A Two-Cent Smartphone Sensor Can Tell You If Food Past 'Use-by' Date Is Still Safe To Eat

The confusing labels on food packaging has caused many people to throw away otherwise edible food, or those that are still safe to eat despite what the "best before" or "use by" date says. In this regard, Firat Guder, an assistant professor in bioengineering at Imperial College London, created a microsensor for smartphones which could detect whether food is safe to eat or not.

The sensor, which costs about two cents to make, identifies spoilage gases — ammonia and trimethylamine, for example — and are linked to “near field communication” (NFC) tags, microchips that smartphones easily can read.
The sensor could help people avoid consuming food tainted by bacteria, which can pose a danger if improperly cooked or mishandled. Beyond protecting people from illness, the sensors also could be important in the fight against climate change. Some 30 to 40 percent of the food produced in the United States is wasted, according to the USDA.

The researchers are still conducting tests on the effectiveness of the sensors on different types of food. So far, they have done tests on chicken and fish so they expect to release the microsensor within the next three years. Until then, we must use our own discretion with our food.

(Image credit: Caroline Attwood/Unsplash)


Comments (1)

Newest 1
Newest 1 Comment

I thought this might be interesting so clicked the link which took me to Popular Science. It seems that I must consent - no other option is apparent - to "Allow all cookies", That means consenting to 14 allegedly necessary cookies and 85, yes 85, others. Being spied on is not one of my favourite things so fuck that and fuck Popular Science. There seems no easy or convenient way to register my disapproval of the policy direct with Popular Science either.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Dude! That image is not of a glancing blow, that's more like being socked in the breadbasket by a burly man being shot out of a cannon! Damage would be much noticeable when leaving a dent like that sucker.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
just like that, huh? of course the scientific method has no bearing here, because realistically, who would have the means to reproduce it and a control in a lab? but you know the old saying: sex sells; unfounded knowledge paired with Micheal Bay-esque explosions obtains grants from the fed.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
The moon is a fascinating ball of rock. Irwin Shapiro (Harvard astrophysicist)jokingly said, "The best explanation for the moon is observational error - The Moon doesn't exist."

1. The Moon is freakin' huge, we're talking ginormous. A natural satellite of the earth should be something closer to 30 miles in diameter, Luna is over 2000 (that's bigger than Pluto).
2. The moon doesn't have a magnetic field, but it's rocks are magnetized.
3. Some moon rocks date back 4.5 billion years and there's even one that was dated 5.3 billion years old (that's a billion years older than the Earth.
4. Moon rocks have also been found to contain processed metals like brass and mica, and uranium236 and neptunium237 (those have never been found to occur naturally).
5. The Moon also appears to be freakin' hollow!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.
Email This Post to a Friend
"A Two-Cent Smartphone Sensor Can Tell You If Food Past 'Use-by' Date Is Still Safe To Eat"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.

 

Success! Your email has been sent!

close window
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
 
Learn More