24 Hour Old Coffee

[Calboner]

There isn't cholesterol in coffee, but there is a substance in it that called cafestol that raises cholesterol and it is absorbed by coffee filters, which makes filtered coffee healthier. So, she's right about the effect, but not the cause. It's the reason why I rarely use my coffee press any more and I returned to using my coffee maker. I just didn't say anything about it earlier because I didn't want to sound like the health freak I deny that I am.

How Coffee Raises Cholesterol

Aw, crap on toast! I recently bought a Bialetti moka pot (popularly known as a stove-top espresso maker) and have found the coffee far better than anything that I could get using a filter.

 

[petite]

Aw, crap on toast! I recently bought a Bialetti moka pot (popularly known as a stove-top espresso maker) and have found the coffee far better than anything that I could get using a filter.

We have one of those, too!

I wonder if cafestol could be removed by pouring the finished espresso through a coffee filter before you drink it. The oils would still float and be absorbed by the paper, right? I've wondered this before, back when I first learned about it and I stopped using my press. It makes sense to me.

 

[Calboner]

We have one of those, too!

I wonder if cafestol could be removed by pouring the finished espresso through a coffee filter before you drink it. The oils would still float and be absorbed by the paper, right? I've wondered this before, back when I first learned about it and I stopped using my press. It makes sense to me.

Perhaps, but you will probably end up with something that tastes like filtered coffee, because that's what it is.

By the way, there is a device that uses a filter but brews the coffee in the manner of a French press: the Clever Coffee Dripper. It's just a pour-through coffee maker with a lid and a valve on the bottom that holds the brew in until you place it on top of a mug or pot. I own one, and use it in preference to my old pour-through filter coffee maker.

 

[petite]

Perhaps, but you will probably end up with something that tastes like filtered coffee, because that's what it is.

By the way, there is a device that uses a filter but brews the coffee in the manner of a French press: the Clever Coffee Dripper. It's just a pour-through coffee maker with a lid and a valve on the bottom that holds the brew in until you place it on top of a mug or pot. I own one, and use it in preference to my old pour-through filter coffee maker.

Oh that's neat! I had a tea maker that worked the same way from Adagio teas until I accidentally broke it. I notice that he also has a link to a video about making coffee in a Chemex coffee maker, which I have considered buying before.

I doubt that rinsing the filter would help with the cafestol problem, though, even though it probably helps with the taste of the paper. The dry paper would have a stronger capillary action which would help pull the oils that float to the top, I suspect. Perhaps if he rinsed them and then found a way to dry them before he uses them again? (As if anyone has the time for that!)

 

[Calboner]

I doubt that rinsing the filter would help with the cafestol problem, though, even though it probably helps with the taste of the paper. The dry paper would have a stronger capillary action which would help pull the oils that float to the top, I suspect.

I don't get it. The paper is only going to be dry at first contact with the brew; then you've got wet paper, just as if you had used a pre-wetted filter. The only difference is that you will also have whatever tastes are eliminated by pre-wetting the filter.

PS. I hadn't watched the video when I posted the link. I just watched it, and found it annoying (had to turn the sound off so that I could at least get rid of the music). If I thought it necessary to be so exact about the timing, I would not bother with the device.

 

[petite]

I don't get it. The paper is only going to be dry at first contact with the brew; then you've got wet paper, just as if you had used a pre-wetted filter. The only difference is that you will also have whatever tastes are eliminated by pre-wetting the filter.

PS. I hadn't watched the video when I posted the link. I just watched it, and found it annoying (had to turn the sound off so that I could at least get rid of the music). If I thought it necessary to be so exact about the timing, I would not bother with the device.

I've noticed that the paper does not get wet so quickly when it starts off dry, with the water level rising higher than the capillary action as the coffee maker drips water into the filter cup. However, it may not matter if that has nothing to do with how it reduces cafestol. It could simply be that as the water level sinks, the cafestol sticks to the sides of the filter, leaving it behind, and it could have nothing to do with the capillary action of the paper at all, in which case pre-wetting it would not have any effect. I looked at the paper briefly, and that does not appear to be a possibility that was tested. I just wondered if that could be the case because permanent filters did not reduce cafestol, which implies that either they are not fine enough, do not possess the proper texture, or my initial assumption, that the oils rise to the top and capillary action of the dry paper above the water level pulls those oils into the paper.

 

[t1ctac]

It was brewed 24 hours ago and it's still in the coffee machine. The warmer has been off. Should I microwave it and drink it?

I just turn the pot back on and let the burner heat it up again. Microwave always makes coffee taste weird, even fairly fresh coffee. I just can't do it.

I only do this if I have somewhere to go (work/school, etc), otherwise I make a new pot.

 

[D_Millard Fillermore]

My taste buds must be in a coma cause a microwaved cup tastes about the same as freshly poured. Maybe i need to actually brew some to get a better effect.

By that i mean i usually drink instant.

(Someone should start a best coffee thread to help out instant coffee drinkers like me. )

 

[Calboner]

My taste buds must be in a coma cause a microwaved cup tastes about the same as freshly poured. Maybe i need to actually brew some to get a better effect.

By that i mean i usually drink instant.

(Someone should start a best coffee thread to help out instant coffee drinkers like me. )

I don't know that improving your discrimination in coffee would be "helping" you. If you are content with instant coffee, and don't notice the difference between freshly made and reheated coffee, then you enjoy the great advantage of being easy to please, as far as coffee goes. This advantage is lost forever when you become more discriminating. I think that it only makes sense to pursue the refinement of your taste if either (1) you already prefer some coffee to other coffee but need to learn how to find or how to make the kind that you like, or (2) you seek (for whatever reason) social acceptance among people who are discriminating in coffee. If neither of those circumstances obtains, then I think you are sitting pretty. And I say that as someone who is pretty particular about the coffee that he drinks. I do not long for a return to the days when I was content with instant, but when I read or listen to disquisitions about the exquisite refinements of single-farm coffees and the like, I rejoice that I am not so fastidious as all that--not yet, anyway.

 

[helgaleena]

Some people prefer instant because it has a sweetness fresh brewed does not. You likely don't drink it for that 'nose feel' provided by freshly brewed. I know my ex preferred instant. He also made it about triple strength and didn't put in any dairy products, which would have been turned immediately to cheese...

 

[D_Millard Fillermore]

I don't know that improving your discrimination in coffee would be "helping" you. If you are content with instant coffee, and don't notice the difference between freshly made and reheated coffee, then you enjoy the great advantage of being easy to please, as far as coffee goes. This advantage is lost forever when you become more discriminating. I think that it only makes sense to pursue the refinement of your taste if either (1) you already prefer some coffee to other coffee but need to learn how to find or how to make the kind that you like, or (2) you seek (for whatever reason) social acceptance among people who are discriminating in coffee. If neither of those circumstances obtains, then I think you are sitting pretty. And I say that as someone who is pretty particular about the coffee that he drinks. I do not long for a return to the days when I was content with instant, but when I read or listen to disquisitions about the exquisite refinements of single-farm coffees and the like, I rejoice that I am not so fastidious as all that--not yet, anyway.

Yeah instant only fills the need (for lack of a better word) for coffee, it doesn't exactly fill the flavor completely. Its like ah cool tastes good and then i'm off to wherever i need to be. Had starbucks an yeah haven't been too thrilled with it. I actually like dunkin donuts like a million times more.

As far as social acceptance goes though well there's no way that's ever gonna happen lol. I found out a long time ago that no matter what i do or who i'm around there will always be that one little itty bitty choice that unintentionally sets me aside. Crazy but ah well you play the hand your dealt

Guess i'm just curious to see how much of difference in taste there is ya know.