Droopy wrote:

> gene wrote:
>
>>Don't think this is defeating the purpose, my friend. Use the iodophor
>>to knock out the bad bugs, then use K-meta to control regrowth without
>>the risk of TCA. Iodophor is a more effective sanitizer than K-meta.
>>Methinks there is method to his madness.
>>
>>Gene
>
>
>
> So you take a piece of equipment, rinse it out with water and you have
> (some arbitraty number) maybe 10^5 organisms in the water you have.
> You use iodophore and knock it down to 10^2. The you take the water
> you originally had (10^5) and treat it with sulfite (still 10^5,
> although they can no longer reproduce).
>
> Instead, rinse it out with sulfite in the first place and have the same
> number of organisms that you started with. Since iodophore is more
> effective of a sanitizer than sulfite solutions, following a strong
> sanitizer witha weak one makes the whole process only as strong as the
> last sanitizer.
>
> Of course,those numbers are not so significant if you are going to use
> fresh juice or fruit that is loaded with microorganisms (a quick
> google search yielded values of about 1X10^4 cfu/g (colony forming
> units per gram, a 23 liter batch would then have 23x10^7 or 230,000,000
> microbes in it) on fresh fruit, but more extensive searching might find
> better numbers).
>
> So you could completely sterilize your equipment and everything, but
> the limiting factor is the fruit. That was the original point I was
> trying to make.
>
ahhhhh... I follow your thought now... You are right on for during
crush. My brain presently stuck in racking time now.
The 'whole process only as strong as the last sanitizer' seems to assume
same bad bugs whole time. Are you sure that is correct assumption?

Gene