maker and events in his life would soon steer him in a completely different direction. Unfortunate events would alter the course of his life completely.

At age 35 his father Antonin had a stroke. One day during a bitter cold he arrived home, freezing. In an effort to warm himself he sat next to the fire place. Sick, he fell asleep. His cloths caught fire and he tragically burned to death. It was 1908.  He was 37.

Grandmom Vilemina died in 1912 in the hospital in Pelhrimov. She had tuberculosis. She was 39 years old. At the time of her passing my father was only 16 years old.

He was forced to take care of his younger siblings, Vaclav, Tana, Jozef and Borka. The youngest was adopted by the neighbors and raised as their own. That is how it happened that the young Ladik was left to care for his brothers and sisters. He learned the art of curing meat as a means to provide for his family.

His biggest invention was certainly his original and patented quick salt which he later called QUICK SALT PRAGANDA.

At first he wrote a few professional books about butchers, to butchers. The most popular and sought after book was “ZLATA KNIHA PRAGANDA” (The Golden Book of PRAGANDA), which is currently being reprinted after 65 years.

Dad had other inventions such as “VOSY,” for spraying hams. Another invention was a preparation for cleaning oxidation from drive belts, called “SAMSON”.

I remember when I was little girl Dad would send New Year’s greetings to all his clients with the wish, “May God give us health!” Until the end of his life he lived by his own creed, “Only the best for Butchers” or “Everything for Butchers.”

In 1939 Dad contracted pneumonia twice. In 1944 he stayed sick and got tuberculosis. He was treated at the hospital in Plesi but to no avail. I remember when Mom and Dad were discussing their 25th wedding anniversary on 2 February 1945. On this day Dad was up and about. The priest came to minister to him and renewed their silver wedding vows.

On 6 February when I came to visit Dad around lunch time, Dr Fricia was also there. My father breathed his last while in my arms. His life ended and his soul was commended into the hands of God.

Through all my life, he was, and he is, my beloved Dad and he will always be an example to me.

In Prague 8 September 2000
Eva Nachmüllnerová”

Notes:

1  Bohemia

“Bohemia is a region in the Czech Republic. In a broader meaning, it often refers to the entire Czech territory, including Moravia and Czech Silesia, especially in historical contexts: the lands of the Bohemian Crown.” (Wikipedia)

References:

Ladislav Nachmüllner vulgo Praganda, Nachmüllnerová, Eva Editor, Nakladatelské údaje: Tábar : OSSIS, 2000

Photo Credit:

Church in Zlichiv.  Photo by Ondřej Kališ – okalis

Jenštejn:  https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hrad_Jen%C5%A1tejn.JPG

Vltava River. http://thewritemag.com/poetry/somewhere-over-the-vltava/

Introduction

Nitric oxide, a derivative from nitrite, reacts with an active groups in the muscle tissue comprising of (for the most part) iron and specific proteins, to create the cured meat colour.  It plays a further role as an antimicrobial agent and is partly responsible for the cured meat taste.  This make nitrite along with salt (sodium chloride) the most important curing agents.

Another key ingredient for bacon cures is ascorbate or vitamin C.  Either as sodium ascorbate or ascorbic acid or its isomer, erythorbate, either as erythorbic acid or its salt, sodium erythorbate.  The functional value of ascorbate is significant. (1)

The value of nitrite has been discovered over the last 200 years (2)  Previous articles dealt with its recognition as curing agent and how the curing industry ended up using it. (3)  We now turn our attention to ascorbate.  We first look at its discovery.

The Discovery of Vitamins

The term “vitamin” was coined by Casimir Funk in 1912 while working at the Lister Institute of Preventive Medicine, in London.   It is a combination of the words, “vital” and “amine” meaning the “amine of life”.  In 1912, it was believed that “accessory factors” (9) in some foods, necessary for the function of the human body, prevented certain diseases like beriberi and scurvy.

It was thought that these “accessory factors” might be chemical amines.  It turned out that this is the case  with thiamine (vitamin B1), but after it was found that other such micronutrients were not amines, the word was shortened to vitamin in English.  (Wikipedia. Beriberi and Vitamin)

The discovery of vitamins happened at a time when the prevailing theory of disease was the germ theory and “dogma held that only four nutritional factors were essential namely proteins, carbohydrates, fats, and minerals.” It was however recognised in this time, by clinicians that scurvy, beriberi, rickets, pellagra, and xerophthalmia were “specific vitamin deficiencies, rather than diseases due to infections or toxins .”  (Semba RD; 2012: 1)

The period when the vitamins were discovered stretches from the early 1800’s until the mid-1900’s. (Semba RD; 2012: 1)

The discovery of the individual vitamins were not the result of big eureka moments but the fruit of the labour and contributions of many epidemiologists, physicians, physiologists, and chemists, from around the world.  Like many discoveries, “it was slow, stepwise progress that included setbacks, contradictions, refutations, and some chicanery.”  (Semba RD; 2012: 1)    This article is not an exhaustive account of the story of its discovery with every important contributor and contribution listed.  It is an overview and a general introduction to some of the main characters in the great saga.

The Discovery of Ascorbate or Vitamin C

Intense scientific inquiry into possible cures and preventative methods for scurvy began at the beginning of the 1800’s with the work of George Budd (1808-82), Professor of Medicine at King’s College, London. (Hughes, R. E.; 2000)

“In 1842, Budd published in the London Medical Gazette a series of articles entitled, “Disorders Resulting from Defective Nutriment.” He described “three different forms of disease which are already traced to defective nutriment” and argued that such conditions resulted from the absence of dietary factor(s) other than carbohydrate, fat, and protein, and that the absence of each of these specific factors would be associated with a specific disease.  This idea lay dormant for 40 years until it was experimentally proved by N. Lunin.  (Hughes, R. E.; 2000)

L. J. Harris who himself made significant contributions in the later history of vitamin C, referred to Budd as “the prophet Budd” and cited an article where Budd expressed the belief that scurvy was due to the “lack of an essential element which it is hardly too sanguine to state will be discovered by organic chemistry or the experiments of physiologists in a not too distant future”  (Hughes, R. E.; 2000)

Little happened, however, to fulfill Budd’s prophesy until the beginning of the twentieth century with the work of A. Holst and T. Fröhlich of Norway.  (Hughes, R. E.; 2000)

McCollum (1922) said that for growth and “prolonged well-being” in rats, the following was necessary: “A single purified protein, a source of the sugar glucose, nine mineral elements and two uncharacterized dietary factors”  (McCollum, E. V.; 1922:  365)  The two unknown dietary factors he called “A” and “B”.

It seemed natural for the scientific community to call the antiscorbutic factor they were looking for, “accessory food factor C.”  The phrase was however clumsy and people already got used to the term vitamine.  After chemists made peace with the option of dropping the e and thereby not referring to any particular chemical structure, the antiscorbutic factor was called vitamin C.

Zilva, working in the Biochemistry Department at the Lister Institute, London was leading the way and he attempted to isolate it from lemon juice.  He was able to create a solution that contained Vitamin C (the presence of which was confirmed in tests on babies) with the citric acid being removed, but as soon as it was evaporated to dryness, the functionality disappeared.   (Carpenter, J. K.; 1986:  187)

The search for Vitamin C continued with renewed vigour until the 1930’s when two different approaches both lead to the discovery of Vitamin C.  (Daniel E. P.  and Munsell H. E; 1937: 5)

The concentration of Vitamin C, derived from lemon juice was studied in depth over a long period of time.  Two German chemists, J. Tillmans and P. Hirsch (1927) observed that there is a correlation between the reducing capacity of plants and animal tissue and their Vitamin C content. (4) (Daniel E. P.  and Munsell H. E; 1937: 5)

Biological oxidation-reduction systems were also being studied where a strong reducing substance was identified with the empirical formula of   from the adrenal cortex. (5)  The substance was acidic and resembled the carbohydrates in reducing power and colour reactions.  (Daniel E. P.  and Munsell H. E; 1937:  5)

Parallel to this work was that of  Dr. Albert Szent-Györgyi’s who isolated hexuronic acid. The work of Dr Szent-Györgyi became legendary.

Dr Szent-Györgyi, “a Hungarian biochemist, was working on plant respiration systems at Groningen in Holland and became interested in a reducing compound present in his preparations.”  (Hughes, R. E.; 2000)

F. G. Hopkins, himself a valuable contributor to the work on vitamins (he demonstrated in 1912 the presence of growth factors in milk and showed their essential dietary nature) invited Szent-Györgyi to Cambridge to extend his studies. In 1927, Szent-Györgyi isolated his “Groningen reducing agent” in a crystalline, from oranges, lemons, cabbages, and adrenal glands.”  (Hughes, R. E.; 2000)

He  published his discovery in 1928, and after some struggle to find an appropriate name, called this new substance hexuronic acid.  In this paper, a statement is made about the studies on the reducing substances of lemon juice, and mentioned that they “established interesting relationships between vitamin C and the reducing properties of plant juices.”  (Daniel E. P.  and Munsell H. E; 1937:  5)

In 1930 R. B. McKinnis and C. G. King, a vitamin researcher at the University of Pittsburgh, suggested in a publication that hexuronic acid could be vitamin C.  (Halver J. E., and Scrimshaw, S.; 2006:  5, 6)  The work of King and Szent-Györgyi would find an interesting and controversial link in the person of J. L. Svirbely who previously worked with King and was appointed by Szent-Györgyi to assist him, in 1931.

While still at Cambridge, Szent-Györgyi was approached by the Hungarian minister of education, Count Kuno Klebelsberg, who wanted to rebuild the Hungarian scientific institutions with Rockefeller Foundation support for expanding the programs in Szeged.    He was invited to return to Hungary and chair the medical chemistry department at the University of Szeged. (The Albert Szent-Györgyi Papers)  With limited advancement opportunities at Cambridge, he took up the new position in January 1931.

Szent-Györgyi was an eccentric, informal, unorthodox, brilliant and very popular professor and a thorn in the flesh for many, more conservative, colleagues.  Apart from fascinating lectures, he was known for “dining or playing sports with his students, riding his bicycle to visit colleagues (as was common at Cambridge)–but the students loved him for his free and spontaneous approach to education.”  (The Albert Szent-Györgyi Papers)

Within the first six months in Szeged, he had done in terms of educational vigor and introducing educational programs and research structures, more than many people do in their lifetime.  (The Albert Szent-Györgyi Papers)

Towards the end of  1931, an American post-doctoral fellow, Joseph Svirbely, also a Hongarian native, joined Szent-Györgyi’s research team at the invitation of Szent-Györgyi.  (The Albert Szent-Györgyi Papers)  Together they conducted landmark experiments on guinea pigs, “which, like humans must ingest Vitamin C to maintain health since they also cannot produce it within their bodies.  These experiments showed that “hexuronic acid — renamed ascorbic acid to reflect its anti-scurvy properties — was indeed the long-sought vitamin C.”  (Schultz, J.; 2002)

The discovery has not been without controversy.  Who exactly discovered it first?  Was it Szent-Györgyi or another researcher who would claim this, Glen King?  Central to the controversy is  Joseph Svirbely.  This is how it unfolded.

J. L. Svirbely initially worked with C. G. King at the University of Pittsburgh, trying to isolate vitamin C, along with graduate students H. L. Sipple, O. Bessie, F. L. Smith, and W. A. Waugh.  “They were able to prepare vitamin C concentrates from lemon juice and studied the properties of vitamin C fractions from 1929 to 1931.  Otto Bessie, from Montana, did not trust J. L. Svirbely.”  It is reported that on one occasion their disagreements ended in physical blows.  (Halver J. E., and Scrimshaw, S.; 2006: 5, 6)

Svirbely completed his work in Pittsburgh under King and was awarded his Ph.D..  He received a postdoctoral fellowship to work in  Germany under Professor H. Wieland. In the fall of 1931, he changed his plans and went to Hungary when Szent-Györgyi offered him an appointment in Hungary which he was keen to take up. (Jukes, T.;  1988:  1290)

This was a strategic appointment by Szent-Györgyi.  One that was fully within his right to do and a lesson in how key appointments can swing the course of events in ones favour.

Svirbely came with all the experience he gained from working with King.    Szent-Györgyi later admitted this himself when he wrote,  “When I asked him (Svirbely) what he knew he said he could find out whether a substance contained vitamin C. I still had a gram or so of my hexuronic acid. I gave it to him to test for vitaminic activity. I told him that I expected he would find it identical with vitamin C. I always had a strong hunch that this was so but never had tested it. I was not acquainted with animal tests in this field and the whole problem was, for me, too glamorous, and vitamins were, to my mind, theoretically uninteresting. ‘Vitamin’ means that one has to eat it. What one has to eat is the first concern of the chef, not the scientist. Anyway, Swirbely [sic] tested hexuronic acid. A full test took two months, but after one month the result was evident: hexuronic acid was Vitamin C.”  (Jukes, T.;  1988:  1290)

Back in Pittsburgh, King and his colleagues were getting close to reaching a similar conclusion.  Svirbely wrote to his former mentor in March 1932, telling him about the work they have done in Szeged. He also mentioned that he and Szent-Györgyi were submitting their findings in an article to Nature.  (The Albert Szent-Györgyi Papers) (8)  From this, it may seem that this prompted King to a hasty submission of what was still to him inconclusive results.  There are evidence that this is not the case and the inference will be wrong. That the conclusions of King, based on work with lemon juice, was completed well before he received the letter from Svirbely.  That he may have hastily submitted work for publication that was “sitting” with him after receiving word from Svirbely, is a matter that should have no bearing on the priority of the discovery.  (Jukes, T.;  1988:  1292)

The following month, on 1 April 1932, Science published King’s paper where he announces that he discovered vitamin C, and that it is identical to hexuronic acid. “King cited Szent-Györgyi’s earlier work on hexuronic acid where he gave Szent-Györgyi full credit for isolating it.  (Jukes, T.;  1988:  1292)

He did however not credit him for vitamin C, despite the note he received from Svirbely, claiming this.  As much as the appointment of  Svirbely by Szent-Györgyi was a prudent decision, fully within his rights, so was it fully within King’s right not to mentioned the unpublished report on the findings of Szent-Györgyi of a link between vitamin C and hexuronic acid.

The discovery by King was picked up quickly by the American press.  (The Albert Szent-Györgyi Papers) This initial report “was followed by a more lengthy and descriptive report in the Journal of Biological Chemistry by Waugh and King in 1932.”  (Halver J. E., and Scrimshaw, S.; 2006:  5, 6)

King remembers the sequence of event and the order of the communication from Svirbely as follows, “We then submitted our paper for the spring meeting of the American Society of Biological Chemists … and sent another manuscript to Science. A few weeks later in March, I received a letter from Dr. Svirbely (who had gone to Hungary to study with Szent-Györgyi the fall of 1931), in which he mentioned that they were just finishing their first assay in which animals grew satisfactorily and were protected from scurvy when given 1 mg/day of their crystalline ‘hexuronic acid’. They were sending a report of the assay to Nature.” (Jukes, T.;  1988:  1290, 1291)

The researchers in Szeged did not see things King’s way.  In reality, King did received the note from Svirbely before the publication in Science,  (Jukes, T.;  1988:  1290, 1291)   They were shocked by what they saw as an the early announcement, prompted by the note.  They felt that their findings had priority.  “Astonished and dismayed, Szent-Györgyi and Svirbely sent off their own report to Nature, challenging King’s priority in the discovery”  (The Albert Szent-Györgyi Papers)

Science did not record the date when thy received the submission from King.  Today we only have the publication date.  It is of course entirely possible that they received it well in advance before King received his note from Svirbely and the actual publication was delayed for an unknown reason.  King may himself had reasons why he submitted it late.  There are reports that he was in the process of checking certain facts and other work that was published that would have a bearing on his work if they were correct.  (Jukes, T.;  1988:  1290, 1291)

The fact that the note and timing of the publications became such a controversy is understandable.  Both worked hard over many years on identifying vitamin C and each felt that they had a claim to its first identification.  They worked independently and, at the same time relied on each others work.  In the case of Szent-Györgyi, through his identification of hexuronic acid and in King’s case, in the establishment of the techniques for analysis that was transferred by Svirbely.  The consternation that followed in both camps after the publication of King’s work and when Szent-Györgyi was credited with the discovery and isolating vitamin C was to be expected.  Such is life.  It makes for, as Jukes puts it, one of the strangest accounts of the discovery of a vitamin.

Further work by Svirbely and Szent-Györgyi (1932) confirmed that Hexuronic Acid was vitamin C. (6)  (Daniel E. P.  and Munsell H. E; 1937: 5) “The fact that King had worked on the problem for over five years was well-known in the scientific community.  Especially in the United States and he had “many supporters, who were ready to vilify Szent-Györgyi as a plagiarist.”  However, Europeans and British scientists also knew about the work of Szent-Györgyi’s and his “long history with this anti-oxidant substance”.  They accepted his claim of being the first to discover vitamin C.  (The Albert Szent-Györgyi Papers)

The emphasis now shifted to understand the structure of vitamin C.  A tentative formula for vitamin C was suggested by Hirst et al (1932) and Herbert et al (1933). (7)  (Daniel E. P.  and Munsell H. E; 1937:  5)   Even though Szent-Györgyi’s credit for the first identification of vitamin C was a bitter and lifelong disappointment to King, together with his research team, they published over 50 papers on ascorbic acid’s characteristics, deficiencies, and enzyme activities in various animal tissues between 1932-1942   (Halver J. E., and Scrimshaw, S.; 2006:  5, 6)

Haworth, a Birmingham (U.K.) chemist, received from Szent-Györgyi a sample of his “hexuronic acid, and in 1933, “in a series of impressive papers, the Birmingham chemist, using both degradative and synthetic procedures, described the structure of the molecule (Hughes 1983). The molecule was synthesized simultaneously, but independently, by T. Reichstein in Switzerland and by Haworth and his colleagues in Birmingham, both groups using essentially the same method.”  (Hughes, R. E.; 2000)

The work of King and his research team came to fruition when Burns and King reported the synthesis of 1-C14-L-ascorbic acid in Science in 1950.”  (Halver J. E., and Scrimshaw, S.; 2006:  5, 6)

Over the years, the story of the analysis by Szent-Györgyi and Svirbely would become part of Chemical history’s folklore.

Conclusion

The history of the discovery of ascorbate becomes an important introduction into our future consideration if its mechanism and functionality.  It introduces us to biological combustion processes and ascorbate’s value as reducing agents.

It takes this vitamin out of the realm of academia and makes it “accessible” by giving it a human face in the persons of King and Szent-Györgyi.   Szent-Györgyi tells a story involving his wife and supper that gave him the inspiration to examine paprika for a possible source of vitamin C.

In 1933, he was looking for additional, natural sources of ascorbic acid to use in further study’s.  Orange and lemon juice have high levels of ascorbic acid, but they also contain sugars that complicated purification. “Szent-Györgyi solved the problem by making imaginative use of the local specialty, paprika.”  (Schultz, J.; 2002)

“Szeged is the paprika capital of the world.”  Szent-Györgyi accounts how his wife prepared supper one night with fresh red paprika.  He writes, “I did not feel like eating it so I thought of a way out. Suddenly it occurred to me that this is the one plant I had never tested. I took it to the laboratory … [and by] about midnight I knew that it was a treasure chest full of vitamin C.”  (Schultz, J.; 2002)

Within weeks he was able to extract almost 1.4L of pure crystalline ascorbic acid from paprika, “enough to show — when fed to the vitamin C-deficient guinea pigs — that the acid was equivalent to vitamin C.”  (Schultz, J.; 2002)

The story of the discovery of ascorbate is a human story.  Rivalry, controversy and disappointment but also of triumph, tenacity, discovery and the creative mind.  To us in the meat curing industry, ascorbate would become the reducing agent of choice in our brine preparations and the story of its discovery, an example of a life of passion, excellence and another contribution by the favourite spice of Roy Oliver (the production manager for Woodys Consumer Brands) –  paprika!

Notes

1.The Function of Ascorbate in Bacon Curing

There are at least four benefits in using ascorbate in meat curing.
a.  Ascorbate or its isomer, erythorbate were originally used to speed up cured meat colour formation.  (Pearson, A. M. and Tauber, F. W.;  1984:  53)  It achieves this apparently by reducing the brown meat pigment, metmyoglobin to myoglobin with its purple-red colour.  (Chichester, C. O.; 1984:  14)
b.  “Ascorbate reacts chemically with nitrite to increase the yield of nitric oxide from nitrous acid.  Nitric Oxide is responsible for meat curing.”  (Pearson, A. M. and Tauber, F. W.;  1984:  53)
c.  “Excess ascorbate acts as an antioxidant, thereby stabilising both colour and flavour.  It prevents rancidity and the fading of sliced bacon when exposed to light.  It achieves this through the prevention of heme-catalyzed lipid oxidation which results in both pigment degradation and rancidity.  As long as excess ascorbate is present, the pigments are protected against breakdown.     (Pearson, A. M. and Tauber, F. W.;  1984:  53)
d.  Under certain conditions, ascorbate has been shown to reduce nitrosamine formation.  (Pearson, A. M. and Tauber, F. W.;  1984:  53)

Only sodium ascorbate or sodium erythorbate (as opposed to ascorbic acid and erythrobic acid) are used in meat cures since ascorbic and erythorbic acid reacts with nitrite to form nitrous oxide.  Nitrous Oxide is dangerous in confined spaces and its formation reduces the amount of nitrite available to participate in meat curing.  (Pearson, A. M. and Tauber, F. W.;  1984:  53)

2.  The Function of Nitrite and Nitric Oxide in Bacon Curing
Nitrite is the starting ingredient in meat curing.  It undergoes several reactions in  the meat, ending with the formation of Nitric Oxide.  Nitric Oxide is the active ingredient that combines with meat pigments.

3.  Articles I have written on the subject of nitrite in curing brines.

Formal Article’s:

Concerning the direct addition of nitrite to curing brine

Concerning Nitrate and Nitrite’s antimicrobial efficacy – chronology of scientific inquiry

Concerning Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER and the invention of the blend that became known as Prague Salt

INTRODUCTION

The creation of Praganda by Ladislav Nachmüllner did not happen in a vacuum or in isolation from the cultural and scientific environment that existed in Prague between the mid-1800’s and 1915.

This article examines the general state of food science in Vienna and Prague during this time and, in particular, the creation of the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus and the international movement that culminated in the creation of the Codex Alimentarius Commission of the World Health Organisation.

We will show how this environment of superior technology and leadership related to food science that existed in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, explains the development of Praganda in Prague.

PRAGUE CREATED PRAGANDA

By the time the master-butcher from Prague, Ladislav Nachmüllner, registered his patent for Praganda, the direct use of nitrites in food was legal in the Austro-Hungarian Empire.  This was not the case in Germany yet.  Praganda became the first commercial nitrite-based curing brine.  Sodium Nitrite was by this time already used directly in curing plants around the world but done so mostly in secret.  Even NACHMÜLLNER did not advertise the fact that his curing mix contained sodium nitrite.  (Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER vs The Griffith Laboratories)

The Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney, New South Wales, Australia) published an article on 22 September 1898 about the Slavs or Czech’s in Bohemia (referring to the entire Czech territory), that they are like “a young man who has come of age”; being surrounded on all sides by the industrious Germans, and they have “learned much, nay, all, from them and in all departments of culture they have kept pace with them and have now overtaken them.”

It is not surprising that the greatest food inventions came from here.  Sodium Nitrite based curing brines, bone-in and boneless hams, ham presses and the cornerstone that our entire food safety system is built upon through the creation of the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus, all originated here.  The creation of the Codex is by itself an amazing story, seldom told and shows how advanced the level of sophistication was in this part of the world in all matters related to food chemistry.  A heritage that makes Prague in many respects the food capital of the world to this day.

TOWARDS THE CODEX

The impetus for developing food safety legislation was in Vienna, as it was around the world, in response to the scourge of food adulteration.  Food adulteration was on its part the result of the development of colourants and chemical preservatives from the coal-tar dye industry in the mid-1800’s and the chemical synthesis industry, before the invention in the 1840’s of, and wide scale application towards the end of the 1800’s of refrigeration  (Concerning Chemical Synthesis and Food Additives)

The journalist, activist and political writer, Paul Lafargue, said it well in his 1883 publication that, “Our time will be called the age of falsification”. “In Brussels, saucissons dits de Bologne were made from the meat of horses that were sick or had died of contagious disease. This did not upset people. A French butcher replied to an angry mayor, “You don’t need to worry about the health of our fellow citizens, Sir, for I am selling unwholesome meat only to the troops!””  (PATRICK ZYLBERMAN, P.  Med Hist. 2004 Jan 1; 48(1): 1–28)

The big issues of the day, flowing out of the problem of food adulteration, were food hygiene, labelling, the testing of final products in the marketplace, inspection during food production and international borders as an effective barrier against importing of animal diseases and harmful foods.  These matters did not all receive equal priority early on.

At first the focus was on the use of international borders and import regulations as a way of safeguarding local populations against harmful foods and national herds against disease.  Labelling was driven by consumer demand.  “Throughout the nineteenth century, consumers had often lodged complaints about the absence of labels.”   Food was inspected only in the marketplace since provisions for controls at manufacturer’s were lacking. (PATRICK ZYLBERMAN, P.  Med Hist. 2004 Jan 1; 48(1): 1–28)

Vienna was leading the world in food safety, but this does not mean that it was not an issue around the world.  In 1879, the German Food Law came into force.  (Int. J. Vitam. Nutr. Res., 82 (3), 2012, 223 – 227. Vojir, F., Schübl, E. and Elmadfa, I)  In the USA, the Pure Food and Drug Act came into force in 1906.

A movement started to develop which called for trade regulations that would link trade and hygiene.  The ideas that formed the Codex Alimentarius or Food Code was in the air during the 1870’s and 1880’s.

France, for example, “modeled its regulations on food on proposals emanating from several international congresses.  As a consequence of international hygiene congresses in 1878, 1882 and 1887, Paul Brouardel, a French pathologist, hygienist, and member of the Académie Nationale de Médecine, along with Bouley and others, called for national as well as international regulations.  In Europe and the United States, chemists joined the ranks of those asking for inspections.”   (PATRICK ZYLBERMAN, P.  Med Hist. 2004 Jan 1; 48(1): 1–28)

The 1890’s saw the germination of these seeds and the creation of the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus.  It happened as follows.

THE AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN STATE

On 12 October 1891, a meeting took place at the Imperial Academy of Sciences, in Vienna, chaired by Prof Ernst Ludwig, of the Assembly of Food chemists and Microscopists where a suggestion was tabled for the establishment of a Scientific Commission which would develop the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus. Ludwig was the professor of applied medical Chemistry and the first head of the Institute for medicinal chemistry at the University of Vienna. (Schübl, E.,  Vojir, F.. 12.10.2011.  120 Jahre Codex Alimentarius Austriacus)

This suggestion came about as follows.  “At this meeting two proposals were submitted for formal voting, which can be seen as starting point in establishing a food codex.”  (Int. J. Vitam. Nutr. Res., 82 (3), 2012, 223 – 227)

The honour for the first suggestion for the codex goes to Dutch scientist, Paul Francois van Hamel-Roos, who suggested that single states should prepare national codices from which would be drafted an international codex. “In addition, the Austrian, Hans Heger, proposed the creation of a commission in Austria, which should prepare the Austrian codex – the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus.  (Int. J. Vitam. Nutr. Res., 82 (3), 2012, 223 – 227)

The very next day, 13 October 1891, the Austrian commission, called the “Scientific Commission” was installed which would draft the Codex.  Twenty-three drafts later, the work on the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus stopped due to various difficulties.  The last meeting was held on 25 April 1898. The participating scientists worked entirely on private initiative.  (Int. J. Vitam. Nutr. Res., 82 (3), 2012, 223 – 227)

The work on the Codex did not become and anchor for Austrian food law that was being drafted due to pressure from the economic sector.  They were notably excluded from the work of the Scientific Commission.  A deputy in the House of Representatives, Wilhelm Neuber, remarked that those who represent economic interest in relation to food adulteration, stood with “one foot in the crime.”  (Schübl, E.,  Vojir, F.. 12.10.2011.  120 Jahre Codex Alimentarius Austriacus)  The creation of the Codex was largely suspended till 1907.

The Austrian Food Law came into force in 1897.  Problems soon arose due to discrepancies in the analysis of and the experts’ opinions on food samples. The producers and food traders pressured the government to complete the work on the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus to minimize these discrepancies.  In light of these pressures, in 1907, the Ministry of the Interior installed a the Codex commission in charge of preparing the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus. (Int. J. Vitam. Nutr. Res., 82 (3), 2012, 223 – 227)

“Based on the drafts of the “Scientific Commission,” the work for the first edition of the Austrian Codex started. Between 1911 and 1917 three volumes, consisting of 55 chapters concerning food, cosmetics, and items of practical use, e.g. kitchenware, food contact material, toys, were completed.”  (Int. J. Vitam. Nutr. Res., 82 (3), 2012, 223 – 227)

“In the introductory ordinance of the Ministry of the Interior that was published with the first volume of the Austrian Codex in 1911, the intended purpose of the Codex was given as follows:

• For producers and traders it should be a source of information on the working criteria of the official control authority

• It should be a working directive for the official laboratories and control authorities

• For the judges basing their decisions on the food law, it should be an albeit non-binding source of technical information

These goals are still valid for the current version of the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus.”  (Int. J. Vitam. Nutr. Res., 82 (3), 2012, 223 – 227)

This is how in the Austro-Hungarian state, a food code, known as the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus was created between 1897 and 1917, at a time when Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER was creating his Praganda cure.  This undoubtedly set Prague and Vienna along cities such as Washington DC and London as center stage to the creation of our modern day food safety system which would focus in the course of its work on matters such as the direct addition of nitrite in foods.

THE WORLD

A second set of conferences would now take center stage and further the initial suggestion by Paul Francois van Hamel-Roos, of and international Codex that would flow out of the various regional works.  The Congress of Applied Chemists would become the cradle of the idea.

The first Congress of Applied Chemists was held in Brussels in 1894. It was an initiative of Dr. H. W. Wiley.  Dr. Wiley was a noted American chemist best known for his leadership in the passage of the landmark Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 in the USA.  The conference in Brussels was divided into four sections.  Sugar Chemistry, Agricultural Chemistry, Food and Public Hygiene and Biological Chemistry. 2000 delegates were in attendance.   (Ind. Eng. Chem., 1912, 4 (10), pp 706–707)

“At the second Congress of Applied Chemistry, held in Paris in 1896, an international Codex was proposed for coupling trade with hygiene. Successive conferences would take up this proposal with hardly any change in its wording. Belgium played an instrumental role in this process.”  (PATRICK ZYLBERMAN, P.  Med Hist. 2004 Jan 1; 48(1): 1–28)

The third Congress of Applied Chemistry was held in Vienna on 27 July 1898, the birth place of the initial Codex. This congress was divided into twelve sections.  One of the principal question before the Congress was the adoption of a uniform method of analysis of commercial products and raw materials.  (PATRICK ZYLBERMAN, P.  Med Hist. 2004 Jan 1; 48(1): 1–28)

The section for food and medicine chemistry were occupied with the drafting of the Codex Alimentarius (food rules) which was first proposed on 12 October 1891 by Dutch scientist, Paul Francois van Hamel-Roos in Vienna and proposed to this Congress for the first time in Paris.  It would deal with the question  “what is to be demanded of the ordinary articles of food.”  It states the problem very simply as the fact that “competition has cheapened food, but hand in hand with this reduction in price goes, particularly in Germany, their deterioration.”  The international Codex was intended to “afford the public, magistrates, and honest middle-men, a means of combating this dishonest competition.” (The Sydney Morning Herald)

“Some pundits resented France’s influence in these various international meetings. Joseph Ruau, French Minister of Agriculture (and author of the 1905 act) declared at the 1909 Paris meeting that honesty in business, hygiene, and international cooperation could be harmoniously linked. He thought all this should become part of a Codex Alimentarius. This did not mean that border controls (poorly organized in France at the time) were not worthwhile: after all, such a harmonization was far from being realized. Ruau was not alone in holding this opinion.”  (PATRICK ZYLBERMAN, P.  Med Hist. 2004 Jan 1; 48(1): 1–28)

While the ideals of an international Codex remained largely unfulfilled till after World War II and the creation of the World Health Organization, the development of the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus continued.

In Vienna, “the Codex Commission was reintroduced in 1921 by the Federal Ministry of Social Administration. The aim was to produce a second edition of the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus considering the latest developments in science and economy. This work was interrupted in 1939.”  (Int. J. Vitam. Nutr. Res., 82 (3), 2012, 223 – 227)

“The Codex Commission was reinstalled in 1946 and emerged as an institution under whose umbrella all stakeholders like producers, traders, consumers, scientists, and official authorities can discuss and resolve problems arising. The organization is flexible enough to keep the single chapters of the Codex concerning foodstuffs, cosmetics, and items of practical use in conformance with the current technical and legal standards.  Corresponding to modern technologies the actual chapters of the fourth edition can be downloaded from the home page of the responsible ministry, which at present is the Ministry of Health.”  (Int. J. Vitam. Nutr. Res., 82 (3), 2012, 223 – 227)

Internationally, the problem of food-poisoning would attract more attention from international organizations following the Second World War. Between 1953 and 1958 several conferences were held around the world that advanced the possibility of an international Codex and sought to deal with the issue of food additives.  (PATRICK ZYLBERMAN, P.  Med Hist. 2004 Jan 1; 48(1): 1–28)

“In 1958 a Permanent Council of the Codex Alimentarius—an old ambition—was set up with nineteen governments represented.  The name given to the commission was after the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus where the idea of a global food standard started to become concrete. The Joint Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) / World Health Orginization (WHO) Codex Alimentarius Commission organized its first meeting in Rome in June 1963: thirty countries and sixteen international organizations attended.”  (PATRICK ZYLBERMAN, P.  Med Hist. 2004 Jan 1; 48(1): 1–28)

The life and times of Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER took place at the time when the world was coming to grips with rules for food in an industrialised age.  Vienna and Prague played a leading role in food research and developing a proper set of food standards.  This highly developed thinking about food safety allowed for the direct addition of Sodium Nitrite to foods which allowed the creation of Praganda.

On 1 July 1991, Dr. B. P. Dutia, Assistant Director-General Economic and Social Policy Department, World Health Organization, spoke at the opening of the Nineteenth Session of the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION.  He said that on “October 1891, a decision was made in Vienna to establish a Codex Alimentarius Austriacus which would seek to protect the legitimate interests of consumers and establish uniform principles for testing and evaluating foods for safety. This idea of codified food standards was the forerunner of today’s international Codex Alimentarius Commission.”  (Dr. B.P. Dutia, 1991)

This commission set the rules on food which are used in national legislation and industry food safety audits.  This is the theater where the leading thinking on food safety and pure foods play out.

The Codex Alimentarius Commission of the WHO would have the final say about the direct addition of nitrites in curing brines.  We deal with this matter separately.

CONCLUSION

The fact that Praganda was invented in Prague is not surprising if we understand that a very sophisticated culture and advanced technology existed in the Austro-Hungarian Empire around chemistry and food between 1850 and 1915.

The competitive advantage of nations hinges on elements like the strength of the local competition as was the case in the rivalry between the Bohemians and the Germans; world leadership in related fields as was the case with food safety and the creation of the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus;  a superior scientific environment as was the case in chemistry and nitrite chemistry in particular (the subject of another article).

——————

(c) eben van tonder

“Bacon & the art of living” in bookform

Stay in touch

Like our Facebook page and see the next post. Like, share, comment, contribute!

Bacon and the art of living

Promote your Page too

——————

References:

Int. J. Vitam. Nutr. Res., 82 (3), 2012, 223 – 227.   Vojir, F., Schübl, E.(1) and Elmadfa, I (2)       The Origins of a Global Standard for Food Quality and Safety: Codex Alimentarius Austriacus and FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius.  1 Bureau of the Codex Commission, Ministry of Health, Vienna, Austria;  2 Institute of Nutritional Sciences, University of Vienna, Austria

Ind. Eng. Chem., 1912, 4 (10), pp 706–707.  International Congress of Applied Chemistry.

Ladislav Nachmüllner vulgo Praganda,  Nachmüllnerová, Eva Editor, Nakladatelské údaje: Tábar : OSSIS, 2000

Opening Statement by Dr. B.P. Dutia, Assistant Director-General Economic and Social Policy Department, FAO to the Nineteenth Session of the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION.  Produced by:  Agriculture and Consumer Protection of the WHO. 1 July 1991

PATRICK ZYLBERMAN, P.  Med Hist. 2004 Jan 1; 48(1): 1–28  Making Food Safety an Issue: Internationalized Food Politics and French Public Health from the 1870s to the Present

Schübl, E.,  Vojir, F.. 12.10.2011.  120 Jahre Codex Alimentarius Austriacus – Die Geschichte eines erfolgreichen Weges.

The Sydney Morning Herald.  (Sydney, New South Wales, Australia)  22 September 1898.

UNDERSTANDING THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Rome, 2006 (ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/Publications/understanding/Understanding_EN.pdf )

Image Credits:

Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER:   from vulgo Praganda.

Paul Brouardel:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Brouardel#/media/File:Paul_Brouardel.jpg

Ernst Ludwig:  https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Ludwig_(Chemiker)

Paul Francois van Hamel-Roos:  https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Fran%C3%A7ois_van_Hamel_Roos

Leonhard_Roesler:  https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonhard_Roesler

Dr. H. W. Wiley:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Washington_Wiley

24 September 2015

Also, see Bacon & the Art of Living, Chapter 11.03: The Direct Addition of Nitrites to Curing Brines – the Master Butcher from Prague

INTRODUCTION

Prague Powder is an iconic curing salt, one of the first in the USA to contain sodium nitrite as curing agent.  It was successfully marketed around the world and has been used by butchers, housewives, farmers and bacon curers since 1925.

The questions of who invented Prague Powder and when it was invented unlock one of the most fascinating sagas in the history of meat curing.  The popular narrative, held since 1925, relegates the creation of Prague Salt to obscurity in the chaos of World War 1, Germany.  Prague Powder was presented as a progression on Prague Salt in 1933 by the company who imported it into the USA since 1925, The Griffith Laboratories.  Griffith announced the creation of Prague Powder in 1934.  (Prague Powder;1963: 3)

I have been fascinated by the lack of information on the origin of Prague Salt in Germany or details on its creation.  Griffith offers virtually no information on the background of Prague Salt or its origin which made me speculate that there may be elements that they may not want us to know.

This precipitated an investigation that focussed on Germany, the findings which I published in an article in 2014, Concerning the direct addition of nitrite to curing brine and in 2015, Concerning Chemical Synthesis and Food Additives.

Despite everything I uncovered about the use of nitrite in curing brines, a practice that became popular during the World War 1, I did not find any evidence of a curing salt called Prague Salt to ever have been produced in Germany or for that matter, anywhere in the world before it was introduced by Griffith in 1925 in the USA.  Unable to find any information about Prague Salt in Germany, my attention shifted to the only other lead I had namely the name itself, Prague Salt.  I started to focus my attention on Prague as the origin of the salt, possibly produced under a different name.

After an interesting course of events, I was introduced to Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER, a master butcher from Prague who lived between 1896 and 1945.  I chronicled these events in my article, Concerning Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER and the invention of the blend that became known as Prague Salt.   He invented a famous curing brine, Praganda which are sold across Europe to this day.

As I learned more about Praganda and its invention, the facts started to point not only to a clear link between Praganda and Prague Salt, but two different accounts of its invention emerged.  One claimed by Griffith and one possibly the work of scientists in Prague and used by NACHMÜLLNER in Praganda.  It sets up a perfect duel of Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER vs the Griffith Laboratories.

THE STORY ACCORDING TO GRIFFITH

A publication of The Griffith Laboratories from 1963, Prague Powder, Its Uses in Modern Curing and Processing, tells the popular story.  According to it, “The Griffith Laboratories’ chemists had been studying the German technique of quick-curing.  During World War I, pushed by military demand for greater production, German processors changed from slow-acting saltpetre cures to PRAGUE SALT – a salt mixture containing sodium nitrite.  Shortly after the war, The Griffith Laboratories  imported and introduced PRAGUE SALT to meat packers in the United States.”  Users found it would cure ham in just 28 days!” (as opposed to 80 to 120 days curing for a 16-pound or roughly 7kg ham). (Prague Powder;1963: 3)

According to Griffith, there was a drawback to the product.  Curers found that it delivered a poor flavour development.  In response to this, they directed their researchers to find a solution. (Prague Powder;1963: 3)

“Griffith announced its success in 1934. ”

THE ROLE OF LLOYD HALL

Enoch Luther Griffith and his son, Carroll Griffith, created the Griffith Laboratories, Inc in 1919.  A young inventor, Lloyd Hall, born on June 20, 1894 in Elgin, Illinois was hired by E. L. Griffith as chief chemist in 1925.  E. L. Griffith and Lloyd Hall were former classmates at Northwestern University while studding towards their Bachelor Degrees in Pharmaceutical Chemistry. (blackinventor.com)

The year of Hall’s appointment, 1925, was the same year that Griffith started importing Prague Salt.  It seems plausible that Hall was appointed because of the anticipated success of Prague Salt and future development work around it.

The patent application gives more details about the scientific underpinnings of the invention.  By this time the priority of nitrite, nitrous acid and its reaction with hemoglobin was firmly established in the scientific and curing community.

Prague Salts itself was a basic mechanical mixture of sodium chloride, sodium nitrite and sodium nitrate.  When mechanically mixed, the different salts would not remain homogeneously distributed through the mix.   This separation resulted in the poor flavour development.  The amount of nitrite, nitrate and sodium chloride would be different depending if you took the salt from the top or the bottom of the bag.  You could therefore never be sure if you use all the ingredients and this caused uneven curing.

Hall also observed “that when sodium chloride, sodium nitrate and sodium nitrite were used in order to preserve and cure the meat, the nitrates and nitrites penetrated the meat much faster than did the sodium chloride. In doing so, the nitrates and nitrites adversely affected the meat by breaking it down before the sodium chloride had a chance to preserve it.”  (blackinventor.com)

The new Prague Powder addressed this issue.  It is best described as a “fused” crystal of sodium chloride (table salt), sodium nitrite and sodium nitrate.  The patented process is described as dissolving the three salts in the right proportion in a stainless steel vat of boiling water.  “The balanced ingredients are now fused as one in a fast-dissolving crystals.”  “The crystals acquire a new melting point and flavour development unlike anything associated with nitrate, nitrite or salt before fusion.”  “It contains nitrate, but its free from the bitterness of saltpeter or nitrate; it contains nitrite, but it’s free from the sharpness in nitrite!”  (Prague Powder;1963: 4, 5)

The issue of the different rates of penetration was also solved.  By encapsulating the nitrates and nitrites within a sodium chloride “shell” through a process called “flash-drying,” the sodium nitrate is now introduced to the meat first and dissolved, and then the nitrates and nitrites.  (blackinventor.com)

THE GRIFFITH PATENT

On 7 November 1936, E. L. Griffith filed an application for a patent for the curing salt.  It was granted as US patent US2054625 A.   The first patent was registered by Griffith on May 18, 1933, 11 year after Hall started at Griffith in 1925.  (US2054625)

This is then the account, known to the world since 1925.  We now turn to Prague for the NACHMÜLLNER invention of Praganda and then we will put these two accounts together to try and figure out what really happened.

EVA’S STORY

By 1915, the Prague master butcher, Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER, had a successful business selling his Praganda curing powder containing the quick curing power of nitrite.  His daughter, Eva, told the story many years after the passing of her dad.  (all information on NACHMÜLLNER comes from Ladislav Nachmüllner vulgo Praganda, written by Eva Nachmuelnerová.)

1915 was one year after the outbreak of World War One. The restrictions on the use of saltpeter in Germany came into effect soon after August 1914 when all saltpeter (sodium and potassium nitrate) was reserved for the war effort. This was the initial impetus behind the change from nitrate to nitrite as principle curing agent in brines.  On the basis of the work of German scientists Polenski (1891), Kisskalt and Lehmann (1899) sodium nitrite was authorised for use in curing brines in Germany for a short period during the war.

PRAGUE – 1915

In 1915, there were only two salts available to butchers in Prague that would achieve a pink/ red cured look and taste of meat, both containing nitrate.  The nitrate in these salts are either bound to potassium or sodium.  NACHMÜLLNER knew the salts as Sanytra (KNO3 or potassium nitrate) or salpetr (Sodium Nitrate or NaNO3).

NACHMÜLLNER discovered through “modern-day professional and scientific investigation” that the outdated sodium or potassium nitrate based curing brines “are not the best.”  Sanytra (potassiumm nitrate) “sits” on meat “for some 6 to 8 weeks without any effect” and “only after that time, starts the work on meats haemoglobin, which is changing to red nitro-oxy-haemoglobin.” This means lost time for the meat curer.  His statement on the action on haemoglobin puts his invention after 1901 when Haldane published his findings that cured meat pigment development was the result of adding nitrite to haemoglobin.

NACHMÜLLNER makes an interesting observation that “the important ingredients (actually responsible for the curing) is released in the brine and drained and later dumped.”  In Denmark, tank curing was developed where during the early 1900 the power of used brines were harnessed on an industrial scale which allowed large scale bacon production.  It would eventually become the legendary Wiltshire cure method, being practiced in the UK till today.

Tank curing is however a combination of injection and dry curing and in Prague of 1915, dry curing was practiced without brine injection. NACHMÜLLNER said that there is a weight loss in the meat associated with the use of Sanytra (potassium nitrate) which shows that dry curing was widely in use in Prague.  The dry curing process has evolved from only using salt to first injecting new brine into the meat and then rubbing the meat in dry salt (The History of Curing).  The weight loss was associated with the long curing time that Sanytra (potassium nitrate) called for.

Again, note that he was aware of developments around the world.  The fact that nitrate is reduced to nitrite, resulting in nitrite being present in the used curing brine shows a complete understanding of the mechanisms of curing.

PRAGANDA REPLACES SALTPETER

THE FULL STORY

Taking all the factors thus far developed into account, in this article as well as in my previous articles on nitrite, a clear narrative starts to develop.

The three articles I refer to are,

– Concerning the direct addition of nitrite to curing brine (2014)

– Concerning Chemical Synthesis and Food Additives (2015)

– Concerning Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER and the invention of the blend that became known as Prague Salt (2015).

The facts, currently at my disposal develop the following narrative:

Between 1891 and 1908 there were key scientific discoveries, unlocking the mechanism behind meat curing which NACHMÜLLNER, a master butcher from Prague, stayed abreast of.  He developed a curing mix based on these discoveries.  He omitted the use of potassium nitrate due to its negative effects.  He probably replaced it with sodium nitrate.  To this he added sodium nitrite, sugar and salt.  Relying on local expert knowledge on salts and the fusion of different crystals, he or scientists that he collaborated with, worked out a way to fuse the four main ingredients of his new curing mix which he called Praganda.  It was probably a mix of sodium nitrate, sodium nitrite, salt and sugar.

In 1914 World War 1 broke out, but despite this, by 1915 he had a successful business, selling Praganda as a replacement for potassium nitrate.  Not only did it not have the negative flavour characteristics associated with potassium, but the curing happened much faster and resulted in an overall better flavour profile (probably as a result of the added sugar, the omission of potassium and the right proportions of nitrate and nitrate).

At the time, the sale of Praganda in Germany and other European countries was prohibited due to the fact that the use of sodium nitrite as a food additive was illegal in these countries.

In 1916 the German Government authorised the use of sodium nitrite as a food additive.  Before the end of the war this was repealed due to many poisonings that occurred as a result of the high toxicity of nitrite.  This later ban was not heeded and following the war, Germany reversed the ban.

Even though it is conjecture, it is easy to see how this would have made Praganda a very popular curing salt in Germany during the war.  Especially because of its quick curing action and the fact that it was far safer and easier to handle then the very toxic sodium nitrite.  It is not far fetched to see how this may have been known colloquially during the war as the curing salt from Prague or Prague Salt.

Up till this point, the invention was driven by a master butcher for whom a proper flavour development was as important as the fast curing action.  Germans, facing unprecedented meat shortages during the war did not want to solve flavour development issues, but, as attested by the Griffith documents, their priority was speed of curing.   This was probably what was focused on in discussions between the Germans and Griffith.

The reality of life after the war where Germany was forced to pay for its own war debt,  took the fate of the cure mix out of the hands of a master butcher and transferred it to the hands of chemists, politicians and accountants.  They had to dispose of the unused chemical stockpiles and generate much needed revenue.  Again, flavour development was not a primary concern.

They identified the enormous packing plants on Chicago as a lucrative market.  Not only was it a lucrative market, but as early as in 1905 the packing plants have been experimenting with the use of sodium nitrite.  They knew the product and knew that they needed it.

It may have been the powerful packing plants in Chicago who set Griffith up to handle the import of sodium nitrite based curing salt.  Despite the fact that it has been legal since 1906 to use sodium nitrite as a food ingredient, the public opinion was still very much stacked against its use as the milling industry discovered when they incorporate it for “bleaching” flour. This may explain why the packing plants decided to handle the import and distribution of sodium nitrite at arms length instead of handling it themselves.

The fact that so much happened in 1925 all seem to be too well coordinated to have been the doing of relatively young company like Griffith Laboratories.  In Oct 1925 the Bureau of Animal Industries legalised the use of sodium nitrite as a curing agent for meat.  In December 1925 the Institute of American Meat Packers, created by the large packing plants in Chicago, published the document, The use of sodium Nitrite in Curing Meats.  In 1925 Hall was appointed as chief chemist at Griffith and in the same year Griffith started to import a mechanically mixed salt from Germany consisting of sodium nitrate, sodium nitrite and sodium chloride.

Griffith may never have heard about Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER.  The crude mix, consisting of only salt, sodium nitrite and sodium nitrate, points away from the involvement of anybody from Prague with high standards in meat quality and flavour development.  The picture fits the involvement, on the one hand, of agents of the German state or chemicals industry post WW1, who had to dispose of enormous chemical stockpiles.  On the other hand, they would have orchestrated this in collaboration with the powerful meat packing industry who stated that their goal was, through the Institute of American Meat Packers, “to find out how to reduce steers to beef and hogs to pork in the quickest, most economical and the most serviceable manner.”   (The Indiana Gazette.  28 March 1924)

Why did it take Griffith till 1933 to develop the technology that Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER probably used already in 1915 to “fuse” the salt crystals to prevent separation in the curing mix?  An obvious answer is that the import of the sodium nitrite, -nitrate and -chloride mix was initially done for the sole purpose of the large packing plants.

As the packing plants were slowly losing their powerful and dominant grip on the meat industry in the US, it would make sense for Griffith to read these signs and to start developing alternative markets for their Prague Salt.  If one mixes large batches of brine, it does not matter if the ingredients separated in the bag since they would all dissociate in any event in the water and form a homogenous mix.  The problem of separation of the salts of a mechanical mix is only a problem for small scale usage such as home use and use by farmers and butchers.

This shift in Griffith away from the large meat packers as their main source of income precipitated the development of Prague Powder.  By this time legislators were dealing with the toxic nature of nitrite in a completely different way namely by ruling that sodium nitrite, sodium nitrate and its carrier, sodium chloride had to be packed separately in a separate bag and be coloured pink in order to distinguish it from ordinary table salt.  Other spices and sugar had to be packed in separate bags and added separately when mixing the brine curing mix.

A good way to see the plausibility of the development that is presented is to view the development of nitrite in meat curing chronologically.  Here is the list of the important dates and a short description of events.

CONCLUSION

The story of Prague Powder and its forerunner, Prague Salt is one of the most fascinating stories in chemical and meat curing history.  Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER, a proud master butcher from Prague, created a legendary curing salt, Praganda and by 1915 had already solved problems that would be re-discovered and patented by Griffith in the 1930’s.

Capitalising on supply opportunities from post-war Germany of low cost sodium nitrate and sodium nitrite and demand by the enormous meat packing industry in Chicago, they started to import a product that was probably colloquially called Prague Salt by the Germans, referring to the famous Praganda, which was coming from Prague.

The evidence does not support a scenario where Griffith bought Prague Salt from NACHMÜLLNER.  It seems to have been a crude mix that was produced in Germany, but named only as a reference to the famous curing mix from Prague.  This crude mix was later refined to be closer to the superior Praganda of NACHMÜLLNER when Griffith launched their Prague Powder in 1934.

In the end, a truer reflection of reality is not Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER vs The Griffith Laboratorie, but Ladislav NACHMÜLLNER and The Griffith Laboratorie – both credible businesses who played their role in the bigger movements of the time.  After almost a hundred years the full story finally starts to unfold and two proud stories emerge.  One, confirming an iconic true American story of entrepreneurship and the other, an “old world” tale of a proud master who elegantly applied the latest technology of the day to centuries of tradition.

What I have uncovered fill me with pride in the industry where I make my living and inspire me to imitate the spirit of both Griffith and NACHMÜLLNER.

——————

(c) eben van tonder

“Bacon & the art of living” in bookform

Stay in touch

Like our Facebook page and see the next post. Like, share, comment, contribute!

Bacon and the art of living

Promote your Page too

——————

References:

Ladislav Nachmüllner vulgo Praganda,  Nachmüllnerová, Eva Editor, Nakladatelské údaje: Tábar : OSSIS, 2000

Prague Powder, Its uses in modern Curing and processing.  1963.  The Griffith Laboratories, Inc.

http://blackinventor.com/lloyd-hall/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curing_salt

https://www.google.com.ar/patents/US2054625

Picture references:

All pictures by Willem Klynveld for Woodys Consumer Brand (Pty) Ltd.

September 2015

David Donde is a complex mixture of creativity and a mechanical engineering mind.  From early on in his life he has been confident, restless, determined, looking for an environment to create something extraordinary.  He found this in the world of speciality coffee, which brought him success and fame throughout the world.

David is much more than a coffee entrepreneur.  I discovered this when I had the privilege to interview him one rainy morning in September 2015 at his Truth Coffee Roasting in Buitenkant Street, Cape Town.

ONE RAINY DAY IN BUITENKANT STREET

Driving into the city to meet David, my mind wandered to the historical setting of Buitenkant Street.  I love climbing Table Mountain and do it at least three times a week.  I have looked down on Buitenkant Street for years and told the story to countless fellow hikers from around the world.

If you hiked up Platteklip Gorge on Table Mountain on 5 April 1652, you would have looked down onto an amazing world. (That is provided you survived the leopards which were once plentiful in the gorge)

Between the mountain and the Atlantic Ocean was a vast grassland filled with herds of wild animals of all kinds. Elephant herds of up to 40 elephants at a time were spotted in the area.  Lions hid below in the grass and bush between the many fresh water streams.   (Heinrich, A. R.; 2010: 50 – 55)

Herds of fat tailed sheep and cattle of the indigenous people would have been guarded by local shepherds.  (Heinrich, A. R.; 2010: 37 – 46) They did not refer to themselves as Khoikhoi or Hottentot, but Khoekhoen which translates as ”’the real people’ or ‘men of men’ and refers to ‘we people with domestic animals’ as opposed to the Bushmen who did not domesticate animals and collected their food off the land.”  (1)  (Peckmann, T.R.; 2002:  7)

A freshwater stream that emanated from Platteklip Gorge meandered its way across the plain, forming branches as it made its way to the ocean.

Two gorges in the North face of Table Mountain, Platteklip Gorge and Silverstream Ravine, feed water into this one stream of fresh, sweet water (2) that Europeans called Rio Dulce or Fresh River (3).  (Herbert, T.; 1928:  300)  These still feed the same river, now, not freely flowing across the land, but having to suffer the indignity of being forced underground and being collected in the Malteno Dam.   Back then, the fresh water stream ran from Platteklip Gorge on Table Mountain, across the plain, into the Atlantic.

Next to the Fresh River there were footpaths, made and used by animals as well as Khoekhoen since a time long before the first European set foot on this magnificent land.

If you were there on 5 April 1652, you would have seen the VOC (the Dutch abbreviation for the United East India Company) ships under Jan van Riebeeck, arriving to set up a replenishment station for the company’s ships travelling from Europe, en route to India and Asia or the route back.  Ferrying, most notably for our project on the history of bacon curing, shiploads of saltpeter from India to be sold to the empires in Europe.

It was at this fresh water streams’ entry point into the sea that a castle was built by European settlers in order to protect the water.  Building work started in 1652. (4)  (Hondius)  A stronger castle (the present day Good Hope Castle) was built between 1666 and 1679.  In reality, the protection of the water never became necessary and the Good Hope Castle came to serve as the command centre and seat of government for the small colony for years to come.

The footpath, running next to the fresh water stream was later named Buitenkant Street or Outside Street by the Europeans and became one of the borders of the small colony.  (5, 6, 7)  The other being Buitengracht or the Outer Ditch.  (SA Archaeological Bulletin)

Buitenkant street was one of the city boundaries with the military stationed along it for protection.  It became central to the life of one group in particulor who was instrumental in the creation of a new language, Afrikaans and who is one of the groups on whose misery, a multi-cultural nation would be build many years later.  These people were the Cape Slaves.

By the 1700’s Buitenkant Street was colloquially known as Slaves’ Walk.  Ships would anchor in Table Bay and the laundry was landed for washing.  “Slaves from the Company’s Slave Lodge carried the washing up the Slaves’ Walk to the main washing site at Platteklip Stream above the town, on the lower slopes of Table Mountain. “Today this spot, in Van Riebeeck Park at the top of Buitenkant Street, is occupied by the Platteklip Wash House.”  (highbeam)

It was on this iconic street, steeped in so much history, where the soul of this magnificent land was first lost as Europeans altered the landscape; on one of the borders where misguided settlers imposed their view of order; on this street, at number 36 Buitenkant Street a true legend was created. On a street of unfortunate endings and tentative beginnings by slave people and colonists, a remarkable man, David Donde, native of this majestic land, decided to set up his Truth Coffee Roasting and create the finest coffee experience in the entire world.

It is here where I settled into a chair in David’s office “spot” overlooking his iconic coffee roasting where I got to know this inspirational man.

PRACTICAL CREATIVITY

David must have had a natural understanding and affinity for technical and mechanical matters from an early age.  After school he enrolled at UCT in mechanical engineering.  At the end of the first year he got called into the Dean’s office.  He was told that he did not actually fail, but the Dean could see that he did not want to be there and challenged David on the point.  He advised David to go and do something else for a year and if he is ready, to come back.  They never spoke again.

After this he tried doing a bachelor’s of Arts until he could no longer escape the clutches of the Old South African government and was conscripted for a year of national service.  In the Air Force he became an air traffic controller.  (His marks for Maths and Science must have been sky high)

He then tried his hand at industrial design for 6 months until he was thrown out.  His family had a chicken farm which he was forced to run.  He initially helped out only and 10 years later realised that chicken farming was not his profession of choice.

Writing the article and reflecting on this, I smiled as I realised that where family and close relationships were involved, David stuck around for 10 years.  I love this.  In a sense this may be the most important feature of David’s character!  He has not achieved success by a ruthless, irresponsible pursuits of his dreams.

That he has boundless energy is clear.  A restless pursuit of excellence, a talent for mechanical gadgets, a keen intellect, pragmatic creativity, warm, personal and a firm grounding in what life is  really about shaped his entrepreneurial pursuits.  In 1994 he put up the Barnyard Farm Stall on Steenberg Road, Tokai, which he ran together with the farm.

DAVID’S TRUTH

After selling the farm stall and the farm, he moved to Greyton where he bought the Post House Country Hotel.  Here he first started roasting coffee.  After his divorce he moved back to Cape Town, co-founded Origin Coffee Roasting and in 2009 he opened Truth.  In 2012 he moved to Buitenkant Street.

In 2015 Truth Coffee Roasting was mentioned by acclaimed UK news agency, The Telegraph, as being the very best in the whole world.

When one visits Truth, your senses are overwhelmed by the amazing, one of a kind decor and ambiance.  I know that underpinning the astounding creativity must be a deep and profound understanding of the art of coffee.  Great decor will give you an excellent business, but decor, combined with a real understanding of the art is how a legend is made. Many articles have been written about Truth, featuring the design, costumes and ambiance, but I have not come across many that delve into the science underpinning the Truth phenomenon.

CREATIVE SCIENCE

David’s general methodology is simple and pragmatic.  He learns from the best, both locally and internationally and questions everything.  By questioning, you gain a real understanding into what you are trying to do.

It was on a trip to New Zealand where David discovered speciality coffee and he was introduced to the work of David Schomer, the father of modern coffee.  The history of the development of speciality coffees, the birth of the modern art of coffee and the science underpinning it became the sparks that ignited David’s love affair with coffee.  In the same way, the historical developments of the art of bacon and understanding its scientific principles, matured and deepened our love affair with bacon.  It is the reason for this work on Bacon & the art of living.

For David, the only question you have to ask to determine if a so called expert knows what he is talking about is the question “Why?”  Ask that and all of a sudden someone who was very sure of himself moments ago is not so sure any more.

David pointed out that this was the fundamental question that David Schomer asked when he went to Italy and began asking why one coffee was better than another.  The answers he got revealed the bankruptcy of the thinking about coffee at that time and in seeking the real answers, a world opened up for him as the age of modern coffee was born.

He started to discover the impact of over extraction, under extraction and flavour development and from there his understanding grew.  David lives his life by learning each day and continually being focussed on understanding more about his art.  He is not so much a student as an exporter who puts his discoveries through a creativity machine and pumps out a result that is “best in the world.”

The current focus point for David is the solubility of coffee.  Once he has learned and applied all he can about solubility, he will move on to the next topic.

David is emphatic that there is nothing secret in coffee.  Everything is on the internet.  We have not a single new idea.  All we do is to improve on things that have been thought and invented in the past.

This concept of “no new thought”  led us to a discussion on bacon brines and the water used in meat processing.  Water is very important for David since coffee is 99% water.  In particular, the calcium percentage matters to him.  A higher calcium content carries the coffee flavours better.  Coffee in Cape Town tastes totally different from Coffee is Hout Bay for example due to the difference in the water and not necessarily the difference in the coffee.

In speciality coffees all one cares about are flavours.  Until four weeks ago, David told me, we talked about 5 basic flavour groups.  Today we talk about 6.  You have sweet, sour, salty, bitter and umami.  Over the last few weeks one more was added.  Fat!  One is able to taste fat.

I told him about a pork banger we produce that is 50% fat and the flavour explosion in your mouth that it creates.  David rides mountain bike races on fat and has great results on it, as opposed to carbs.  In a recent race where he did this he came 34th.  Impressive for a man with a demanding day job!

This fascinates me because the matters of flavour in bacon, sausages and cured meats are so key to what we do.  Where the world has shun fat for long, it is the carrier of much of what makes food exceptional and we are learning every day that it is not as bad for us as we always thought.

DAVID ON BACON

It is not often that I get a chance to speak to a food scientist from another industry and I questioned David about possible benefits for the meat industry that may be found in coffee.  I have previously explored the possibility of a coffee brine for bacon, but abandoned it when the flavours did not seem to be compatible.

David suggested that I approach the question differently.  He challenged me to ask if there is not a component or an inherent characteristic of coffee that can be used in bacon production.  Not to make bacon taste like coffee, but to serve good curing, flavour development, etc. generally.  In particular, David suggested that we focus on any matter that would help tenderizing meat.

We discussed the production of a superior bacon at length.  Predicated upon the principals of dry curing and tank curing or Wiltshire curing where conditions are created for enzymes to perform their softening work.  We spoke about the advantages of doing this in an environment under vacuum.

David challenge my thinking at every point.  Whenever I make a statement, he would ask me “why?”  I realised that the interview is becoming a real challenge to my thinking and I found a small and easily reproducible technique that I could integrate into my world, namely being more aggressive in my use of the question “why?”

David’s mindset to continually learn and improve permeates everything he does. He states it plainly, “You can always learn. You can always do better.  If this is your outlook, there does not have to be a particular mentor in your life.  Everybody is good at something.  Learn from all people!”

What frustrates him about the age we live in is that we are trying to be super specialists and don’t trust the idea that someone can be good at a multiple of things.

David has the ability to demystify seemingly complex processes.  The case in point is the fact that he immediately saw the basic process of curing bacon as similar to fermenting beer or producing wine.  Superficially this is not the case, but the more one understand the basic principles at work and the history behind fermentation technology and curing, you realises that he is right.

MISCELLANEOUS TRUTH’S

A few random, interesting facts about David came up in the interview.

Every morning at 5:55 you will find him cycling.  Mostly around Cape Town, but also around the world.

He lives in Tamboerskloof.

David is not franchising the Truth concept.  From Truth they supply coffee.

Besides a coffee entrepreneur, David is a motoring journalist.  It blends well with his mechanical talents.  He has been doing it for 5 years.  Even though he is not currently restoring cars, he is “inclined to be doing it.”  The thing that would irritate him is not finishing a project like a car restoration.

Management style:  He believes he is not a good manager.

Outlook:  David is currently reading on migration in South Africa.  Especially in the context of giving land back.  The question comes up:  To whom do you give it back?  The only people one could really give it back to have been killed by us.  The strandloper is gone.

On the future of South Africa David said:  “I dont know.  It all hinges on economics and economics hinge on personal greed.  I live in hope!”   I asked if he will ever leave South Africa.  His answer was an emphatic “No!”  He is South African and will stay here for the rest of his life!

A MALAY ORCHESTRA

Laurance Green recorded a picturesque recollection of life in Buitenkant Street in 1960 from very old sources.  He recounts one such recollection involving the slave-woman from Buitenkant street and the Platteklip Stream.  “I knew Platteklip in the days when Malay washerwomen worked there in scores. Long before the wash houses were built, slaves carried Cape Town’s laundry on their heads to this stream, and laid the clean clothes on the flat rocks to dry. Many an author recorded the picturesque scene.

Lady Duff Gordon wrote a century ago: “Tomorrow my linen will go to the top of the giant mountain … and there be scoured in a clear spring by brown women, bleached on the mountain top, and carried back all those long miles on their heads, as it went up”. In fact, her linen went no farther than Platteklip. There the Malays found all they needed without climbing higher than the foot of Platteklip Gorge.

Van Riebeeck issued a placaat forbidding the pollution of streams in the settlement, so the Platteklip custom must have started very long ago. One of the sights of Old Cape Town was the long procession of Malay washerwomen, huge bundles on their heads, swinging along up Hope Street and Buitenkant Street in single file. For many years they used the stream and the rocks provided by nature. Wash-houses were built three quarters of a century ago, with seventy cement wash-tubs and proper ironing facilities; and the women paid three pence a day.

These washhouses were closed only a few years ago. Then the Malay women, each with her doek and flowing skirt, came down the cobbled path for the last time. Some were descendants of the slaves who used the Platteklip stream in the eighteenth century. After the abolition of slavery in 1834, there was a celebration at Platteklip on December 1 each year. They finished their work early and danced to the Malay orchestras.”  (Green, L. G..  1964)

I sit at David Donde’s Truth Coffee Roasting and look up Buitenkant street towards Platteklip and I see the woman in single file, with washing on their heads, slowly making their way to the stream.  I think how fitting it is that David settled his business here, in this street where the voices of hardship and also of hope, emancipation and liberation merge and sound the loudest.  Where he showed that excellence is within each person’s grasp, no matter your background.  That this is an age where anybody can dream and achieve; when information is at our fingertips.

I take another sip of my double flat white latte and I swear that for a moment I hear the slave-women sing to the tune of an old Malay orchestra!
——————

(c) eben van tonder

“Bacon & the art of living” in book form

Stay in touch

Like our Facebook page and see the next post. Like, share, comment, contribute!

Bacon and the art of living

Promote your Page too

——————
Note 1:  A traditional Khoekhoen hut, c 1880;

Note 2.  Platteklip Gorge and Silverstream Ravine, feed water into one small stream of fresh, sweet water that Europeans named Rio Dulce or Fresh River.  It ran from Platteklip Gorge, across the plain, into the sea. During the summer it is only a trickle of water, but in the winter it is transformed into something majestic!

Note 3:  Platteklip Stream, c 1900.

Note 4:  Hondius’ descriptions of the Cape in 1652

Hondius (1652) gives the following description of the Platteklip stream:  “A short distance beyond the tail of the Lion Mountain is the little Fresh River which is a stream rising in the foothills of Table Mountain, or in its higher slopes. The river usually flows quite strongly, but in most parts the water does not reach above the knees. In the year 1644 the crew of the [wrecked ship] Mauritius marked out a fort with 4 bastions across this Fresh River in order to protect the fresh water, but no building took place until this present year, 1652, when a fortress was begun on the eastern side of the same streamlet.”  (Hondius)

Note 5:  Map of the Cape of Good Hope by Isaac Tirion dated about 1730.   (© Nationaal Archief, The Hague, 4.BMF . no.471)

Note 6:  Map of Cape Town, 1770 showing the VOC’s Slave Lodge.  Plan of Cape Town by Francois Valentijn, 1770.  The map shows a stream running along the way of the modern day Buitenkant street with plantations and buildings facing the street.  It also shows the deviation of the streams when one compares the 1730 and 1770 maps.

Note 7:  Location of Truth on a modern map of Buitenkant street.

References:

Heinrich, A. R..  2010.  A ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION INTO THE MEAT INDUSTRY ESTABLISHED AT THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE BY THE DUTCH EAST INDIA COMPANY IN THE SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES. By ADAM R. HEINRICH

Green, L. G..  1964.  I HEARD THE OLD MEN SAY. Secrets of the Cape That Has Vanished, and Little-Known Dramas on the Fringe of Living Memory.  Timmins, Cape Town.

Herbert, T..  1928.  Travels in Persia: 1627-1629.  RoutlegeCurzon (reprinted in 2005)

Peckmann, T.R..  2002.  DIALOGUES WITH THE DEAD: AN OSTEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE PALAEO-DEMOGRAPHY AND LIFE HISTORY OF THE 18TH AND 19TH CENTURY NORTHERN FRONTIER IN SOUTH AFRICA

Richards, J. F..  2003.  The Unending Frontier: An Environmental History of the Early Modern World.  University of California Press.

The South African Archaeological Bulletin, Volumes 7-8

http://www.sajs.co.za/sites/default/files/publications/xml/544-7373-1-PB.xml  (Hondius)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molteno_Dam

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-348048331.html   The Plague That Came from the Sea.

Picture References:

Pic 1:  David Donde:  Picture by Eben

Pic 2:  Truth in Buitekant street:  www.capeviewclifton.co.za

Pic 3:  Truth Best in the World:  http://traveller24.news24.com/News/SA-coffee-shop-voted-the-best-in-the-WORLD-Here-are-our-fav-coffee-spots-in-SA-20150626

Pic 4:  Inside Truth:  https://capetowncollectables.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/truth-hq-industrial-style-coffee/

Pic 5:  Coffee Roaster:  http://www.southafrica.net/uploads/blog/-1.jpg

Pic 6:  Khoekhoen Hut.  http://www.heritageportal.co.za/forum/story-behind-historic-photograph

Pic 7:  Platteklip waterfall by Eben

Pic 8:  Platteklip Stream.  http://www.anneleighjacobsen.co.za/2010/02/when-history-goes-underground/

Pic 9:  Map of the Cape of Good Hope:  http://tanap.net/content/activities/documents/resolutions_Cape_of_Good_Hope/index.htm

Pic 10:  Second old map of Cape Town.  http://media1.mweb.co.za/iziko/sh/resources/slavery/plan.html

Pic 11:  Modern day Buitenkant street:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Cape_Town#/media/File:Truth_Coffee_Cape_Town_location_map.svg

August 1892

Dear children,

Today I boarded the Union Shipping liner of Donald Currie & Company en route to Cape Town. Oscar sent me a telegraph message two weeks ago announcing the plans of James and Christel to get married.

An investor in our cause to set up a bacon curing plant in Cape Town saw this as an ideal opportunity to get me home. I can report on what I have learned; assist Oscar in designing the new plant to be erected at the back of the Combrinck & Co. building in Newmarket street; above all, I can see the two of you and Ava.  It is a welcome break before I return to London and the forests and fields of Bristol, Calne and Peterborough.

James and Christel have been friends since university. They formally saw each other for 6 months and in accordance with all sense and sensibility, got engaged 2 months ago. James is Oscar’s youngest brother and took over the financial affairs of our company. He gambled a lucrative career in the Bank of the Netherlands with his move to Woody’s, which I am confident, will pay off handsomely.

Together, Ava and I have hiked up Table Mountain a few times with him and Christel and I consider it a great privilege to know them. He is an upstanding citizen and Christel is everything a good wife should be.

Her dad knows Livingston, being a seasoned explorer himself. When Oscar, David and I met in Copenhagen, Oscar told me that Christel’s dad is travelling through Kazakhstan.  I am looking forward to hear his many stories at the wedding. Martin Sauer from Denmark’s dad also knows Livingston. He has been in Rhodesia to help farmers set up pork farms. Maybe they know each other.

From Ava, I hear that you both have taken a keen interest in chemistry.  Uncle David promises to take you two along to the reading room (1) in Cape Town one day.  The reading rooms in Copenhagen and now in London and Bristol, where I have been staying with Kevin, is the source of endless pleasure.

I am sure you will find it equally engaging in years to come.  It is the gateway to the world.  Where printed newspapers and posts link our globe and knowledge are shared within weeks of a discovery or an event or a newsworthy happening.  It is an indispensable tool to the scientist and businessman alike and the fact that Cape Town has its own is just marvellous.

On the steam liner I picked up an old copy of the Marion Record from Marion in Kansas, published 4 years ago on Friday, 15 July 1887.  The journalist entitled his piece, About Nitrogen.  I am not sure how it survived these four years, but I am thankful that I found the article.  It gives me much insight into matters that Uncle Jeppe in Denmark taught me and its content provides occasion for contemplation and reflection in order to answer important questions.

Back in England I have been challenged by a chemistry student on the subject of brine formulations and microbiology.  In Denmark I become convinced that it may be a good idea to slightly acidify our bacon brine, that is, to lower the pH to a range between 5 and 6. My reasoning is that microorganisms prefer a higher pH and grow faster, spoiling meat and causing illness.

One evening a few friends from the processing industry and I were discussing this theory over drinks in a pub in London when an objection was raised by a chemistry student who was listening to our conversation, that acidifying the brine will cause nitrite to rapidly change to nitric oxide.  This would, according to him, have two detrimental effects. On the one hand it would release nitric oxide, a corrosive gas, into the atmosphere to the detriment of staff working in the curing room and on the other hand, it would deplete the available nitrite in the brine, thus removing the substance that cures the meat.

In order to look into the matters, I have to refresh my own memory on matters of chemistry.  I have to review nitrogen, nitric oxide and the other oxidation states of nitrogen and acidification.  What is acidification and how it will interact with nitrogen and its many forms.  It is therefore a good opportunity to introduce you to the subject more thoroughly.

NITROGEN

Farmers all around the world heard about nitrogen and its value in the soil.  It is a gas that forms part of our atmosphere.  We estimate, at least 4/5th.  The rest, roughly 20%, is oxygen.  (2)  (Marion Record, p3: About Nitrogen)

Up to the present time, its relation to the animal and plant world has not been clearly understood.  It is found in the tissue of all animal structures and in all plants.  Exactly how nitrogen, which exist as a gas, tightly bound in pairs and requiring enormous energy to separate, end up in plants and animals, is an important question to the farmer     (Marion Record, p3: About Nitrogen) and the starting point of our chemistry review. 

The article from the Marion Record reminded me that the role and effect of nitrogen in human and animal tissue is relevant not just to the living but also to pork from which we make bacon.  The art of bacon is the art of the manipulation of the properties of meat through nitrogen, sodium and chloride.  I told you about the pioneers who discovered these elements and processes in Lauren learns the nitrogen cycle and The micro letter.

It is important to know a few of the other chemical elements at work in our industry.  Nitrogen is the basis for the earliest food colouring industry, an attempt to make our meals look more appetising. (see Concerning chemical synthesis and food additives)  Nitrogen is the link between fertilizer, food processing and war since the same power fires bullet, provides nutrition to plants and cures meat for future consumption.

NITROGEN GAS (N₂)

Nitrogen was so named by the early chemists as the generator of nitre.  Nitre is also called saltpeter, something you are familiar with by now.

Nitrogen was independently discovered by two scientists.  In 1772, by the Scottish physicist, Daniel Rutherford  (Marion Record, p3: About Nitrogen) and in the early 1770’s by a Swedish chemist, Carl Scheele.  “Rutherford named his discovery “noxious air,” because animals were not able to breath in it.  Scheele called it “foul air.”  (Farndon, J, 1999: 9)

In one of my first letters, I wrote to you about the French chemist, Antoine Lavoisier (1743 – 1794) who realized that air was basically a mixture between two gasses, oxygen and nitrogen.  He burned mercury in a closed jar and found that a 5th of the air combined with the mercury to form a red powder, mercury oxide.  No matter what he did, the rest stayed a gas.  Mice died in it and a candle could not burn in it.  “Lavoisier decided that air is made of two gases.  One, which he called oxygen, was the gas that burned with the mercury.  The other he called azote from the Greek for ‘no life.’  It later came to be known as nitrogen, because it can be generated from niter, the common name for sodium or potassium nitrate or saltpeter” (Farndon, J, 1999: 9)

Nitrogen comes into our lives through the power of lightning and the small microorganisms that I have written about in my previous letters.  Let’s first look at nitrogen that falls from the skies.

NITRIC OXIDE (NO)

Nitrogen gas exists as two atoms, tightly bound in one molecule (N₂).  The bonds between the atoms are so strong that it doesn’t normally react with anything else.  Lightning provides enough energy to break these strong bonds which now makes the nitrogen available to react with other elements.  (Farndon, J, 1999: 10)

One of these elements is oxygen.  When they react, they form nitrogen monoxide (NO).  Nitrogen monoxide is a colourless gas, also called nitric oxide or nitrogen oxide.  The nitric oxide is heated due to the energy from the lightning flash that created it.  (Farndon, J, 1999: 10)

The reaction is written as follows:

N_{2 (g)} + O_{2 (g)}  lightning —> 2NO _(g)

NITROGEN DIOXIDE (NO₂)

Other sources of nitric oxide, besides lightning, are certain bacteria and volcanos.  (Air Quality Guidelines, 2000:  chapter 7).  As it cools down, it reacts further with the oxygen molecules around it to form nitrogen dioxide.  One nitrogen atom attached to two oxygen atoms and forms nitrogen dioxide. “It is a poisonous, brown, acidic, pungent gas”.  (Farndon, J, 1999: 12)  Nitrogen dioxide is however mainly formed in the atmosphere through it’s a reaction with ozone (O3).

Like nitrogen, oxygen occurs as two oxygen atoms, bound in one molecule.  Ultra-violet light and lightning cause the two tightly bound oxygen atoms to separate and react, either with other single atom oxygen molecules or with more stable two atom oxygen molecules.  In the latter case, three oxygen atoms are bound into one molecule (O₃). (3)  (Wikipedia, Ozone)  It is not very stable and quickly breaks down into one oxygen atom (O) and or two oxygen atom molecules or it reacts with nitric oxide to form nitrogen dioxide.  (Huffman, R. E.; 1992: 210) (Air Quality Guidelines, 2000:  chapter 7)

The reaction occurs as follows:

NO _(g) + ¹/₂O_{2 (g)} —> NO_{2 (g)}

NITRIC ACID (HNO₃)

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO₂) reacts with more oxygen and rain drops to form nitric acid (HNO₃) which falls to earth and enters the soil to provide nutrients for plants.  (Ramakrishna, A.; 2014: 14) Nitric acid (HNO₃) is also known as aqua fortis and spirit of niter.  (Wikipedia, Nitric Acid)

This puzzling phrase, “spirit of” something seems to have been used generally by chemists when they did not really know what it was.  The particular phrase, “spirit of niter” was puzzling to even  Robert Boyle in the 1650’s and 60’s.  (Rattansi, P.;1994: 66)

The reaction occurs as follows:

3NO_{2 (g)} + H₂O —> 2HNO_{3 (aq)} + NO _(g)

Nitric acid is highly reactive and combines with salts in the soil, converting it to nitrates which in turn become food for the plants.  (Ramakrishna, A.; 2014: 14)  It is this reaction of nitric acid with salts that create sodium nitrate  or calcium nitrate or potassium nitrate that are used as fertilizer or in gunpowder or to cure bacon.

It has been discovered that curing happens much faster if nitrite is used directly.  Bacteria are responsible for changing nitrate to nitrite when it is injected into meat as a curing agent, just as it is done by bacteria in soil.  Nitrite (NO₂^–) is the same as nitrate (NO₃^–), with one less oxygen atom.  By using nitrite directly, curing is accomplished much faster since the reduction to nitrite takes time.

AMMONIA (NH₃)

Nitrogen comes into our lives from the atmosphere, but despite the fact that “nitrogen oxides trapped in rocks and sediments probably represent a larger total quantity of nitrogen, this nitrogen, for the most part, is not accessible to living organisms.”  (Igarashi, Y. and Seefeldt, C. L..  2003)   Most nitrogen enters our world through special bacteria that take nitrogen from the atmosphere and combine it with another important chemical element, hydrogen, to produce ammonia.  (www.eoearth.org)

There are many bacteria who achieve this conversion through various means, but a common denominator is that they all use the most interesting enzyme, nitrogenase.  It is this enzyme that is responsible for changing N₂ to ammonia.  The general N₂ reduction reaction catalyzed by these enzymes is typically presented as follows:

N2 + 8 e− + 16 ATP + 8 H+ → 2 NH3 + 16 ADP + 16 Pi + H2  (Igarashi, Y. and Seefeldt, C. L..  2003)

This amazing enzyme has the ability to break to very strong N2 molecule and form ammonia.  “Ammonia is easily manipulated by biological cells and by converting it into ammonium (NH₄⁺) and other compounds such as nitrate and nitrites.”   (Dincer, I. and Zamfirescu, C.; 2011: 706)  Interestingly enough, a small amount of ammonia is also produced through pressure and energy from lightning.  (Krasny, M. E.; 2003: 46)

Bacteria with this remarkable ability are found in fresh water, soil and in seawater.  A few of these bacteria live in a special relationship with plants where both benefits in special ways.  The bacteria live in the roots and supply the plant with nitrogen.  In turn, the plant supplies the bacteria with sugars and other carbon compounds.  Examples of these plants are alfalfa, clover, peas, peanuts and beans.  (Krasny, M. E.; 2003: 46)

Ammonium (NH₄⁺) is taken up by the plants and incorporated in amino acids, the building blocks of proteins.  When animals or humans eat the plants, the nitrogen is taken up in their bodies in the form of amino acids and proteins.  (Krasny, M. E.; 2003: 46)

“Similar to Carbon, organic nitrogen is returned to the atmosphere when plants and animals die and are decomposed.  Bacteria first break protein and amino acids back down into ammonium.”  The process now becomes complicated as some ammonium is taken up again by plants and used by the plants to build amino acids and protein.  Some are broken down further by bacteria into nitrite (NO₂^–)and nitrate (NO₃^–).  Nitrate (NO₃^–) itself can be taken up directly by the plants. Some of the nitrate are transformed by bacteria into gaseous nitrous oxide (N₂O), nitric oxide (NO), or nitrogen gas (N₂), which are released into the air.  Some nitrate makes its way into streams, lakes and groundwater.  (Krasny, M. E.; 2003: 46)

Lauren and Tristan, now that I have painted the landscape of how nitrogen moves through its various oxidation states we can look at acidity.  Then we will try and write the reaction that occurs when a brine mix containing nitrite is dosed with an organic acid such as acetic acid, in order to reduce the pH.  We will then try and predict how much nitrite is converted into nitric oxide and why this happens. Lastly, we will see if this is a reaction that should be a concern to us. This will deal with the particular question that I was challenged about in the pub in London.

I also want to learn more about nitric oxide (NO) and its role in curing of meat.  Some interesting studies are coming out that it may be nitric oxide that is ultimately responsible for bacon curing.

I am looking forward to give you the letters I am writing on the streamliner personally and read them to you in the evenings after supper.  When I close my eyes, my spirit floats to our living room in Cape Town where, after supper, we sit and first read and then talk until the evening sun sets over the Atlantic in all its brilliance.

I dream about being home and enjoying Ava’s home cooked meals and telling you first-hand about all my adventures.  The quest of setting up a bacon curing plant in Cape Town in becoming the most interesting adventure I have ever imagined.

Much love!

Your Dad.

——————

(c) eben van tonder

“Bacon & the art of living” in book form

Stay in touch

Like our Facebook page and see the next post. Like, share, comment, contribute!

Bacon and the art of living

Promote your Page too

——————

Notes:
1. Reading Room in Cape Town

2.  This estimation is accurate, even by today’s reckoning.

3.  In 1930 S.Chapman, a British scientist, proposed a theory of the formation of ozone in the stratosphere (known as Chapman mechanism).

References

Air Quality Guidelines – Second Edition.  2000. Published by the WHO, Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Butcher, S. S.. et al.  1992.  Global biogeochemical cycles. Academic Press, Inc.

Dincer, I. and Zamfirescu, C.  2011.  Sustainable Energy Systems and Applications.  Springer Science + BusinessMedia, LLC.

Farndon, J.  1999.  The Elements, Nitrogen.  Marshall Cavendish Corporation.

Huffman, R. E..  1992.  Atmospheric Ultraviolet Remote Sensing.  Academic Press, Inc.

Igarashi, Y. and Seefeldt, C. L..  2003.  Nitrogen Fixation: The Mechanism of the Mo-Dependent Nitrogenase.  Article from Critical Reviews in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 38:351–384.  Robert. Taylor and Francis Inc.

Krasny, M. E..  2003.  Invasion Ecology.  NSTA Press.

Langa, S. L..  1999.  The Impact of Nitrogen Deposition on Natural and Semi-Natural Ecosystems.  Springer Science+Business Media.

Marion Record, Marion, Kansas.  Friday, 15 July 1887. About nitrogen, p3

Ramakrishna, A.  2014.  Goyal’s IIT FOUNDATION COURSE CHEMISTRY.  Roshan Lal Goyal for Goyal Brothersn Prakashan.

Rattansi, P..  1994.  Alchemy and Chemistry in the 16th and 17th Centuries.  Kluwer Academic Publishers.

http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/170977/  Atmospheric Science. Earth’s atmospheric air.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozonehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitric_acid

Image references

Image 1:  James and Christel.  From James.

Image 2:  Union-Castle liners in Cape Town harbour. Early 1900s, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percy_Molteno

Image 3:  Dinitrogen molecule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diatomic_molecule

Image 4:  Nitric Oxide:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitric_oxide

Image 5:  Nitrogen dioxide.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_oxide

Image 6:  Nitric Acid.  http://900igr.net/kartinki/khimija/Primenenie-kisloty/004-TSarskaja-vodka.html

Image 7:  Ammonia.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia

By Eben van Tonder

20 May 2015

* In marking a major event in the life of Woody’s Consumer Brands (Pty) Ltd. Dedicated to the Woody’s team.

Available in PDF download: C & T Harris and their Wiltshire bacon cure – the blending of a legend

In 2021 I did a major update to the information presented here.

• Chapter 09.01 – Mild Cured Bacon
• Chapter 10.01: Lord Lansdowne
• Chapter 10.02 – Sweet Cured Harris Bacon
• Chapter 10.03: American Ice Houses for England: Year-Round Curing
• Chapter 10.04: Ice Cold in Africa
• Chapter 10.05: Ice Cold Revolution
• Chapter 10.06: Harris Bacon – From Pale Dried to Tank Curing!
• Chapter 10.07: John Harris Reciprocates!
• Chapter 10.08: Irish Animosity
• Chapter 10.09: The Wiltshire Cut

When time one day permits, I will re-write the article below, but for now, I refer you to the work listed above. For a detailed clarification of the progression of mild cured bacon of William Oake, sweet cure, pale dried and finally tank curing of C&T Harris, I refer you to Chapter 09.01 – Mild Cured Bacon, Chapter 10.02 – Sweet Cured Harris Bacon and Chapter 10.06: Harris Bacon – From Pale Dried to Tank Curing!

Eben van Tonder. 2021.

INTRODUCTION

Few companies had the impact on an industry as C&T Harris had on the bacon industry.  We focus on a number of points in this article.  The importance and role of good quality pork supply from local and foreign sources.  The Harris brothers as good butchers.  I offer a possible explanation for the exact nature of the first sweet cure they developed and a possible inspiration for the development.  The exact nature of George’s strategy and what he wanted to achieve on his trip to America.  The force of the central commitment of the company to produce the best bacon on earth.  How the introduction of refrigeration fed directly into achieving this goal.  How they carefully chose the best curing technique to achieved this goal in a large scale factory environment.  The fact that the Wiltshire curing process was in the first place a Danish invention that happened many years before the Harris brothers.  The entrepreneurial spirit that drove the company to success by overcoming every obstacle, no matter what it took. Lastly, we high-lite a few lessons for the modern-day curing plant.   This is their story.

THE MAKING OF A LEGEND

The making of a legend in the bacon world was, as is usual in these cases, the result of several seismic movements of tectonic plates that created the world of C & T Harris and their Wiltshire bacon cure.  Several key ingredients were blended together to create a remarkable bacon curing company.  One that produced what was hailed around the globe as the best bacon on earth.

The first ingredient needed in blending this bacon legend was an abundant supply of pork.  There was a large local supply of pigs.  Wiltshire has been an area associated with pigs since very early.  There is a reference from a book by Daniel Defoe, Tour Through the Whole Island of Great Britain, published in 1720 about a strong pork industry in Wiltshire on account of the abundance of whey from the local dairy industry.  He makes mention of large quantities of bacon sent from among other, Wiltshire to London.  He wrote, “The bacon is raised in such quantities here, by reason of the great dairies . . . the hogs being fed with the vast quantity of whey , and skim’d milk, which so many farmers have to spare, and which must , otherwise be thrown away.”  (Malcolmson, R. and Mastoris, S.; 1998:  38, 39)

There was a strong supply of imported pigs from Ireland.  Between 1770 and 1800 exports of Irish pork to England increased eight-fold.  Over 60% of the Irish imports into England was done to London.  (Cullen, L. M.;  1968:  71)   The pigs arrived by ship in Bristol and were walked on the hoof all the way to London. Along the way it was important to rest the animals and give them a chance to graze to ensure good meat quality when they arrive in London.  The small town of Calne, in North Wiltshire, was a convenient stop-over on the long walk.    (wiki.mfo.me.uk).

Not only were the pigs in abundance, but they came at good prices and from a diversity of suppliers.  Pork is a commodity, the price of which fluctuates on a daily or weekly basis.  The price is an indication of its availability and some level of price stability for quality pigs are important requirements for a successful curing operation.  It was important back then as it is important today.

Availability is driven by seasonal domestic and export demand and external influences such as the supply of the army and the navy.  With the English fighting several foreign wars and a large navy to supply, the demand for bacon was unusually strong.  There are other factors such as pork disease that impacts on its availability. Even the time of year plays a role since in those days, before the advent of refrigeration, pork could only be cured in the winter on account of it going off in the summer before the cure could diffuse through the entire muscle.

It would therefore be a very important benefit to have access of pigs from local as well as foreign sources.  The demand and supply in the foreign market will inevitably differ from local trends and the producer is able to exploit low price cycles to ensure low input cost and the best possible quality.  For an in depth analysis of the prevailing economic environment, particularly related to Ireland and England during this time readers are directed to “The Economics of the Industrial Revolution,” by Joel Mokyr and “The Foundations of British Maritime Ascendancy – Resources, Logistics and the State, 1755–1815” by Roger Morriss.

The third ingredient in the making of this legend is an ample supply of saltpeter, the principal curing agent of pork in those days.  “The geology around Calne was excellent for saltpetre. The Calne Guild Stewards’ Book  has an entry for 1654 listing a payment for the removal of saltpetre tubs. It is mentioned in relation to glass making in 17th Century. A token was found for use at the glass house in Calne, suggesting there was glass manufacture going on in the town, although no record has been found of it. Saltpetre is essential for making glass.  The antiquarian John Aubrey in his book ‘Topographical Collections’ 1659-70, says concerning Calne that the ‘Sand on the hills here about is very fit for glass making.’ He described it as being very white and having the largest grains he had ever seen. He also mentions on page 94, ‘The deep lane from Bowden to Raybridge is very full of nitre, as a warm day will indicate.’ Bowden Hill and Raybridge are only a few miles from Calne.” (SB)

Three essential ingredients for good bacon were all present by the late 1700’s.  An almost unlimited supply of pigs, both local and imported, low prices and a mature local industry for the supply of the principal curing ingredient of saltpeter.  The scene is set for an entrepreneur to step forward, mix all the prevailing ingredients together and create a legend!  This is how it happened.

JOHN HARRIS AND SONS

The first Harris to come to Calne was John Harris in the late 1700’s.  He moved there with his widowed mom, Sarah Harris, in 1770.  They were living in a small market town of Devizes, about ten miles from Calne.  When they moved to Calne, they set up in a small property in Butchers Row. (SB)  When he died in 1791 the business was carried on by his wif but on a very small scale.  (SB)  She ‘thought it a good week if she had killed five or six pigs and sold clear out on a Saturday night’.  Two of her sons helped her in the butchery, John and Henry.   (british-history)  When she passed away, she left in her will £60 to each of her three sons, John, Henry and James. Henry and James were twins, but James had no interest in butchery and became a civil servant.  (SB)  As John and Henry’s own bacon interests grew over the years, this must have been a story that she told them many times and it must have been a favourite family tale.

Her one son, John,  married Mary Perkins in 1808, who, in 1805/1806  (british-history), opened a butcher’s shop and bacon curing business of his own in Calne, High Street.  His younger brother, Henry Harris, married Sophia Perkins in 1813.  He managed the Perkins Family Grocery and Butchers in Butcher’s Row (later Church Street). He took the business over when his father in law passed away.  (british-history)

John and Mary had 12 children.  Disaster struck the young family when John passed away at a young age in 1837.  “His wife, Mary, continued to run the business until eventually handing it over to one of their sons, Thomas.  Henry and Sophia were childless and looked after four of Johns children.  He left the Church Street business to his nephew George. Charles later joined George as a partner in Church Street.  John’s son Thomas took over the High Street business when his father died.  George died in 1861, leaving Charles running the Church Street factory. Charles and Thomas amalgamated their businesses in 1888.  It is interesting to note that one of Thomas Harris’ sons struck out on his own and founded Bowyers Bacon factory in Trowbridge.” (SB)

They remained close and innovations were done together.  The first progression that created the legend was a simple one. Add sugar to the bacon cure.  (wiki.mfo.me.uk)

An interesting question is what exactly this sweet cure was that they introduced.  Could it have been that adding sugar to the brine was a completely new concept to Wiltshire and the butchers in Calne?  A 1776 liquid cure mix for bacon is given as “4 lb. of salt, 2 lb. of brown sugar, and 4 gallons of water with a touch of saltpetre.” (Holland, LZ, 2003: 9, 10)  This salt/water mix was used to cure barrel pork.

Barrel pork was a crude process of laying pork joints in a wooden barrel and immersing it in a water brine-mix of salt, saltpeter and sugar.  It was food for a poor family, shared by slaves, farmers or wage earners.  It was disdained by the elites as “sea-junk”, cured by sopping in brine that imparted a nauseous taste to the meat. (Horowitz, R.; 2006:  45)  It is easy to see how adding sugar to barrel-pork was an attempt to improve its taste.  Could it be that sugar was not part of the standard dry-cure process employed in Calne and the Harris brothers took this idea of adding sugar to the dry-cure from barrel pork?

We have a description of the dry-cure process employed in Calne that would have been used by John Harris when he opened his butchery in 1770 and also by his sons in their curing operations. The description comes to us from a 1805 account from Wiltshire.  “When the hog is killed, the sides are laid in large wooden troughs, and sprinkled over with bay salt, after which they are left for twenty-four hours, in order to drain off the blood and superfluous juices.  Next they are taken out and wiped thoroughly dry, and some fresh bay salt, previously heated in an iron frying pan, is rubbed into the flesh till it has absorbed a sufficient quantity;  this rubbing is continued for four successive days, during which the sides, or flitches, as they are usually called, are turned every other day.  Where large hogs are killed, it becomes necessary to keep the flitches in brine for three weeks, and in that interval to turn them ten times, after which period they are taken out and dried in the common manner; in fact, unless they are thus treated, they can not be preserved in the sweet state, nor will they be equal in point of flavour, to bacon that is properly cured.  (Malcolmson, R. and Mastoris, S.; 1998:  114)

This account omits sugar, but it also omits saltpeter, a widespread ingredient in bacon cures of this time, which then begs the question if the mention of salt in the 1805 account is supposed to be an exhaustive list.  Several factors can be brought into the discussion to try and  bring clarity.

Bay-salt regularly contains very small traces of nitrite which have a reddening effect in the meat.  A second point is that it was a well known practice by certain butchers to omit saltpeter and only use salt.  Some curers of this time described using salt alone as a superior curing technique (even though unbeknownst to them, the salt itself probably contained nitrate and nitrite which the saltpeter was added for).  A last important factor to consider is that even dry-cured bacon was extremely salty at this time due to the fact that no refrigeration existed.  Over-salting was the only sure way to ensure the meat is preserved.

So, taking everything into account, in my view, the most likely scenario is that the Harris brothers borrowed the concept of adding sugar from barrel-pork.  They added the sugar to the cure, not to give a sweet note to the bacon, but to reduce the salty taste of the bacon.  An added advantage of adding sugar is that it enhances the meat flavour.  Viewed overall, it improved the taste which was and remained a key feature of Harris bacon.

GEORGE IN AMERICA

Events were about to unfold in Ireland that would not only turn their world upside down, but would set the background for two of their most important inventions.  It was the potato famine that occurred between 1845 and 1852.  When it was all over, more than a million people died and another million immigrated to flee the devastating conditions in Ireland.

The mass migration of people from Ireland to places like the USA happened on an unprecedented scale.  “A report from England stated that the emigration of 1847 would probably go to 200,000 or 300,000 from Ireland alone. Government agents in other countries were also reporting large increases in the number of people heading to the port cities of the continent. Ships were being hired at an ever increasing pace and Captains were carrying full compliments of passengers, some exceeding the legal limits.” (theshipslist)

Ships sailed from Ireland and from the North Americas, ships were sailing to Ireland with provisions.  “There are reports of vessels leaving various parts of the United States and Canada with supplies for Europe. For example, on March 4, 1847, the Constitution and Sarah Sands had unfurled their sails, while at Boston, the Tartar sailed in April. These vessels were on their way to Ireland. A New York paper reported that in March some $1,250,000 of supplies a week were leaving from that port for Ireland and about $5,000,000 from all parts of the U.S.” (theshipslist)

The disaster in Ireland had a severe impact on the Harris brothers, as it did on food production around the world.  The pigs stopped arriving in Bristol, threatening the existence of the butchers of Calne.   George and his mom, Mary hatched a plan to try and rescue the situation.  The plan was to send George to America by ship. “The idea, they decided, was for George to strike up a pig business deal with American farmers and figure out a way to transport their slaughtered animals across the Atlantic in boxes packed with salt to ward off spoilage during the long journey. On its way to England, the meat would cure into ham and George’s entrepreneurial venture would save the family.” (Smithsonianmag)  The plan was not novel.  By 1847 barrel pork has been exported from America to England for years.  On Saturday, 4 November 1843, a circular appeared in Boon’s Lick Times (Fayette, Missouri) by George K. Budd where advice is given to American pork producers on what they can do to ensure that the barrel pork reach England in an excellent condition in order to fetch the best possible price.

The plan then seems to have been for the 23 year old George to procure the pigs directly from farmers as opposed to buying it from American packing plants.  If George could procure the pigs directly from the farmers, pack the pork in America and export it, the Harris brothers would cut out the middlemen and would again regain not only their supply of foreign pork, but also effect the imports at the best possible price.  The supply of cured meat for bacon from America to England was however the poor quality barrel pork.  Besides procuring the pork directly from the farmers and packing it himself in the USA for export to England, George planned to do it by using their well-known dry cure process.  George was the innovator and the driving force behind the Harris brothers.  His brothers said about him, “ Of all us brothers George was a long way ahead; he was the smartest businessman of any of us. He was the means of lifting us out of the old rut and laid the foundation of the new system and its prosperous future.” (SB)

One can only imagine what the voyage to America was like.  Hundreds of thousands of Irish were fleeing the deadly conditions in Ireland, cramming the ships. “Adding to the misery, the northern U.S. and Canada had a hard winter in 1846-7 and the snow and ice were causing delays for many of the vessels. There are reports of gales and of vessels being stuck in the ice for weeks. The Albion, from Greenock, for example, sailed on March 25, 1847 and on April 10 hit the ice about 40 miles off Cape Ray. The vessel did not arrive in Quebec until June 4, 1847!” (theshipslist)

George arrived in America witnessing the misery of the arriving Irish.  “For a year he traveled about America visiting many bacon-curers, and sending home bacon, lard, cheese, and other provisions. After a brief visit home in the summer of 1848, he again returned to America and opened a bacon curing establishment in Schenectady (New York State). The venture was not successful, however, and the American branch was closed.”  (british-history)  In the process he was exposed to a development in America that would transform the way that bacon is cured and would give rise to the birth of the legend.

Ice houses started to be built in the northern hemisphere, including England, on the property of wealthy owners from the 1700’s.  These were generally brick-lined pits, build below the ground where ice from surrounding lakes were stored  (Dellino, C, 1979: 2) to store ice-cream, fruit and vegetables from the kitchen garden but they were not used much in industry at this time in Britain. (SB)  This concept of this natural refrigeration was first described by Frederic Tudor (1783 – 1864). (Kha, AR, 2006:  26)

In the 1800’s commercial cold storage facilities were being built at harbors in America and Europe, mainly for the storage of carcasses, fruit and dairy products.  The ice was cut from frozen ponds, lakes or rivers in the winter and stored in the heavily insulated ice house.  (Mfo.me.uk)    “In the U.S., this method allowed farmers to slaughter pigs not only in months ending in an ‘r’ (or those cold enough for the meat not to rot before it could be cured and preserved), but during any time of year – even in steamy July or August. Curing, or the process of preventing decomposition-causing bacteria from setting in by packing the meat in salt, was then the only way to preserve pork for periods of time longer than 36 hours. Such horrendously salty meat was eaten out of necessity rather than enjoyment, however, and it often required sitting in a bucket of water for days at time before it could be rinsed of its saltiness to the point that it would even be palatable.” (smithsonianmag)

The revolutionary idea was the storage of meat on a commercial scale in ice houses for the purpose of slow curing.  George did not make the link with the curing of bacon straight away.  “Back in Calne, attempts were made to find a way of curing bacon in hot weather instead of curing it in the winter and keeping it hard salted for summer use.  These, however, had not met with any success.  It was George who suggested that they should follow the American method of cooling, thus applying cooling to bacon curing.”  (british-history)

CURING IN ICE HOUSES

George persuaded his brother Charles who owned the Grocer and Butchers shop on Butchers Row with Thomas and some of his staff to go back to America with him and look at the process. “As a result both he and Charles set up ice houses in their separate factories.”  (SB)  “The first ice-house was constructed at the High Street factory in 1856.” (british-history)

After a great deal of experimentation, it was found that charcoal was the best insulating material for use in the walls round the ice-chamber.  (british-history)  “The Harris ice houses had thatched roofs. There was a steel plated ceiling containing the ice with drainage outlets which could measure the rate of melting and hence the stock of ice remaining.  The unemployed and residents of the workhouse were sent out to collect ice from streams and ponds but in warmer winters it was imported from Norway and transported by canal. Thomas Harris patented the ice preservation process in 1864.”  (SB)

“Most of the important bacon-curers throughout the country took advantage of the chance to improve their output by constructing such ice-houses under licence.”  The volume of trade from the two Harris operations continued to increase throughout this time and in 1863 the Harris family joined with other local interests to finance a branch railway line between Calne and Chippenham. Meanwhile, the income from the ice-house patent together with their own expansion enabled the two Calne businesses to increase their rate of mechanization.  “At the High Street premises a new ice-house, furnace, and pigsties were built in 1869; and ten years later it was said that at the Church Street factory the pigs were moved almost entirely by machinery after they had been killed.” (british-history)  “The first mechanical refrigeration was introduced in 1885.  One 6 ton and 0ne 4 ton Pontifex and wood absorption machines” (SB)    “There was always close co-operation between the two firms and in July 1888 they were amalgamated as Charles & Thomas Harris & Co. Ltd.”  (british-history)

PIGS TO SUITE INDUSTRIALISATION

While the Harris brothers were working towards greater mechanization, shortly before the installation of brine refrigeration in place of the ice-house method, “they embarked on a planned campaign to persuade farmers to breed the type of lean pig best suited to bacon.  In 1887 pigs were received from 25 counties in England and Wales, of which Wiltshire, Hampshire, Somerset, Dorset, and Devon were the most important, and a large number of pigs were again being received from Ireland.”  (british-history)

FOCUS ON BACON BRINES AND CURING TECHNOLOGY

–  best bacon on earth

Refrigeration allowed the Harris brothers an important progression of the initial work they did by producing a sweet cure.  It allowed the use of even less salt.   The mildly salted, sweet-cured bacon was a huge success.   Harris bacon was being exported to many parts of the world including most European countries, America, Australia, India, China, the Cape of Good Hope, and New Zealand.  Some bacon was extra-cured and smoked for sending to hot climates.  By the end of the century, the Calne factories also supplied the principal Transatlantic, Pacific, and Far Eastern steamship lines.  There was considerable competition by cheaper meat from America and the colonies, but by concentration on high-quality products, the Harris Company survived this.  It was said in The British Journal of Commerce that in January 1889 Calne was ‘the chief seat of the bacon-curing industry of England’. At the end of the century, it was claimed, possibly with some exaggeration, that Harris’s produced more bacon than any other four or five curers in England together. Between 2,000 and 3,000 pigs were slaughtered each week and over 200 workmen and 30 clerks were employed.  (british-history)

– the Irish Invention of mild curing and its adaptation by the Danish

A major development took place when the dry cure was replaced with a wet cure, late in the 1800s.  (SB)  The development that made it possible to produce high quality wet cured bacon was in the first place the invention of stitch pumping which involved pumping brine through a single needle brine injector directly into the meat, thus speeding up the process of diffusing the brine throughout the muscle.  Stitch pumping was however first used in combination with dry-curing (The History of Curing).  It is reported that Harris has used stitch pumping with their dry-curing process as early as 1843.  (SB)

In Denmark, during the 1800s, a wet curing method was invented using a combination of stitch pumping and curing the meat in curing tanks with a cover brine.  (Wilson, W, 2005:  219)  Brine consisting of nitrate, salt and sugar were injected into the meat with a single needle attached to a hand pump (stitch pumping).  The meat was then placed in a mother brine mix consisting of old, used brine and new brine.  The old brine contained the nitrate which was reduced through bacterial action into nitrite.  It was the nitrite that was responsible for the quick curing of the meat.  (The Mother Brine)

Denmark was, as it is to this day, one of the largest exporters of pork and bacon to England. The wholesale involvement of the Danes in the English market made it inevitable that probably at least 50 years after the Danish invention, a bacon curer from Denmark must have found his way to Calne in Wiltshire and the Harris bacon factories.  The tank-cured method, as it became known, was adopted by Harris and a true legend was born.

A major advantages of this method is the speed with which curing is done compared with the dry salt process previously practiced.  Wet tank-curing is also more suited for the industrialisation of bacon curing and have the added cost advantage of re-using some of the brine.  It allowed for the use of even less salt since the injected brine along with a cover brine were distributed throughout the muscle much faster than was the case with the dry curing process.

Injection with a single needle injector was time consuming and soon it was replaced by multi-needle brine injectors.  Below is a diagram indicating the position where brine was injected with the stitch-pumping method.

– Wiltshire cure

Callow gave us a description of Wiltshire cure in 1934.  The pig sides were cooled after the back bone was removed, either by ambient temperature or in a chiller.  “After cooling, the sides were trimmed.”  Trimming involved removing the fillet (the psoas major muscle along the central spine portion), the shoulder blade bone (the scapula), and the pelvic bone (the aitch bone).  The sides were now placed in a curing cellar (room temp of between 3 deg C to 7 deg C).  (Lawrie, R. A.; 1985: 149)

Curing took place in four stages.  First the brine was pumped into the sides, using stitch pumping or a single needle hand injector.  The salt concentration in the brine was between 25 and 30%,  2.5 to 4% potassium or sodium nitrate (saltpeter) and 0.5 to 1% sugar.    Between 18 and 25 injections are required, most in the gammon region.    The total weight of brine injected is about 5% of the weight of the side.  1kg then became 1.05kg injected.  (Lawrie, R. A.; 1985: 150)

The sides were now either sprinkled with dry salt or placed in a tank of brine, stacked about 12 deep and tied down.  If wet cure was used, the sides were covered with a mix of salt and potassium nitrate in a ratio 10:1.  Liquid brine solution was run into the tank and the sides remained submerged for between 4 and 5 days.  (Lawrie, R. A.; 1985: 150)

A major progression of the cure preparation took place in effecting the reduction of nitrates to nitrites.  The make up of the tank pickle was between 20% and 28% salt (sodium chloride) and 3% – 4% sodium nitrate when it was first prepared.  In order to effect the reduction of the nitrates to nitrites, the brine was now seeded with the specific microorganisms who is responsible for the reduction. (Lawrie, R. A.; 1985: 150)

This was done by taking meat juices (protein) that leached from meat that was previously immersed in brine.  This correlates to the Danish adaptation of the Irish invention of the “mother brine.”  Ingram, Hawthorne and Gatherum described in 1947 how it was possible to manage the amount of nitrite in the brine by adjusting the salt (sodium chloride) concentration of the brine.  (Lawrie, R. A.; 1985: 150)

The sides were placed in a maturing cellar for 7 to 14 days or even longer.  This was another major progression of the process described in 1805.  The temperature was kept at between 3% and 4%as was the case of the brine cellar.  The goal of this step was to diffuse the brine of sodium chloride, nitrate and nitrite throughout the meat. (Lawrie, R. A.; 1985: 150)

Some of the cured meat was un-smoked (green) but the majority would be smoked for between 2 and 3 days.  The traditional Wiltshire process yielded well cured bacon in anything between 10 and 21 days. (Lawrie, R. A.; 1985: 150)

The right size pork cut was required.  A 1958 publication gives the following description of a typical Wiltshire pork cut (Warde, F. and Wilson, T.;  2013:  55).

Early in the 1900’s, Harris also diversified producing a range of small goods- pies, sausages, mince, lard, tinned meats etc. (SB)

– Sodium Nitrite cure’s from Germany

The key feature of the Harris bacon empire became their Wiltshire bacon cure.  In Germany, a new curing process was developed with references to experiments with it dating back to the mid 1800’s.  The curing agent was sodium nitrite that would replace saltpeter (sodium or potassium nitrate) as the curing agent of choice.    Cures with sodium nitrite began emerging from Germany at the beginning of the 1900’s.   It was the First World War that provided the transition moments necessary to effect the almost universal change from saltpeter to sodium nitrite.  Adding sodium nitrite to the brine called for a simple system and yielded the quickest curing.  The Danish Mother Brine system and the Wiltshire method used saltpeter (potassium nitrate) that was already reduced by bacterial action to nitrite in combination with nitrate.  In contrast, using sodium nitrite to begin with (a chemical used in the coal tar dye industry and as a medicine) eliminated the step of bacteria reducing the nitrate to nitrite.  The curing cycle when sodium nitrite is used is completed in 12 hours where the Danish Mother Brine and Wiltshire Brine took up to three weeks to cure the meat.  (Concerning the direct addition of nitrite to curing brines and Concerning chemical synthesis and Food Additives)

It is a matter of profound interest that the Harris bacon factories continued using tank curing for many years following World War One.  Several studies emerged showing the superiority of the sodium nitrite brine over the Wiltshire method from a microbial perspective and still it prevailed.  Tank curing is practiced to this day by at leadt one large and sophisticated bacon curers in the UK.

THE LAST OF THE HARRIS FAMILY’S CURING DAYS

“During the economic slump of 1920s Harris‘ was bought (1925) by Ernest Marsh of Marsh and Baxter, a large meat processing business located at Brierly Hill in the Midlands and famous for their York Hams brand. George Harry Harris, known as Jack, was the only member of the family who was involved with the Harris business during the twenties. He came in to sign a cheque now and then but was no longer involved after 1930.”  (SB)

“In 1926 Ernest Marsh brought over an American as chief engineer, Dixon E Washington from Kansas City to modernise the factory. Washington was an experienced in architectural, civil. structural and mechanical engineering and introduced many modern new elements to the Calne factory.”  (SB)

LESSONS

Reflecting on the Harris brothers and the creation of their legendary Wiltshire bacon cure is a lesson in business as much as it is a lesson in building a bacon curing company.

The first lesson is that they relentlessly searched out competitive advantages.  They found it in the use of refrigeration and very cleverly patented it.

Right from the start they identified taste as the central distinguishing feature of their bacon.  They added sugar to the dry cure, possibly borrowing from the well known concept of adding sugar to the wet curing brines.  At the beginning of the 1900’s, they learned from the Danes who developed a system of bacon curing that exploited discoveries at the end of the 1800’s by several scientists that nitrite was the real curing agent and not nitrate.  The system not only employed the direct use of nitrite in curing mixes through the use of the Danish concept of a mother brine, but they combined it with nitrate which they injected into the meat, thus creating rapid diffusion of the brine throughout the muscle and allowing for a future source of nitrite as bacteria in the meat reduced the nitrate to nitrite, over time.  This curing system was ideal for a factory and a large scale curing environment.  The key feature of the Danish brining method was an even better tasted than any of their previous curing systems, making taste the primary feature of their rise to dominance.

A second lesson is that they relentlessly stuck to a formula that worked.  New brine systems were being experimented with, especially at the beginning of the 1900’s.  After the First World War, sodium nitrite replaced potassium or sodium nitrate in bacon curing systems almost everywhere on earth.  Despite this, they stuck to tank curing, insisting that it simply tastes better.  This focus in the face of what I can only imagine was overwhelming pressure to change, is a lesson that I will personally never, ever forget.  A man once told me that the main thing is to keep the main thing, the main thing.  That this is the main thing!  In bacon curing, the main thing is not yield, but taste!  This is what created the legend of C & T Harris and their Wiltshire cure.

There are other facets to the story.   The story is epic and more is to come!

——————

(c) eben van tonder

“Bacon & the art of living” in book form

Stay in touch

Like our Facebook page and see the next post. Like, share, comment, contribute!

Bacon and the art of living

Promote your Page too

——————

Special thanks:

Special thanks to Susan Boddington (SB), curator of the Calne Heritage Centre, for the liberal supply of information, insights, advice and photos.

References:

Cullen, L. M..  1968.  Anglo-Irish Trade, 1660-1800.  The University Press, Manchester.

Holland, LZ. 2003. Feasting and Fasting with Lewis & Clark: A Food and Social History of the early 1800’s. Old Yellowstone Publishing, Inc.

Horowitz, R.  2006.  Putting Meat on the American Table.  The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Kha, AR.  2006.  Cryogenic Technology and Applications.  Elsevier, Inc.

Lawrie, R. A..  1985.  Meat Science.  Pergamon Press.

Malcolmson, R. and Mastoris, S..  1998.  The English Pig: A History.  Hambledon Press.

Smith, Edwards. 1873. Foods. Henry S King and Co.

Susan Boddington (SB) is the curator of the Calne Heritage Centre.  Information from private correspondence.

Warde, F. and Wilson, T..  2013.  Ginger Pig Farmhouse Cook Book.  Mitchell Beazley.

Wilson, W.  2005.  Wilson’s Practical Meat Inspection. 7th edition.  Blackwell Publishing.

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/wilts/vol4/pp220-253

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/how-one-family-helped-change-the-way-we-eat-ham-21978817, article by Rachel Nuwer

http://www.theshipslist.com/1847/ Emigration To North America In 1847

http://wiki.mfo.me.uk/index.php?title=C%26T_Harris_(Calne)_Ltd

Images:

Wiltshire cut. Harrington, G. 1958. Pig Carcass Evaluation. Page 55. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux Farnham Royal, Bucks, England. Robert Cunningham and Sons, Ltd. Alva

The Wiltshire injection:  Wilson, W.  2005: 220

All other images supplied by SB

9 May 2015
By Eben van Tonder

Available in PDF download:  Concerning Nitrate and Nitrite’s antimicrobial efficacy – chronology of scientific inquiry

Also, see Bacon & the Art of Living, Chapter 11.05: The Preserving Power of Nitrite

Producing good bacon is simple, but the processes involved are complex.  I am not a historian or a food scientist, but I work in the bacon industry as an entrepreneur.  Understanding the environment is fundamental.

The best way for me to understand complex processes is to retrace the historical account of unraveling the system.  This is the approach we follow related to bacon.  One of the most exciting stories in bacon is that of saltpeter (potassium nitrate) and sodium nitrite.  We now come to the question of their efficacy as antimicrobials or are these chemicals merely functional to provide the colour and taste to cured products such as bacon.

Background

Curing brines have been made with salt and a small quantity of saltpeter (potassium or sodium nitrate) for centuries.  Nitrate changes into nitrite through microbial reduction.  This step takes some time.  Once it happens, nitrite starts to undergo further reduction which leads to chemical reactions in the meat, resulting in the cured colour and taste.

The idea started to develop from the mid 1800’s that curing time could be sped up by using nitrite directly.  A novel curing method was developed in Denmark which spread to places like Calne, Wiltshire, England where it was adopted and called the “Danish method“.

Nitrite and nitrate were used in combination.  A mixture of salt, sugar and saltpeter (potassium nitrate) was injected into the muscle with a single needle injector.  The meat was then placed in an old cover brine, called the mother brine.  Bacterial reduction had change nitrate (saltpeter) that was originally used in the curing brine into nitrite by bacterial reduction, over time and the mother brine therefore contained the nitrite.  It entered the meat through capillary and osmotic forces.  (see The mother brine and The history of curing)  This mother brine was used over and over again, constantly being topped up by saltpeter and constantly undergoing bacterial reduction to nitrite.

In Germany, experiments were done with a compound called sodium nitrite as a possible replacement for nitrate in curing brines.  This would be an improvement on the Danish method since the amount of nitrite added could be controlled.  Sodium nitrite was a well known compound at this time, being used as part of an intermediary process in the manufacturing of dyes.  It is however a very toxic compound and people generally frowned on the thought of adding a poisonous substance to food.  (see Concerning chemical synthesis and food additives)

The transition events that caused its wholesale application in the meat industry as a curing agent to replace nitrate are associated with conditions in Germany during World War I.  The use of saltpeter (potassium nitrate) in meat curing was made illegal in Germany when war broke out since saltpeter is a key component in the manufacturing of explosives and all available saltpeter were used for the war-effort.  The German Government allowed the use of sodium nitrite as a replacement for saltpeter.  Unfortunate events in Leipzig where 34 people were killed due to the accidental consumption of sodium nitrite caused it to be banned for use in curing brines, but by this time its quick curing action was so popular that the ban was not heeded.  After World War I its use was again permitted and soon its was legalised around the world for use in curing.   (see Concerning the direct addition of nitrite to curing brine)

Its application as curing agent remained functionally for colour and taste.  Right from the start its use was not without controversy due to its high toxicity and consumer concern over food additives.  (see Concerning chemical synthesis and food additives)

Nitrate’s role in curing brines

Conventional wisdom that surfaced in the 1920’s suggested that nitrate and nitrate should continue to be used in combination in curing brines  (Davidson, M. P. et al; 2005:  171) as was the case with the Danish curing method and the mother brine concept of the previous century.  Nitrite gives the immediate quick cure and nitrate acts as reservoir for future nitrite and therefore prolongs the supply of nitrite and ensures a longer curing action.  The question comes up if there are any other reasons why one should continue to use nitrate?  Is there for example any preservative role of nitrate and while we are considering this question, what exactly is the preservative value of nitrite?

Clostridium Botuninum – a key organism to consider

The first thing to remember when considering the effectiveness of a preservative is that not all preservatives are equally effective against all microorganisms.  A second point is that different microorganisms are generally associated with different kinds of food.  When we look at bacon in particular, what are some of the microorganisms associated with it?   Some of the these are Lactobacillus, Pseudomonas, Clostridium, yeasts like Dabaryomyces and molds like Aspergillus and Penicillium. (Jay, J. M. et al.; 2005:  102)  We then want to look at anti-microbials that are particularly effective against these and other organisms associated with bacon.

Before we look at this list more carefully and how these organisms are managed, one organism is the starting point when considering antimicrobial efficacy of any chemical.  The first and most important microorganism to begin with, associated with bacon and other foods is clostridium botulinum.  (see Concerning Clostridium Botulinum – the priority organism)

The reason for its priority in food safety is that certain types of its toxins counts as some of the most lethal substances on earth.

A headline appeared in a newspaper in California in 1972, reporting that nitrite has been found effective against botulism.  (Montclair Tribune; 20 April 1972:  28)  The headline incorrectly read “Nitrate useful against botulism“.  The study it is reporting on deals with nitrite.

The discovery was news worthy.  Botulism is a serious and potentially fatal disease that caused considerable alarm since it was identified in the early 1800’s by Justinus Kerner.  (Emmeluth, D.; 2010: 16)  It is caused by a toxin called botulin, a neurotoxic proteins produced by the bacteria clostridium botulinum.  It is so poisonous that one millionth of a gram can kill an adult human.  500mL is enough to kill every person on earth.  (Sterba, J. P.; 28 April 1982)

Preventing it remained a focus for the food industry throughout the 1900’s and into the 2000’s and any consideration of the anti-microbial effect of nitrate and nitrite must include its effectiveness in preventing it.  It affects humans and animals and one of the ways we contract it is through food.  Our article, Concerning Clostridium Botulinum – the priority organism describes the organism, its toxin formation, prevalence, spores and how it makes its way into food.

Clostridium botulinum was isolated as the microorganism causing botulism in 1895 by Emile Emergem, professor of bacteriology at the university of Ghent, in Belgium.  (Emmeluth, D.; 2010: 19)  The following year and article appeared in The Centralia Enterprise and Tribune in Centralia, Wisconsin, reporting on a warning issued by the the Connecticut State Department of Health, issued in its weekly bulletin, in response to two cases of botulism that occurred in New Haven, the week prior.  The warning identified home canned foods as the usual source of the botulism.  Especially “improperly processed, non-acid fruits and vegetables which are served cold”.  The incidents of the previous week were traced back to improperly processed home canned figs.   (The Centralia Enterprise and Tribune; 25 January 1896:  5)

Such was the public’s concern over botulism that in 1896 when in the US new Food and Drug Administration rules came into effect allowing low-level radiation of food, concern was raised by some consumer groups that this would destroy “more common and more vulnerable spoilage bacteria” while deadly botulism bacteria would grow undetected.  The argument was that the more common spoilage bacteria would alert the consumer that the food has gone bad before the deadly botulism toxins could be produced.  The FDA responded to this concern by pointing out that at higher radiation levels it would share the concern, but that the levels were to low to completely destroy the spoilage bacteria.  (The Laredo Times;  1 December 1896: 14)

It is interesting that this same principle is still a recognised hurdle against botulism where spoilage bacteria is allowed to be present in certain food in order to cause spoilage before clostridium botulinum toxin formation takes place.

The Montclair Tribune article of 20 April 1972 reported on work done by Dr. Richard A. Greenberg, director of research for Swift & Company, on behalf of the American Meat Institute.  After studying canned ham he suggested that the unblemished botulism safety record of the curing industry in the USA may be due to the use of nitrites.

So, clostridium botulinum will feature prominently in our considerations of the efficacy of nitrate and nitrite as antimicrobial agents, but other bacteria will also be considered.

The historical perspective

There are many reviews of the antimicrobial efficacy of nitrate and nitrite.  I rely exclusively on an review article written by Dr. R. Bruce Tompkin (1), the former Vice President for Food Safety, ConAgra Refrigerated Prepared Foods, published as part of  Davidson, M. P. et al’s,  2005 publication, “Antimicrobial in Food, Third edition.”  Dr. Tomkin is an exceptionally qualified man to write such a review.  He is a “microbiologist with more than 45 years in the food processing industry and one of the developers of HACCP.” (Maple Leaf Press release) He arranges the material chronologically which provided insight into why the research was conducted and why certain important points were missed early on.

It is in line with our approach of first understanding the historical background to any technology associated with the bacon industry.

Observations

In 1969, a major issue developed around the question of nitrite’s formation of nitrisomines in cured meat and the question if nitrate or nitrites are carcinogenic.  This immediately became the major issue that dominated research for the next 30 years.  It is an issue of such importance that we will deal with it separately along with the question if one can produce bacon without adding nitrite.  The general contention will be that considerable scientific evidence suggesting the safety of nitrite in cured meat, but that the consumers who are not swayed by the arguments should be afforded a choice between nitrite free and traditional nitrite containing products, as long as a nitrite-free option can be offered where the risk of botulin formation has been prevented.

For now we remain with the story of nitrite and nitrate as science started to unlock the fascinating secret of its full effect in cured meats since the 1930’s.  Most of the research focuses on canned and cured meat and we incorporate some of these important findings and see what can be applied to bacon.  The focus on research of nitrite and its effectiveness in canned cured meat makes sense since botulin formation occurs mostly from canned food and due to its deadly nature it is the priority organism in food safety.  All consideration of preservatives must therefore start with the question if its effective against clostridium botulism, its spores and toxins.

“Unlike most other antimicrobial agents, there has been a long, controversial history over whether nitrate and nitrite have antimicrobial properties. ” (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  172)

An avalanche of investigations followed, elucidating the efficacy of these chemicals as antimicrobials.

Tanner and Evans (1933) said that sodium chloride (normal table salt), is the most effective component in curing mixtures and that sodium nitrite present, apparently produced no effect on organisms.  They then sited MacNeal and Kerr who said that potassium nitrate (saltpeter), in acid solutions had marked inhibitory efficacy.  They said that this effect was “incompatibly greater than that of salt.”   They believed that the claim of meat packers that small amounts of nitrate in the pickle produced better preservation of the meat was born out by their results.  It seemed that nitrate was especially valuable in preventing a high degree of acidity of souring of meat. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  172)

Brooks et al (1940) looked at bacon curing in the United Kingdom and concluded that bacon can be produced with nitrite only.  “They said that the characteristic cured flavour of bacon is primarily the result of the action of nitrite.  The conversion of nitrate to nitrite in commercial bacon curing brines is mainly the result of growth of micrococci.  The presence of nitrate or microbial action during the curing process is not essential for bacon flavour.”  Rapid chilling, as was practiced in the United States, was also not detrimental, as some speculated.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  172)

Tarr and Sutherland (1940) showed that nitrite delayed spoilage in fish.  Tarr (1941) revealed the importance of pH to the efficacy of nitrite.  At pH 7.01 there was little or no inhibition, but at p”H 5.7 and 6.0, complete or strong microbial inhibition occurred”. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  173)

Jensen and Hess (1941) insisted that nitrites role was purely colour development and said that nitrate “exerts a definite inhibitory effect upon bacteria”.  They reported that  nitrite reacts with protein during the heating process and is destroyed, “thus leaving the meat in much the same state as freshly cooked uncured meat”.  Scott (1955) agreed.  Jensen and Hess said that a combination of heat, nitrate, nitrite and salt caused destruction of anaerobic spores at much lower temperatures. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  173)

Yesair and Cameron (1942) took up this concept and reached the conclusion that curing salts do not assist in thermal destruction but inhibit outgrowth.  Stumbo et al. (1945) reported that nitrite delayed germination, although salt was the stronger inhibitor.  Nitrate alone or in combination with other ingredients did not “appreciably influence spoilage.” (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  173)

Jensen et al. (1949) looked at the combination of heat and curing salts.  The magical temperature range where increased inhibition occurs in tubes of pork was between 50 deg C and 65 deg C, for 30 minutes.  Raising the temperature and heating it for longer times did not increase the effect.  However, looking at the effect in canned ham, increasing salt and nitrite increased inhibition.  Studying these effects of C. sporogenes 369 showed that increasing nitrate did not increase the inhibition. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  173)

Steinke and Foster 1951 found salt to be major factor retarding botulinal outgrowth in temperature-abused products. Having a moderately high brine of 5.05% to 5.37% and a pH range of 6.1 to 6.5.  A combination sodium nitrate, nitrate and nitrite was the most inhibitory. (Steinke and Foster 1951)  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  174)  

Bulman and Ayres (1952) found that a mixed cure of salt, nitrate and nitrite yielded the maximum inhibition.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  174)

“Henry et al. (1954) found that at pH 7.5 or above, nitrite enhanced bacterial grow in curing brine. A pH of 5.6 to 5.8 was optimal for antibacterial efficacy.  At pH 5.3 or below, nitrite rapidly disappeared and was ineffective. Nitrite was more inhibitory in the presence of ascorbate.” (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  175)

Castellani and Niven (1955) said that nitrite was not known to have any practical preservative value against those organisms not inhibited by high salt in cured meat.  They also found that if a broth medium (pH 6.55) was autoclaved with glucose, a very small amount added nitrite prevented staphylococcal growth when incubated anaerobically. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  175)

Lechowich (1956) showed that S. aureus growth can occur in any combination of salt, nitrite, and nitrate that is palatable and permissible.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  175)

Scott (1955) said that because nitrate exhibited relatively poor antimicrobial inhibition and nitrite, although effective, has been shown to be unstable, the control of salt concentration and resultant water activity is the most reliable bacteriostatic system for cured meats. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  175)

As late as in 1957, Eddy was very cautious when expressing an opinion about the antimicrobial ability of nitrite.  He wrote: “Taken in their totality, these observations leave no doubt inhibition by nitrite is at least a possibility”. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  176)

Tomkin summarizes the findings from 1950 to 1960 and state that it was found that nitrite, per se, had no antimicrobial effect, other than its possible influence on water activity. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  176)

He further states that by the end of the 1960’s nitrite was recognized as an effective antimicrobial agent, but its value as a preservative in perishable meat was still in doubt.  The majority of studies focused and proved its effectiveness in shelf-stable canned meat. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  176)

Brine content was shown to be an important factor in botulinal outgrowth and toxin formation.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  177)

Following 1960, the focus shifted towards the role of nitrite in the total inhibitory system in cured meat.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  177)

In 1962, Eddy and Ingram investigated “the survival of S. aureus in vacuum packed, sliced bacon.  They found that staphylococci grew among the natural microflora of the bacon but growth was better when the number of saprophytic microorganisms was low and the storage temperature was high.  (Doyle, M.  1989.  :  476)

Gould (1964) showed that the toxicity of nitrite was 3 to 5 times greater at pH 6 than at pH 7.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  177)

Brownlie (1966) indicated that at pH 7.0, the presence of nitrite caused very little or no inhibition. At pH 6.0 and below, increasing the amount of nitrite from 25 to 200 μg/g caused progressively greater inhibition.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  178)

Brownlie (1966) has shown that nitrite was more inhibitory at 0°C than at the other temperatures tested (10°C and 25°C)  Several studies showed that salt becomes more inhibitory as storage temperatures are decreased in perishable vacuum packed cured meat. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  177)

Brownlie (1966) showed the inhibitory effect of sodium nitrite concentration, pH and temperature.  Brine content was shown to be an important factor in botulinal outgrowth and toxin formation. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  177)

According to studies by Riemann Anon (1968), C. botulinum type A, the most toxic form, seemed to be completely inhibited by 4.5% brine at pH 5.3, 5.5% brine at pH 6.1, and 8.6% brine at pH 6.5.   (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  180)

Studies by Baird-Parker and Baillie (1974) indicated that when adding sodium nitrite and L-ascorbic acid as filter-sterilized solutions, the number of strains showing growth in broth was found to decrease with increasing nitrite (50, 100, 150, 200 μg/g), decreasing temperature (25°C, 20°C, 15°C), decreasing pH (7.0, 6.5. 6.0, 5.5), increasing salt (1.5%, 3.0%, 4.5%, 6.0% w/v), and decreasing inoculum level (106, 103, 101).  Adding L-ascorbic acid (1.0%) markedly increased the effectiveness of nitrite.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  180)

Adding hemoglobin resulted in a lower level of residual nitrite after processing, decreasing botulinal inhibition. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  181)

Tompkin et al. concluded that Isoascorbate, ascorbate, cysteine, and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) share a common function in meat, which later was demonstrated to be the sequestering of iron. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  180)

Grever (1974) indicated that Bacillus species are less sensitive to nitrite than clostridia. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  187)

Tompkin et al (1979) also showed that although isoascorbate enhances the antibotulinal effect of nitrite in freshly prepared perishable cured meat that is temperature abused, isoascorbate also reduces the efficacy of nitrite by causing more rapid depletion of residual nitrite.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  187)

According to Crowther et al. (1976),  studying mixtures of nitrite, nitrate, ascorbate and brine levels and their effect on botulinal toxins in vacuum packed back bacon, a higher percentage of samples analysed were toxic with the addition of 200 μg/g of nitrite than with 100 μg/g of nitrite. The addition of ascorbate enhanced the antibotulinal effect of 100 μg/g but not 200 μg/g of nitrite. These values raise a question concerning the conclusions that (1) protection was greater if the level of nitrite was increased to 200 μg/g and (2) sodium ascorbate at a level up to 2000 μg/g did not reduce the protection afforded by nitrite against C. botulinum. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  187)

Crowther et al. (1976) also reported that S. aureus grew well in the medium-salted bacon, regardless of the level of nitrite or ascorbate. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  189)

Shaw and Harding (1978) studied the effect of nitrate and nitrite on the microbial flora of Wiltshire bacon. The predominant flora of the bacon after curing consisted of micrococci, Moraxella species, and Moraxella-like bacteria. Omitting nitrate led to higher numbers of Moraxella species in the cured bacon.  However, bacon that was sliced and vacuum packaged developed a flora mainly of micrococci and lactics. Including nitrate in the bacon enhanced the growth of micrococci.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  189)

Shaw and Harding (1978) showed that because higher numbers of lactics were present in bacon with the lowest initial nitrite concentration, it was suggested that nitrite could be important in delaying the sour spoilage caused by the growth of lactics.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  189)

Various botulinal studies were conducted in the USA in the 1970’s.  It showed that  vacuum-packaged bacon prepared with 0.7% sugar (sucrose) or more provides sufficient fermentable carbohydrate that naturally occurring lactics cause a decline in pH to inhibitory levels. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  190)

The botulinal studies in the ’70’s also showed that brine levels below 4.0% are not inhibitory to botulinal outgrowth. As the brine level exceeds 4.0%, outgrowth is increasingly delayed. If a lactic fermentation develops in the interim, the combination of relatively higher brine and decreasing pH can prevent botulinal outgrowth. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  190)

These same studies showed that the level of residual nitrite at the time the bacon is abused influences the extent of the delay in botulinal outgrowth. The level of nitrite added to the product is not important, aside from the fact that the amount of added nitrite partially determines the level of residual nitrite. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  190)

It also showed that the addition of ascorbate or isoascorbate can act in concert with residual nitrite to retard botulinal outgrowth in freshly produced bacon. However, ascorbate and isoascorbate can also have a negative effect by causing more rapid loss of residual nitrite during processing and storage. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  190)

Nurmi and Turunen (1970) studied the effect of adding nitrite to a previously autoclaved broth medium (pH 6.0). Lactobacilli (78 strains), micrococci and staphylococci (24 strains), and Pediococcus cerevisiae (1 strain) were examined for their tolerance to nitrite in the presence and absence of 4.01% salt. At 200 μg/g growth was delayed or slower. At 40 μg/g growth was comparable to that in the control without nitrite, results were subsequently reported that showed the production of enterotoxin A to decrease as pH decreased, salt increased, and nitrite increased (Tompkin et al., 1973). 

Morse and Mah (1973) studied the effect of glucose on enterotoxin B synthesis in a broth medium buffered to an alkaline pH (7.7). Adding glucose caused decreased toxin production.  Glucose repression of enterotoxin B production was also reported to occur at pH 6.0 but to a lesser degree than at pH 7.7 (Morse and Baldwin, 1973).

Bean and Roberts (1974, 1975)  The inhibitory effect of nitrite in the recovery medium increased with increasing salt content, decreasing incubation temperature, and decreasing pH. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  190)

Zeuthen (1980) conducted studies on the effect of pH on the rate of microbial growth in sliced ham.  They found that the lower pH meat resulted in a ham with a pH of 6.0 with residual nitrite after processing and the higher pH meat resulted in a ham with a pH of 6.35 with a higher residual nitrite level.  The brine level of both products were equal.  During 7 – 8 weeks of storage at 5 deg C, the rate of microbial growth was considerably slower in the sliced ham prepared with the lower pH meat.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  203)

In the 1980’s, the USDA adopted a regulation for bacon that requires a maximum of 120 μg/g sodium nitrite and the addition of 550 μg/g sodium ascorbate or isoascorbate.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  203)

It was also shown during this period that the mechanism of nitrite inhibition differs in different bacterial species.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  203)

In 1988, the USDA initiated a series of increasingly restrictive policies on the rate of chilling for perishable cured meat manufactured under USDA inspection.    Dr Tompkin continues that this is a case where the epidemiologic data indicate a negligible public health concern for cured meats but the evidence from challenge studies and predictive modeling suggests otherwise.  He notes that the situation is a reminder of Morris Ingram’s frustration with the increase in research on nitrite’s role in botulinal inhibition in the 1970’s.  At the time he stated, ” What we need at the present time, in my opinion, is not more inoculated pack experiments but a rationale for interpreting them” (Ingram, 1974).  

“Since 1990 there has been increased interest of L. monocytogenes in ready-to-eat foods.  McClure et al (1991) found the efficacy of sodium nitrite to be temperature and pH dependent.  At a pH value of 6.0 sodium nitrite had little effect in delaying the time to detect visible growth except at the highest level tested (200 ppm) and a temperature of 15 deg C or below.  At pH 6.0 and 5 deg C no growth was observed with any of the levels of sodium nitrite evaluated (50, 100, 200, 400 μg/g).  Buchanan and Golden, 1995; Buchanan et al., 1997) conducted an extensive series of experiments that led to the conclusion that nonthermal inactivation of L. monocytogenes by sodium nitrite is pH dependant and related to the concentration of undissociated nitrous acid.  (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  203)

Duffy et al. (1994) inoculated a variety of vacuum-packaged cooked sliced meat with L. monocytogenes and found the lag time increased and the rate of growth decreased at 0 deg C and 5 deg C with the addition of sodium nitrite (0 to 315 μg/g).   The effectiveness of sodium nitrite was significantly increased with the addition of sodium ascorbate. (Davidson, M. P. et al.;  2005:  203)

Applications to our bacon curing

We skipped over the entire N-Nitrisomine issue and the possibility that nitrite in bacon is carcinogenic.  According to Dr. Tompkin, the fear of N-nitrisomine formation in the early 1970’s and 1980’s is probably the main reason why bacon curers in the USA opted to leave nitrate out of curing brines and use only nitrite.  (from private correspondence)    We will return to the nitrisomine issue in a future article.

Lets first have a look at legislation in South Africa and then draw some practical applications that can be applied in the bacon curing plant.

SA REGULATIONS

The South African max allowed limits on nitrite, nitrate and some of the chemicals mentioned in our survey are:

from Regulation R965 of 1977(18):

– Potassium and sodium nitrate:  200mg/ kg
– Potassium or sodium nitrite: 160mg/kg

Where nitrate and nitrite are used in combination they must be added together and proportionally neither one can exceed the max limit (section 2b of Regulation R965 of 1977).

For using erythrobic acid or sodium erythrobate:  550 mg/kg
L Ascorbic Acid:  550 mg/kg.

One other matter must be considers before we make our applications and that is the status of bacon.  Is it a cooked (ready-to-eat) or a raw product?  This is an important point since uncooked products assume that heat will be applied as a final barrier before consumption.  In the case of a ready-to-eat product, these are produced in such a way that it assumes no further barrier before consumption.

In South Africa bacon is not a cooked product. It is similar to the situation in the USA where “commercial bacon is cooked and smoked to an internal temperature of about 128F (53.3C). It is not considered ready-to-eat as in some European countries where a trichinae control program has been in place for about a century.” In South Africa, as in the USA, bacon is cooked before it is consumed. (private communication with Dr. Tompkin)  This means that bacon is handled as a low risk product from a food safety perspective.

Now that we have the proper legal position of bacon and the maximum allowed limits of nitrate, nitrite and some chemicals often assosiated with them we can move on to our list of applications.

POINTS OF APPLICATION

Here are a few practical applications that flows from the consideration of nitrite and nitrate in bacon.

– We suggest a combination of nitrate and nitrite with a maximum of salt (as much as is palatable).

– An important economic and fod safety consideration is shelf life.  In order to extend shelf life, good manufacturing practices, a thorough food safety program and using the correct heat, freezing and pH during processing are as important as antimicrobial chemicals.  Some argue that these may have the ability to replace most antimicrobial’s in food. An example of this is the contention that much of the improved shelf life in the US on bacon and poultry products is “attributed to improvements in sanitation between cooking and packaging as a requirement to control Listeria contamination”.  (private communication with Dr. Tompkin)

– Reduce the pH  in the meat.  We suggest manipulating the pH of the meat to levels of between 5.6 and 5.8.  Not below 5.3 since reducing the pH will increase the rate of nitrite depletion  (private communication with Dr. Tompkin) and 5.3 has been shown to be a threshold.

– Use nitrate, nitrite and salt in combination with a low temperature, targeting an internal core temp of between 50 and 65 deg C for at least 30 minutes.

–  The goal of keeping the meat temperature below 5 deg C from receiving of meat till before smoking/ cooking and then rapid chilling and freezing and keeping the finished product below 5 deg C is an excellent way of increase the lag time and the reduce the rate of growth of L. monocytogenes.  As a general policy, meat must be kept below this during processing.

–  Related to the greening of bacon.  “Greening is due to the growth of certain other lactobacilli which also occur on cured meats and is a very old problem.  It is a major problem at times if cooked product is held in storage allowing for the lactobacilli to multiply and then the product is used as rework into new product.  Over time the repetitive addition of aged rework leads to a high population of lactobacilli that are exceptionally heat resistant. They are microaerophilic meaning they can not tolerate much oxygen and grow well under the perimeter of sausages or in vacuum packaged meats. Upon opening the packages the product turns green.” (private communication with Dr. Tompkin)

Another reason often sited for a green discolouration in cured meat is nitrite burn.  It is caused by a combination of excessive levels of nitrite and reduced pH (Deibel and Evans, 1957).  The levels that nitrite is used in cured meat is so low that greening in bacon is unlikely to occur as a result of nitrite and reduced pH.  (private communication with Dr. Tompkin)

Conclusion

Nitrite’s role in cured meat is far more than only colour and taste.  It is a key component of a very complex environment with definite antimicrobial efficacy.  It is an effective hurdle against clostridium butulinum.  Its antimicrobial efficacy extends to other organisms, the level of which differs from organism to organism.  It is definitely an important general antimicrobial hurdle.

Regarding nitrate, enough early research has been done that show efficacy if its used in conjunction with nitrite and salt to warrants its inclusion in brine curing mixes.

The efficacy of nitrate and nitrite is strongly tied to brine content, pH, heat treatment and adding complementary chemicals.

The story of saltpeter (potassium nitrate) and sodium nitrite is epic in the true sense of the word.

——————

(c) eben van tonder

“Bacon & the art of living” in book form

Stay in touch Like our Facebook page and see the next post. Like, share, comment, contribute!

Bacon and the art of living Promote your Page too

——————

Notes:

(1)    Dr. Tompkin is retired and currently associated with the School of Applied Technology as part of the Illinois Institute of Technology.  For his background, see https://appliedtech.iit.edu/people/bruce-tompkin.

References

Davidson, P. M. et al.  2005.  Antimicrobials in Food, Third Edition.  CRC Press.

Doyle, M.  1989.  Bacterial Pathogens.  Marcel Dekker, Inc.

Emmeluth, D.  2010.  Botulism.  Infobase Publishing.

Jay. M. J. et al.  2005.  Modern Food Microbiology. Springer Science + Business Media.

The Centralia Enterprise and Tribune.  Centralia, Wisconsin.  25 January 1896.

The Laredo Times.  Laredo, Texas.  1 December 1896.

Maple Leaf Press release:  http://investor.mapleleaf.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=88490&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1363993&highlight=

McCarthy, M. Chairman of the Committee of nitrite and alternative curing agents in food.  Et al.  1981.  The Health Effects of Nitrate, Nitrite, and N- Nitroso Compounds.  National Academy Press.

Montclair Tribune.  Montclair, California. 20 April 1972.

Sterba, J. P.. 28 April 1982.  The History of Botulism.  The New York Times.

http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Clostridium+putrificum

Images

Image 1:  Clipping from newspaper article:  Montclair Tribune (Montclair, California), 20 April 1972.

All other images by Willem Klynveld.

How the development of coal tar dyes in the late 1800’s sparked a proliferation of food additives in the 1890’s and early 1900’s.

Monday, 30 March 2015

This article is available for download in pdf: Concerning chemical synthesis and food additives

Summary

This article outlines the development of curing technology against the backdrop of the advances in science that gave rise to the coal tar dye industry after an accidental discovery of synthetic mauve (a pale purple coulor, named after the mallow flower) by the young English scientist, William Perkin. It outlines the explosion of chemical synthesis and the accompanied synthesis of colourants and preservatives for the food industry.  Along with the direct introduction of nitrites, these made its way into curing brines starting from the mid 1850’s.  It sets out the response in Germany and the USA by legislating against adulteration in foods.

The wholesale use of synthetic colourants and preservatives by the German Government during World War One is discussed, including the direct use of sodium nitrite as curing agent due to the food shortages during the Great War and due to restrictions placed on the use of saltpeter (nitrate).  Sodium nitrite was being produced at this time as an important chemical for the coal tar dye industry.

It is widely held that Polenski was the first to identify nitrite as the curing ingredient and not nitrate.  Evidence is presented that nitrite’s central role in curing was understood some time before Polensi published in 1891.

Introduction

Through the ages, meat curing has reflected the prevailing scientific knowledge. (1)  Initially meat preservation was accomplished simply by reduced water activity through the action of salt and sugar on meat juices and the drying and preserving action of smoke and heat.  Over time humans realised that something in saltpetre was causing the reddening effect upon meat and the distinct cured taste.  Much later, in the 1920’s, we started to realise that it also have antimicrobial properties. (2)

For a comprehensive treatment of the history of saltpeter and nitrite, see “Concerning the direct addition of nitrite to curing brine.”

Coal Tar Dye

It is the development of chemical synthesis from the coal tar dye industry of the late 1800’s that profoundly advanced the science of pharmaceutical drugs, colourants for the textile and food industry and the synthesis of preservatives.  It captivated the imagination of the meat industry where the preservation of foods and a good, wholesome presentation was still a challenge in a time when the average household did not have refrigeration.

It all began in 1856 when the 18 year old William Henry Perkin (1838 – 1907), during the Easter vacation from London’s Royal College of Chemistry, synthesized mauve, or aniline purple (a pale purple). This was the first synthetic dyestuff from chemicals derived from coal tar. (Chemical Heritage Foundation)

In “A Letter from Denmark” we looked at the importance of Friedrich Wöhler’s accidental synthesis of urea.  In many respect, the concept of synthesised chemicals remained largely unexplored until Perkin, trying to produce the antimalarial drug quinine, produced the colour mauve.  For us living in the 2000’s this does not seem like an important accomplishment, but in the late 1800’s, dyes were big business and at the cutting edge of chemical investigation. (Chemical Heritage Foundation)

Scientific rigour

By the 1820’s, France was the world-leader in chemical technology where scientists started to advocate a rigorous, quantitative, experimental approach to chemistry, unlike anything that was found in Germany and Britain at this time.  (Paterson, G. R; 1983: 4)  Laboratory work was not a standard part of chemistry training, not even in France, but a set of fortunate circumstances enabled the German scientist, Justice von Liebig (1803 – 1873), to get access to Gay-Lussac’s laboratory.  He was in Paris, courtesy of a grant awarded him by Grand Duke Louis I of Besse in 1822.  (Paterson, G. R., 1983: 4)

Von Liebig returned to Germany not only with a more rigorous approach to chemistry, which he learned from people like Gay-Lussac, but with the benefits of laboratory work firmly entrenched in his mind.  He took the model of laboratory work back to Germany and applied it at his university.  This model was later adopted by many of the great German universities.   Under Von Liebig, students “learned qualitative and quantitative analysis, prepared organic compounds and each performed a special laboratory work.”  (Paterson, G. R., 1983 4)

This resulted in a new generation of better trained chemists. In 1847 Von Liebig published Research on the Chemistry of Food what is probably the first book on food chemistry.  (Fenneman, O. R. et al., 2007: 3)

One of Von Liebig’s students at University of Giessen was August W. Hofmann.  Hofmann became the conduit for disseminating Von Liebig’s ideas (3) and methods in England where Prince Albert, Sir Robert Peele (the British Prime Minister) and other influential people asked Von Liebig to recommend someone as the Director for the new Royal College of Chemistry that was established in 1845.  (Paterson, G. R, 1983: 5)

Among the English students who studied under him was the young Perkin.  (Paterson, G. R; 1983: 5)

The discovery of a purple dye changed history

Let us go back for a moment to Wöhler’s accidental synthesis of urea in 1828 which is hailed as the first synthesis of an organic compound.  Since those days, synthesizing organic compounds gained much favour with chemists. Quinine, the only important medicine for the treatment of malaria, was both scarce and a priority for Hofmann as a synthetic target.  The medicine is obtained from the bark of cinchona tree which grows mainly in South America. Hofmann had suggested that it would be nice if someone could synthesize quinine. In 1856 Perkin took up the challenge and he started the work on quinine in the laboratory he set up at home. (4) (Nagendrappa, G, 2010:  781)

Perkin set out to accomplish this with a large amount of enthusiasm and not quite the required skill set.  In the process he failed to create quinine, but instead created a purple colour that intrigued him and the rest is history. (4)

He was eager to commercialize the discovery of his light purple dye. Hofmann was against this, suggesting that he should remain focused on an academic career. With the financial support of his father, a construction contractor, Perkin forged ahead with his plans and developed the processes for the production and use of the new dye. In 1857 he opened his factory at Greenford Green, not far from London.  (Chemical Heritage Foundation)

Germany’s rise to dominance

Scientists in England, France, Germany and Switzerland followed this discovery with many new synthesized dyes but their period of dominance was short-lived, largely because of the following events.

First there was the discovery by Johann Peter Greiss (1829-1888) in 1858 in Kolbe’s laboratory, of the diazotization reaction. (Paterson, G. R., 1983: 8)  As an important side-note, it was an improvement of this production process initially used by Greiss for the production of Diazo compounds that sodium nitrite became important. In the improved process, sodium nitrite was used to produce nitrous acid.  (Cain, J.C., 1908:  6)  Sodium nitrite that later became the curing agent of choice thus emerged onto the scene, initially as part of the production process of coal tar dye’s in the mid 1800’s.

“The second important event was the synthesis by Carl Graebe (1841-1927) and Carl Theodor Liebermann (1842-1914) in Baeyer’s laboratory of alizarin (the dye of natural madder) from anthraquinone.” This is an important event since it caused the demise of a natural dye industry, with the synthetic product overtaking for the first time a natural dye. “Although British patents to Heinrich Caro (1834-1911), Graebe and Liebermam on the one hand, and to Perkin on the other, were granted on successive days in June, 1869 for the commercial manufacturing methods of alizarin, the effects in Germany and Britain proved to be quite opposite.”  (Paterson, G. R., 1983: 8)

Haber writes: “the synthesis was being investigated in Britain and Germany: the invention was made simultaneously in both countries. In the former country it marked the end of nearly fifteen years of brilliant inventiveness, in the latter it was the first of a long line of important discoveries“.  Harber quotes Otto Nikolaus Witt (1853-1915) as saying that the discovery of synthetic alizarin “was the first fruit of a new trend in chemical research, that of purposive chemistry.”  (Paterson, G. R., 1983:  8)

The creation of BASF in 1865 became a further propellant for establishing German dominance in the synthesized coal tar dye industry. (It is the biggest producer of dyes in the world today). (Nagendrappa, G, 2010:  787, 788)  By 1900 BASF’s dominance could clearly be seen in its numbers.  “It employed about 6,300 workers and overseers, 146 chemists, 75 engineers and technicians, and 433 commercial employees. Its 421 factory buildings in Ludwigshafen on the Rhine covered an area of 317,429m2 on a terrain  of 206 hectares, over which ran a company rail network of 42.6km including 223 turn tables.  The company annually consumed 243,000tons of coal  to run its 253 steam engines and eight electrical generators, 132 million kg  of other raw materials, 20 million m3 of water, 12 million kg of ice, and about 12.6 million m3 of gas (for heat and light).”  (Abelshauser, W. et al; 2004: 116)

BASF was more resourceful, rapidly increased its capacity and from 1872 steadily exceeded that of Perkin & Sons. They were also able to sell the dyes at a cheaper rate.  A low cost price strategy is key to their market dominance to this day.  Perkin found it difficult to compete. Declining profits pushed up the production rate required and they found it increasingly difficult to finance growth. Faced with the realities of the German competition, the brothers decided to sell while they still had a company worth something. (Nagendrappa, G, 2010:  787, 788)

Another series of events that propelled Germany to its dominance in synthesised coal tar dye industry was “the flourishing of structural studies of organic molecules by Friedrich August Kekule (1829-18961), Archibald Scott Couper (1831-1892) and others. (Paterson, G. R., 1983:  8)

“Biology provided a further impetus in this evolution of the coal tar colour industry into a fine chemicals industry in which both dyes and drug entities were of prime importance.”  (Paterson, G. R., 1983: 8)

These factors are all part of the multi-faceted reasons behind the almost complete transfer of the synthetic dye industry from England to Germany. This transfer mostly took place during the 1870’s.  (Paterson, G. R., 1983: 8)

Other reasons for the German take-over are the achievement of German national unity in 1871 with the establishment of the Prussian-dominated German Empire and the role of the banks.  Germany had state banks which financed Germany’s  fine chemical manufacturers to construct modern factories, thoroughly equipped and scientifically and economically well-staffed. In Britain, the private manufacturer had, on the other hand, to provide the capital, and that from decreasing profits. (Paterson, G. R., 1983: 10)

An important factor in the rise of Germany’s scientific dominance was their preeminence in its education system.  For more than 20 years prior to Perkin’s 1856 discovery, soon after Liebig took up his position in Giessen, Germany led the world in producing well-trained chemists. German chemical research was focused on practical goals, principally from Liebig’s research.(Paterson, G. R., 1983: 10)

Another reason for Germany’s dominance was their use of patent laws. (Paterson, G. R., 1983: 10)

Spawning multiple functional ingredients

A direct result of the enormous German chemical dye industry at the end of the 1800’s is the proliferation of functional ingredients for the meat industry such as colourants and preservatives.   (Young J. H.  1989: 111) “The commercialization of these dyes marked the demise of the German agriculture production and the birth of a science-based, predominantly German, industry.”  (Tao, J. et al,  2010:  3)

Public laboratories were founded throughout the country for testing foods in Bonn (1855), Munster (1871), Leipzig (1875) and Hamburg (1878).  A private laboratory was founded in 1848 of C.  R. Fresenius (his doctoral advisor was none other than Justus von Liebig).  At this time many food adulterations were known:  heavy metals in flour, copper acetate in cucumbers; the colouring of sausages with cochineal, fuchsine or carmine; the preserving of minced meat by means of sulphur dioxide or nitrite.  One the one hand was the adulteration of food through a wholesale use of colourants and preservatives and on the other hand was the toxins from disease causing food-born microorganisms. Many people died as a result of trichinosis during this time. (Morton, I. D. and Lenges. J.,1992: 142) 

Some years before Polenske, Kisskalt or Lehmann published their research findings on nitrite and its role in meat curing, scientists and butchers knew the importance of nitrite.  The work of C. R. Fresenius points to this.  At this time (until the 1950’s), nitrite was in the class of a food colourant.  Its main function in food was to produce the reddening effect that make cured meat look appetising.

German food laws and food chemistry

The first food laws in Germany were established in 1879 prescribing the chemicals and technological examinations and assessments of among other, food stuffs.  The task of examining foods was placed in the hands of a newly established occupational group who were regulated by law in terms of the scope of their work and their required academic qualifications.  Their occupation was that of “Food Chemists” and their title was protected by law.  (Morton, I. D. and Lenges. J.,1992: 142) 

The state was responsible for their education.  From 1894 mandatory requirements for their admission to the government education programs were a full education in pharmacy or chemistry or a successful study of 2 years in chemistry and the pre-diploma (corresponding to a B. Sc degree in England and South Africa).  (Morton, I. D. and Lenges. J.,1992: 142) 

For this reason, with techniques available to test for nitrite and with a thorough understanding of the role of bacteria in the reduction process from nitrate to nitrite, it is hard to imagine that the role of nitrite in meat curing was not well known, long before any scientist published on the subject.    

Nitrite – the principal curing ingredient

Formally, German scientists were publishing experimental evidence on the reddening effect of meat that is cured with saltpeter (potassium nitrate) and salt.  In 1891, Dr Ed Polenske, working for the Imperial Health Office concluded that nitrite found in cured meats and curing pickle arose from bacterial reduction of nitrate. (Pegg, R. B. and  Shahidi, F.  2000: 12)

The German scientists, Kisskalt and Lehmann confirmed that the reddish/ pinkish cured meat colour is due to nitrite and not nitrate.  (Pegg, R. B. and  Shahidi, F.  2000: 12)

Ersatz food

World War One (1914 – 1918) broke out in Europe.  By 1915 German food supplies were critical.  Germany deployed its full scientific might in every aspect of the war, including the effort to create “replacement food” and to colour this with the technology from its impressive synthetic dyes industry in order to make it more appetizing.  This food was called Ersatz food (replacement food).

In Jan 1915 the German Government ordered potato flour to be added to wheat in the production of so called “k” (for war or potato) bread.  Barley, oat and rice quickly entered bread production – as did ground bean, pea, and corn meal later in the war. (Herwig, H. H.  2014:  285)

Butter was replaced with coconut and curdled milk, sugar and food colouring.  Cooking oil by a mixture of red beets, carrots, turnips and spices.  Salad oil by 99% mucilage.  Meat soup, cubes of flavoured brine.  Eggs by yellow coloured corn or potato flour.  Wheat flour was stretched by adding powdered hay.  Ground European beetles and linden wood replaced fats.  Sausage was formed by mixtures of water, plant fibres and animal scraps.  More than 11 000 ersatz products reached German stores during the war.  Patents on ersatz were granted for 837 types of sausages. (Herwig, H. H.  2014:  285)

“Evelyn Princess Blucher, and English observer in Berlin, suffering from influenza in March 1916, jokingly suggested that she had succumbed to ‘Ersatz illnesses’.  ‘Everyone is feeling ill from too many chemicals in the hotel food.  I don’t believe that Germany will ever be starved out, but she will be poisoned out first with these substitutes.”  (Herwig, H. H.  2014:  285)

By 1916/ 1917, German meat production had fallen by 31%.  The weekly entitlement of meat for a German adult was restricted to 100 – 250g.  Even this was not readily available and could be bought mainly on the black market through a barter trade system.  As much as one third of rations reached the consumers through the back market.  (Herwig, H. H.  2014:  285)

Probably based on the work of Polenske, Haldene and Kisskalt, the German Government authorised the use of nitrite in food sometime after 1916.  This was in all likelihood done in an effort to speed up curing time of meat, even though this may have been used by the German population well before 1916 due to the increased production and availability of sodium nitrite as part of the war effort.  The main motivation for the legalising of an alternative curing agent was probably that all saltpeter (potassium nitrate) was claimed for the war-effort to produce munitions and as such its use in foods was illegal in this time.  (Concerning the direct addition of Nitrite)

The meat curers initially used sodium nitrite directly (i.e. not mixed with sodium chloride).  Several cases of poisoning were reported including the mass poisoning of 34 people including a child who died in Leipzig.  The Government promptly banned its use (Hans Marquardt , et al, 1999:  21), but in the prevailing war conditions, and with the Government’s inability to stamp out the massive black market in foods, there can be no doubt that this practice persisted throughout the war.

The practice of colouring curing salt containing sodium nitrite pink probably stems from this indecent of incidents like this, in order to prevent people from confusing sodium nitrite with table salt.  The practice became law in most countries in subsequent years and the remains to this day.

During the war the German Government suggested the use of jam on bread.  Today it is customary to have jam on bread, but in pre-war Germany, bread was eaten with butter and/or meat fat.  “So when the government advocated jam as a substitute for this” it brought about resistance.  “In 1916, a crowd of food rioters had as their chant, “Bread!  Bacon!  Fat!  Potatoes!  Away with jam!””   (hogsalt)

By 1917 nitrite was not only used for curing meat in Germany, but proprietary meat cures containing nitrites were being marketed in Europe. (Pegg, R. B. and  Shahidi, F.  2000: 13)

The USA’s “Pure Food” Act (5)

In the USA, the “Pure Food and Drug Act and Meat Inspection Act” of 1906 is a direct result of the proliferation of synthetic dyes used as food colourants and the use as preservatives.

Opposed to these moves were the powerful meat packing industry in Chicago and spice and ingredient suppliers such as Heller & Co..  They put the same choice that was faced by the authorities in Germany before consumers namely the choice between the deadly bugs that could be in the food or the chemicals with questionable health status.  They wrote in 1906 in one of their publications, ‘Shall we eat the germs, or make the germs’ existence impossible.’ (Heller Brothers, 1906:  6)

There was a growing awareness by the general public about food hygiene and with the rise of consumerism, pressure on meat packers and bacon curers emerged to improve the brines used.

Many of the curing mixes with nitrite and other ingredients added made their way from Europe to the USA in this time.  Functional ingredients were sold under various trade names.  In a time when no legislation existed about ingredient declarations, it makes a proper evaluation of curing mixes from this time challenging.  Producers of the functional ingredients and bacon curers alike were very secretive about the ingredients used. (Fenneman, O. R. et al, 2007: 111)  Authorities in the US were cracking down on the use of these ingredients by 1906. (Heller Brothers, 1906:  6)

R. C. Yeoman, Dean of Civil Engineering, Valparaiso University, published The Rural Efficiency Guide in 1918.  He lists the following functional ingredients used as preservatives at this time, “borax, boracic acid, formalin, salicylic acid, and other chemicals are sometimes used in preserving meats”.  He suggests that they should not be used on account of them being “considered by so many authorities to be harmful to the health of the consumer that their use should be avoided.” He refers to “the proprietary preparations put on the market” that are “also dangerous to health”. The reason why they were popular in curing brines is given as that “they are more active than salt, and the chief reason for their use is to hasten the curing process.”  It was his opinion that only salt was required to cure good quality bacon.  (Yeoman R. C. 1918: 280)

He adds an interesting note on saltpeter.  He writes that “Saltpeter is used to preserve the natural color of the flesh or to give a reddish color, but it is harmful to the health. It is even more astringent (cause tissue to shrink) than salt.”   He is in favour of the use of sugar and a little bit of baking soda.  “Sugar is not an astringent and its presence in the pickle softens the muscle fibres and improves the flavor of the meat. Saleratus(baking soda) is used in small quantities to sweeten the brine. In warm weather a small quantity will aid in preventing the brine from spoiling.”  (Yeoman R. C. 1918: 280)

Publications from the US firm, Heller and Co, from 1906 to 1922 address this issue of banning harmful functional ingredients.

Adolph Heller, the father of Benjamin, Albert, Joe, Edward and Harry, the members of the firm, is described as a scientific and practical butcher and packer and a practical sausage manufacturer. (Heller Brothers, 1922: 18)  It is said that he studied the causes of failure in handling of meat with the aim of always producing the best and most uniform product that could be made.  In light of the enactment of the national Pure Food Law, the National Meat Inspection Law and various state Pure Food Laws, they have set out to compile guidelines for the manufacturing of various meat products without the use of ingredients that have been banned by these various laws.  (Heller Brothers, 1922: 18, 19)

Heller & Co gives the following list of proprietary preparations in 1906 that is targeted by the US government for banning due to questions about its safety,  “Preservaline , Freeze-Em, KonservirungsSalze, Freeze-Em-Pickle, Zanzibar Carbon, Zanzibar Ham Smoke and other such well known articles. (Heller Brothers, 1906:  6)

Preservaline, was mostly salicylic acid used as a preservative.  (Young J. H.  1989: 111); Freeze-Em, sodium sulfite.  (Young J. H.  1989: 111).   Zanzibar Carbon, a combination of celery and other condiments.

This is then how the late 1800’s and early 1900’s became the period of the proliferation of food dyes and preservatives.  A movement started where the world realised that harmful food ingredients can not be justified by the pathogens it is preventing and a move to reduced E-numbers or functional ingredients started.

Conclusion

Functional food ingredients and curing salt are closely linked to the prevailing level of science and technology.  The quest is to present to consumers safe, affordable, quality food, free from harmful ingredients.

Developments in the coal tar dye industry brought about a proliferation of such functional ingredients, many of them harmful to human health.

Understanding its history helps us realise that everything we use in food has a history and a reason.  These reasons can and must be continually re-evaluated, including the merits of using nitrite and the quest must remain for safer, better quality foods.

——————

(c) eben van tonder

Home Page

Bacon and the art of living Home Page

Stay in touch

Like our Facebook page and see the next post. Like, share, comment, contribute!

Bacon and the art of living

Promote your Page too

——————

Notes:

1.  The development of chemistry and adding chemicals to food went hand in hand.   During the 1700’s, 1800’s and much of the early 1900’s, the chemical revolution generated as much excitement and yielded productive changes to our lives as information technology in the late 1900’s and the beginning of the 2000’s.

A number of important discoveries were made between 1780 and 1850 that directly impacted on our understanding of the chemistry of food.  A few examples will suffice.

One of the greatest Chemists, who ever lived, Carl Wilhelm Scheele (1742 – 1786), a Swedish pharmacist, isolated and studied the properties of lactose (1780).   He devised a means of preserving vinegar by the application of heat (1782). He discovered chlorine, glycerol, and oxygen (three years before Priestly, but unpublished).  He isolated citric acid from lemon juice (1784) and gooseberries (1785) and isolated malic acid from apples (1785).  (Fenneman, O. R. et al., 2007: 2)  It was Carl who first made pure nitrite in 1777.  (Scheele CW. 1777)

His work is considered the beginning of analytical research in agricultural and food chemistry.  (Fenneman, O. R. et al., 2007: 2)

The brilliant French Chemist, Antoine Lavoisier (1743 – 1794) was instrumental in formulating the principals of modern chemistry.  He established the fundamental principle of combustion organic analysis.  He was the first to show that the process of fermentation could be expressed as a balanced equation.  He was the first to attempt to determine the elemental composition of alcohol (1784) and he presented one of the first papers on organic acids of various fruits (1786).  It was Antoine who established that saltpetre is potassium nitrate.     (Bacon and the art of living 02. The saltpeter letter)

Nicolas Theodore Saussure (1767 – 1845) helped to formulise and clarify the principals of agriculture and Chemistry provided by Antoine.  He studies CO2 and O2 changes during plant respiration (1804) and the mineral content of plants and made the first accurate elemental analysis of alcohol (1807).  (Fenneman, O. R. et al., 2007: 2)

In 1847, Justice von Liebig (1803 – 1873) published what is probably the first book on food chemistry, Research on the Chemistry of Food.  Included in this book is his research into the constituents of muscle (creatine, creatinine, sarcosine, inosinic acid, lactic acid, etc) (Fenneman, O. R. et al., 2007: 3)

As one can expect, the widespread occurrence of what is called the adulteration of foods parallels the developments in food chemistry.  (Fenneman, O. R. et al., 2007: 3)

A particular case in point is our understanding of the working of curing brines particularly related to the action of nitrite’s.  The chemistry of nitrates, nitrites and bacterial reduction was well established by the end of the 1800’s.  (The micro letter)  In 1891, Dr Ed Polenski published results of testes where he found nitrites present in brine after only nitrates were used in t6he initial mix.  He correctly speculated tha this was due to bacterial reduction of the nitrate to nitrites.  (Concerning the direct addition of nitrite to curing brine) This was followed by detailed analysis of the subject from around the world that in one form or the other continues to this day.

2.  The specific antimicrobial contribution of Nitrite (and indirectly nitrate) was only recognised in the late 1920’s.  Kerr et al. (1926) stated that nitrites and nitrates had no value to preserve, but two years later Lewis and Moran (1928) suggested that nitrite had anti-microbial effects.  Steinke and Foster (1951) delivered definitive evidence of sodium nitrites antimicrobial efficacy in cured meats.  During the 1970’s, definitive evidence of the relative contribution of nitrite in controlling c. botulinum was only obtained for certain foods. (McCarthy, M. Chairman of the Committee of nitrite and alternative curing agents in food.  Et al.  1981. Page 2-4 )

3. “At the beginning of the nineteenth century, France led the world in organized chemical endeavours, although there were singular contributions from other Europeans, chiefly Germans and the British. After the end of the Napoleonic Wars, many aspiring chemists (most often pharmaceutically trained) sought experience and instruction in France; here Napoleon’s education reforms had produced better training. It was in France too where innovative and gifted pharmacists (this tern replaced “apothecary” in 1777) gave rise to establishments, manufacturing the first drug entities, the alkaloids.

The Englishman Morson was an excellent example of an apothecary chemist who went to Paris for several years in order to learn the newer methodology.  An important visitor to Paris was Justus Liebig (1803-1873); his stay in Paris was the foundation for all his subsequent work.  Even in Paris, instruction in chemistry did not usually include laboratory work. However a set of fortunate circumstances enabled Liebig, who had in 1822 obtained from Grand Duke Louis I of Besse a grant to study in Paris, to gain access to Gay-Lussac’s laboratory.’   This was quite different from the small Darmstadt facility his father maintained in connection with the family drug and painting supplies business.

It was in his father’s laboratory that the younger Liebig first performed experiments, including preparation of the explosive, silver fulminate. When he first went to Paris, it was to attend lectures. Holmes says “Liebig attended the lectures of Gay-Lussac, Thenard and Dulong, where he encountered a rigorous, quantitative, experimental chemistry unlike anything he had found in Germany and learned for the first time some of the general principles, connecting his knowledge of particular compounds and processes.  Liebig, presenting a memoir on fulminates to the Acadknie des Sciences in 1823, impressed Humboldt who arranged for him to work in Gay-Lussac’s private laboratory.

When Liebig returned to Germany to the University of Giessen, he was determined to institute laboratory instruction, such as he had experienced in Paris, for his students. Under Liebig, they learned qualitative and quantitative analysis, prepared organic compounds and each performed a special laboratory problem.  Even though the first laboratory was a converted, and unventilated, barracks, it was the model for all future academic laboratory teaching. “It was the first institution deliberately designed to enable a number of students to progress systematically from elementary operations to independent research under the guidance of an established scientist”.8 Here we have the keys to Liebig’s importance for future developments rigorous laboratory teaching, numbers of procedures developed for and applied to many organic compounds. Other universities in Germany also adopted Liebig’s methods and philosophy, and a new generation of chemists was produced, mre thoroughly trained than ever before. (Paterson, G. R. p 3 – 5)

4.  Dr. Nagendrappa explains Perkins discovery as follows: “The most basic requirement for synthesizing a compound is the knowledge of its molecular structure, i.e., how its atoms are connected. In 1856, knowledge of chemical structures was just then emerging, though fairly correct molecular formulae could be determined. The structures of only small molecules could be written. The ring structures were still unknown. Perkin was therefore completely ignorant of the quinine structure (Box 1). It was indeed presumptuous on the part of Perkin to have undertaken quinine synthesis, which must be attributed to his irrepressible enthusiasm and confidence. It seems that he had no doubt  about the outcome.

His reasoning was simple. The empirical formula of quinine was known to be C20H24N2O2 . Therefore it is quite logical to assume that one can combine two molecules of a compound with molecular formula C10H13N to get C20H26N2 , at the same time adding two oxygen atoms and removing two hydrogen atoms. And it would be perfectly understandable if one thought, in 1856, of oxidizing a compound with formula C10H13N to get a compound of formula C20H24N2O2 :

Perkin chose allyltoluidine, which has the formula C10H13N, as the reactant and heated it with potassium dichromateand sulphuric acid as oxidizing agent. Of course, only a miracle would have produced quinine from such a concoction, and indeed what Perkin got was a reddish brown precipitate. However, he did not give up, but decided to investigate the reaction with aniline, a simpler compound. He treated aniline sulphate with potassium dichromate. Now he obtained a black precipitate. When he added methanol, probably to wash it, he noticed that methanol became purple coloured. As the colour was attractive, young Perkin thought of using it as a dye. He dyed a silk fabric with the colour and sent it to a well-known dye house Pullar & Son who approved it with admiration for its much desired attractive purple colour and its fastness on the fabric. The dye was called Aniline Purple, Mauve or Mauveine. He applied for a patent1 for it on 26th August 1856, with the intention of manufacturing it. The patent was granted on 20th February 1857. At 18, William Perkin was on his way to become one of the most celebrated figures of chemistry and chemical industry. Hofmann was unhappy that Perkin was leaving the Royal College of Chemistry to take up manufacturing, as it was considered not a desirable activity for people of refined social rank.

For Perkin, the situation to start an industry to manufacture Aniline Purple was not quite favourable. He had no industrial experience or business skill. He had to mobilize funds, get assured supply of raw materials, find buyers of the finished products, acquire land and take care of other related matters. He could overcome every hurdle with his abundant enthusiasm, patience and resoluteness.

Perkin’s father, who had changed his stance by now, put all the required money, and his brother Thomas Dix Perkin provided building and business support. The modern dye industry was born with the establishment of Perkin & Sons at Greenford Green, England, to manufacture mauve in 1856.”

When Perkin started the work on the oxidation of aniline, it was not his adroitness alone that led to mauve, but also a providential coincidence. The aniline sample that he was using was not pure; it contained toluidines in considerable quantities. Had there been no toluidine, there would still be some kind of a dye, but the result would not have been so spectacular. The purple shade of mauve was the most desired colour by the high society. The need for a purple dye was earlier met by the expensive Tyrian Purple extracted from mollusks. Discovery of mauve, which Perkin had initially called Tyrian Purple, changed the scenario as it was available to common people at affordable prices. Perkin inferred the presence of toluidine in mauve from its elemental analysis. Later he found that toluidines and other aniline derivatives (e.g., xylidines) also formed similar dyes. He made a dye from pure aniline and called it pseudo-mauveine, though its colour was not much attractive. Of all these new dyes the best was still the mauve. So Perkin’s luck lay in impure aniline mixed with toluidines.

Mauve itself is not a pure compound. It is a mixture of two major components A and B, and small amounts of other purple dyes. The components A and B were isolated and their structural identity determined only in 19942 . They are phenazene derivatives. The component A contains two aniline, one o-toluidine and one p-toluidine molecules, while the component B contains one aniline, two o-toluidine and one p-toluidine molecules.

(Nagendrappa, G, 2010:  781 -783, 785)

5.  Adulterated food is impure, unsafe, or unwholesome food. In theUnited States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), regulates and enforces laws on food safety and has technical definitions of adulterated food in various United States laws.  “Adulteration” is a legal term meaning that a food product fails to meet federal or state standards. Adulteration is an addition of a non food item to increase the quantity of the food item in raw form or prepared form, which may result in the loss of actual quality of food item. Among meat and meat products one of the items used to adulterate are water.

The History is instructive as we have referred to some of these vents many times in this work and will continue to refer to them:

• 1906 (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
• 1938Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321 et seq.)
• 1957Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.)

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adulterated_food)

Referances:

Cain, J. C. 1908. The chemistry of the Diazo-Compounds. Edward Arnold

Chemical Heritage Foundation.  http://www.chemheritage.org/discover/online-resources/chemistry-in-history/themes/molecular-synthesis-structure-and-bonding/perkin.aspx

The Complete Grazier.  1830.  Fifth edition.  paternoster Row.  Baldwin and Cradock

Fenneman, O. R. et al.  2007.  Fennema’s Food Chemistry, Fourth Edition. Taylor & Francis Group.

Herwig, H. H.  2014.  The First World War: Germany and Austria-Hungary 1914-1918.  Bloomsbury Publishing, Inc.

Heller Brothers.  1922.  5^th Edition; H Secrets of Meat Curing and Sausage Making. Published by B Heller and Co.

Hoagland, Ralph.  1914.  Coloring matter of raw and cooked salted meats.  United States Department of Agriculture.  National Agricultural Library.  Digital Collections.

Holland, LZ. 2003. Feasting and Fasting with Lewis & Clark: A Food and Social History of the early 1800’s. Old Yellowstone Publishing, Inc.0

Hui, Y. H..  2012.  Handbook of meat and meat processing.  Second edition.  CRC Press.

Marquardt, H., et al. 1999. Toxicology.  Academic Press.

McCarthy, M. Chairman of the Committee of nitrite and alternative curing agents in food.  Et al.  1981.  The Health Effects of Nitrate, Nitrite, and N- Nitroso Compounds.  National Academy Press.

Morton, I. D. and Lenges. J.  1992.  Education and Training in Food Science: A Changing Scene.  Ellis Hornwood Limited.

Nagendrappa, G.   Sir William Henry Perkin: The Man and his ‘Mauve’.  RESONANCE ç September 2010

Paterson, G. R..  Relationships between synthetic dyes and drug entities.  This paper is an edited version of a presentation to the convention of the Canadian Medical Association, Monte Carlo, 6 October, 1983.

Pegg, R. B. and  Shahidi, F.  2000  Nitrite Curing of Meat: The N-Nitrosamine Problem and Nitrite Alternatives.  Food & Nutrition Press, Inc.

Scheele CW. 1777. Chemische Abhandlung von der Luft und dem Feuer. Upsala, Sweden: M. Swederus.

Tao, J. et al.  2010.  Biocatalysis for Green Chemistry and Chemical Process Development.  John Wiley & Sond, Inc.

Abelshauser, W. et al.  2004.  German Industry and Global Enterprise BASF: The History of a Company.  Cambridge University press.

Yeats, J. 1871. The technical history of commerce; or, Skilled labour applied to production. Cassell, Petter, and Galpin

Yeoman R. C. 1918.  The Rural Efficiency Guide, Engineering Book. Publishing Co., Cleveland.

Young J. H.  1989.  Pure Food: Securing the Federal Food and Drugs Act of 1906.  Princeton University Press.

http://www.economist.com/node/8345876

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adulterated_food

http://www.hogsalt.com/wp-hogsalt/2013/05/faking-it/

Images:

All photos in this post by Willem Klynveld.  Used with permission.