Balsamic vinegar is likely fake
bbc.com
bbc.com
Tom Scott: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=642x2Y3Zla0
As for different things, about 7 years ago in LA there was as huge wine counterfeit operation bust. Expensive bottles were filled with cheaper wine, re-corked and sold. This is why expensive bottles now "destroyed" one way or another.
Point is - easier to sell and fewer troubles.
Real 100 year old Balsamic vinegar is $200/oz though: https://giusti.com/products/giusti-100-reserve
It's not fake in the same way it's talked about fake balsamic vinegar in this article.
Botulism can survive boiling, but not pressure cooking, which is only a little bit hotter, And below the point which oils are destroyed.
When you package anything, whichever department of ag you’re regulated by analyzes your ingredients and process to make sure you get a certain log reduction of any pathogens of interest. If there’s any risk at all, you have to have all of this greenlit by a process authority. (Oddly, Cornell is the 800 lb gorilla of that market, a huge chunk of packaged food in the US paid them for it.)
If someone is packaging real truffle oil anywhere in the US, and assuming botulism is a pathogen of interest (which I don’t know but does sound sensible) there’s definitely a kill step. I’ve never worked with mushrooms or any recipes that have low acid, so I don’t know what it is in this case. But I’m sure there is one.
Corollary: if you have a truffle not in season, it's definitely a fake. If you have a truffle in season, it's still probably a fake. Often it's a Chinese one, which tastes of nothing, with fake truffle flavour added. If you eat a naturally tasty truffle, you might not recognise it, nearly everyone has only ever eaten fakes.
I remember having fake truffle fries shortly after real truffle fries and boy the difference so big, I don't know why fake truffle just didn't create it's own label.
>> Aged vinegars, favored by gourmets and sometimes costing $100 a bottle, contain more lead than the quicker brewed, less expensive kinds. For three imported varieties tested in 2002, people who eat one tablespoon per day would be exposed to seven to 10 times the maximum daily level of lead set by California.
https://www.ehn.org/special-report-some-vinegars-often-expen...
Artisanal production is very interesting and can be great, but not always.
Balsamic Vinegar got a chapter, IIRC.
It is not really clear if this limit is due to capacity or an artificial limit imposed by regulators.
"Real" balsamic vinegar as the title uses the world real is related to protected designation of origin, abbreviated PDO in English or DOP in Italian.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_designation_of_origi...
This designation in the context of balsamic vinegar involves specific grapes from specific regions, but the most important characteristic in the usage of the word real in this context is that there is only a single ingredient:
> True [traditional] balsamic vinegar is made from a reduction of pressed Trebbiano and Lambrusco grapes. The resulting thick syrup, called mosto cotto in Italian [grape must], is subsequently aged for a minimum of 12 years in a battery of several barrels of successively smaller sizes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balsamic_vinegar
The confusion arises where you have products that are not traditional DOP balsamic vinegar.
Other methods of producing products labeled as balsamic vinegar could actually use the above single ingredient musto cotto but with grapes from outside the two designated regions, which is then also aged in wooden barrels for at least 12 years, the same single ingredient recipe aged in batteries of wooden barrels production method used to make so-called traditional balsamic vinegar.
Or, grape must may be mixed with wine vinegar and only be aged for as little as few months in non-wooden barrels - this is the type of product that seems to me to be less "real" as TFA uses the word.
I would personally rather consume either traditional DOP "real" balsamic vinegar, or at least a cheaper alternative which uses the same "single ingredient grape must aged in wooden barrels at least 12 years" recipe as traditional balsamic vinegar, as that is at least the same production process.
Any other vinegar product that uses blends of grape must and wine vinegar may be a fine-tasting product according to some, but to me, it isn't even the same thing, and it isn't really in the spirit of balsamic vinegar. To sell such a blend and labeling it as balsamic vinegar feels like selling blended whisky as single malt whisky - it minces words in order to subvert truth in advertising to the detriment of informed consumers attempting to buy a product that actually is what its label purports it to be.
To me, these are distinctions with a difference.
> A distinction without a difference is a type of logical fallacy where an author or speaker attempts to describe a distinction between two things where no discernible difference exists. It is particularly used when a word or phrase has connotations associated with it that one party to an argument prefers to avoid.
> For example, a person might say "I did not lie; I merely stretched the truth a little bit."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction_without_a_differen...
No "real" is mentioned in the title. And any suggestion the common, non-trad variety is fake is conspicuously absent from the body.
Correct, but “fake” is mentioned in the title, and real is the obverse/inverse of fake. It’s the inverse of the implication that “fake balsamic vinegar exists,” which is a statement that has multiple possible meanings and interpretations, one of which being: any balsamic vinegar which is not traditional balsamic vinegar is “fake.” I do not subscribe to such a view, as I explained my own view further in my original comment.
> And any suggestion the common, non-trad variety is fake is conspicuously absent from the body.
To me, it’s somewhat obvious that the author believes real balsamic vinegar exists and so too must fake exist of the same, by process of deduction and elimination: due to the fact that the author discusses DOP traditional balsamic vinegar, the two grape varieties and growth regions used for grape must, multiple wooden barrels, and so on; these characteristics and methods are contrasted with other balsamic vinegars made using wine vinegar.
To me, it reads that the author is using a wide reading of the team “fake” and a narrow interpretation of “real” by implying that the only real balsamic vinegar is traditional, and anything else is therefore fake.
To quote TFA, italics mine for emphasis:
>> And yet, many have never tasted the real "black gold" of Modena, Italy. It takes 12 years to make the best, aceto balsamico tradizionale (traditional balsamic vinegar), and at least 25 to make the finest, extra Vecchio.
>> Because of traditional balsamic vinegar's painstaking artisanal production process, supplies are limited, and it tends to be rather pricey. And so, as the global demand for it has risen since the early 1980s, a market for imitation balsamic vinegar and cheaper products has exploded. In one instance in March 2019, a dramatic Interpol operation in northern Italy seized 9,000 tonnes of crushed grapes intended to be made into fake balsamic vinegar.
What do you think the author means by ‘“fake” balsamic vinegar?’
Not a reasonable interpretation.
Not traditional means only what it says.
> To me, it’s somewhat obvious that the author believes real balsamic vinegar exists and so too must fake exist of the same
To me its obvious that an editor added a clickbait title that fails to accord with the article content. Period.
You’re not responding to the strongest form of my argument here or to that of TFA in OP, as is encouraged by the HN Guidelines, instead opting for a dismissive, argumentative attitude which isn’t really helping your argument, to be honest.
I mean, you aren’t really making much of an argument, either, just authoritatively stating your opinions as fact with no actual factual basis or even any attempt to articulate your own views.
Anyone can be contrary, but to simply say “I disagree” or “you’re wrong” isn’t consistent with HN Guidelines either, so I’m not sure what you want me to do with your responses here.
It’s fine to have a difference of opinion or disagree regarding matters of fact, but you really owe it to yourself and to the other visitors to post better.
Period.
I'm responding to the only form of your argument here.
Please respond with your views on OP and my views on balsamic vinegar or I guess you can continue with your own form of argument. Honestly I’ll take nearly any kind of response showing some kind of effort, but this ain’t it.
> "Real" balsamic vinegar as the title uses the world real ...
(the title does not use the word real at all) I don't believe it is worth effort to rebut.
One sign that a thread is leaving the rails is when people start arguing about their argument, as you guys did here and here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40280772
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40279988
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
I was attempting to reformulate/rephrase my discussion to avoid low-effort and groundless dismissal of my good faith points. I was all but asking them why they believe the way they do and what they believe, to no avail. I was turning their own words against them in order to hold a mirror up to the absurdity of carrying on like they do when all else failed.
Thanks for the points all the same, including my debate partner, after all this, and also to dang, naturally.
One sign that a thread is leaving the rails is when people start arguing about their argument, as you guys did here and here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40280772
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40279988
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
It can absolutely be described as balsamic vinegar, though. Even the protected (PGI) name 'balsamic vinegar of Modena' is a blend with wine vinegar. Only the PDO term 'traditional balsamic vinegar' forbids this.
It's interesting to know that there's a special kind of balsamic vinegar that I've probably never tasted. But even if that's amazing, I still enjoy the balsamic vinegar I can get in the supermarket, and that's what almost everyone means when they say 'balsamic vinegar'. Insisting that almost everyone using the term is misusing it feels like a weird form of elitism.
If Francesco Aggazzotti, the person who invented the modern recipe for traditional balsamic vinegar, which is the basis for the PDO standard, is elitist regarding the proper way to make his family recipe traditional balsamic vinegar is a claim that could be made. I don’t know how you could say that he’s wrong to do so without tasting it, however. You’re dismissing the whole basis for the DPO standard out of hand.
> But even if that's amazing, I still enjoy the balsamic vinegar I can get in the supermarket, and that's what almost everyone means when they say 'balsamic vinegar'.
I’m not trying to yuck your yum, here. I like what you like, too. I’m arguing for truth in advertising and labeling, so that counterfeit, fake, and adulterated products are eliminated from the market. I think there should be a finer distinction between balsamic vinegars that are made to essentially no standard with added wine vinegar and a single and/or non-wooden barrel, and balsamic vinegars made in other regions and countries in a traditional-compatible production process: Trebbiano and Lambrusco grape musts aged in a battery of multiple wooden barrels for at least 12 years.
The Wikipedia page for traditional balsamic vinegar has a helpful chart that further explains the differences in the production process.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_balsamic_vinegar
I think the DPO TBV and BVM standards have been largely helpful for consumers, and I think that better labeling standards for the types of grapes and aging process in other countries would help. The market has selected for a variety of different price points consumers find palatable.
The point of TFA is that consumers really don't know what they’re missing when it comes to traditional balsamic vinegar. I happen to believe we could go a long way toward replicating the aspects that make traditional balsamic vinegar possess a unique flavor profile in other grape growth regions while retaining the same traditional production methods. The author of TFA seems somewhat skeptical on this due to their effusive praise of traditional balsamic vinegar, but I think if the real thing is so good, it’s at least worth trying. As someone who likes balsamic vinegar myself, I think we both could agree it’s at the very least worth trying traditional balsamic vinegar for ourselves so we know what the brouhaha is all about, and so we know whether or not the distinction has a difference to us, personally.
I think it’s okay to appreciate the finer things in life, and I don’t think that pointing out that finer things exist makes one elitist: it’s just a matter of perspective, preference, and taste. That’s my point, basically.
It's not a counterfeit, fake or adulterated product, though. It's balsamic vinegar, as almost everyone uses the term, and as the law, even in Italy, allows. If you want the extra special & expensive kind, you can look for 'Traditional balsamic vinegar' and the PDO logo that goes with it.
If people are selling regular balsamic vinegar as PDO 'Traditional balsamic vinegar', I'd agree with you. But I don't think that's happening on a significant scale.
Not fake.
"Balsamic vinegar that is not labelled "tradizionale" (traditional) is a blend of wine vinegar and grape must, made from grapes with no particular provenance and aged in wooden or steel barrels for just a few months."
Italy has local standards called, DOP and IGP, if I recall correctly. DOP is the elite stuff. You dont put this on salads. Some varieties are almost gel like. This is the stuff that was sitting in someones attic for ten years. IGP is still good but not as good, and it still has to come from the right region. Costco in the US sells Kirkland balsamic vinegar di Modena, and it is IGP. You can imagine that at Costco scale, it is not sitting in someones attic. This is still excellent, by the way.
Then there is all the rest, that claims to be balsamic vinegar, but was produced to meet high scale, low price points.
The article is simply saying that what you likely buy in the supermarket is unlikely to be DOP and might not even be IGP. Thats not really news.
This is just about protected names. If you make champagne but you don't do it in Champagne then it is "fake champagne", but if you make cheddar but not in Cheddar then it's "real".
> but using the same name as a product with expensive ingredients
Incorrect. The difference in name is omission of the word traditional.
The problem I have with "fake" and "real", particularly with Italian and French goods, is there's often a "Produced from this region by these people" incorporated into the definition of "real".
This is very apparent when you look into things like "Mozzarella". Italy would have you believe that mozzarella could only be produced in Italy as if the region somehow blesses the cheese with magic properties. The reality is the mozzarella is just renat + milk. The only arguable difference is which animal milk is used (for most, it's beef).
If the breakdown process of balsamic vinegar ends up producing a chemically and flavor profile identical to just red wine vinegar and grape must, then who cares if it's "fake"?
Aging in barrels, just like whiskey and a bunch of other alcohols. The geographic designation is only important because it's the only authority that guarantees that the manufacturer is selling what they claim. I couldn't care less about Modena or Reggio Emilia but I want something that's been aged in a barrel, not just mixed with thickener to make it look reduced.
It's not acceptable to dilute Everclear with food coloring and flavoring and call it whiskey, regardless of geographic designation, which is what these "fake" balsamic vinegars are essentially doing.
> If the breakdown process of balsamic vinegar ends up producing a chemically and flavor profile identical to just red wine vinegar and grape must, then who cares if it's "fake"?
The process doesn't produce the same flavors. Not even close. As a lover of real aged balsamic, it just doesn't compare. It's just cheap and good enough for many recipes so I use it as often as the real stuff, but it's a cheap imitation through and through.
Claiming to be something it is not.
I thought it was going to be more like wasabi, where most places just serve green horseradish.
The balsamic vinegar most of us buy is not the super expensive 'Traditional balsamic vinegar', which is what they're describing aging in barrels for 12 years. It may still be 'balsamic vinegar of Modena', which is a protected term but with much less strict requirements, and consequently much cheaper. And 'balsamic vinegar' without qualifiers is not protected at all, as far as I know. It seems like a stretch to call these fakes.
Either protected term can fetch a better price than generic 'balsamic vinegar', so someone will have a go at faking some paperwork to make their product more valuable. The Guardian article describes one such case that was caught (in 2019), but doesn't say much about how prevalent this is.