Jump to content

Talk:Gelatin/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

tons vs. metric tons

In the section regarding worldwide production per year, it says 375,000 tons (827,000 pounds)'. The conversion works if the ton is a metric ton. A short ton (or in America, just a ton) is exactly 2000 pounds.

hooves

Don't let the information on some manufacturer's websites fool you - their reasoning is quite circular, essentially saying that hooves are keratin, so what isn't keratin can't be hoof.

There's much more in hooves than just the keratinized sheath: look at http://www.abdn.ac.uk/biologicalsci/research/physiology.shtml and http://www.naturalhorsetrim.com/Section_14_full.htm for longitudinal cross sections of a cow and horse hoof, respectively. Most of it appears to be bone, cartilage, or other connective tissue, actually, which contain plenty of collagen. Enough to obtain gelatin from, as evidenced by the existance of "calf's foot jelly".

I think the real reason we talk about "hooves" and not about "chopped-off feet as a whole" is, it obviously sounds better, and those parts are easier made into bone meal and fertilizer than into gelatin anyway. Femto 13:13, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It is important to distinguish the 'foot' from the 'hoof'. The difference is roughly the same as 'fingertip' and 'fingernail'. By the way, hooves and horns do not go into bone meal. (I work with the rendering industry). ike9898 16:10, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
Okay, I meant what else they're made into then. The dictionary isn't a big help in making a distinction here, as it just lists both definitions of "hoof" as valid. No matter what we wrote, it can be considered wrong in one way or the other. The simplest thing seems to both leave hooves out of the listing of possible sources of collagen, and not to mention them beyond their no-use for commercial gelatin. Femto 19:15, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Re: the recent >> horns and hooves do not yield gelatin

Hoof and hooves are used synonymously, but only "hoof" (collective plural) is made exclusively of keratin. "The hoof" is ambiguous, and "hooves" are the complex structure of the foot consisting of the outer keratinized sheath, as well as cartilage and bone. At least by my definition, which I seem to share with the above-linked cross-section image titled "bovine hoof", and a professor of meat science stating that gelatin can be extracted from bones and hooves. http://beef.unl.edu/FAQ/200412130.shtml So a statement that hooves do not yield gelatin is misleading at least, and it either must be clarified in full or should not be mentioned at all. Femto 18:38, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

amino acid composition

I just added a text and reference for the approximate amino acid composition of gelatin under medical uses section. Someone wrote that a gelatine only diet had made several people dead in the 1970's. Is there are reference to this such as news paper article or such? Bedrupsbaneman 18:51, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm not the one who initially added it, but I'm convinced of its authenticity and can provide these references. Quote http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/NationalList/TAPReviews/Gelatin.pdf [referring to this article Modified fast: A sometime solution to a weighty problem. FDA Consumer (April): 10-17.]
During the 1970s, the low protein quality of collagen-based 'Liquid Protein' diet products led to Federal regulatory action (Vanderveen and Mitchell, 1981). The Food and Drug Administration investigated the deaths of 17 relatively young people, 13 with diets whose sole caloric intake came from a liquid collagen or gelatin solution. The FDA subsequently developed regulations that modified the label requirements of such diet products (US FDA, 1990).
Femto 21:02, 11 August 2005 (UTC)


art

Should the art group gelatin also be mentioned on this page? (http://www.gelitin.net)

It's two different topics, so provided it meets the notability criterion, it should get a separate Gelatin (art group) article, with only a disambiguation note here. Femto 10:51, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Contradictions in gelatin articles

The gelatin article says that "contrary to popular belief, hooves and horns are not commonly used." And then in the gelatin dessert article, it says "hooves and horns are commonly used." (I think those are the exact quotes.) I see there's some debate about this, but what's up with the total contradiction?

It appears there was simply a word missing in this edit of gelatin dessert. (edited) The debate so far wasn't about whether or not (parts of) horns and hooves get used in commercial-scale gelatin manufacturing (that seems rather uneconomic in any case), but if it's possible at all. Some gelatin manufacturer's websites, probably in an attempt to dispel the persistent rumor, claim that horns and hooves are not used "because they're made of keratin", which is an oversimplification. Femto 20:11, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Obvious information

It says in the introduction: "Gelatin melts when heated and solidifies when cooled again."

That should be obvious. This basic chemical phenomenan occurs with every substance in the universe... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.251.240.113 (talk • contribs) .

...such as wood? Or other protein substances like egg white for example which denature and decompose? Femto 20:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Student project underway here (Dec 4-15, 2006)

This article on Gelatin, particularly the section on gelatin manufacture, is being edited by User:GBoran as part of a WP:SUP student project on Downstream_processing at Cornell University. This article is slated for scientific peer review by the user's classmates and instructor over the next two weeks and will be finalized (for the purposes of the class) by 15 Dec 2006. If you would like to help, please hold off from the normal "bold editing" process until after December 15, and instead leave comments and suggestions for GBoran here on the article discussion page. Your thoughtful review will be very much appreciated! And thanks, Femto for your kind words on the history page. Gokhan, take a look, those were meant for you.

Jean Hunter, instructor, BEE 464 susato 17:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Reviews

Review by Vivek

Hey Gokhan, I think your article has a lot of good information. It just seems a bit wordy. If there is any possible way to add some visuals that would also help. Some tables will also help if you need them. For the most part, everything you said made sense to me and it was a good article. Just be careful with your format and add some visuals, it will definitely improve the readability of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vivek216 (talk • contribs) 17:13, December 5, 2006

Review by Jon

I thought this article was very good. I've been using Word to edit articles for gramar because I think it's easier to insert comments that way, so I'll email that to you. As far as content, I thought it was very good and had a lot of information in it. I thought it was well organized and easy to read. Good Job!

Jhsuosu 23:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Evan's Review

Wow Gokhan, your article is really awesome. I took my cue from Jon and used MS Word to review your article. I sent it to you with my comments. It is a bit wordy, and pretty scientific, but other than that it is really great, with a lot of great information!!

Evjammin 07:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Avani's review

Very detailed article, lots of info. You might not need so many internal links for simple words like 'meat' or 'leather' but just for those words where the average student without a science background may not know the definitions. Good description of the processing method. I agree with some of the previous comments about perhaps making it too wordy...you might want to simplify it just a bit. Keep in mind this is Wikipedia and not a scientific paper :) Overall well written

Snickerr291 20:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Will's review

Gokhan, this is a really great article. You packed in so much great information, while keeping your article easy to follow and understand. I really like how you effectively broke down your subject into the main sections, and expanded each section with very sufficient detail. Overall, it’s a very cohesive article. I especially enjoyed your production section. Although it was long, I think you covered everything you needed to cover and not too much. My only suggestions would be to perhaps reword or even cut out the very technical sentences in the Physical properties section, and also, have you considered reworking the Edible gelatins section to fit it under food uses? If anything, the Edible gelatins section is the only one that seems a little empty. Again, great job!

Wwc26 02:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Image copyrights

The images Image:Gelatin structural chain.gif and Image:Aa composition of gelatin.gif are taken from http://www.gelatin.com? What is their copyright status? You need to prove that they're compatible with Wikipedia's free license, otherwise the images will have to be deleted; Wikipedia cannot accept unfree media taken from other websites. Femto 19:05, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message! I do not know their copy right status as I checked so while uploading the images. The same images can also be seen at the following web site: http://www.madehow.com/Volume-5/Gelatin.html I did not notice any notes about copy rights of these images. And I do not know how I can prove or what I need to do to prove that they are compatible with Wikipedia's free license. If you can help me on this, I would be glad. Thanks. GBoran 05:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
The images at madehow.com are not the same, far as copyright is concerned (though they're copyrighted too). Basically, you only need to show that gelatin.com says their content is freely usable. Commercial sites almost never do, thus by default we must assume the images are copyrighted. I've removed them from the article, the image files will be deleted within 7 days.
What you can do is to re-create similar images yourself, the facts (that is, a chemical structure or the numbers from a pie chart) aren't copyrighted. Femto 14:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestion. The images at madehow.com are the same, just black-white versions of the images at gelatin.com. There is no such a notice stating that their content is freely usable at gelatin.com. But please take a look at gelatin.com, "Disclaimer" link. Does that work? Otherwise, I will create my own images. GBoran 19:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
The disclaimer states only that they refuse to be held liable (in a legal sense) for any errors on the site. It has nothing to do with the copyright status of the images on the site. They still own those images, whether the infomation in those images is correct or incorrect. You'll need to make your own images as Femto suggested above, or find public domain (non copyrighted) images elsewhere.susato 07:28, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Solution versus suspension

It's been many years since I studied chemistry, but I think the Physical Properties section errs when it says that gelatin is a colloidal solution. My understanding is that colloids are particles too big to dissolve and too small to settle out. If I'm correct, the right term would be "colloidal suspension." 198.4.159.6 16:17, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

SI Units?

Maybe I'm nit-picking, but since this encyclopedia is aimed at a global community, perhaps the reference to degrees farenheit at the end of the Physical Properties section should be changed to Celsius, as it is the internationally agreed (and more common) unit. It is also more correct in scientific circles. 81.174.177.58 (talk) 22:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC) this gelatin is not is starburst

medicinal properties

come to think of it, it is probably more stringent to move the amino acid composition to a new section, lets call it "chemical properties". Make a new heading for e.g. "gelatine diet" and keep the medicinal properties for only that. As far as I know gelatine is formally only used as a food additive. Bedrupsbaneman 09:28, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

The manufacturers make a clear point of calling gelatin a "foodstuff" and grouping it not with "food additives" like other thickeners, colors, or such. Though, not being much of a food by itself, this protein content and amino acid composition is just what gelatin is (more or less formally) advertised for. It seems promising to have two separate sections. One strictly uncontroversial for its chemical and physical properties as a substance, and based about that, one that details the pros and cons of the medicinal and dietary properties and the advertising and health culture around it. Femto 11:22, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Who put the link in to the Russian article regarding ulcer treatment? This does not appear to have been a peer-reviewed study, and the "journal" referenced is not a legitimate medical reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.73.152.100 (talk) 11:11, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

semi-protection

I would like to recommend that this article be semi-protected. There has been a lot of vandalism recently from anonymous posters. Omjeremy (talk) 17:23, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

LSD use

I feel that mention of use with illicit drugs such as LSD should be deleted from the article, and then my remark about it removed, and (if possible) both excised from the editing history. Since any use of such drugs is dangerous, and in most countries illegal, it is inappropriate to spread information about how to prepare such drugs for ingestion through the Internet. I state my concern here rather than editing the article itself, because I would not like to be accused of being a vandal by someone not aware of my motives. (Peter Manser, Sydney, Australia: 123.243.198.14 (talk) 06:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC))

Peter, I acknowledge your best intention here, but Wikipedia is not censored. LSD, methamphetamine, cocaine and heroin all have lengthy articles describing their roles on this messy planet. Further, "burning the evidence" by erasing items from the edit history is not taken lightly here. I believe its most common use is in cases where retaining the data would be a violation of personal privacy. The passing mention in this article does not constitute a recipe for, nor an endorsement of the use of illegal drugs, in my humble opinion. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 14:34, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

banned?

I just reverted a comment that gelatin is banned from food in some countries. This may be true, but if it is can we at least name one or two of them? It will be much easier to determine if the statement is actually true that way. I don't think anyone here is familiar with the food regulations worldwide, but if we name specific countries, it won't be too hard to verify whether or not the statement is true. (I'm not convinced that it is) ike9898 18:50, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

India has banned the production of gelatine or usage in India, but imports of foreign foods that include gelatine is still legal. Example, Haribo's gum bears imported into India do not fall under the law as they were produced in a foreign country. Similarly Iran has also banned the creation or use of gelatine, and unlike India has also added restrictions on importation of gelatine related product if the origins of the gelatine can be proven to include Pig material. To find out more information about other countries, you really need to check their government websites, which sometimes is not available in English. The Indian situation can be double checked with a simple letter to your Indian embassy likewise with Irans prohibitions of gelatine. In both countries their usage for science is legal, but must be imported. Now I know these two because of my origins, I doubt for a foreigner it would be as easy to gain such information, once again, because such information does not concern English speakers or the western world. So if you have time and you want to complete the gelatine prohibition section, then I suggest checking out local country websites rather than relying on an English website to tell you the condition in a non-English world. Do you see Indians making websites that tells Indians the British laws on food in Hindi? No, its non of their concern. Likewise here. --93.97.181.187 (talk) 03:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

There is no ban on production of gelatine in India. There are even at least 3 producers of gelatine in India. See the following webpages: http://www.sterlinggelatin.com/ http://www.gelatin.in/ http://members.rediff.com/redferrari/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.246.199.194 (talk) 13:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

who ever deface the page should be aware

The some Jews AND SOME MUSLIMS consider it to have gone trough a chemical change and is no longer pork —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.215.131 (talk) 22:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

"Edible Gelatins" and "Religion and Gelatin Substitutes" sections should be merged

The "Edible Gelatins" section has only three sentences, one of which ("Many vegetarians will not eat foods containing gelatin because it is made from animals.") probably belongs in the Religion section alongside kosher/halal. I'm going to combine these into one section for now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.125.251.254 (talk) 18:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit - moved the vegetarian part to religion. "Edible gelatins" didn't really make sense under the production section. This section probably needs an expansion tag or a nomination for deletion tag now (?)
I just merged the remaining "Edible gelatins" text into the lead paragraph, and split out a "Composition and properties" section from it. The article could probably stand some further rearrangement and copyediting... __ Just plain Bill (talk) 21:46, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

?

'rott extracts and some glatinous stemy thing such as domesticated sunflower, hukleberry, and mcdonaldss.' What exactly does that mean? This needs to be cleaned up.--58.167.50.76 (talk) 08:35, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

How to measure gelatin bloom

moved to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science where it may get better answers Femto 15:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

This archived question was never answered. -- 124.157.218.132 (talk) 06:31, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Foreskin?

Is that true? After a 3 second Google search I can't seem to find anything... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.208.219 (talk) 12:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

That was vandalism. It has been reverted. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 15:11, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Gelatin |= protein

to quote the article: "Gelatin is a protein produced by partial hydrolysis of collagen extracted from the boiled bones..."

This is not true. Gelatin is first of all a mixture of different collagens consisting of different proteins and then these proteins are hydrolised partially. So you got peptides of x length and intact proteins, partially cleaved proteins...

Padder333 (talk) 22:24, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I think I fixed it. That looks like an opportune place to put a reference. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 22:46, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Brilliant! Thanks ;) Padder333 (talk) 21:05, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Colonial Times ??

"Gelatin was used for hardening paper in Colonial times." When exactly were colonial times? And which colony? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.227.79.56 (talk) 11:43, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Now it is gone. That bullet item was vague, unsourced, and redundant with the mention of paper sizing immediately above it. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 11:57, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Vegetable Sources

Why is there no information on vegetable sources of gelatin? I was hoping to learn more about it here.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.210.83 (talk) 01:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Because gelatin is derived from collagen, which is only animal product. Although there is no such thing as vegetable gelatin, there are vegetarian gelatin substitutes, which are mentioned in the Religion and gelatin substitutes section. --ABehrens (talk) 20:11, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

chicken leg gelatin

gelatin from chicken legs (217.24.158.1)

It's possible to make chicken stock jelly at home, but less than 5% of commercial gelatin is made from "other sources". Of that, only a fraction is poultry, of that only a fraction is legs - not really worth to mention. Femto 14:03, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Agreed, although I think most, if not all, chicken gelatin is made from chicken feet, not legs, because they are not much use for anything else. As an aside, I once tested some experimental chicken gelatin that was 400 Bloom, way higher than anything commercially availble now. AlanParkerFrance (talk) 19:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

swimmers

Whoa. First I thought some joker added a reference to "synchronized underwater basket weaving"... Nice addition, who would have thought. Femto 14:03, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I added a reference to back up the claim about synchro swimmers using gelatin, since an anonymous "no, really, they do" isn't enough. That said: no, really, they do. I was on my college's synchronized swimming team, and we used plain Knox food gelatin in our hair for shows. We put our hair up in a tight bun, made a concentrated batch of the gelatin, then brushed it on with a turkey basting brush while it was still warm (hot, actually) and waited for it to harden into a shell. After several routines, it would start to get a bit tacky, but it wouldn't come out until you took a hot shower. Smelled awful while you were making it, but it left your hair glossy for a couple days, at least. And if you think synchro is "underwater basket weaving", you obviously haven't tried to do it! Imagine doing a handstand underwater, but supporting your body weight by moving your arms since you're not allowed to touch the bottom, to music, and trying to line yourself up into a formation with people you can't really see because your head's underwater. --24.126.54.195 (talk) 04:14, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

And keeping a cheesy grin on your face the whole time! ;o) 92.25.15.35 (talk) 21:38, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Hydrolysed collagen

Q. What's the difference between hydrolyzed collagen and gelatin?

A. Nothing, apart from their two separate articles. The former should be merged here, it does have some useful information that would be nice to incorporate into this article.

Tomásdearg92 (talk) 06:59, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Incomplete sentence

"Gelatin has also been claimed to promote general joint health. A study at Ball State University sponsored by Nabisco, the former parent company of Knox gelatin,[14]"

That is the whole sentence, currently. It seems to have been lopped off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.172.40.53 (talk) 11:34, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


History missing

I would like to have seen some history and background on gelatin. It is an important protein source. Bdubay (talk) 03:07, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

I agree! I came to the article in hopes of finding historic information, because I know the use of gelatin goes back centuries at the very least, but was sad to see no mention of the history. I did appreciate the wealth of information presented, but a paragraph or so history would be helpful, too.

Decrease in ulcer size

"...decreasing the ulcer area by twice.[12]"

This must be a mistranslation; it's not possible to decrease the size of a wound by more than once (100%). Unfortunately, I don't read Russian, so I can't vet the citation and correct it. I assume it should read "decreasing the ulcer area by half." — Preceding unsigned comment added by RaumschiffZumMond (talk • contribs) 04:05, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

No Russian needed, I found the article on the MNT website and fixed the link. I assumed they meant "twofold" or, as you said, "by half". Hopefully, my edit was accurate. Tomásdearg92 (talk) 23:05, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

What is this medical news today website? Looks like it could very well be propaganda. The MNT site re: gelatin treats ulcers lists http://www.newmaterials.com/news/ as it's sole reference. Upon searching that site for gelatin, there are no results pertaining to gelatin and ulcers. MNT's additional information tab cites MNT. MNT's citations page cites itself, again.

Upon further research online, I find no reputable sites/studies backing up this claim.

I am new to editing wikipedia pages (never done that before) so I do not know what should be done with that claim on the wikipedia page for gelatin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enigmafied (talk • contribs) 19:25, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

working on new project

I am, for a class at University, creating a wiki page for gelatin microparticles. Just reaching out to see if anyone has any sources they would like linked to the new article. It is currently a Userpage I am creating. Thanks! Hbialic (talk) 20:19, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Gelatin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:01, 26 August 2015 (UTC)


BSE/CJD

"Some discussions"? "Few concerns"? Come on... Independent of the actual risk, BSE had (and still has) a severe international impact on food trade. Be specific; the BSE/CJD/prion wikilinks very much helped to set the context. True, BSE may be assumed 'managed' now. This safety comes from the price of a BSE test for every single head of cattle (at least here in Europe) but it does not mean that BSE is "very unlikely" to be present. The infection risk is 'low enough' for meat, and negligible to zero for gelatin, which should only be worth mentioning because it's so oftenvvvvvvvvvvvvnnnnnnnnnvvnvnn a (semi)hidden meat-derived ingredient, but there has been much concern. Just curious, which 2004 study are we talking about? Femto 13:34, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I just added a reference to the study. The last author, Taylor, is a very prominent researcher in this field. ike9898 21:57, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)

edits of 26 Jan 2005

  • Feet/hooves, see above. The keratin content can't be the main reason why they're not used. For what it's worth, Knox's early gelatin was "Sparkling Granulated Calves Foot Gelatine".
  • The year isn't needed, the numbers are not really of 2004. It's an average estimate which shouldn't outdate too soon. (I've found various sources from some 220-ish to 273 thousand tons per year.)
  • It's the dissolving that's instant, not the gelling.
  • I've taken out "Other plant starches can act as thickeners..." because it isn't really related to gelatin.
  • It's important to me to mention that there isn't any vegetable source for gelatin at all.
  • I hope you weren't too attached to all of the subheadings, which were a bit excessive, IMHO. The food/technical/other subdivisions and the bulleted lists should suffice for now to loosen up the text.

Femto 16:19, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Gelatin in capsules and vegetarians

I was surprised to find that an animal product is used in the packaging of many medications. Is it possible for vegetarians to request that prescription medications be placed in other types of capsules? Are some people unable to go strictly vegetarian just because they can't get their medications? -- Creidieki 4 July 2005 16:14 (UTC)

There is a growing market for hydroxypropyl methylcellulose veg-caps, though with currently at two or three times the price of the gelatin variant (not for the whole medication of course, only for the capsules, a cent more or so), manufacturers have little incentive to use them by default unless more people begin to ask for them. Given that the most common response to even the ingredients of everyday gummy bears is still either "Yeah, whatever." or "Eew, really?", but not "I knew that!", it's still a long way to vegetarian paradise. Femto 5 July 2005 13:57 (UTC)


Lack of technical detail

In the production segment it is explained merely that gelatin is made through a few kinds of production methods, but it is not explained how the production methods works. It is possible to create their own articles that explained how to do curing, acid and alkali processes, but it would not help this article. Wikipedia needs detailed technical articles which can function as a handbook and not merely as a general knowledge source, to explain what something means. This is one function of combined knowledge, and without it this works only as an occational entertainment center. /====

History

What I miss in this article is the history of gelatin. When was it first created and when and by whom was it introduced as an industrial product? Wasn't it in the beginning of the 19th century? An uncertified website tells me this. Glatisant (talk) 10:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Encyclopedia.com offers this history with sources. "First created" is attributed to food uses in Medieval Britain (1400s). "Industrial origin" appears to be during the 1700s when a British manufacturing patent was issued. Food applications in the USA and France during mid 1800s-1900 appear to have established the versatility of gelatin, including the origin of its popularity in the USA as Jell-o. The "How products are made" tab reveals Charles Knox of New York in the 1840s as an entrepreneur for marketing gelatin powder which broadened the appeal and applications of gelatin. As this is of interest to you, Glatisant, do you want to write a section in the article or here for other editors to review? --Zefr (talk) 14:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your serious answer, Zefr. Being a Dutchman, I don't feel really able to write a Wikipedia article in English (although I did before, but that was not easy at all). I hope a paragraph like the one you wrote here, will enter the article soon. Glatisant (talk) 21:10, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced

The following section is all unsourced - moving here per PRESERVE

Other uses
  • Blocks of ballistic gelatin simulate muscle tissue as a standardized medium for testing ammunition.
  • Gelatin is used by synchronized swimmers to hold their hair in place during their routines, as it will not dissolve in the cold water of the pool. It is frequently referred to as "knoxing", a reference to Knox brand gelatin.[1]
  • When added to boiling water and cooled, unflavored gelatin can make a home-made hair styling gel that is cheaper than many commercial hair styling products, but by comparison has a shorter shelf life (about a week) when stored in this form (usually in a refrigerator). After being applied to scalp hair, it can be removed with rinsing and some shampoo.
  • It is commonly used as a biological substrate to culture adherent cells.
  • It may be used by those who are sensitive to tannins (which can irritate the stomach) in teas, soups or brews.
  • It may be used as a medium with which to consume LSD. LSD in gelatin form is known as "windowpane" or "geltabs".
  • Gelatin is used to make the shells of paintballs, similar to the way pharmaceutical capsules are produced.
  • It is used as an ingredient in implantable medical devices, such as in some bone void fillers.
  • It is used in nail polish remover and makeup applications. The gelatin is often tinted in different colors to match a model's natural skin tone.
  • Leaf or sheet gelatin is used directly in food-based model-making, for example to make translucent, edible, diamond-paned windows in gingerbread houses.
  • Gelatin can be used as a binding agent in India ink.
  • It may be used as a technique within the process of fine-art printmaking. The prints are made by creating a block of gelatin and applying printing inks. The gelatin is made using twice the normal amount of gelatin granules to the usual amount of water. Once set – printmaking ink (usually water-based) is applied to its surface. Other water-based media may also be applied. Items such as dried grass, leaves, and paper stencils are placed onto the inked surface. Gelatin monotype is best done with the use of medium to lightweight paper. This is gently pressed onto the inked plate once the 'design' has been composed.

This article is about the gelatin that is derived from collagen; not clear that all of the above are that. Jytdog (talk) 18:48, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "2008 United States Olympic Synchronized Swimming Team" (PDF). USA Synchro Swimming.

Suggestions for Improvement

Citations are needed for the information under the “Extraction” and “Recovery” sections. The “Dietary restrictions and gelatin substitutes” section contains two sentences at the end of the first paragraph that refer to unnamed sources of information (“many people” and “other people”). In addition to clarifying these two sentences, the source(s) used to obtain information for this whole paragraph should be cited. In the same section, the sentence about ongoing research in synthetic collagen seems unnecessary- the research is not yet widely accepted and it does not indicate a direct link between gelatin and their developed synthetic collagen. The reference for the Vyse Gelatin Company is not a strong source because it links to the company’s official website. The “Protein content” section seems superfluous- the one sentence could be moved to the “Composition and properties” section. --Durpri (talk) 20:28, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gelatin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:42, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Checked bot. First ref is ok, second is a dead link. --Zefr (talk) 23:43, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gelatin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:18, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gelatin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:14, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Hydrolyzed collagen

They are the same thing, so should be merged. UltraMagnusspeak 20:43, 9 July 2018 (UTC) I agree. Especially useful for practical cooks/chefs as well as professionals. Haroldormsby (talk) 21:23, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Done217.214.152.92 (talk) 21:37, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gelatin/Archive_1&oldid=1029192086"