Jump to content
Sibiriak

Extra-Virgin Olive Oil (EVOO) Sourcing

Recommended Posts

MMM...., Kalamon organic, with 3325 ppm is a really huge value, almost too good to be true. Has it been measured by the HPLC method? Has it been double, treble-checked? It's thrice the Torre Di Mossa concentration which we have discussed so many times. I'll try and get more info from the site.

Also, why 2017 production? In my place the first olives are harvested in October-November. Maybe they've been harvested prematurely with the specific purpose to increase the polyphenols.

Edited by mccoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, the mistery is cleared. As specified by the site:

 

Each brand is certified for its phenolic profile by NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance)
at the World Olive Center for Health (WOC)  in Athens.

 

 

As per previous discussion with Gordo, NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance, used by Melliou and Magiatis of Athens Univeristy, Greece) apparently yields much higher PC values than HPLC (Hi performance liquid chromatography, the industry standard) so those values are not comparable to the usual values we comment. The PC values are surely very high, but we lack a reference here. Also, Melliou and Magiatis determined that PC is higher in early harvests, so these are oils which have been probably harvested just a short while ago.

Edited by mccoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Aristoleo site also portrays some wild olive oils which make me curious. The analysed samples don't have huge amounts of PC, so I wonder what may be the advantage, probably some other hormetic compounds, unknown or little known. The one below is from the Volvi estate in Thessaloniki.

This wild EVOO issue may take our orthorexia to another insane level, LOL.

 

post-7347-0-01172000-1505653132_thumb.jpg

Edited by mccoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the drop of life EVOO which exhibits 3076 ppm polys. The site correctly and honestly specifies MNR as the analysis method. I wonder if tehre are any corrections available to estimate ppm in HPLC from ppms in NMR.

 

bottle.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the lab results of the Drop of life EVOO from 2012, when the NMR method was not developed yet, so this is most probably HPLC, the current industry standard.

 

PC 2012 HPLC = 554 ppm

PC 2016 NMR =  3076 ppm

 

post-7347-0-06468700-1505671244_thumb.jpg

 

The NMR concentration is about six times the HPLC concentration, whereas the annual variability in content across the different harvests is probably much, much less, other conditiosn being equal .

 

So Torre Di Mossa 2016 harvest would appear to be still #1 in PC.

 

One interesting aspect of the above is that, if NMR is really a more sensitive method for polyphenols analysis, then it turns out that poly content in EVOO is actually much higher than previously believed when using exclusively the HPCL method. That is, the benefits of EVOO would be related to a very high content in specific phenolic compounds like the secoridoids.

 

Also, a far lesser amount than 24 grams would be needed to reap the healthy benefits.

 

I didn't focus on the oleocanthal issue, another favourite topic of Melliou and Magiatis.

Edited by mccoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, the standard method for total phenolics is neither HPLC nor NMR, but a colorimetric assay using Folin–Ciocalteu reagent. I doubt that a simple fold-factor mutiplication can be used to convert polyphenol count as measured by HPLC or NMR, and I am quite sure you can't do so to get from either to the standard colotimetric assay. Either one will certainly report many times larger numbers, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael, as I noticed in research papers they always cite the HPLC, but after your post I searched and noticed that the spectrophotometric method or GE method or Folin-Ciocalteu is cited pretty often in lab analyses.

So, there appears to be some indetermination and the common industry standard woudl be the one you cite.

 

This makes it more difficult to make comparisons, especially if the analytical method is not mentioned. We'd have to evaluate whether the value comes from commercial labs (GAE method), university labs (probably HPLC) or recent labs which apply the NMR method (Only Greece?).

 

Most probably the Amphora Nueva values are all comparable among them, since they have only one reference lab to test their EVOOs, AFAIK

Edited by mccoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael, as I noticed in research papers they always cite the HPLC, but after your post I searched and noticed that the spectrophotometric method or GE method or Folin-Ciocalteu is cited pretty often in lab analyses.

So, there appears to be some indetermination and the common industry standard woudl be the one you cite.

 

This makes it more difficult to make comparisons, especially if the analytical method is not mentioned. We'd have to evaluate whether the value comes from commercial labs (GAE method), university labs (probably HPLC) or recent labs which apply the NMR method (Only Greece?).

 

Most probably the Amphora Nueva values are all comparable among them, since they have only one reference lab to test their EVOOs, AFAIK

 

I agree with you that there are serious limitations to F-C: none the less, I am quite sure that it's the standard way of doing this, both in industry and in research, for simple low cost and rapidity reasons.

 

By "GE method," I take it you mean "gallic-equivalent" mehtod: that's just a variation on F-C. As I mentioned here and here, you always have to report phenolic counts per F-C as against a standard: gallic-, caffeic-, or tyrosol-equivalents are most common, tho' others use syringic acid, etc. Tyrosol-equivalents, which is the most common way of reporting it commercially, tends to exaggerate the count vs. caffeic- or gallic-equivalents by roughly 20%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mccoy: In my place the first olives are harvested in October-November.

 

Do you know when the Oct. harvest first hits the market?

Edited by Sibiriak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sibiriak, I just read a communication from the local Agricultural agency, in my place (central Italy) this year the harvest is foreseen from the end of September to the beginning of October, so it should hit the market by half-October beginning of November. It also depends on geographic and climatic areas and different varieties. I'm going to start asking around this week and shall let you know.

 

Central and southern Italy have been hit by freeze and drought this year and the snowfall broken many limbs of, or whole olive trees. We'll see if all these stresses contribute to a higher concentration of phenolic compounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For Sibiriak and all the interested ones:

 

I just got my first batch of the new harvest EVOO. Olives picked in an inland hillside grove, October 10, squeezed the day after, processed to maximize polyphenol content. I've yet to taste it.

 

I also called De Carlo, they are going to harvest the Torre Di Mossa later on, end of November, beginning of December.

 

It is interesting to notice the remarkable difference in harvesting times in two geographical areas which are relatively close.

Edited by mccoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new EVOO is incredibly good. Delicate taste with the strong presence of a pungent and bitterish background, which bespeaks of the abundant phenolic compounds. I'm already addicted...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently completed the book Fantastic Voyage.  In the book, the authors state that one should not cook or heat extra virgin olive oil.  I regularly cook with it.  Does anyone know why the authors say not to cook with it or why it might be ok? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not pure fat or oil. It has loads of plant compounds, hence its greeness. These plant componds or polyphenols literally burn when they reach temps associated with baking and frying. Consequently the flavors and their integrity are degraded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the Kirkland brand organic EVOO from costco because I read it passed testing showing it's a true EVOO.

Anyone know if it's a good choice?

I take 1 tbsp daily. We also use it to stir fry veggies and things at lower heat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest André

Has anyone tried the Dehesa de la Sabina? It's pretty reasonable with free shipping, and they say 2017 harvest tested at 738 mg/kg polyphenols.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GUL8G8Q?th=1(if anyone does try it, please let me know how it is and how it compares to some amphoranueva oils)

Dehesa de la Sabia is a wonderfull product. An early harvest, more for quality, than profit, from a group of dedicated olive grove lovers who have restored an eco-system to their groves and achieved excellence in best In Class and Gold Awards.

 

These stewards of the land should be admired by every producer of real EVOO. I love this oil, its producers and its attitude toward nature.

 

Many corporate fake oil producers are put to shame by this excellent organic EVOO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×