Lead exposure risk in tea

 

This subject came up in a couple of different forms recently, so I looked it up, how much risk there is from lead exposure in tea.  Of course I'm not representing this as developed and conclusive research; I read a half dozen references, and this passes on the most interesting content from that.

Two studies of Chinese tea (one pu'er, one general) and one of tea in Britain, which probably relates more to teas produced in India, Sri Lanka, and Kenya, were all really consistent.  Lead exposure in tea might relate to an average of 2+ mg / kg of dry leaf, across all those categories.  Is that a lot; is it safe?  I'm still not completely sure, but all three said that's fine, just normal limited food exposure.  

One study passed on findings related to what that works out to in brewed tea, just not in as complete a form as would be more informative.  That said that half the brewed samples were below the threshold range, but didn't offer an average or distribution of the rest.

I'll mention the studies and references, summarize what I took them to mean, and cite a relevant selection that covers that.  A more in-depth review would continue on to a closer read of a dozen or so good references; this type of fast review isn't very reliable.  I only wanted to get an idea of general level of likely risk, and I think this gets you that, but the confidence of complete results is not there.

Contents of fluoride, lead, copper, chromium, arsenic and cadmium in Chinese Pu-erh tea (2012)

Very interesting; this is basically what I was looking for.  I looked up when the Chinese government banned use of lead in gasoline, since that's going to be a factor, and that was in 2000.  Another reference, which I'll get to, said that beyond that (generally earlier input) use of coal also amounted to a considerable input factor, and Chinese production of electricity from coal probably increased quite a bit from 2012 to today.  

On to considering a relevant citation:

In order to assess safety for consumers and the levels of contamination in Pu-erh tea, the authors studied the contents of fluoride, lead, copper, chromium, arsenic and cadmium in 56 Chinese samples of Pu-erh tea collected from Dali City, Lincang City, Xishuangbanna City, Simao City and Dehong City in Yunnan province. 

The ranges obtained for the elements analyzed were 80.2–151.6 mg kg− 1 (fluoride), 0.66–4.66 mg kg− 1 (lead), 14.8–19.3 mg kg− 1 (copper), 1.95–4.98 mg kg− 1 (chromium), 0.07–0.25 mg kg− 1 (arsenic) and 0.023–0.130 mg kg− 1 (cadmium). The mean leached analyte concentrations in tea infusion were 523.86 μg L− 1 for fluoride, 5.70 μg L− 1 for lead, 43.18 μg L− 1 for copper, 13.67 μg L− 1 for chromium, 0.43 μg L− 1 for arsenic and 0.17 μg L− 1 for cadmium after the tea leaves were brewed twice with boil water in a ratio of 1 g/50 ml for 5 min. The mean dissolving rates of fluoride, lead, copper, chromium, arsenic, and cadmium were 45.8%, 24.6%, 26.2%, 35.2%, 30.8% and 27.4%, respectively. 

Lots more there to cover than I'll discuss.  Note the average finding range I mentioned, 2 mg lead / kg tea, is expressed here as a findings range of .66-4.66 mg / kg, not a complete match.  Their conclusion:

Based on a 70 kg individual consuming 15 g of Pu-erh tea daily or 105 g Pu-erh tea weekly, the dietary intake of the studied elements was below the safe limits recommended by various authorities. This suggested that under the current dietary intake, there are no possible health risks to Pu-erh tea drinking consumers.

Since there is no safe level of exposure to lead (per another reference I'll cite later) "no possible health risks" seems a little strong, but I get what they're saying, that limited food exposure happens, so a normal and low range is regarded as conventional and acceptable.  Is 5 μg (per liter) a really low amount?  I never really do settle that.  It's not easy to find an acceptable low limit for lead exposure since the EPA and such say people should avoid any, and then don't want to move on to state acceptable exposure levels, even though it's going to come up.

Note that I've written separately about fluoride here.  That's still being added to municipal water in a lot of places; it's only really a contaminant and a health risk within a certain dosage range, which I won't go further into here, beyond saying that scanning that post (really the other earlier one that goes into more detail) 10 mg / day comes up as an earlier recommended adult limit, later dropped to more like half that.  I think this 523 μg / liter works out to .5 mg; not much.  In that post I state that "the treatment level of fluoride (added to municipal water) is .7 to 1.2 mg / liter," of course citing references, so that brewed tea fluoride level is just below treated water level.  On the high side two liters of brewed tea from treated water might contain 3.4 mg then; not above the limit, but high enough, and getting there.

Back to the next reference and considering lead instead.

Accumulation of potentially toxic elements in Chinese tea (Camellia sinensis): Towards source apportionment and health risk assessment  (2022)

Tea (Camellia sinensis) is a popular beverage that is consumed globally. However, a better understanding of potentially toxic elements (PTEs) content in tea leaves and infusion is necessary to minimize risk on human health. Therefore, 249 tea samples (grown in different areas) covering six types of tea were collected in China to investigate the PTEs contents, identify their potential source and assess the health risk associated with drinking tea. 

PTE contents in tea leaves across six tea types were ND–0.900 (Cd), 0.005–2.133 (As), ND–5.679 (Pb), ND–13.86 (Cr), 1.601–22.93 (Ni), ND–2.048 (Se), 0.109–622.4 (F), 13.02–269.9 (Rb), 1.845–50.88 (Sr), and 2.796–53.23 (Ba) mg/kg. The result of tea infusion showed that 14.3 %–44.1 % (green tea), 14.5 %–46.7 % (black tea), 10.5 %–25.3 % (dark tea), 13.6 %–34.2 % (oolong tea), 16.9 %–40.7 % (yellow tea), and 19.9 %–35.1 % (white tea) of F were released. All tea types, except green tea, exhibited comparatively low leachability of Cd, As, Pb and Cr in tea infusion. 

The source apportionment revealed that PTEs in tea leaves mainly originated from soil parental materials, while industrial activities, fertilizer application, and manufacturing processes may contribute to exogenous Se, Cd, As, and Cr accumulation. Health risk assessment indicated that F in tea infusion dominated the health risk. 

It's interesting that a relatively similar finding for fluoride level, as in the earlier study, was identified as a potential health risk, while it wasn't earlier.  That earlier study identified an average of 80 to 150 mg / kg Fluoride and this a range of .1 to 644 (so four times higher on the high end, but negligible on the low side).

Here the lead range is not detectable to 5.7 mg / kg of dry leaf; a little higher top range, but similar (the other was 0.66–4.66 mg / kg (lead).  Extraction rate was 24.6% in the last study for lead (just mentioned as low here), but we're still back to considering if the earlier exposure level was ok or not (5.70 μg / liter for lead).  It sounds low, but really a second review of food exposure levels would really help place that, and I didn't get to that here.  

Google does offer this, as a starting point:

What are the maximum levels for lead in certain food categories?

Heavy metals

The maximum allowed lead content ranges from 0.01 mg/kg in some baby foods to 3 mg/kg in food supplements. Most meat products, fats, and oils should not contain more than 0.1 mg/kg of lead, while the limits for fruit, vegetables, and fungi vary between 0.1 mg/kg and 0.8 mg/kg.Jun 4, 2566 BE

.1 mg would be 100 micrograms; that's a good bit in comparison to what's turning up here.  It's necessary to note that I'm switching around between dosage level per liter and amount per kg; it takes awhile to brew up a kg of tea, and that 24% extraction rate is positive (versus that being higher).  If you eat a kg of lettuce presumably that .1 to .8 mg--100 to 800 μg--goes right into you.  That's a lot of lettuce, but nothing like brewing 1000 grams of tea 5 to 8 grams at a time.

Analyses of lead levels in tea (seemingly from a 2014 review)

This study was carried out to address the urgent need to gather more data on levels of lead (Pb) in tea, to inform current EU discussions on a proposed maximum limit of 1 mg/kg Pb in tea (‘dried leaves and stalks, fermented or otherwise of Camellia sinensis’).

Levels of Pb were quantified in 51 samples of black and green tea leaves.These samples were also analysed as tea liquid (drink), after steeping the tea leaves for both a shorter and a longer brew time, following an agreed protocol. 11 different varieties of dried tea (including a white tea) from different tea growing regions were also purchased and analysed to ensure there was good geographic and tea-type coverage.

Note that the tested range went way beyond that considered 1 mg / kg limit in those other studies, up to 4.6 and 5.7 mg / kg.

The study findings showed that the levels of lead in the 51 samples of dried tea varied significantly and ranged from 0.125 to 2.56 mg/kg.

The levels of lead found in the brewed teas were very low with half the results being less than the limit of detection 0.2µg/L (1 µg/L=0.001mg/kg).

Teas brewed for a longer period of time resulted in only a slightly higher level of lead.

The levels of lead found in the additional 11 dry teas ranged from 0.177 to 1.96 mg/kg.

Exposure to lead from the consumption of the brewed teas as tested is not considered to be of concern for consumer health compared to normal levels of exposure to lead from all dietary sources. 

They were one stat away from expressing clear findings, identifying the brewed tea lead levels and an average across the samples for that range.  It's a lot to go through just to say "it was low" at the end.  The paper itself (linked there; that's just a summary) goes further:

Two samples contained Pb levels above 1 µg/L and the highest level, 2 µg/L, was found in a sample of green tea (Chinese Sencha).

Ok then, three samples ranged at or above 1 µg/L, out of 51, which is still low, based on input from the other papers.

Presumably the conclusion here is that a 1 mg / kg dry tea lead level isn't the right threshold limit, and 2 or 2 1/2 is still no problem (relating back to considering 1 mg / kg as an import level limit).

In China, where is the lead contamination coming from?

Initially I was concerned that leaded gasoline might be an issue, but this reviewed identified that was banned in 2000 (so it's surely not being produced or sold in China now, right?).  It's an odd starting point but this is how they open that:

It is common to use effluent as a fertiliser in China. This results in accumulation over time, within fields, of heavy metals.- cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead and zinc (Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn).

Interesting!  A lot of the paper is about lead contamination in water sources, presumably from a number of industrial waste sources, natural sources, or from coal use, as described further:

Lead can be emitted during the mining and smelting of mercury ores, because most such ores also contain lead. Lead is also emitted during the burning of coal. Researchers in Guizhou province, where there are 12 large mercury mining and smelting operations and heavy coal-powered industry, found that rice accounted for 94-96% of the uptake of methyl mercury (Raloff, 2010). They were not testing for lead, but it is likely that the rice was also a source of lead in the diet...

...What the evidence from water catchments in the more industrialised parts of the China shows is that there is a clear link between lead contamination of the environment and industrial activity. Coal use in China is rising steadily and it should be noted that coal naturally contains lead.

Tea gardens would surely never water plants from the Yangtze river, or other polluted sources, but I suppose airborne lead exposure is probably a concern.

WHO guidance to reduce illness due to lead exposure

I never did find much guidance on safe lead exposure limits or relative risk of exposure but this is a start:

The WHO Guideline for Clinical Management of Exposure to Lead recommends a  blood lead concentration of 5 micrograms per decilitre (μg/dL) as a trigger for a thorough review of the ways in which a person is being exposed to lead and for action to reduce or end this exposure.

With 1 in 3 children estimated to have blood lead levels in excess of the 5μg/dL threshold[1], according to the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)...

“There is no known safe level of lead in the human body. The new guideline will help the diagnosis and treatment of lead exposure for individual patients and help health workers tackle mass poisoning incidents,” said Lesley Onyon, Scientist, Chemical Safety and Health Unit.

This covers more on general effects and risk sources:

Lead in the body affects practically all organ systems, travelling to the brain, liver and kidney and accumulating in the teeth and bones, where it can last decades and move from bones back into the blood during pregnancy, exposing the developing foetus.

It is still widespread owing to current and past use of the metal and its salts, most commonly in storage batteries, ammunition, pipes (including those used for water supply) and in alloys such as solder, pigments, paints, glazes, plastics and even some traditional medicines, cosmetics and spices.

Lead was once used extensively in petrol additives, but this has recently been banned in all countries in the world. But in many popular uses, particularly lead in paint, remain although alternatives are known and available. 

Framed this way it sounds like more of a "developing world" issue than related to standard risks.  I'm still a little concerned about those food exposure levels; surely that's not a complete non-issue, even if lead pipes, paint, glazes, and cosmetics may pose more risk, when that's not carefully controlled.

Another reference says more about lead exposure risk and effects, but I won't go further with that, only mentioning it here for those still interested in going further:

Lead toxicity: a review

Tea seems to only pose a very limited lead exposure risk, in general, although I guess there could always be exceptions.  

I don't love the idea of consuming 5 µg / liter, even if I still don't feel like I can place what that means.  At least the teas tested in the British samples study identified 48 out of 51 with levels below 1 µg / liter, two samples around 1 microgram and one at 2, and half below the testing threshold of .2 µg / liter.

So we should probably "use trusted tea sources?"  That's always a little problematic, isn't it?  At least the worst case doesn't sound so bad.  It makes you wonder how bad food risk is, if this is all on the low side compared to that.

Sweetest Dew / Dylan Conroy sharing exceptional Qimen

 

This is a second review of teas sent by Dylan Conroy for me to try (after reviewing a white tea here), as much sharing experience as for review exposure, but both.  These are Qimen, a main black tea type he has been focusing on.

That type should be familiar as an older tea type, more original, often now sold as high volume production and moderate quality versions.  Of course there are exceptional versions out there, but they don't make it to the West so often.  People might demand Lapsang Souchong, Jin Jun Mei, or Dian Hong more, as Chinese black teas go, then onto Golden Monkey or whatever else.

These two tea versions were amazing.  I'll let the review description go on more about that, not really even doing much with conclusions beyond that account.  He sent a third to try, but I tend to avoid doing three way comparison reviews these days, so I'll get back to that.  It's too much tea to try, and I don't brew tea without actually drinking it.  I'll let his Sweetest Dew vending page description of both types serve as an introduction:

Old Style Qimen (listing for a bit under $30 per 50 grams, I think, 911 baht, although I'm not seeing that volume clearly defined)

Qimens originally were picked around Gu Yu, late April, underwent no shape making step and Then were then baked using charcoal. The maker of this tea is replicating the original Qimen.

Because the tea is a late pick, it is mostly leaves. And while you may expect a dark bitter brew, what you get instead is a medium-light brew that is very clean and has notes of natural honey and nuts. The profile isn't very complex but the flavor is simply enjoyable.

Qimen Mao Feng (the same price, 911 baht, or under $30 for 50 grams)

Qimen Mao Feng is the smoothest out of all the Qimens.

Contary to popular belief Qimen Mao Fengs are not made with the mao feng cultivar or use the Mao Feng picking standard. Mao Feng simply means there is no shape making step, the leaves hold the natural shape they took on during the making.

Qimen Mao Fengs, the original Qimen black tea, is the smoothest of all the styles. It also boasts the the most savory body. This particular one is rich and deep with a whismical floral aroma to it. While boasting no loud flavor notes or aromas, this Qimen will sooth you with a calm but rich body that is reminisent of Mao Feng green tea.

I looked for a picture of Dylan on his sales site but didn't find one.  Maybe I'll show what he looks like in one last review post.  I did see a cool looking travel set there, a small gaiwan and four cups, for about $20.  That might be worth looking into if someone is going to order tea, since shipping works out better if get more stuff, since the value gets better and better, the ratio of what you buy to cost of sending it, if the selling price is good to begin with.

Review:

Old Style Qimen:  I've not had even a basic version of qimen in so long I can't place how this relates to that.  I remember it as basic black tea, maybe a bit inky as flavor ranges go, but then I never tried anything presented as exceptional.

This is exceptional.  It's inky too, with good sweetness, good flavor complexity, great balance and depth.  Flavor might center on something along the lines of roasted sweet potato.  Mineral depth really stands out; it's complex.  Feel is nice and rich, especially for this being a first relatively light round.  I tend to go back to Dian Hong range as a baseline, for style, aspects, and match to preference, and this doesn't overlap that much with that typical range.  It's more refined, which is good, with a lot of depth and complexity, but it's not as basic in a sense that's both good and also limiting.  Depth comes across as much as the flavor, at this point, it's not as flavor-forward, which really could relate to it being a first round.  It's too early for those kind of conclusions anyway.

Qimen Mao Feng:  before that fully registered it stood out that it's good.  This has pretty good depth too but there's a range of intense flavor that really stands out.  This reminds me a little of the more oxidized style of Jin Jun Mei, the warmer, honey-toned versions of those.  Not a little either, an awful lot.  I mean like this version.  The strong honey note is common with those, ranging from honey taste into beeswax.  There is some general roasted sweet potato / yam range too; let's just say it's more yam in this version, even though at some point these interpretations tend to be guesswork.  Warm mineral tone also stands out.  Not like in the other, exactly, where that base layer and depth is a good half of the overall experience, but it supports the rest.  

Both of these are very complex and refined.  This is a quality range in black teas that doesn't come up that often.  To say that neither includes any flaws is technically correct, but it's discussing a range of concerns that doesn't even come to mind.  These are carefully and well made teas, the product of a long tradition, for sure.  It is also interesting trying versions from new places, people originating new styles, or borrowing from other areas, and this doesn't seem to be that.  

Maybe "Qimen Mao Feng" is a reference to exactly what I'm describing [later edit:  it's not], but even if so it's not a case of a new tea maker sorting out processing.  It couldn't be.  I can love the results from such a set of inputs, or possibly even prefer a version to these, but it never results in tea this refined.  The unusually fine leaf and bud material is surely a related input; that's not typical of almost any black tea types.  It's normal for Jin Jun Mei, and that's about it, of what I've tried.

I'm curious how this version can brew darker liquid when the leaf oxidation level seems much lighter (the color), and this includes a lot of fine bud content.  Intuitively both would seem to lead towards the opposite outcome.  For once no speculation goes with that observation; I just don't know.

Old Style Qimen #2:  intensity picks up in this, not that it was overly subtle the first round.  I'm not going to do justice to unpacking this complex flavor.  Warm mineral is definitely the base; that part is easy.  Roasted sweet potato is still dominant, but there's a lot more going on this round.  It seems like floral range joined that, a very rich, deep, and heavy floral range, like rose petals.  Dried fruit might relate to some of the rest, in a type range that's hard to pin down, along the line of dried tamarind, but that's not it.  It's so intense that it seems like there's more to it yet, maybe something like caraway seed spice, tying this to how a dark rye bread might come across.  

It's pleasant; it all really integrates.  It comes across as all one thing, but then when you try to describe what that is it seems like there's a lot to it.  Feel is rich and some aftertaste experience adds depth.  I would expect the other to be considerably different too; this will be a lot to experience in just two rounds.

Mao Feng Qimen:  it's more that the balance of the flavors from the last round changed, but something is fundamentally different in how it comes across.  It tastes like brandy; it has that richness, intensity, and depth.  Teas taking on a liqueur- like quality isn't new, but this form of that isn't familiar.  A high quality Wuyi Yancha oolong might start into that range, but not like this, in a lighter range form, like a touch of cognac versus this resembling brandy.  

Intensity, refinement, and complexity for this tea version are all off the charts.  There's a "wow!" effect, a simple response of appreciation, that goes beyond the attempt to evaluate aspects or describe it in terms of liking it to a certain degree.  This is better tea than I would tend to try to drink on a regular basis, even cost aside; tea just doesn't need to be like this.  Versions that are more basic, with simpler character and more rough edges, essentially almost all black teas, compared to this, can be appealing for being approachable, for not requiring or implying that you should fully experience and appreciate them.  

It would seem absurd to drink this tea along with toast and jam.  It would be good though, once you moved past that set of expectations.  I just never would have this tea with a rushed breakfast, which to me isn't necessarily the core of tea drinking and appreciation, that role as a mundane beverage, but somehow that helps me connect with teas, in a sense.  

Anyone who has tried a very exceptional, refined, complex, and unique Jin Jun Mei knows what I'm talking about.  I want to stop short of saying that some teas can be too high in quality, since I don't mean that, but moving past all "basicness" in style can almost seem to come with some limitation.  Very refined Wuyi Yancha can be similar; it calls for a different kind of experiential approach to really take it in.  I'm not an aesthetic setting / ceremonial approach / mystical tea experience kind of guy; for people on that page this could take black tea experience to another level.

Old Style Qimen #3:  brewed lighter it comes across as less intense, but not so different otherwise.  The depth and refinement are really nice.  Complexity would stand out more if this wasn't compared to the other version.  This is definitely nothing at all like the low-medium quality commercial versions of Qimen I've tried before.

Mao Feng Qimen:  the way the balance of the aspects I described shift is really novel and appealing, but hard to describe.  Different parts stand out more brewed at different intensity, or else it's just evolving through rounds, or both.  That beeswax note is really catchy, and the overall effect, the balance of complex flavors, is very appealing.  Higher end and forward flavor range balances so well with depth and a mineral base.  

Refinement is exceptional, not just a lack of flaws, but the opposite.  That last set of comments is the closest I've ever came to complaining that the quality level is too high.

Old Style Qimen #4:  a dark wood tone base picks up.  It's not like when teas get brewed out, and become woody, more that aromatic / aged furniture range that can come up, in between the flavor of rich dark tropical wood and aromatic oil that might be used as a preservative.  The thickness and richness of this tea is really something.  After you swallow it the aftertaste experience almost seems stronger than the taste while drinking it.  Rich mineral base seems to connect with a warm spice aspect, an aromatic incense range of spice, which of course is not separate from what I'm describing as aged furniture / tropical dark wood / essential oil that I can't place.  It's closest to an aromatic bark spice range but it also includes root spice sort of depth.  It's all quite nice.  

I doubt this tea is close to finished but I'll need to stop taking notes to go run an errand, and drinking 8 fast cups of hot tea on a ridiculously hot Bangkok afternoon is pushing it.  I ran 10k this morning, up early anyway to take our cat to get a bandage changed, an outcome from fighting a street cat, and experienced some mild heat stroke even at 10 AM.  

It's nice being able to see that on a heart rate graph now.  I don't need to, I can feel it internally, but there it is in stats, that I was running a slow pace (6:30 km or so) at 160 bpm heart rate, for the last 6 km.  The actual experience had more immediacy and depth than the stats; I felt a lot like walking instead.  But I didn't; I kept running "slow," and toughed it out.

for me doing 5k at 150 bpm is a rough go

what struggling looks like (note device distances don't match--strange)

Mao Feng Qimen:  floral range picked up a lot.  The earlier flavors are still there, but this continued that trend of the balance completely shifting round to round.  That's pleasant, and novel.  Transitions across infusions is normal but it's usually not that extreme.  New flavors can join, or some from the earlier set can drop out, but that kind of thing is more common for sheng pu'er than for black tea.

I don't feel like this version is completely eclipsing the other but I do like it more, and it's more unique, complex, and novel.  

From drinking upper-medium level quality oolong I've gotten into the habit of guessing what a normal price range would be for tea versions, for a style and quality level, and for this tea being so unique that really doesn't work.  For this version it's more about if the higher end of pricing can still make sense.  If this sold for much under $1 a gram it would be underpriced, but in general I just wouldn't consider buying much of anything for $1 a gram.  Most of what self-styled "curator vendors" are presenting as high quality, unique, exceptional, refined teas surely aren't on this level.

Let's consider a reference:  that "honey style" Jin Jun Mei from Wuyi Origin, that I mentioned earlier, somehow sells for $40 for 100 grams (that seems low).  Their "wild Jin Jun Mei" sells for $74.60 per 100 grams, that might be even better.  I can't place this tea version in relation to those two, although it's tempting to try, but it's exceptional enough that the second typically unheard of higher price range--high for black teas--might be about right.  Or if a tea style and version barely exists at all, which is probably true of that wild Jin Jun Mei too, then market rate is whatever a source says it is, because there is no second option out there.  

If smaller vendors tip towards a $1 / gram price range because their mark-up practices are different that's not necessarily unjustified.  Competing on value with a direct-from-producer outlet isn't practical.  Larger outlet vendors will sometimes describe not quite as novel and high quality teas in similar ways and sell them for that just under $1 / gram range.  Maybe that's fair too; not everyone is combing the internet for the best value for unrealistic novelty and quality level teas.  

Only a limited subset of tea drinkers could even appreciate what these are, really.  And I don't see that as a bad thing; I personally don't need for the teas I experience and enjoy to be anywhere near this good.  When I drink Wuyi Origin teas I have a similar experience, that I can tell they're that much better than everything else I ever drink, but that in some limited sense that must still be wasted on me.

Conclusions:

There doesn't seem to be much more to cover, really, since I wrote some conclusions into the notes.  The Old Style version was quite good, only seeming less interesting for the Mao Feng version being that extra bit better.  I really didn't expect these teas to hold their own with Wuyi Origin's (Cindy's) Jin Jun Mei versions.  Maybe only the one did, but quality level, complexity, refinement, and novel style were all really far up the scale for that tea version.  It holds its own with anything else.

For people considering ordering this that might pose a dilemma:  it's quite interesting to compare different styles or versions of novel tea types together, but for sure the Mao Feng version is better.  It would help shift the psychology of that decision a little if they weren't priced the same.

They were both pleasant to try; Dylan sharing these samples was much appreciated.

ITea World Da Hong Pao and Zhangping Shui Xian

I'm reviewing the next two types of oolongs that were part of a set sent by ITea World for review.  This follows an earlier review of Dan Cong and Tie Guan Yin versions, here.  I had liked that Dan Cong more, but both seemed pleasant, and a reasonable value as moderate cost, above average quality, high volume tea outlet versions.

The same holds true for these, again with one outshining the other, per my personal preference.  The teas come as part of a sample set, here; they don't seem to be sold separately.  100 grams of four types of oolong are sold as 5 ounce separate samples, for 1475 baht, about $45.  That would be a good price if quality was exceptional, and not all that great a value if it was lower-medium level, and to me it seems fair for what the teas are, pretty good but not necessarily great.  They do seem a bit better than the versions they sent for review a year or so before.

To me the Dan Cong and Da Hong Pao really outshined the other two versions, but personal preference factors into such a judgement, even though I see it as also based on a fairly objective assessment of quality level and trueness to a standard type.  This post spells all that out in great detail, related to these two teas.  

In that earlier post I reviewed how some alternative sources work out, and I'll sample one from the top of a Google search list here to do the same, to clarify the one type, and support what I'm claiming about a market value:

Palais Des Thes Zhang Ping Shui Xian Grand Cru (selling for $48 per 100 grams)

This Zhang Ping Shui Xian Grand Cru, which translates to “water fairy from Zhang Ping”, is harvested in the namesake village in Fujian province, China. The tradition of oolong compression continues here: growers carefully compress oolong made from the Shui Xian cultivar into small cubes.

A superb oolong with delicate white flower, yellow fruit and vanilla notes which develop against a subtly powdered texture.

In order to bring out all the aromatic complexity of this tea, we recommend multiple infusions using the traditional Chinese Gong Fu Cha method.

Maybe that's roughly equivalent in quality level and style, or maybe it's better, or possibly even lower in quality level; there's no way to know without trying it.  That Google search turned up countless other examples, some costing significantly less, and again only trying them would indicate style, aspect range, and quality.  

Review:

Da Hong Pao:  this is nice.  It's so heavy on cinnamon flavor that it seems more type-typical for Rou Gui than Da Hong Pao, but it probably includes more Rou Gui than Shui Xian, and probably little or none of Qi Dan or Bei Dou, the more original DHP cultivars.  Da Hong Pao means two different things:  a derivative version of one of the original plant versions (7 originally, was it?), or else a style, most typically a blend of other plant types made to taste a certain way, typically with an upper-medium roast input level.  This could be the second thing.  Or it's conceivable that it could just be Rou Gui, but I doubt that.

This producer outlet listing of blended Da Hong Pao clarifies what I mean, about DHP also referring to a blend.

It's good, the main thing.  And the style is fine for the DHP range; it's appropriate.  It includes a good bit of inky mineral depth that works as a quality level marker across a lot of Wuyi Yancha range (just not always present; the styles of those vary, and plant types).  Sweetness is good, as is flavor range and overall balance.  Aftertaste is pronounced, already, including mostly that heavy cinnamon note.

Other flavor range matches ordinary DHP scope.  Warm mineral and cinnamon stand out the most, and the warm tones of a roast input (probably coupled with significant oxidation, not the low level version).  The rest is what people tend to describe in lots of different ways, as a familiar range, but one that doesn't map over to food and other flavor experience all that well.  It tastes like leather, or aromatic dark woods, towards incense spice, and so on.  It's not dis-similar to some dried fruit, like tamarind, but that's not it.  Probably an obscure spice reference is better than that whole list of guesses.

Zhangping Shui Xian:  this isn't really opened up yet; it will probably take two long infusions just to get it going.  I'll pass on an early impression anyway.  It's too light to come across as positively as it will when brewed stronger.  Often a bright freshness is a main part of this style of oolong, if the couple of examples I've tried are an indication, and this doesn't include all that much of that just yet.  The flavor that is present isn't too far off good Tie Guan Yin range.  

If floral tones pick up, and sweetness, and a fresh edge, this will be right where it should be.  If not it will be a decent but somewhat muted version of this style.  I'll take it apart to give it a chance to express itself better.

DHP #2:  mineral tones really pick up, from pronounced to quite strong.  That's positive, as I see it, a normal form of this type.  Roast input is moderate enough that that's lending to this effect quite a bit but it doesn't taste charred, in a good balance.  For people loving a lighter style of these range of teas that's not ideal, but DHP typically is like this, so those people should be drinking something else, a single cultivar type identified as made in that style.  Oddly when a version is sold as Qi Dan or Bei Dou it wouldn't usually be made in exactly this style; DHP really does refer to a processing form, even when the most original plant types are made into something that could fairly be called that, or really represent the original range even more than this evolved modern form does.  

Aftertaste is good in this, and feel thickness is upper medium, so in a pretty good balance.  The mineral really stays with you.  It really tastes like ink smells, as it should.  That effect leans a little towards a liqueur or perfume like character.

This is what you hope random gambling-oriented purchases of DHP in Chinatown shops would be like, and it almost never is.  I like lower quality DHP too though; to me some styles carry over and work better as lower quality versions, even giving up a positive attribute here or there.  Lower medium quality Tie Guan Yin can be drinkable but not as pleasant.  Moderate quality Dian Hong can be great.  I suppose that's all more about my subjective preference than anything that is grounded beyond my experience.

Zhangping Shui Xian:  it has good depth, and is pleasant in character.  The main limitation seems to come from my own expectations, of this including bright floral range and freshness.  It's not like that, at least not in a pronounced form.  The main flavor is quite similar to Tie Guan Yin range, but a warmer and more vegetal variation of that.  I suppose that's like Taiwanese oolong, just without the one pronounced unusual note those tend to include, a strong floral tone.  I could imagine people loving this style, but I don't.  It needs a bit more sweetness and floral range to tie the rest together.

It says on the packaging this is from an old plant source, and in some cases forward or higher end intensity can be diminished in older plants, swapped out for a greater depth.  That doesn't hold as true for Dan Cong; the range of sweet and aromatic tones in those tends to have a strong forward, higher end, more fragrant component, even in styles and versions where depth is more pronounced.  I'm not familiar enough with this style range to place it as just a normal variation or else atypical instead.

Other quality markers, beyond sweetness and flavor intensity, aren't as positive as they could be.  Thickness of feel is very limited, as is aftertaste.  It just doesn't seem exceptional.  It's good though, it's ok, but not as pleasant or seemingly a match in quality level to the DHP version.  That also isn't really in the "best of the best" range, but it's very positive, and works well, even venturing into complex and refined character, so close enough.

DHP #3:  more of the same; as described before.  I'd be surprised if this isn't half Rou Gui.  If so that's fine; they seem to have blended inputs that balance each other well, which is a good example of that second definition of Da Hong Pao.  A touch more woodiness enters in this round; this may be as positive as it will be, and could transition to be less exceptional over 2 or 3 more rounds.  We'll see.

Zhangping Shui Xian:  also more of the same.  A bit of additional warm spice may be picking up; it's better than in the first two rounds.  There is a fullness and depth to this, across flavor and to a lesser extent also feel range, with a touch more aftertaste expression picking up.  For people who love the greenest / lightest styles of Wuyi Yancha this may work well enough.  I can appreciate that style range, depending on what aspects are there, and I like this, but to me it's not really exceptional.  

Beyond lacking intensity, and some flavor aspect range that could be present, it includes no flaws.  It's hard to explain how that defines it, or where to place it in relation to what's not there.  This could easily taste woody, or include a trace of sourness, and so on, and it doesn't.  I might have not mentioned much for flavor yet, beyond that it's vaguely vegetal, in a neutral sense.  It's probably floral too, in a relatively neutral sense, as something like chrysanthemum is.  That's why it comes across as including depth and some complexity, even though flavor intensity is limited.

I'll give these one more 30 second or so infusion and then leave off taking notes.  That won't cover how they transition through the last half of the infusion range, but I can mention something about that later in a conclusion section, after drinking more later.  

I'm brewing 5 grams each of these, the sample versions, which is more like conventional Gongfu approach than I usually use.  I tend to max out proportion, brewing 7 or 8 grams in a 100 ml gaiwan, requiring using 10 to 15 second infusion times across the first half of the cycle, and resulting in brewing over a dozen rounds.  Either way works.

DHP 4:  this might be fading a little; that can happen, for using a lower proportion, and extending brewing times.  It's far from done but this won't make it past a dozen infusions, or maybe even 10.  I bet you could keep stretching this though, brewing it for 45 seconds to a minute lots of times, then even longer.  Cinnamon is fading as woody tones pick up; it's on the downhill side of positive character too.  

I was drinking both on the strong side, really pushing them both to drink this strong related to the other being subtle in character.  You could use shorter times and light infusion strength and this DHP would've been fine, or maybe better, per someone else's taste preference.

Zhangping Shui Xian:  it's fine, not different than last round.

I might mention that as a sheng pu'er drinker I'm acclimated to a really high intensity level in tea character.  For someone dialed into a lighter range this would probably come across better.  The intensity of the DHP brewed a bit strong worked for me, but this stays a bit subtle, picking up depth but not overall intensity.  Sweetness and bright floral tone missing seemed a limitation, although I suppose that it's possible that this is one conventional style version of this tea type.

Conclusions:

Those did start fading after that, so durability wasn't exceptional for either, but again I was pushing the teas related to using a low proportion (for me) and brewing them a bit strong.

So how good were they?  To me it's important to specify that within a range.  Were they presented as exceptional quality, boutique producer teas, or as better than average standard outlet versions?  Were they supposed to compete with the better curator vendor offerings, or instead high volume online outlets, or Chinatown shops?  In the middle, I think.  I'll add pricing and some background during the final editing but from the last review these are sold as medium priced teas, implying a medium level of quality.

In relation to that they're good.  I liked the Da Hong Pao version more, and it seemed like a better quality tea to me, but both were nice enough.  Both fell within a general range for type, although perhaps the Shui Xian could've been a little different, brighter in tone, with more floral range, and sweeter.  As I've mentioned this could've been within a standard range though; it's not a type or style I'm all that familiar with, having only tried a couple of related versions before.

In the last combined review from this set I liked the Dan Cong version more than the Tie Guan Yin, and to some extent that could've related to my preference for type matching that pattern.  That could've happened again.  I'm interpreting my impression as an objective assessment of style (match to standard type) and quality instead, but the themes and impression range can mix, to some extent.

It can be hard to be more specific; just how good were these, on a scale of 1 to 10, in relation to what is selling in mainstream outlets of other types at different pricing, etc.  I think the Da Hong Pao would be as good as what higher volume outlets (or smaller vendors too) sell for 40 cents per gram or so, if their value was good.  Market-style online outlets might carry more versions that aren't quite that good, with this equating to their higher end range.  

It's harder to say for the Shui Xian; the style is less common and less familiar.  Pricing might run slightly higher due to novelty.  I don't think this is an uncommon type or form, at this point, but it does seem like it's a type and presentation that has evolved relatively recently, at least related to Western exposure, to the extent types like Da Hong Pao and the Dan Cong and Tie Guan Yin ranges have been available.  The quality and aspects weren't as appealing for this version as the other, but it is a more novel style.