TL;DR
Get kitchen gear delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
A report by Casual Physics Enjoyer describes a home experiment in which chicken breast soaked in tartrazine solution became partly translucent, allowing a grid beneath it to show through. The result was limited and did not reproduce the stronger transparency reported in a research paper; the chicken was discarded, not eaten.
A home experiment reported by Casual Physics Enjoyer found that chicken breast soaked in a solution of tartrazine, a yellow-orange food dye associated with Doritos, became partly translucent, but did not turn fully transparent. The informal test follows published research on making tissue optically clearer, while underscoring that the result was limited and the sample was not safe to eat.
The writer says a roughly 5-millimeter-thick chicken slice was soaked at room temperature in a tartrazine solution estimated at about 0.19 molar. After six hours, a thin piece cut from the sample let a grid beneath it show through in places. The writer described its appearance as similar to a gummy bear, but said the transparency was weaker than in the paper that inspired the test.
The experiment also included a water-soaked control, which remained opaque. A stronger solution, estimated at about 0.56 molar, did not produce a usable result: the writer reported that dye appeared to crystallize on the chicken. In a later trial, the writer soaked chicken in the 0.19-molar solution for 12 hours and reported slight translucency compared with the control.
The source says the dye powder was labeled as containing more than 80% dye, making the actual concentration uncertain. The writer also changed the published method: the research used a stronger solution, a temperature of 40°C and a shaker, while the home test used room temperature and lacked that equipment. The writer discarded the chicken and warned against eating it because of the risk of Salmonella.
A Low-Cost Test of Tissue Clearing
The result is a small-scale demonstration of a technique that could matter to people trying to image biological structures. The writer says tissue transparency can help make fluorescence imaging easier, and suggests that simpler approaches could let independent researchers examine tissue more closely with accessible equipment.
That possibility remains a goal, not a result established by this test. The reported chicken was only partly translucent, and the experiment did not show that the method can reliably reveal internal structures or improve imaging in a working microscope. Its immediate value is as an informal replication attempt that identifies practical limits, including concentration, crystallization and equipment needs.
The distinction matters because an eye-catching visual effect is not, by itself, evidence that a method is reproducible or useful for research. The source describes one experiment and does not report independent verification, systematic measurement of transparency or a comparison of imaging performance.
food dye for scientific experiments
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
From Published Research to Kitchen Test
The experiment was prompted by the paper Achieving optical transparency in live animals with absorbing molecules, which the writer says used tartrazine to make biological tissue, including chicken breast, more transparent. The home report credits Adaobi Adibe with suggesting the idea and says a fuller replication is still being worked on.
Tartrazine is a food dye, but the source’s comparison to Doritos is a way of identifying the dye, not evidence that snack powder itself was used. The writer purchased a tartrazine product labeled E102 and prepared solutions using the powder and tap water. The reported product specification said it contained more than 80% dye, so the listed molar concentrations are approximate.
As a possible explanation, the writer describes a model in which tartrazine’s absorption properties alter water’s refractive index, bringing it closer to that of proteins and lipids and reducing light scattering. The report presents this as a working explanation, with a fuller account promised later—not as a mechanism tested by the home experiment.
“I got partial transparency but not to the degree of the paper.”
— Casual Physics Enjoyer
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Much Transparency Was Achieved
The report does not provide a measured transparency value, controlled imaging data or enough repeated trials to establish how consistently the effect occurs. The photographs and descriptions indicate some light transmission, but the degree is difficult to quantify from the information supplied.
The actual dye concentration is also uncertain because the powder was labeled as more than 80% dye, and the solution volume was estimated. The source does not establish whether the reported effect came from tartrazine alone, how the result compares quantitatively with the paper’s method, or whether the proposed refractive-index explanation accounts for the observation. No independent replication is included.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
A Fuller Replication Is Planned
The writer says a more ambitious replication is planned, but the source gives no schedule or detailed protocol for that work. It also says the author intends to explain the proposed mechanism in greater detail later.
Any follow-up would need to clarify the solution concentration and compare results under controlled conditions, including the published paper’s temperature and mixing method where practical. The current report does not say whether those conditions will be reproduced. The next substantive update is therefore expected to be the writer’s further experiment and explanation, rather than a confirmed finding that the home method reliably makes chicken transparent.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
Did the experiment make chicken fully transparent?
No. The writer reported partial translucency: a grid beneath a thin piece was visible in places, but the result was weaker than the transparency described in the research paper.
Was Doritos powder used?
The report says the experiment used tartrazine dye powder, not Doritos seasoning. Doritos is mentioned because tartrazine is a yellow-orange food dye associated with the snack.
How long was the chicken soaked?
The writer reported an initial six-hour test and a later trial lasting 12 hours, both at room temperature. The longer trial showed slight translucency compared with a water-soaked control.
Can the treated chicken be eaten?
No. The writer discarded the samples and warned against eating them because raw chicken can carry Salmonella. The experiment was not a food-preparation method.
What is supposed to cause the transparency?
The writer’s proposed explanation is that tartrazine changes water’s refractive index, making it closer to that of tissue components and allowing more light through. The report describes this as a working model, not a mechanism confirmed by the home test.
Source: hn
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
