5/30/23 Final thoughts: TLDR: (3 weeks ago)Ann: writes me an email saying: I can’t get the air back into my buttercream after using the immersion blender. So that must mean that the air loss is causing the color saturation. Me: Ok, sure, let’s try to figure this out together. I write back email saying: ok, here’s how you whip air back to the initial volume, and also, notice how the color remains dark. In addition to air loss, there must be other things going on. Here is all my data for you to see. *crickets for 3 weeks* (at this point, I’m thinking she’s busy or just not interested) Ann: Releases a new video without emailing me back or considering suggestions in the email exchange, and performs a similar technique to her first video, and says cannot rewhip back to the initial volume, therefore it must be air. Me: …? --- Ok, what’s strange to me is that I’ve acknowledged aeration even before these response videos, which are annotated in all my previous videos. I believe it fits into a bigger picture of what’s going on, yet Ann hasn’t once acknowledged homogenization, emulsions, or even topics that both of us know exist, such as diffusion or concentration gradients. I’m trying here. Anyone who watches this channel knows I aim to be as transparent as possible. I’m meeting her at every step here to explain what I think is going on. I am definitely interested in seeing how everything fits together in the bigger picture of things. However, it’s pretty clear that we disagree on the fundamental properties of what’s going on. I'm not sure how to move forward in a productive manner with those who refuse to acknowledge that anything exists outside of what they think. So with that, I will continue to do my work here. Many of you have commented or messaged me, and please know that although I can’t answer everything, I am grateful for your ideas and suggestions. More baking and frosting videos to come! - FAQ: Why would you go through all this, rewhipping, ice bath, etc. Why not just add more dye? I don’t really suggest doing that at all. This all began when Ann suggested that loss of air was the only reason that the color was saturated. So, I tried to help by showing that yes, you can rewhip it back and the color remains dark. --- 05/26/23 OK, I've tried to help out as much as possible, and I'm not sure there's much else I can assist with but I’ll try. Additionally, I’ve been trying to answer some interesting questions in the comments below but there’s a bit to cover so apologies if I don’t get to yours. Please remember I’m just one person here and because some commenters can’t behave themselves with their language 😔I’ve had to turn up stricter filters for commenting. So, I'm hoping this will help those interested in some background reasoning or using this technique. Most of this was mentioned in my previous email (written out below). And it was a long and detailed email - but the gist of it was that I could whip air back into the frosting, maintaining most of the color and how to achieve the same results. And, so regarding the last video, yes, I agree about experiments needing to be repeatable. That being said, it's been hard to keep up since new variables are constantly being introduced. *These are a few differences I've observed in the latest video:* 1. This time Italian meringue buttercream was made - that's an emulsion-based buttercream too, but, again, for consistency, I use Swiss meringue buttercream for everything across the board. 2. The gel color is added directly to the meringue, the water-based component of buttercreams. This was not done in the previous experiments, and doing this will result in an initial darker buttercream than if gel food coloring is added to the final buttercream. *In other words, the starting point, from which all the rest of the changes are compared, is darker and makes color changes less apparent in the final comparison. This may skew the final picture and favor the contribution of aeration plays vs. homogenization.* (I explain a little more about aeration vs. homogenization below in the email) *The amount and type of color pigment, in addition to when you add it, and how you add it in, is what we're measuring and therefore is very important when making comparisons such as in these experiments.* 4. The final volume cannot be achieved due to the reasons outlined in my letter below. An ice water bath is needed to aerate the butterfat post-immersion blender. Aeration is from butterfat in meringue-based buttercreams, not the meringue component, which largely deflates when added to the buttercream. I'm happy to share all the data and images: including weight and percent loss, and a picture indicating where I used a stand mixer in experiment #3. For reference, if you wish to see the contents of my email, it's in a comment of mine further down. (I have maxed out characters for this particular comment it seems.)

I kind of relish when my partner asks "What are you watching?" and I get to answer "Oh there's drama about frosting on the baked goods side of KZfaq." 😂

I have been receiving tags and comments on every platform to add my reply to this video, so here it is. I, like others, have watched her videos for a while now. I am fully supportive of those videos targeted at the mindless content mills that make it difficult for small food content creators (like myself) to put out trustworthy and high value content. The lack of research on my video, however, was a bit uncharacteristic of her channel. As my channel grows, I try to be as helpful and approachable as possible, even though it can be difficult. If you follow on Instagram, you may have seen my Q&A sessions or my comment threads where I'm pretty active, or maybe we've had a conversation in my DMs. Along those lines, if there were any questions from her or her team, I would have been more than happy to help out or answer. 💗🧁

It is pretty sad that she used a non-emulsion based buttercream when the whole point was to debunk something about emulsion buttercreams

Its that 'PhD in Biochem/Molecular Bio' coming out. bless. Wait it would actually be really cool if Ann corrected herself bc the whole point of her debunking series was to take apart misinformation in food making videos, which she herself is not immune too.

Furthermore, what is the purpose of this "debunking?" So that bakers know that imursion blending will result in less buttercream? The process still results in a deeper color, and it still "works." And knocking the air out is actually kind of helpful, because you’ll end up with fewer air pockets when you're trying to get a smooth finish on the side of a cake.

**Here is an update with those who are interested** Ann has retested the buttercream saturation experiments and has since written me an email. I'm not going to post the exact email unless I get permission to do so, but the purpose of it was to ask if I was able to re-whip the buttercream back to its initial volume after using the immersion blender. She's observed that: 1) Swiss meringue buttercream is airy from the foam in the meringue and is difficult to re-whip once deflated with the immersion blender; and 2) since it cannot be re-whipped back to the starting volume, the air is the significant factor causing color saturation. Below you can see my response trying to help: -------- Hi Ann, Sure, so to answer your question, yes, I could re-whip your Swiss meringue buttercream (SMBC) up to nearly the initial starting volume with a minimal loss in color saturation. I achieved this using my logic that color saturation is due to the emulsive properties of the frosting. I'll share my dataset and pictures with results with you here: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LMoefL079gksJQn9nSZh-dPhGDwyeXJwHdsLmcOH72I/edit?usp=sharing Before I explain how I did this, one issue needs sorting out: the source of aeration in the frosting. You mention that Swiss meringue buttercream is "a very airy frosting, so it is hard to re-whip the air (gained from making a foam with the egg whites) back into it." Yes, so I agree that foaming occurs during the meringue whipping step. But because the foam is aqueous, it is largely destabilized/deflated by adding butterfat. The lipids interfere with the egg white protein's ability to encase large air bubbles. Maybe some bubbles at the microscale still exist, but I think, for the most part, the larger ones get deflated. The deflation is also probably due to the sheer amount of butterfat we have to add, and this is competing for the air-water interface that was once occupied by the egg white protein matrix. And you can see this happen in real-time; once the butter is added when making SMBC, it deflates the meringue, causing a significant loss in total volume. After adding all the butter (given that the meringue and butter temperatures are between 65-75F/18-23C), we often see a runny or perhaps "curdled" texture. After mixing the fat and aqueous phases, the emulsion forms, the buttercream thickens, and perhaps, there is a slight increase in volume. In my experience, at this point on, the majority of aeration in these types of buttercreams is from gas trapped in the butterfat, not meringue. That's not to say that the meringue doesn't offer other textural and space-filling (bulk) advantages, which I believe to be from the extended and denatured egg white proteins. But as far as aeration, I think it is localized primarily within the continuous phase of the water-in-oil emulsion, that is, in the butterfat, not meringue. Now, using this logic, I could re-whip your Swiss meringue buttercream closely back to its initial volume. It's hard to tell with a beaker instead of a graduated cylinder, but my guess is that it's within 5% of the initial volume, just by gauging visually. This is while maintaining the weight within an average of 3% of the initial frosting. When using the immersion blender with the buttercream, the emulsion is homogenized due to the shearing effects but is also heated, which melts some of the butterfat. And we can see this; the resulting frosting post-immersion blending is a little glossier and more liquid-like. Typically, I measure the temperature and observe average increases around 5 degrees F post-immersion blender. And because the aeration of the buttercream occurs primarily within the butterfat, we can control the aeration by adjusting the temperature of the butterfat. Lipids hold air more efficiently when solid, so we need to chill the frosting slightly. Now there are a couple of methods to go about this if the goal is to achieve the initial volume via re-whipping. You can wait (i.e., leave at room temperature) until the buttercream lowers its temperature (I've found that between 60-70F/15-21C is ideal) and then attempt to re-whip. Or you can do what I do: put the frosting bowl atop an ice water bath. Then mixing the entire time, the buttercream will aerate because the fat is now more solid and can retain the air bubbles. The tricky thing is that I think most people (including myself at one point) will want to put the whole thing in the fridge to chill. But that sets the emulsion - such that if you solidify the butterfats entirely and attempt to agitate it, you'll destroy the emulsion. In that case, you'll likely have to redo the steps (immersion blend, etc.) Most bakers have experienced this when trying to re-whip buttercream that has been chilled; it will look broken or split until the butter reaches the proper temperature to re-emulsify the meringue. Through working with buttercreams, I've realized it's all about balance. In this case, re-whipping to add air to the continuous phase of the emulsion is dependent on getting the butterfat to the right plasticity (temperature) such that the emulsion is stabilized while maintaining enough solid structure to trap gas. ➡And as far as the color, it did lighten a little after whipping. We can use the color to understand each mechanism's impact: aeration vs. homogenization. The important thing here is to look at the color change. The difference between before the immersion blender vs. after the immersion blender is greater than the difference between after the immersion blender vs. re-whipping. ➡To me, this indicates a more significant effect due to homogenization, which allows the dispersion of pigment into the aqueous phase inside the continuous phase of butter. That there is still saturation post-re-whipping even back to its initial volume shows that the pigment has diffused enough such that added aeration has a minimal effect. Now to address anything else that I may not have covered: You ask, "Do you use a stand mixer or hand mixer? I am wondering if that may account for the difference?" I've used both. The stand mixer got the frosting back up to the initial volume much quicker than my hand mixer. I performed this using Sample 3, so you can compare it to samples 1 and 2. You also state, "After whipping in a stand mixer for 5 minutes, it was back up to 600mL. But still not all the way up to 700mL But it was already nearly back to the pale color. Indicating that the air is making it paler or lack air, making it darker." So I covered how to address the loss of volume by chilling above, but other thoughts regarding the paler color. I don't have the concentration of my color pigment, and I don't know if that's available. This will affect the overall saturation of my frosting vs. yours. I'm using Americolor in Royal Blue at a 0.1% w/w in my frosting. Also, maybe the fat content of your butter is different than mine, or your mixer is better at aeration. If, overall, the concentration of pigment is not enough to permeate the emulsion such that a color change is strong, it may be that the aeration will override any color changes. Lastly, some other notes: - Volumetric measurements are not very quantitative, particularly with something as solid as frosting. That's why I give weight measurements for every step to ensure all the frosting is accounted for. You can see in my datasheet I track the weight at every step. - Along those lines, I try to limit container switching to reduce sample loss and remove as much frosting as possible from the immersion blender and mixer attachments. Again, this is why I was weighing. - One topic we haven't even attempted to explore is the process of diffusion of the pigment across concentration gradients.

I was really disappointed that Ann included you in her video. Lumping a real creator in with a bunch of content farm crap goes against everything she has been complaining about for years. I then got even more frustrated by her refusal to respond to *any* of the responses questioning her. People were kind and respectful but got no response. I don't know what's going on behind the scenes, so I'm trying not to judge, but I lost a lot of respect for Ann over this. It was lazy and felt like Ann had become what she hates - someone who resorted to shortcuts in a rush to create content for content sake. Either way, she owes you an apology. Thanks again for the work that you do. This hack was 100% how I manged to get macaron fillings that matched the shells I had made for a rainbow display. They were bright and beautiful and tasted great. And your ADBC is a game changer!

6:11 “or aaaask…?!” made me giggle 💀

Am I blind? The rewhipped buttercream is way lighter than the blended buttercream and looks identical to the initial whipped buttercream. It’d be helpful to see the rewhipped version next to the original color.

I was shocked to see you pop up in the htct debunking video. As someone who loves baking and works in the science field, your videos have been an absolute delight. The science of baking and cake decorating is quite underdeveloped/ not adressed much. I think Ann does a great job with debunking dangerous hacks, but it seems even she is not immune to the pitfalls of keeping up with the entertainment machine. I really hope she adresses this.

Ann usually gets stuff right, but she isn’t immune to wrongdoing. I Just hope she apologizes for this Edit: after looking into it and seeing all the stuff people are pointing out, I guess I just never noticed, or was blissfully ignorant too the stuff she has gotten wrong over the years and just ignored. Quite a shame really.

THere is a clear difference in color tones. After using the blender, its at least twice as intense in color. WHen you whip it again, the color gets a bit lighter

Free class in the science of colored frosting! Thank you so much. So glad I found your channel. I find this so interesting and thank you for showing us the options and methods. This home baker is very much appreciative 😊

Your immersion blender hack is literally the best hack I've seen in getting the perfect color. I really appreciate the work you do, your work is fuelled by such passionate curiosity by you, i love it!!!!!

This is the second video (first one Helen Rennie) where htct science has been debunked. This doesn't take away her credibility, but it does make me sit back and evaluate what people are saying on this platform

I had to laugh because you literally said in the shorts, word for word, "This works best with emulsion based buttercreams - Italian, French, German etc. (less so with American - that's not emulsion-based)" and Ann goes and uses American buttercream. Really?

I say this as a viewer of you and Ann, amazing response! While watching Ann’s video, I was also left wondering if air was the sole factor in color change. Her experiment was certainly not enough to prove that, and I’m so glad you were able to show otherwise. Keep up the great work!

I used to really enjoy Anne’s, ‘Debunking’ series, but her video trying to, ‘debunk’ your video seemed really unnecessary. I thought the whole point of her series was to debunk the rubbish put out by content farms, not to go after good and descent creators in the baking community. It’s really a shame and quite disheartening. Please keep up your great work Sugarologie!

I think the best demonstration of color saturation, for both Anne Reardon's video and yours, would be to leave a space between the original buttercream and the imulsified one, then putting the re-whipped frosting in between them once it was made. That way, comparison between the original buttercream and the finished product is much easier

Question-would it not make more sense to rewhip the buttercream until the volume is equal to what it was prior to immersion blending, rather than whipping, blending, and rewhipping for the same amount of time each? I think that would make the comparison a bit more direct since there are lots of variables that could impact the rate of aeration. But of course, as you mentioned, there’s no doing away with outside variables completely.

This makes me sad because I noticed your video in the thumbnail of her video and was looking forward to watching it because I assumed yours would be one of the videos she says does work. I was pretty shocked to find out that wasn’t the case. We support you, Adriana! Hopefully you have gained a few new subs from this at least.

I was surprised to see you in a htct video, especially when it's clear you don't mess around with scientific data!

This is the 3rd time I've seen Ann be so confidently wrong. Plus she tends to not admit when she's wrong. Starting to trust her word less and less. Imagine disagreeing with an actual scientist about chemistry.

I'm not sure if i'm missing something, so here is how i underatand it. Knocking the air out (regardless of buttercream type) will make the frosting darker. If you whip it back up again it will not retain its original volume and therefore the colour will not go back to being as light as it has before? However, it seems that the darker colour does not stay the same once air has been added back in either. The video says the difference is marginal but there is still a difference. So are they not both correct? Knocking the air out will make it darker but, even after adding air back in it will never achieve the same light colour as before but it will get lighter?

In all honesty I love your videos so much cause you include the science behind and it becomes so interesting. Thanks for the videos

It did upset me when she “debunked” you, because she clearly didn’t even know who you are, or the fact you 1000% know what you’re talking about!

I legit didn't even know what was going on, so I clicked for drama and was rewarded with the scientific method~ such a professional response

When I saw Anne Reardon calling YOU out, of all channels, I was shocked. I would consider you both peers, approaching recipes and baking from a scientific perspective. I expected her to do the due diligence of reaching out to you before making her video. I'm sad and disappointed to see someone who I would expect to be in praise of your work be so off the mark

If airation is not the main factor here, would you please consider trying this experiment without whipping the buttercream at all in the first place? I am really curious of the results! Is it even possible to completely rule out the air component from an emulsion buttercream? If it's not then in my opinion it is a component in an experiment and it must affect the result in some way.

There is that trend going around in almost every area of life lately, where ppl love to over simplify things. It might be due to the fact that simple short bursts of contetnt captivate people's attention more. But honestly, I'm here for the details, I wanna know all the nuances. I love your approach❤ keep up the amazing work you're doing!

I saw Ann’s video and wondered your thoughts. She is also a food scientist but I have noticed her methods lately are not as precise as I would hope. Her ‘debunking’ of dark pans vs shiny ones also sticks out because she concluded dark pans have little to do with darker results. I couldn’t agree with her conclusion on that either. Your recipes have been very good in my kitchen and I love your posts.

You put so much work into doing all these tests - just incredible. I love your content and find it so valuable. 💜

i've been watching your videos for a while, and i didn't know Ann made a video about you. i'm currently studying food science and i think your response video is really interesting. i look forward to more of your videos as i think the depth you go into is really great. you are clearly a very dedicated and knowledgeable scientist!

Anne has some weird takes recently.

I had to go watch the other video first for more context but this is a cool response and I like the way you broke it down.

I too have noticed that Ann Reardon has been "uncharacteristic" (read: jumped the shark, lazy, apathetic, etc...) lately. Her videos are shorter, more shallow, and now as we see, throwing the wrong person under the bus! I totally support you, Sugarologie! I'm glad I'm not the only one to think Ms. Reardon is badly missing the mark and losing credibility.

I actually used this technique to try it yesterday and it was such a visible difference, even for someone who only bakes fairly casually. Thank you for sharing your knowledge with us and giving us new things to try !

when watching ann's video i didn't take it as being placed with a content farm/5 minutes crafts type thing, just a claim that may or may not work (like the video's thumbnail is about water exploding in the microwave, that's not a hack more than an interesting fact). it's interesting to see both opinions for why something might happen the way it does, especially as someone with no knowledge about food science.

i just want to say i was ecstatic when i found your content. without the level of education needed for as deep an understanding of how food works at a molecular level as yours, and the funds to try and experiment with stuff, for the longest time i thought it would be so cool if i could experiment with food like you do and record what happens to see if i can perfect my recipes. i'm just so genuinely happy i get to watch someone else do it and learn from them! all the best of luck to you

Great video. Helen Rennie also made a video debunking one of Ann's debunking videos recently. It was about cookie/baking sheets. Makes you question all of Ann's debunkings.

I had no idea Ann made a video about you, but I am here to tell you that I absolutely adore your content and purchased your recommended immersion blender to try your technique. Keep your head up and keep making content, we love it!!

Thank you for responding so eloquently! I've been following Ann's channel since she used to make amazing cakes and desserts, and was shocked to see your legitimate advice on there.

Your videos are so meticulously researched & you have the ability to explain the chemistry involved in baking so that it’s easy for N at home chef to understand why things work. Keep doing what you are doing 💜

Oh my gosh, yes!! Thank you for posting your response! ❤

I was shocked when your video was featured in Ann’s video as if you were another one of those five minute crafts type junk channels. I hope she responds to your video and admits her wrongs as she clearly didn’t research your channel enough.

It’s sad that the first step of her videos is not googling the creator. In another universe, I could see a really amazing collab between you guys.

As a baker myself, you've explained everything in this video extremely well, your videos have helped so many including myself learn more of the chemistry involved in baking

I’m grateful to the KZfaq algorithm - it can be useful. I’m also a self taught baker and I love science as well (no PhD yet). I appreciate the scientific approach of your videos

Omg your last statement on scientist inspired me so much. I'm still a student so it's hard for me yo call myself a scientist. But I felt so identified when you said that all scientist like to talk about their work and even tho I haven't put out that much knowledge into the world I love to talk about what I've discovered. Not on a soberbio kinda way (sorry I'm not a native English speaker) but on a purely passion based way ❤❤❤. You inspired me to keep investigating

I’m glad you had this back and forth though because I had only seen your short immersion blender video of the technique and didn’t realize that this was emulsion-buttercream specific. I had it in my mind that it would work on any of them. So thank you for addressing this!

Also doesnt she say she used swiss buttercream for the test in the video but her example is american buttercream???? What is going on there ann????

Just commenting to say thanks for being so transparent and clear in your responding--this is exactly how science ought to be, and you're really demonstrating that epistemological process perfectly.

I still watch her sometimes but I find Ann sus since she "debunked" that the beef and dairy industry is very bad for the environment/climate change. Her research just seemed like she didn't consider motivations or vet sources enough for me. Also she reviewed a multilevel marketing kitchen product without a good disclaimer about the predatory nature of MLMs. And Thermomix machines have burned people because of defects that are still happening, even if they aren't as commonly as the old models.

It's obvious that the "rewhipping" barely added any air and volume back, hence it still being darker. Measure the volume.

Finally someone who debunks the debunking videos of Ann. I am not a fan of her videos that are often showing obvious fake videos or spectacular. Love your videos that are clear and scientific.

Massive respect for the amount research for this. You're amazing!

Ann Reardon is an interesting case. I've been watching her forever, and her consumer-focused sort of meta-KZfaq debunking videos have been pure gold. But for quite a while I've noticed this...breezy overconfidence, from both her and her husband, that has started to border on insularity and cluelessness.

When I watched her video , I immediately knew she was not comparing them accurately, but I have a background in science, so I recognized that her answer would be wrong beca she was not comparing the two experiments accurately. As she said in that video, we have to stop taking every we find online as gospel… with that being said, even people trying to do good make mistakes.

I’ve repeatedly been seeing Ann get things wrong and convince the masses, like her saying color doesn’t matter for baking pans or getting oil in egg whites doesn’t inhibit their ability to whip up. She’s never debunked someone I was subscribed too, tho, until I saw her recent video. I’m glad you’re standing up for yourself! People have to understand that her word is not gospel

damn ! this was an amazing and super informative response. really enjoyed and appreciated it. :)

A lot of comments pointing out Ann's error on the original video have gone missing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I love a good scientist read 😂😂😂😂😂.

I'm glad you made a response. I love your work and its intellectual and scientific rigor. I find it fascinating and delightful. I hope Ann sees this. I would think it would be right up her alley--debunking a debunking video. But who knows.

Your rigor and dedication is matched only by your grace and patience. Beautiful reply :)

This whole thing really kind of grossed me out (along with a couple other things I have noticed in her past videos to a lesser extent) and the fact that she hasn’t replied to anyone or made a statement or reached out to you is the proverbial “Icing on the cake”. It’s just not a great look on Anne’s part.

when I saw your immersion blender hack in anns video i was like nah this isnt right . i wish ann had properly researched what was happening instead of just giving her audience the wrong information :(

Hi! Self-taught and constantly improving baker here. Your videos have taught me quite a bit about the composition and process of frostings. I watch Anne occasionally, and I had no clue this came from one of her videos. As a viewer who may be less versed in food science, I understand your point, and I find your response sensible through your experiment.

I stand corrected. I thought she used the same buttercream you did for the color and volume changes, but apparently she did not. Kinda crappy, to be honest. How can you be mad at the recipe when you didn't follow it to the T? Also the amount of volume loss in Ann's video is suspicious compared to your much thorough and bigger sample size. I think I might have to reconsider my opinion about Ann. It seems like her effort to do good by the community (and to stay relevant in the landscape of short-form content), she's rushing into conclusions without delving into the proper methodology to actually arrive with significant results.

I was surprised when she "debunked" your video. It's not the first time I've been disappointed with what Ann has said about something. She's forgotten that she's allowed to say "I don't know"

There are people in the comments saying that Ann was just saying that the hack worked for different reasons, if that was the case and there was no reason to put your content in the thumbnail of a video where the title says debunking hacks

I'm a long time follower of Ann's and I unfollowed due to how she's handled this.

The scientific version of “Per my last email. . .” Lol I love it! Thank you for what you do.

I love both you and Ann. Thanks!!

Ann really enjoys making a splash with these videos. While I understand not reaching out to a channel like five minute crafts I wish she would be a little more nuanced when it came to responsible channels. But I guess that wouldn’t be as good of a gotcha, huh?

I'm glad to have caught this in my recommendations! I'm sorry to see a miss on Ann's part, but I'm glad it lead me to your channel! Wonderful and informative response. You've got a new subscriber :)

I'm a little confused. When you explain the science of emulsion, it all makes perfect sense. But then when you showed the experiments, I see it doing exactly what Ann said; the first sample is light blue for instance, then after using the immersion blender it's darker blue, then when you re-whip it it is more or less back to light blue. So wouldn't that mean it really is all about the air molecules (knocking air in/out of it)? Edit: misspoke/spelling

To me, this says that either Ann didn't understand your video or she didn't expect you to respond. Also, you handled this very well. It's embarrassing that she tried to drag you down.

I have been following Ann Readon for them very start, but I am personally not a big fan of those debunking videos. In the last one she ruined her microwave with a plastic Nutella jar. But what she failed to acknowledge is that most countries have glass Nutella jars, that wouldn’t melt in the microwave. I think the quality of those videos is definitely lacking lately.

2 of my favorite youtubers 💞💞💞 I don't even care how this works out...more learning for me. Thank you ladies...you are beautiful!

I hadn’t really paid too much attention to this section in Ann’s video but I’ve very glad this video appeared in my recommended section. It’s been wonderful seeing your explanation and thorough data.

Ann puts in the scientific approach for content farm videos, but she just approached this with such a blasé attitude it was off putting. I was so confused when I watched her video and I’ve been a fan for a long time. I’d already seen your video and subscribed so I knew how much work you put into this and that it DOES work. It’s just so odd to see her make zero mention of the scientific basis and just say “yep it’s air” I’m so sorry this happened and I think you’re right about her having other motivations for this.

Did everyone hear the mic drop?

Simply love Sugarlogic. Very good science information as well as recipes. Now if I could just see some adjustments for altitude I'd be set.

When you were using the emulsion blender, it did look like the buttercream almost disappeared. The volume loss does look like a lot. But I failed science so😅

nothing like debunking a debunking channel with science and common sense lol

It was vexing to see Ann inaccurately replicate your process by using the wrong type of butter cream and then simplify your explanation. As an aside, I used your cake-ulator to make an amazing 4 layered white vanilla cake with pale blue ermine frosting... Everyone loved it! Can't wait to see more science-based baking content from you

I just recently starting to follow you and love your content and have learned a lot so far (thank you). What was the original video of yours that was called into question?

So happy you reacted to the ‘debunking’ video. Just like you, I also enjoy watching Ann Reardon’s videos. That’s why I thought it was so strange and unlike her to tar you with the same brush as 5 minutes crafts and the likes. I appreciate your extensive research and clear explanations about anything cakes.

I've been watching htct for a while now and even before this video, I had started feeling the slight shift in her content or rather her demeanor. The way she interacted and responded to the Food Theory Milk/Calcium episode left a bad aftertaste in my mouth cuz matpat had been nothing but respectful towards her while she continued being borderline condescending and even seemed to deliberately pick and choose points of his research to maintain that he was wrong. Since then, I made it a point to watch the source video for any of the "creator videos" she features. Glad I did that cuz that's how I found this channel and now I'm subscribed. I love it when I'm given scientific explanations to what I'm watching, especially when I'm shown all the different experiments and their outcomes that lead to the final product + it's also generally very very satisfying to watch the frosting/buttercream (the shorts especially) Thank you

i was very surprised to see u in her latest video ! i really enjoy seeing ur innovative improvements on frostings n it helps me be more interested in science, i hope you get a response from her :(

ahh incredible video showing how its related to the emulsion properties- I love science (I have a degree in chemical engineering) and id never seen your channel before- This popped up in my recommended (I did watch the htct vid) - there have been a handful of experiments ann has done on her channel that were a bit flawed in terms of her methodology. I didnt even know the different types of buttercreams and that some were emulsions while others werent so I totally didnt notice that that one was wrong- I really appreciate the way you went about this and made a genuinely educational video explaining and showing how it works :)

Thank you for this video. The moment I saw your name on Ann Reardon's page, I knew she was full of bs. You are one of, if not the best baking channel out here. I'm quite sick of her debunking videos, I've also seen her attacking videos that are clearly satire and while there is danger in satire, she never even mentions that they are.

I just want to say thank you for making a polite and dignified response to this, rather than an angry one. It takes every act of kindness we can muster to keep this world turning, and we all know it isn't easy. I don't know much about your channel (coming into this as a How to Cook That follower) but you seem like a decent human being, and I'm curious what other tips you have to share. Here's hoping that this continues to a nice and peaceful resolution, and again, thank you! 💕

I used to like Ann Reardon's videos when she actually made desserts. Hard to believe she has to resort to attacking creators who actually create instead of making good content. Her cakes were really creative.

I'm really disappointed in Ann. I watched her videos because I thought she was honest about her debunking videos. But now, I'm not so sure if she can be trusted. I've been following you since the beginning and I appreciate your honest analysis and transparency in the process. I've used you frostings in my cakes and my fave is the American Dreamy Buttercream. Thank you for what you do!

Your attention to detail and thoroughness when doing your experiments is exactly why I immediately vibed with your content. You get straight to the facts, show methods and have consistent parameters. I am a stickler for accuracy and truth and you seem like one too, so thanks for being here.

“We both know why you’re here.” Guilty.

Respectful, conversational discourse earned my sub!

Ann has blocked your name under her most recent video