Spyke
lemmy.blahaj.zone

I think it wouldn't really taste that interesting, because it's only meant to be used as a standardized point of comparison for other manufacturers when they're testing batches of their own products. I recall NileRed did a video making cookies out of a bunch of standard reference ingredients, and I don't remember if he said at the end they were bland or awful, but he didn't like them. The reference stuff simply isn't meant for eating or for use in cooking.

6

the nilered video was so precious. here we have a guy thats handling extremly dangerous substances (even radioactive ones) on the regular, yet he totally loses his cool over a cookie cracking in the oven

3
lemmy.world

It's not for cooking, it's for tool testing.

If you want to test how well someone's fancy cleaning detergent works on stains, or if their claim that a new knife shape makes spreading easier, you want a very standard peanut butter.

3

Yeah, you’re paying for consistency, not quantity. The standard reference material will contain exactly what it says on the label. No more, no less. It’s meant to be a reliable and dependable product, with absolutely zero variation between batches. And that consistency costs a lot of extra time and testing to guarantee.

5

In addition to what others have said there is an interesting video from Veratasium about that NIST department, they have a wild variety of items.

0

You reached the end

This "Standard Reference" peanut butter is >$2,000 | Spyke