Killian’s is Teh Sux0rs

I went to see Bryan’s band (Bulletproof Lincoln) play last night. I got there after they had already started playing, but I still wanted to get a drink at the bar. I walked up to the bar and I glanced around for a line-up of bottled beers but I didn’t see one right away. And since I wanted to get back to the listening area, I figured that I should consider my draught options instead. They had, of course, all the usual Bad American Beers: Coors, Budweiser and so on. But, they also had Killian’s Irish Red.

And, contrary to its name, it’s not from Ireland at all — rather, it’s completely American and made by Coors. I was aware of the Coors connection but I recalled that Killian’s had at least somewhat-dark in color and I thought to myself, “Well, how bad could it be?”. So, ordered one and walked back to listen to the band. I took a few sips and soon discovered that it was not what I was hoping for. [Note to amateur copy editors: “not for what I was hoping”?]

The dark color (well, reddish, anyway) belied its true flavor — or lack thereof. If I was blindfolded, someone could have told me that I was drinking Just Another American Beer and I would have believed him. There wasn’t much flavor at all, other than the distinct wateriness. And there was an odd degree of carbonation — not a creamy effervescence like a good porter but a sharp sparkle more closely resembling a club soda.

A visit to RateBeer.com later that evening confirmed my suspicions. I looked up Killian’s and discovered that it has a score of 2.82/5.0 which puts it in the 28th percentile. To put that in perspective, I checked on RateBeer’s list of Top Accessible Beers. They define an “accessible beer” as those with over 500 ratings — in other words, beers that you'd have a pretty good chance of finding in a store.

And just because a beer is “accessible” doesn’t mean that it’s a bad beer, either. I mean, the top rated Accessible Beer is Ayinger’s Celebrator Doppelbock which is in the 100th percentile (obviously rounded to 100, but still). And even the 17th best Accessible Beer, Guinness Stout, is in the 77th percentile.

But I suppose that there are relatively few beers with that many ratings since the scores tend to trail off towards the bottom of the list. For instance, Sam’s Adams Boston Lager — an otherwise decent beer — clocks in at the 53rd percentile for the #22 spot. In fairness to Sam Adams, I don’t think it a bad beer at all, but in the spectrum of all beers produced worldwide, I can understand that it might be only slightly above average.

There’re 25 entries in RateBeer’s Top Accessible Beers list and Killian’s Irish Red squeaks in at the end. A few of the posted comments mirror my own feelings of this brew:

  • “Damn you rate beer, i used to honestly enjoy this, then you came into my life. I can no longer be content in my beer darkness now that you�ve shined your glorious light down upon my palate and shown me what beer can be. Pours a light ruby red with a thin clingy head. dead nose, smells blank. has a bitter tree bark flavor. overly bitter and got bad quick. […] ”

  • “This is what I would consider a middle of the road beer in everyway. The color a very nice red, but it cant hide its mass produced roots. […] ”

  • “Clear amber colour, the head quickly disappears, butter and grapefruit aroma, some malts, tart and sweet with a bubblegum-like finish — artificial and very forgettable.”

  • “Finish is lightly sweet, moderately bitter, slightly metallic. Light to medium body, watery texture, fizzy carbonation. I am amused by the fact that the label says "Manufactured", rather than brewed. […] ”

That’s not to say that I didn’t enjoy the band, but the Killian’s was a bit lacking. After a few subsequent sips I realized that the mildly non-badness of the beer wasn't outweighing the calories that came with it. So, after making it halfway through the glass, I just set it aside.

Work Overriding Blogging

I’ve been busy with work and I haven’t been able to write as frequently as I’d like. So, I came up with this haiku which I hope conveys my situation:

Work is So Busy
This Project Is Due Monday
I Will Blog More Soon

Blood Sugar Levels Surge with Caffeine

The other day at work, we got to talking about foods which promote fitness and Larry mentioned that he had read a new study about caffeine. He didn’t go into it much at the time, but I was curious since I gingerly sip caffeine every morning (tea — Earl Grey — hot). So, later that day, I went to see what I could find at the Health section of Google News.

Sure enough, researchers at Duke University did a study of caffeine’s effect on blood sugar levels. They tested 14 people with type 2 diabetes and discovered that large doses of caffeine can cause blood sugar levels to climb:

The study showed that caffeine had little effect on glucose and insulin levels during the fasting period, but it caused significant surges after eating a meal. People who received the 375-milligram dose of caffeine experienced a 21% larger increase in glucose levels and a 48% larger increase in insulin levels compared with those who took the placebo during the two hours following their meals.

“It seems that caffeine, by further impairing the metabolism of meals, is something diabetics ought to consider avoiding. Some people already watch their diet and exercise regularly,” says Lane. “Avoiding caffeine might be another way to better manage their disease. In fact, it’s possible that staying away from caffeine could provide bigger benefits altogether.” […]

It’s not that caffeine creates blood sugar, but it seems to aggravate blood sugar levels when consumed with a high-carbohydrate meal. So, I may be out of the woods on this one — I generally have a mid-carb breakfast of diced apples with cottage cheese (+ cinnamon + Splenda) but I drink my tea about an hour after I eat breakfast. With any luck, most of my breakfast-based blood sugars would have been metabolized by then.

Restaurants Urged to Disclose Trans Fat

The Center for Science in the Public Interest — a Washington-based think tank which focuses on food and nutrition — is urging the FDA to require restaurants to disclose the use of trans fats. I don’t always agree with the CSPI, but I’ll concede that they may be on point this time.

In case you’re not up to speed on trans fats, they’re a type of fat (like saturated fat or monounsaturated fat) but far worse than other types of fat since they not only raise your “bad” cholesterol but they also lower your “good ” cholesterol. They’re created by the hydrogenation of liquid oils (turning them solid) and commonly used by restaurants for frying.

The FDA is requiring food labels to include trans fat by 2006, but that still doesn’t help much with restaurants. And, as much as I respect a restaurant’s artistic license to design their menu as they like, I’m not sure that artistic license outweighs the health concerns in this case.

So, I think the CSPI may be on to something here. Then again, I don’t agree with everything they have to say. One of their side-projects is TransFreeAmeria, an effort to ban trans fat entirely. And, while trans fat is undeniably unhealthy, I still believe that people should have the choice to consume whatever they like, whether bad for them or otherwise.

Interval Cardio Training

I’ve been reading off and on about interval training which, in short, is cardio training with short intervals of intense effort. I was browsing through some magazines at Barnes & Noble and a recent mention in Men’s [Health | Fitness] reinterested me in the technique. I checked online for some more information and found some useful articles at iVillage.

From what I've read, interval training can burn more calories in less time than traditional cardio. And the article “Invigorate with Interval Training” at iVillage has a good overview. As a starting point, they define exertion on a 1-10 scale with 1 being “very easy” and 10 being “very difficult”; and, they offer various interval training suggestions depending on your current fitness level:

  • For beginners, they recommend a 1:3 ratio of interval (at exertion 4-5) to recovery (at exertion 2-3). So, after a warm at low-middle effort for 5 minutes, you could go to a half-full effort for 2 minutes, return to low-middle effort for 6 minutes, and then repeat with the interval.

  • And, for intermediate fitness, they recommend a 1:1 radio of interval (at 4-6 exertion) to recovery (at 2-3 exertion). This one does have the advantage of being the easiest to keep track of times ;).

  • Then, for conditioned folks, their recommendation goes back to a 1:3 interval-to-recovery ratio, but with an interval intensity around 7-10. They point out that these intervals are called “anaerobic, because they are more like sprints and can't be sustained for a great amount of time on the aerobic energy system”.

Much of their examples focus on treadmills, but they add that easily adaptable to other machines such as exercise bikes and elliptical machines. I’ve been aware of interval training intuitively for some time, but I haven’t known the particulars on ratios and exertion. And, as I’ve only heard good things about this technique, I look forward to giving it a try next time I go to the gym.