On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:56:21 -0700
"D.Currie" > wrote:

>
> I'll second that notion. Just because it's not toxic doesn't mean I want
> to eat it in quantity. Or actually, at all. That's the type of thing I'd
> pick off and set aside.


If you have any amalgam fillings, you have far more to fear from having
them in your mouth than gold, especially the amount of gold that ends up on
a cake.

Which is to say, basically nothing to fear. the gold is non-reactive -
your amalgam fillings will react with aluminum.

"Eric Jorgensen" > wrote in message
news:20050128224222.0a28d175@wafer...
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:56:21 -0700
> "D.Currie" > wrote:
>
> >
> > I'll second that notion. Just because it's not toxic doesn't mean I want
> > to eat it in quantity. Or actually, at all. That's the type of thing
I'd
> > pick off and set aside.
>
>
> If you have any amalgam fillings, you have far more to fear from having
> them in your mouth than gold, especially the amount of gold that ends up
on
> a cake.
>
> Which is to say, basically nothing to fear. the gold is non-reactive -
> your amalgam fillings will react with aluminum.
>

I was thinking more from a design standpoint. In my opinion, a fully gilded
cake would be tacky unless you were Liberace.

"Eric Jorgensen" > wrote in message
news:20050128224222.0a28d175@wafer...
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:56:21 -0700
> "D.Currie" > wrote:
>
>>
>> I'll second that notion. Just because it's not toxic doesn't mean I want
>> to eat it in quantity. Or actually, at all. That's the type of thing I'd
>> pick off and set aside.
>
>
> If you have any amalgam fillings, you have far more to fear from having
> them in your mouth than gold, especially the amount of gold that ends up
> on
> a cake.
>
> Which is to say, basically nothing to fear. the gold is non-reactive -
> your amalgam fillings will react with aluminum.
>

Like I said, just because it's not toxic doesn't mean I want to eat it. I
know gold won't hurt me, but that doesn't mean I want it in my food. If
someone want to give me gold, they can buy jewelry or something.

I think everyone's got a list of things that they don't care to eat, ranging
from "wouldn't choose it at a buffet" all the way to "would likely spit it
out, even in polite company."

For me, that list includes coconut, raisins, and metal, among other things.
It's like those edible paper labels they put on apples and other fruit. I
peel them off. Some people eat them. I know they won't hurt me, but I don't
like eating them, and at my age, I'm allowed to NOT eat something if I don't
want to.

Eric Jorgensen wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:56:21 -0700
> "D.Currie" > wrote:
>
>
>>I'll second that notion. Just because it's not toxic doesn't mean I want
>>to eat it in quantity. Or actually, at all. That's the type of thing I'd
>>pick off and set aside.
>
>
>
> If you have any amalgam fillings, you have far more to fear from having
> them in your mouth than gold, especially the amount of gold that ends up on
> a cake.
>
> Which is to say, basically nothing to fear. the gold is non-reactive -
> your amalgam fillings will react with aluminum.
>

Edible gold may not actually be chemically gold, just like most gold
paint isn't chemically gold. Whether it's reactive or digestible is not
easy to tell without knowing more about what it is.

Indian sweets sometimes use gold leaf and silver leaf, which I thought
were actual metal, though maybe they've been replaced by something
cheaper now. Still, an Indian grocery might be a good place to try if
only smaller pieces are wanted.

Eric Jorgensen wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:56:21 -0700
> "D.Currie" > wrote:
>
>
>>I'll second that notion. Just because it's not toxic doesn't mean I want
>>to eat it in quantity. Or actually, at all. That's the type of thing I'd
>>pick off and set aside.
>
>
>
> If you have any amalgam fillings, you have far more to fear from having
> them in your mouth than gold, especially the amount of gold that ends up on
> a cake.
>
> Which is to say, basically nothing to fear. the gold is non-reactive -
> your amalgam fillings will react with aluminum.

Edible gold may not actually be chemically gold, just like gold paint
usually isn't chemically gold. Whether it's reactive or digestible is
not easy to tell without knowing more about what it is.

I see that the gold leaf mentioned in the OP is 23 carat, with the
remaining carat being silver. They make a point of not using copper.

Indian sweets sometimes use gold leaf and silver leaf, which I thought
were actual metal, though maybe they've been replaced by something
cheaper now. So an Indian grocery might be a good place to try for
smaller pieces.