WEBVTT - Reheated Coffee, More Comfortable Mammograms, and the Chemist Who Created Home Ec

0:00:01.160 --> 0:00:03.840
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to How staff Works. Now. I'm your host, Lauren Vogelbaum,

0:00:03.880 --> 0:00:10.600
<v Speaker 1>a researcher and writer. Here at How Stuff Works. Every week,

0:00:10.640 --> 0:00:12.799
<v Speaker 1>I'm bringing you three stories from our team about the

0:00:12.840 --> 0:00:16.479
<v Speaker 1>weird and wondrous advances we've seen in science, technology, and culture.

0:00:16.840 --> 0:00:19.040
<v Speaker 1>This week, we take a look back at the perhaps

0:00:19.040 --> 0:00:23.040
<v Speaker 1>surprisingly feminist founder of the American Home a class and

0:00:23.720 --> 0:00:28.280
<v Speaker 1>unrelated Why is reheated coffee such a miserable experience? The

0:00:28.320 --> 0:00:32.120
<v Speaker 1>short answer science, but first. Senior editor Katherine Whitburne, along

0:00:32.120 --> 0:00:35.200
<v Speaker 1>with our freelance writer Aliya Hoyt, seek to answer another

0:00:35.280 --> 0:00:37.960
<v Speaker 1>question for us. Will there ever be a more comfortable

0:00:37.960 --> 0:00:46.479
<v Speaker 1>replacement for the vice like manogram? Like making a ponini

0:00:46.560 --> 0:00:50.000
<v Speaker 1>with your boobs? Is hall Anne Marie Crabtree of spring Hill, Tennessee,

0:00:50.000 --> 0:00:53.880
<v Speaker 1>describes getting a mammogram that sounds about right. Although mammograms

0:00:53.880 --> 0:00:57.120
<v Speaker 1>are critically important for screening for breast cancer, the experience

0:00:57.160 --> 0:01:00.360
<v Speaker 1>is far from delightful. It involves placing one breast startard

0:01:00.400 --> 0:01:03.240
<v Speaker 1>time on a machine that clamps it between two plates

0:01:03.240 --> 0:01:05.600
<v Speaker 1>while a load dose X ray of the breast is taken.

0:01:06.240 --> 0:01:10.200
<v Speaker 1>Susan Brown, Director of Education, with Susan G. Coleman explains

0:01:10.200 --> 0:01:12.360
<v Speaker 1>the point of the compression on your boobs like this,

0:01:13.200 --> 0:01:15.760
<v Speaker 1>X rays don't go through tissue very easily, so the

0:01:15.800 --> 0:01:18.000
<v Speaker 1>breast needs to be flattened out in order to spread

0:01:18.040 --> 0:01:20.600
<v Speaker 1>out the tissue. This allows for a better X ray

0:01:20.640 --> 0:01:24.760
<v Speaker 1>image with less radiation. Currently, mammograms are the best breast

0:01:24.800 --> 0:01:27.600
<v Speaker 1>cancer screening tool we have, but there could eventually be

0:01:27.680 --> 0:01:30.399
<v Speaker 1>other ways of getting the same results with no compression.

0:01:30.680 --> 0:01:33.800
<v Speaker 1>There's the breast ultrasound, where a handheld device is moved

0:01:33.800 --> 0:01:36.440
<v Speaker 1>over the breast to take pictures of it. It's used

0:01:36.440 --> 0:01:39.399
<v Speaker 1>to check ab normal results for a mammogram, for instance,

0:01:39.480 --> 0:01:42.320
<v Speaker 1>to see what's inside a breast lump. It's more comfortable

0:01:42.319 --> 0:01:45.039
<v Speaker 1>than a mammogram, but currently not accurate enough to be

0:01:45.080 --> 0:01:47.560
<v Speaker 1>a screening tool on its own. That could change, though,

0:01:47.600 --> 0:01:51.720
<v Speaker 1>as the technology improves. A biologically based test is another option.

0:01:52.080 --> 0:01:54.760
<v Speaker 1>Comen is funding research into creating a blood test that

0:01:54.760 --> 0:01:56.960
<v Speaker 1>could look for the presence of certain proteins in the

0:01:57.000 --> 0:02:00.120
<v Speaker 1>blood to detect cancer. Brown says a salive or or

0:02:00.120 --> 0:02:03.040
<v Speaker 1>your intest could be a possibility one day too. Here's

0:02:03.040 --> 0:02:07.320
<v Speaker 1>another high tech option. The Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility

0:02:07.400 --> 0:02:10.679
<v Speaker 1>and Dylon diagnostics have teamed up to develop breast specific

0:02:10.680 --> 0:02:14.040
<v Speaker 1>gamma imaging. Here, the patient is injected with a chemical

0:02:14.280 --> 0:02:17.160
<v Speaker 1>that would be more likely to be absorbed by cancerous tissue.

0:02:17.560 --> 0:02:20.840
<v Speaker 1>Once absorbed, any cancer cells would light up, allowing the

0:02:21.000 --> 0:02:24.200
<v Speaker 1>scientists to form a two dimensional image. The imaging is

0:02:24.240 --> 0:02:27.440
<v Speaker 1>done by a special molecular imaging camera created by Dylan.

0:02:27.840 --> 0:02:30.360
<v Speaker 1>For this procedure, the breast is confined to make it

0:02:30.400 --> 0:02:32.920
<v Speaker 1>easier to image, but at least it's not pressed down.

0:02:33.240 --> 0:02:35.880
<v Speaker 1>The camera is not yet on the market, partially because

0:02:35.919 --> 0:02:38.880
<v Speaker 1>the injected radiation is a higher dose than patients currently

0:02:38.880 --> 0:02:42.320
<v Speaker 1>are exposed to during a regular mammogram. Researchers are working

0:02:42.320 --> 0:02:45.440
<v Speaker 1>to lower this dosage level, but until we arrive at

0:02:45.480 --> 0:02:47.760
<v Speaker 1>the holy grail of a comfing mammogram, here are some

0:02:47.800 --> 0:02:51.040
<v Speaker 1>ways you can lessen your discomfort. Number one, if your

0:02:51.080 --> 0:02:55.200
<v Speaker 1>pre menopausal, schedule your mamograms immediately after your period when

0:02:55.200 --> 0:02:58.760
<v Speaker 1>your breasts are less tender. Number two, use over the

0:02:58.800 --> 0:03:02.440
<v Speaker 1>counter pay medication or even breathing techniques like those used

0:03:02.480 --> 0:03:06.600
<v Speaker 1>during childbirth to help with anxiety. And number three, talk

0:03:06.680 --> 0:03:09.040
<v Speaker 1>to the technician doing the mammogram if you're feeling a

0:03:09.040 --> 0:03:12.240
<v Speaker 1>lot of discomfort during the procedure. Keep in mind, though,

0:03:12.280 --> 0:03:14.280
<v Speaker 1>that any pressure on your breast is worth it in

0:03:14.320 --> 0:03:16.840
<v Speaker 1>the short and long term when you compare that to

0:03:16.880 --> 0:03:24.960
<v Speaker 1>the risk of actually getting breast cants. Next step stuff

0:03:25.000 --> 0:03:27.800
<v Speaker 1>uditor Eves, Jeff Cote, and our freelance writer Kate Kershner

0:03:27.880 --> 0:03:30.480
<v Speaker 1>explored the fascinating life in Times of Allen Richards, the

0:03:30.600 --> 0:03:33.120
<v Speaker 1>nineteenth century woman who helped make the study of living

0:03:33.120 --> 0:03:44.520
<v Speaker 1>conditions into a science. Women in science have experienced what

0:03:44.640 --> 0:03:47.800
<v Speaker 1>some research is called the Matilda effect, the idea that

0:03:47.840 --> 0:03:51.400
<v Speaker 1>women's work is systematically under recognized or simply ignored, and

0:03:51.440 --> 0:03:55.000
<v Speaker 1>men are given credit exclusively. The effect is evident, for example,

0:03:55.320 --> 0:03:59.600
<v Speaker 1>when men are disproportionately given scientific awards and prizes considering

0:03:59.640 --> 0:04:02.920
<v Speaker 1>the number of women nominated, but researchers have become keener

0:04:02.960 --> 0:04:05.920
<v Speaker 1>to learn how women's work in science has been overlooked

0:04:06.040 --> 0:04:09.200
<v Speaker 1>or prone to bias. When one scientific journal switched this

0:04:09.240 --> 0:04:12.200
<v Speaker 1>review process to leave out the names of authors, women's

0:04:12.240 --> 0:04:16.160
<v Speaker 1>acceptance rates rose seven point nine percent, and it's thirteen

0:04:16.200 --> 0:04:19.280
<v Speaker 1>Studies showed that abstracts of scientific papers were seeing as

0:04:19.320 --> 0:04:21.880
<v Speaker 1>higher quality if the author was male and wrote about

0:04:21.880 --> 0:04:25.880
<v Speaker 1>a stereotypically male subject like physics. Or math, but female

0:04:25.920 --> 0:04:28.680
<v Speaker 1>scientists have also been pushed aside for the very fields

0:04:28.680 --> 0:04:31.159
<v Speaker 1>in which they study. Let's delve into the story of

0:04:31.200 --> 0:04:34.960
<v Speaker 1>Ellen's Swallow Richards, who was instrumental to modern science, yet

0:04:35.000 --> 0:04:38.760
<v Speaker 1>her legacy and even entire field was dismissed and appropriated

0:04:38.760 --> 0:04:43.479
<v Speaker 1>into real scientific studies, and her story typifies the Matilda effect.

0:04:43.800 --> 0:04:46.200
<v Speaker 1>She was the first woman in America accepted into a

0:04:46.200 --> 0:04:50.080
<v Speaker 1>scientific school, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which was then

0:04:50.200 --> 0:04:53.000
<v Speaker 1>male only. She was also one of the first female

0:04:53.080 --> 0:04:56.200
<v Speaker 1>chemists in the United States, a creator of state water

0:04:56.279 --> 0:04:59.200
<v Speaker 1>quality standards, and founder of the modern study of domestic

0:04:59.240 --> 0:05:03.960
<v Speaker 1>science or home economics. Ellen Richards's career path, by all accounts,

0:05:04.200 --> 0:05:07.520
<v Speaker 1>hasn't received much recognition and perhaps has been pushed aside

0:05:07.560 --> 0:05:10.440
<v Speaker 1>because it wasn't seen as scientifically rigorous as so called

0:05:10.560 --> 0:05:13.800
<v Speaker 1>mail field. After graduating from Vassar College with a degree

0:05:13.839 --> 0:05:16.839
<v Speaker 1>in chemistry in eighteen seventy, and facing many rejections for

0:05:16.920 --> 0:05:20.040
<v Speaker 1>jobs in the field, she decided to pursue more education.

0:05:20.640 --> 0:05:23.040
<v Speaker 1>MTT accepted her, but only as a test case to

0:05:23.080 --> 0:05:26.120
<v Speaker 1>see if women could handle the rigor of a science program.

0:05:26.160 --> 0:05:29.039
<v Speaker 1>She passed the test after receiving a Bachelor of Science

0:05:29.040 --> 0:05:31.920
<v Speaker 1>and chemistry. In eighteen seventy three, she became a leader

0:05:31.920 --> 0:05:35.440
<v Speaker 1>in pollution studies and developed the study she dubbed ocology,

0:05:35.480 --> 0:05:39.120
<v Speaker 1>which became the basis for ecology. Richard's even taught sanitary

0:05:39.200 --> 0:05:42.760
<v Speaker 1>chemistry at her alma mater for nearly thirty years. Richard's

0:05:42.800 --> 0:05:46.040
<v Speaker 1>development of authenics, a study she defined as the betterment

0:05:46.080 --> 0:05:49.120
<v Speaker 1>of living conditions through conscious endeavor for the purpose of

0:05:49.160 --> 0:05:53.360
<v Speaker 1>securing efficient human beings, demonstrates her commitment to improving public

0:05:53.400 --> 0:05:57.120
<v Speaker 1>health and scientific education. Her early work as an ecologist

0:05:57.279 --> 0:05:59.840
<v Speaker 1>studying air and water pollution led to her interests and

0:05:59.839 --> 0:06:02.919
<v Speaker 1>in damning the home environment. She founded the modern movement

0:06:02.920 --> 0:06:06.120
<v Speaker 1>of home economics to incorporate science into the tests of

0:06:06.160 --> 0:06:09.039
<v Speaker 1>everyday life as a way of improving living conditions on

0:06:09.040 --> 0:06:12.239
<v Speaker 1>a household level. Maybe your idea of homemach is simply

0:06:12.279 --> 0:06:14.800
<v Speaker 1>sewing a button unclothed and learning to cook an omelet,

0:06:15.240 --> 0:06:18.520
<v Speaker 1>And yes, the science does include these household tests. But

0:06:18.680 --> 0:06:22.880
<v Speaker 1>what Ellen Richards recognized was that cooking, sanitary conditions, household organization,

0:06:22.960 --> 0:06:26.039
<v Speaker 1>and raising a healthy family were absolutely based in science.

0:06:26.600 --> 0:06:30.120
<v Speaker 1>Not that women universally embraced their mindset, though some early

0:06:30.120 --> 0:06:33.560
<v Speaker 1>women's liberation activists were not fans, believing that homemach just

0:06:33.720 --> 0:06:37.440
<v Speaker 1>enslave women to household tests and didn't promote equality. But

0:06:37.560 --> 0:06:41.240
<v Speaker 1>Ellen richards work added value and scientific backing to work

0:06:41.240 --> 0:06:44.239
<v Speaker 1>that women were already doing, like cleaning and raising children.

0:06:44.600 --> 0:06:47.880
<v Speaker 1>She highlighted public health issues like hygiene in luncheon schools,

0:06:48.080 --> 0:06:52.080
<v Speaker 1>and household issues issues like arsenic content and wallpaper and fabric.

0:06:52.480 --> 0:06:55.440
<v Speaker 1>Much of Richard's progressiveness resided in her uplifting a typically

0:06:55.440 --> 0:06:58.760
<v Speaker 1>female sphere instead of urging women into typically male spheres

0:06:58.800 --> 0:07:03.360
<v Speaker 1>for recognition radical stuff really. Richards even brought her background

0:07:03.360 --> 0:07:06.160
<v Speaker 1>as a chemist into the kitchen, making chemistry part of

0:07:06.200 --> 0:07:10.320
<v Speaker 1>the domestic activities of cooking and eating. She promoted nutrition

0:07:10.440 --> 0:07:13.280
<v Speaker 1>education and the science behind foods at a time when

0:07:13.280 --> 0:07:16.640
<v Speaker 1>diets were often poor and people rarely discussed health. Today,

0:07:16.760 --> 0:07:19.320
<v Speaker 1>the science of diet and nutrition is now studied robustly.

0:07:19.960 --> 0:07:22.239
<v Speaker 1>But Richards also worked hard to give women and girls

0:07:22.280 --> 0:07:26.560
<v Speaker 1>access to traditionally male spaces. In eighteen seventy six, she

0:07:26.600 --> 0:07:29.080
<v Speaker 1>founded the Women's Laboratory at m I T, a place

0:07:29.120 --> 0:07:31.680
<v Speaker 1>for women to study the sciences, which gave women more

0:07:31.760 --> 0:07:35.720
<v Speaker 1>recognition in higher education. We still shuffle the discipline of

0:07:35.720 --> 0:07:39.920
<v Speaker 1>home economics now called Family and consumer sciences into a

0:07:39.960 --> 0:07:44.040
<v Speaker 1>marginalized field or considered a soft science, although the work

0:07:44.120 --> 0:07:47.680
<v Speaker 1>is vital to many professions. Generally it includes the same

0:07:47.680 --> 0:07:51.840
<v Speaker 1>studies as one years ago, like nutrition and wellness, housing

0:07:51.880 --> 0:07:55.800
<v Speaker 1>practices and research, and family and child development. Yet it

0:07:55.840 --> 0:07:58.480
<v Speaker 1>could be argued that society has largely forgotten the woman

0:07:58.520 --> 0:08:01.520
<v Speaker 1>who pioneered the home economic movement in make science, education

0:08:01.760 --> 0:08:05.040
<v Speaker 1>and professions more accessible for women. Many feels we might

0:08:05.040 --> 0:08:09.440
<v Speaker 1>consider more rigorous or important, like sanitation and environmental studies,

0:08:09.440 --> 0:08:12.920
<v Speaker 1>are closely taught to Richard's research, just like the Matilda

0:08:13.000 --> 0:08:22.520
<v Speaker 1>pet might have predicted. Finally, this week staff out of

0:08:22.560 --> 0:08:26.000
<v Speaker 1>our Christopher Hasiotis and our freelancer Desceline Shields calling an

0:08:26.000 --> 0:08:29.120
<v Speaker 1>expert to explain the chemistry of coffee? Why is it

0:08:29.240 --> 0:08:32.280
<v Speaker 1>so delicious hot or cold? And so much the opposite

0:08:32.280 --> 0:08:38.880
<v Speaker 1>once it's been reheated. Hot coffee is supposed to be hot.

0:08:39.400 --> 0:08:41.960
<v Speaker 1>Cold coffee is supposed to be cold. That's the deal,

0:08:42.200 --> 0:08:45.520
<v Speaker 1>ask anybody. The problem, then, with hot coffee is that

0:08:45.600 --> 0:08:47.800
<v Speaker 1>you can't drink the whole cup while it's at optimal

0:08:47.800 --> 0:08:51.400
<v Speaker 1>temperature unless you're willing to really guzzle it. So when

0:08:51.400 --> 0:08:54.600
<v Speaker 1>it gets cold, you've got a few choices. Just drink

0:08:54.600 --> 0:08:57.760
<v Speaker 1>it cold, reheat it, or pour the cup down the

0:08:57.800 --> 0:09:00.640
<v Speaker 1>drain and start over with a new pot. All three

0:09:00.640 --> 0:09:04.120
<v Speaker 1>of these approaches are either perfectly fine or completely barbaric,

0:09:04.240 --> 0:09:08.000
<v Speaker 1>depending on whom you ask to. Some hot coffee that's

0:09:08.000 --> 0:09:12.000
<v Speaker 1>gone cold is revolting to others. The reheating process renders

0:09:12.000 --> 0:09:15.120
<v Speaker 1>it completely undrinkable. But tell that to the person who

0:09:15.120 --> 0:09:17.520
<v Speaker 1>pops a cup of nine hour old java into the

0:09:17.520 --> 0:09:20.199
<v Speaker 1>microwave at four p m each afternoon just to power

0:09:20.280 --> 0:09:24.760
<v Speaker 1>through until bedtime. Pooh pooing your scornful commentary. Research into

0:09:24.760 --> 0:09:28.040
<v Speaker 1>the flavors involved in reheating this humble drink is pretty

0:09:28.120 --> 0:09:30.960
<v Speaker 1>much non existent. But everything most likely has to do

0:09:31.000 --> 0:09:34.040
<v Speaker 1>with our sense of smell. Humans aren't great at separating

0:09:34.040 --> 0:09:38.080
<v Speaker 1>our gustatory and old factory responses our taste and smell responses,

0:09:38.559 --> 0:09:40.920
<v Speaker 1>and coffee has aromas and flavors that hit all five

0:09:40.960 --> 0:09:45.680
<v Speaker 1>of the tastes that can be picked up by your tongue. Sweet, salty, bitter, sour,

0:09:46.040 --> 0:09:50.000
<v Speaker 1>and savory. Yes, fine, you can call it ummmy. So

0:09:50.160 --> 0:09:52.040
<v Speaker 1>your personal sense of smell has a lot to do

0:09:52.080 --> 0:09:55.120
<v Speaker 1>with how coffee tastes to you, whatever the temperature or

0:09:55.120 --> 0:09:59.000
<v Speaker 1>however that temperature was achieved. But listen, the chemical makeup

0:09:59.000 --> 0:10:02.240
<v Speaker 1>of coffee is a stou doingly complex. Even though its

0:10:02.240 --> 0:10:05.640
<v Speaker 1>reputation relies heavily on the presence of caffeine, Coffee gets

0:10:05.640 --> 0:10:10.200
<v Speaker 1>its flavor from around one thousand different chemical compounds. Also,

0:10:10.480 --> 0:10:12.600
<v Speaker 1>the final flavor of the coffee you enjoyed this morning

0:10:12.640 --> 0:10:15.520
<v Speaker 1>was the product of a dizzying array of variables, including

0:10:15.559 --> 0:10:19.120
<v Speaker 1>temperatures and weather conditions, the coffee beans experienced when the

0:10:19.160 --> 0:10:21.840
<v Speaker 1>beans were harvested, how they were dried, how they were

0:10:21.920 --> 0:10:24.880
<v Speaker 1>stored and roasted, and how they were ground and brewed.

0:10:25.520 --> 0:10:29.040
<v Speaker 1>So while the compound three methyl butinol might make your

0:10:29.080 --> 0:10:31.800
<v Speaker 1>cup of joe taste a little caramel like, and ethyl

0:10:31.840 --> 0:10:34.440
<v Speaker 1>nonanoate may give it some fruit of your notes, each

0:10:34.440 --> 0:10:37.480
<v Speaker 1>step of the process either brings out or suppresses any

0:10:37.559 --> 0:10:41.559
<v Speaker 1>one of these many aromatic compounds differently. We spoke with

0:10:41.640 --> 0:10:44.800
<v Speaker 1>Christopher Hendon, a postdoctoral fellow in a chemistry department at

0:10:44.920 --> 0:10:47.360
<v Speaker 1>m I T and author of Water for Coffee, a

0:10:47.400 --> 0:10:50.840
<v Speaker 1>book about how coffee interacts with water. He told us

0:10:51.520 --> 0:10:55.440
<v Speaker 1>reheating coffee in principle can be an absolutely fine approach

0:10:55.440 --> 0:10:58.800
<v Speaker 1>to achieving a tasty beverage. In practice, this is not

0:10:58.960 --> 0:11:01.760
<v Speaker 1>usually observed because people reheated in ways that promote the

0:11:01.800 --> 0:11:06.199
<v Speaker 1>loss of delicious volatile compounds, and so the process of heating, cooling,

0:11:06.440 --> 0:11:10.160
<v Speaker 1>and heating again drives smelly and tasty compounds right out

0:11:10.160 --> 0:11:14.160
<v Speaker 1>of the cup. According to Hendon, coffee experts seem to

0:11:14.160 --> 0:11:16.320
<v Speaker 1>prefer a drink that has been brewed within the past

0:11:16.480 --> 0:11:19.440
<v Speaker 1>five to twenty minutes, and it turns out that most

0:11:19.440 --> 0:11:21.760
<v Speaker 1>people prefer the coffee as it cools to around a

0:11:21.800 --> 0:11:25.079
<v Speaker 1>hundred and fifty degrees fahrenheit or sixty five degrees celsius.

0:11:25.640 --> 0:11:27.600
<v Speaker 1>This has to do with the way our taste pathways

0:11:27.640 --> 0:11:30.400
<v Speaker 1>respond to temperature in our food. When something we put

0:11:30.400 --> 0:11:32.760
<v Speaker 1>in our mouth is too hot or too cold, we

0:11:32.800 --> 0:11:35.200
<v Speaker 1>can't detect all the compounds that contribute to its flavor,

0:11:35.840 --> 0:11:38.720
<v Speaker 1>and since coffee has loads of these compounds, the temperature

0:11:38.760 --> 0:11:41.920
<v Speaker 1>of the drink really can affect the taste. Bringing the

0:11:41.920 --> 0:11:44.959
<v Speaker 1>coffee brings out these aromatic compounds, but whether the cooling

0:11:44.960 --> 0:11:49.440
<v Speaker 1>process changes the actual chemistry seems to be controversial. Hendon

0:11:49.520 --> 0:11:52.679
<v Speaker 1>says it's absolutely benign, while others claim it makes the

0:11:52.760 --> 0:11:55.320
<v Speaker 1>drink more acidic as the coffee that's exposed to the

0:11:55.360 --> 0:11:59.040
<v Speaker 1>air oxidizes, So reheating coffee to the same temperature it

0:11:59.200 --> 0:12:02.040
<v Speaker 1>was when it was first brood might help you reach

0:12:02.080 --> 0:12:05.000
<v Speaker 1>that sweet spot temperature wise, but it also has the

0:12:05.000 --> 0:12:08.640
<v Speaker 1>potential to cause additional chemical reactions that further alter the flavor.

0:12:09.200 --> 0:12:11.280
<v Speaker 1>And if you're reheating coffee that already has milk or

0:12:11.320 --> 0:12:15.280
<v Speaker 1>sugar in it, that's even more in the way of flavors, proteins, chemicals,

0:12:15.280 --> 0:12:18.800
<v Speaker 1>and compounds to contend with. So although many coffee condostours

0:12:18.800 --> 0:12:20.800
<v Speaker 1>will tell you it's a lost cause once your coffee

0:12:20.800 --> 0:12:23.800
<v Speaker 1>goes cold, others say it's just important to reheat your

0:12:23.800 --> 0:12:26.079
<v Speaker 1>coffee as slowly as you can in order to prevent

0:12:26.080 --> 0:12:29.760
<v Speaker 1>additional chemical reactions. If you're worried the ghosts of past

0:12:29.840 --> 0:12:32.240
<v Speaker 1>foods heated in your microwave or coming back to hot

0:12:32.240 --> 0:12:36.240
<v Speaker 1>your reheated coffee, Hendon says that's actually pretty unlikely, telling

0:12:36.320 --> 0:12:39.920
<v Speaker 1>us that the concentration of volatile chemicals in say, splattered

0:12:39.960 --> 0:12:42.679
<v Speaker 1>pasta sauce, is pretty low, so he'd be surprised if

0:12:42.679 --> 0:12:45.079
<v Speaker 1>we could attribute the bad taste of microwave coffee to

0:12:45.240 --> 0:12:49.080
<v Speaker 1>only that the websites of large coffee shop chains even

0:12:49.120 --> 0:12:53.120
<v Speaker 1>speak out against microwaving their coffee. But also there's advice

0:12:53.160 --> 0:12:55.880
<v Speaker 1>out there for nuking coffee if you must, so pass

0:12:55.960 --> 0:13:03.520
<v Speaker 1>that info along before your next coffee argument pizza. That's

0:13:03.520 --> 0:13:05.400
<v Speaker 1>our show for this week. Thank you so much for

0:13:05.480 --> 0:13:08.320
<v Speaker 1>tuning in. Further thanks to our audio tex Tristan McNeil,

0:13:08.400 --> 0:13:12.080
<v Speaker 1>our producer Dylan Fagan, and our editorial liaison Alison Ludermilk.

0:13:12.320 --> 0:13:14.720
<v Speaker 1>Subscribe to now Now for more of the latest science

0:13:14.720 --> 0:13:16.400
<v Speaker 1>news and send us links to anything you'd like to

0:13:16.400 --> 0:13:19.680
<v Speaker 1>hear us cover, plus what's your favorite flavor? Mine is bitter.

0:13:20.040 --> 0:13:21.840
<v Speaker 1>You can send us an email at now podcast at

0:13:21.880 --> 0:13:24.560
<v Speaker 1>how stuff works dot com, and of course, for lots

0:13:24.600 --> 0:13:26.680
<v Speaker 1>more stories like these, head on over to our home

0:13:26.720 --> 0:13:40.920
<v Speaker 1>planet now dot how stuff works dot com