Talk:Decaffeination

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ehewer.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Green Tea Talk

Decaffeination is the act of removing caffeine from coffee beans.

Then what about decaffeinated green tea? Are any or all of the same processes applicable to tea leaves? --LostLeviathan 22:48, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

As far as I know there is no such thing as decaffeinated green tea. Green tea is naturally very low in caffeine. --Zenyu 06:10, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

Decaffeinated green tea does exist [1]. Other types of tea can also be decaffeinated [2]. --ErikStewart 19:27, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

More Tea Talk

Could we have some more tea-leaf specific information on decaffeination please? --81.178.110.53 11:57, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

According to this page [3] both ethyl acetate and carbon dioxide methods are used to decaffeinate tea. The carbon dioxide method allegedly leaves more of the health-benefit-related compounds in the tea intact. 18.142.6.208 15:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I decaffeinate tea leaves by steeping them in hot water for 20 seconds. I discard this water and then reuse the leaves. I learned this from a friend who worked at a coffee shop and said that it removed up to 99% of the caffeine.Morganfitzp 19:37, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense unless supported by scientific evidence! 87.114.155.130 (talk) 14:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe the "at home" decaffeination method discussed here is popular enough (on commercial tea pages and as passed down through cultural tea brewing processes that it needs to be mention, with the tone that it *may* work and referencing other sources. I added these changes last week. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.243.114.222 (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The Upton Tea Imports Winter 2003 newsletter has an informative article, "Tea and Caffeine," which discusses the caffeine content of tea and different ways of decaffeinating tea (with references). I will the URL as a reference to this article, and create a short summary of the content as a placeholder. Edalton 17:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

"Direct Process" cleanup

I removed the following sentence: In the direct method the caffeine reacts with the solvent to form a chemical that is not soluble in the solvent. It's nonsense from a chemical standpoint-- solvents extract caffeine unchanged, they don't react with it, and if caffeine got converted into something that wasn't soluble, the extraction process wouldn't remove it. Is the intent to discuss at a more basic level "how extraction works", or to extend the discussion to cover what might be done with the caffeine solution after extraction? DMacks 20:47, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Headaches

I get terrible headaches from drinking decaf along with many other people. Any studies on that? --chad 08:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Possibly because you are so accustomed to caffeine, that when not consuming enough, you get withdrawal syndromes. By adapting yourself to decaf, you may find that it will eventually work the other way around njaard 13:29, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

There is a mega-study done by JHU that showed caffiene can cause withdrawl headache up to 9 days after cutting back. Another study I can't remeber said that caffiene affected novice users positively, but people who had it before and quit - then tried it in the study didn't respond as positively. Lastly, in a personal discussion with the herbalist Jim Duke, he mentioned a unique studying showing that decaf has addicting affects of its own, partially attributed to low levels of caffiene but largely attributed to other acidic chemicals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.243.114.222 (talk) 18:04, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Is that really decaf?

It's interesting to note that you often don't get decaffeinated coffee, even when you order it, probably due to human error (or perhaps shared brewing equipment). [4] 18.142.6.208 15:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Reasons?

It might be worth adding a few sentences about why decaffeinated drink are disireable in the first place. --Alamaison 14:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

  desirable? There'd be no wiki, infact no software at all without caffeine!

I agree. The article focuses way too much on how the caffeine is removed, and doesn't mention any reason why this would be done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.197.139.196 (talk) 19:13, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Health concerns

Any health concerns regarding the decaffeination process should be mentioned.

if you know any post them with the correct evidence. Markthemac (talk) 20:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Swiss Water Process

There's something about this section that (you should pardon the expression) smells a little funny. The phrasing sounds like it was lifted from a press release or company website, especially with the repeated references to "fresh, pure water." I don't have time now, but I'm thinking this bears some investigation. Septegram 20:04, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Good nose! Looks like much of it is copyvio from swisswater.com [5][6] DMacks 22:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Concur. I'm frantically trying to leave the office to go on vacation, so I certainly can't work on it now. I may get to it later, but if you want to rework it I won't feel that my toes have been a-step-ped upon.

Septegram 22:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

What's funny is that the people at swisswater.com don't seem to know how to spell "caffeine."

Septegram 22:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the suspicious content from the page...better to have a copvio-free but incomplete page until such time as someone writes it. The text was:

Originally, unroasted coffee beans were immersed in the pure water. The water extracted both the coffee flavor solids and the caffeine from the beans. These beans were then discarded and the caffeine was removed using a carbon filter, leaving just the water, super-saturated with coffee solids. Flavor-charged water, integral to the Swiss Water Process, was created.

Each batch of beans decaffeinated using the Swiss Water Process is first soaked in pure water, partially saturated with coffee flavor solids, in preparation for caffeine extraction. Next, the beans are immersed in the flavor-charged water. Initially the water is caffeine-free, and as a result the caffeine diffuses from the beans into the water. Since the concentration of flavor components in the bean and in the water is equal, only the caffeine is removed, leaving the flavor intact. The water then passes through a carbon filter that traps the caffeine. The now caffeine-free, flavor-charged water flows back to the beans to remove more caffeine. This process continues for approximately 8 hours, until the beans are 99.9% caffeine-free.

Following decaffeination, the trapped caffeine is removed from the carbon filter. The flavor-charged water is then recycled to the start of the process for the next batch of beans.

DMacks 19:28, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Concur. Thanks for jumping on this; I've been meaning to see to rewriting it, but I think you made a good call. Plus, it means I don't have to rewrite it now {grin}

Septegram 19:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I think it would still merit from rewriting. It reads now like 2 different paragraphs that have been melded together. Richardson mcphillips (talk) 18:25, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Leftover caffeine in decaffeinated coffee

I am curious about a contradiction between two sections of this article:

• The first section mentions "the international standard of having removed 97% of the caffeine in the beans or the EU standard of having the beans 99.9% caffeine free by mass". According to the US Standard, it would then take 33 cups of decaffeinated coffee to equal the amount of caffeine in one cup of regular (unless brewing decaf somehow removes a larger percentage of the caffeine in the beans than brewing regular...?)
• In the last section before the references, entitled "Not caffeine free", one reads "Drinking five to ten cups of decaffeinated coffee could deliver as much caffeine as one or two cups of regular coffee".

Does anybody have an explanation for this contradiction? Are coffee producers simply not meeting the standards? Or is one of those tidbits of information incorrect? 207.108.254.113 20:35, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The description of the extraction notes that it takes many cycles of extraction to get to the "decaffeinated" level. So it's possible that any one brewing cycle can only remove a certain amount of caffeine, not necessarily an amount in ratio to the concentration in the beans. No idea for sure for this particular situation though. DMacks 20:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

What do they do with the caffeine they remove?

What do they do with the caffeine they remove? Marnanel 01:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

it depends on the process, in some cases there is nothing left over. but in other cases the left over caffeine residue is (freeze dried) powdered and used in everything which contains caffeine ;) from Soda's to caffeinated candy/mints Markthemac (talk) 07:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

CO2/O2 process

There are several incorrections in this part of the article:

CO2/O2 process With the CO2 process, pre-steamed beans are soaked in a liquid bath of carbon dioxide

It is not liquid, it's supercritical. It's a different matter state and shouldn't be confused.

at 73 to 300 atmospheres.

SI units shoul be used: 7,3 to 30,0 MPa.

After a thorough soaking, the pressure is reduced allowing the CO2 to evaporate, or the pressurized CO2 is run through either water or charcoal filters to remove the caffeine.

This should be rephrased into something like: After a thorough soaking, CO2 is run through either water or charcoal filters to remove the caffeine, and then the pressure is reduced allowing the CO2 to evaporate.

This same process can also be done with oxygen (O2).

Never heard of this.

These liquids work better than water because they are kept in supercritical state near the transition from liquid to gas so that they have the high diffusion of gas and the high density of a liquid.

Again, they are not liquids, they are supercritical fluids, and they don't work better than water, they work better than LIQUID water. Water can also be in supercritical state, which also enhances it's solvent properties, but has the drawback of being highly corrosive. And they have the DIFFUSIVITY of a gas.

16:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)Ricardo Couto

Aflatoxin/ochratoxin

Might anyone be willing to add a section on these mycotoxins, and how they might contaminated decaffeinated beans? I am aware that the fungi which produce these toxins are inhibited by caffeine, but don't know much more. Is the final aflatoxin content more than, say, commercially produced peanuts? I'd be interested to know. Tuckerekcut (talk) 22:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

decaf coffee in India

Where can we ask for decaf coffee in India? I havent seen it in any coffe shops. Any idea about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.123.182.27 (talk) 06:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

starbucks has decaf and IDEE Coffee i've seen in many parts of the world (i dunno about india). Markthemac (talk) 20:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm unfamiliar with India, but I can give you a hint to enable you to locate easier the decaf in the shops. Usually it's packed in blue packaging. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srelu (talk • contribs) 23:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Article contradicts itself

The last part of the article states that 10 cups of decaf coffee contain the same amount of caffeine as 1-2 cups of caffeinated coffee, but earlier in the article the Swiss Water Process is said to remove 99.9% of the caffeine. The later paragraph needs to be rewritten so that the article is not self-contradictory. Cernansky (talk) 04:32, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ Coffee is NEVER entirely decaffeinated. Vague references (note the spelling) are all one should need to know only a few processes will be suited to your medical needs including the Swiss Water process and the CO2 process. Any other coffees and you might as well drink benzene directly because the same death could result. I don't mean to pry but since decaf coffee is only partially decaffeinated leaving sometimes 20% of the original caffeine unremoved, why are you even experimenting with these more properly termed "caffeinated" drinks at all? Looking for exact details is like Waiting for Godot. He never comes.Scarman2 (talk) 07:51, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

 == Looking for exact details, dissatisfied ==

I wanted to find information about the amount of caffeine in the regular coffee, and the amount of caffeine in the decaffeinated coffe. Found only a vague refference of 97% (99%) caffeine removed from the regular coffee.

I have serious heart problems and I'm extremely sensitive to caffeine. Just tried a new brand of decaf and suddenly felt very ill. I'm wondering if the coffee is really decaffeinated. I'm not sure if I can afford to ask for a lab test for that coffee, but first of all, not knowing exact numbers, I don't know what should I ask and what should I expect.

Does anybody know the legal requirements about the maximum level of caffeine in the decaf ? I mean exact numbers in milligrams. (Both in North America and Europe.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.114.233.209 (talk) 23:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

cite needed

"this effectively means that no physical process or chemical reaction will remove only caffeine while leaving the other chemicals at their original concentrations. "

This is a very strong claim (any chemist could easily think of a process to do this imo, it would simply be prohibitively expensive), so it need citing. I reworded it to say it was "challenging" in the article.YobMod 12:33, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Trichloroethylene

Edited this sentence in the 2nd paragraph, "They are then rinsed with Trichloroethylene, a solvent that contains as much of the chemical composition of coffee as possible without also containing the caffeine in a soluble form.

Took out "Trichloroethylene" -- this solvent is no longer used. I've also read that methylene chloride may be carcinogenic (or was thought to be at one time). This article really needs some help because this issue should at least be noted in the article. Allbiblio (talk) 03:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

"...decaffeinated drinks still have around 1-2% caffeine in them" must be wrong.

I cannot believe that decaffeinated drinks contain 1-2% caffeine. Normal coffee contains about 0.05% caffeine by weight, and regular coke has around 0.01%. Can someone who knows the subject please fix this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baziliscus (talk • contribs) 19:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It means 1-2% of the original caffeine content (compared to non-decaffeinated), not the direct amount of caffeine as a fraction of the coffee itself. For example, the subsequent paragraph states "the international standard of having removed 97% of the caffeine". I adjusted the wording of the earlier sentence, hope it's clearer there now. DMacks (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Decaffeinated Tea

There are some weasel words:

    A generally accepted statistic...

Genetic?

There are some scientists who are making decaf coffee plant with gene splicing. Plant biotechnology: Make it a decaf Komitsuki (talk) 12:15, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Which process was first: the steam or Roselius process?

I added an inconsistency template to the article because it is claimed that BOTH processes were the first commercially successful ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter baum (talk • contribs) 22:04, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

See next section. DMacks (talk) 17:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Wrong year???

The steam process can't have been invented in 2012 if it is the method that was originally used by HAG coffee. Maybe it should be 1912 instead of 2012? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter baum (talk • contribs) 21:55, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Yup, that was a bunch of nonsense. Even 1912 wouldn't be "first steam process" (by almost a decade). I deleted it and added cites for the long-existing reasonably-correct information about the Roselius process. DMacks (talk) 17:12, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Mountain Water Process

…which we see on the label in some stores… Is that just another name for the Swiss Water Process? --Jerome Potts (talk) 17:11, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

This is a process that is different from the Swiss Water Process, as instead of using carbon to remove the caffeine from the extract, their process does use a chemical (like the indirect method referenced in the article). The folks at Mountain Water have their own website with background (http://www.descamex.com/) Kjbavaro (talk) 04:57, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Chlorogenic acids extracted from Coffee Bean-Question!

is the same quantity of Chlorogenic acids present in decaffeinated coffee bean (Not Roasted) as in green Coffee bean?#### — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitup (talk • contribs) 12:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Lead

Someone told me Lead is used for decaffeinating coffee. Can't find anything about it with a quick search, because in most hits lead is used as in "can lead to" rather than the element/metal. So is this a local fable? PizzaMan (♨♨) 11:50, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Minor restructuring

The sequencing of the sections has been changed to keep the sections about coffee together, instead of interjecting the section about decaffeinated tea between them. The heading of the long section on "Decaffeination processes" has been changed to make clear that it is only about coffee. The hierarchy of the subheadings within that section has also been tweaked. Piperh (talk) 09:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Green (unroasted) beans

The article had two contradictory phrases: "The process is usually performed on unroasted (green) beans ..." and "... coffee is always decaffeinated in its green, unroasted state." Since all of the processes described in detail in the rest of the article start with unroasted (green) beans, I've taken out the "usually". If anyone knows of an exception, the text can be reworded appropriately. Piperh (talk) 09:29, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Weird statement about tea and tannins

"Preserving tannins is desirable not only because of their flavor, but also because they have been shown to have anticarcinogenic, antimutagenic, antioxidative, and antimicrobrial properties. Specifically, tannins accelerate blood clotting, reduce blood pressure, decrease the serum lipid level, produce liver necrosis, and modulate immunoresponses."

Ahem... Are you REALLY sure that you would like to get liver necrosis? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.50.216.62 (talk) 17:33, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Restructuring to remove duplicated sections

I've restructured the article a little, specifically the section about decaffeination of coffee, to avoid the duplication of the information included in the history section and then the section about the specific processes, and bringing it all under a larger heading, with more subheadings.

It may be worth adding more information about the line "Noted food engineer Torunn Atteraas Garin also developed a process to remove caffeine from coffee." and perhaps it should not be beneath the Swiss water process heading, but I've left it for now.

Some of the information that is included on the Catalan-language version of the article could also be worth translating and integrating into this article. https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descafe%C3%AFnament

Confusing line about "red" tea

I'm unclear what this parenthetical about "red" tea is doing here, or if this is an uncommon term to refer to a type of Camellia sinensis tea:

A generally accepted statistic is that a cup of normal black (or red) tea contains 40–50 mg of caffeine, roughly half the content of a cup of coffee.

Typically "red" tea would mean rooibos, which is an uncaffeinated herbal tea that is not made from the camellia sinensis plant. Or is there a type of "red" tea that refers to a camellia sinensis (i.e. caffeinated) tea? Cultstudmugged (talk) 16:50, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

References