-
x

Meet New Friends!

Recommended friends are based on your interests. Make sure they are up to date.

Friends
Kidzworld Logo

Urban Legend or Coffee Delicacy?

Urban Legend or Coffee Delicacy? - Reviewed by Kidzworld on Dec 27, 2006
( Rating: 1 Star Rating)

Would you believe that there's a brand of coffee called Kopi Luwak that sells for as much as $300 US a pound, even though the beans have been picked out of a cat's poop?

Are you tired of getting your caffeine fix from your morning can of Coke or Pepsi? Lookin' to try something a bit out of the ordinary? Then maybe you should give Kopi Luwak a shot. It's a full-bodied coffee experience with a hint of chocolate that's a taste bud treat. If it sounds like a tempting alternative, then you will probably want to start saving your pennies - this coffee's gonna cost you a bit.

You see, Kopi Luwak goes through a pretty unique harvesting process that drives the cost of these beans through the roof. Coffee beans are actually the seed of a cherry-like fruit grown on islands like Java and Sumatra. An animal, much like the raccoon, called a Palm Civet, lives on these islands amongst the coffee trees. It is in these coffee plantations that the Palm Civet helps itself to the ripest cherries on the trees. Only the fruit gets digested and the Palm Civet later poops out the beans.

So instead of getting angry, plantation owners thought they would try to salvage the beans from the cat's feces. Only about 500 lbs (227 kg) of this oh-so-tasty coffee is harvested each year, which means you're going to be paying an arm and a leg for a sip. A pound of this delicacy goes for as much as $300 US ($387 CDN). And the cheapest you'll get a cup of the stuff for is $5 US ($6.45 CDN). Ouch! Seems like a lot of money for recycled (cough, cough) coffee.

In Morocco and Mexico entrepreneurs also rely on animal droppings for their livelihood. They sift through goat dropping for the pits of olives, which are then ground up for oil. The oil is then used for massages and cooking.

And that's not all. There is a certain kind of rice, collected only in China from the nests of the Taiwan Magpie. The birds collect many grains of rice in their mouths and then scatter them in the bottom of their nests. If harvested right away, the rice becomes a very rare treat that sells for hundreds of dollars a bag, around the world. If not collected in time (for example, after the birds have slept in it,) the rice is not sellable.

1 These things are so true. I know it! These rare, tasty treats sound yummy. Even if they weren't true, I wish they were!!!

Kidz Submit by:

Nickname: Smartest_gurl
Age: 10

What do you think about these strange products? Are any of 'em real, or did we make 'em up? and tell us what you think!

1 The last Believe It or Not story was about Back-to-School Urban Legends like, the mystery cafeteria food, a couple's braces getting caught together and the mixing of test papers. Did you fall for these urban legends? Then we tricked ya, cuz none of them are actually true!

Here's what you all thought about Back-to-School Urban Legends:

Believe It or Not?

I think they are all real. 46%
Only the one about the test could've happened. 15%
I guess we never really know what's in the caf food. 15%
None of them are real. They're just stories! 23%

Related Stories:

  • Exploding Water - Microwave
  • El Chupacabra
  • Weird Collections
  • More in The Lab!
  • 0 Comments

    Related Stories

    F1032478144609

    Believe These Stories or Not?

    • Yeah, I think they're all true.
    • Maybe the ones about olive oil and coffee are true.
    • The coffee one's true, I saw it on the news.
    • I don't think any of them are true.

    Random In The Forums

    -Gwen9--
    -Gwen9-- posted in Debating:
    "AlphaT" wrote: "donteatcarrots" wrote:​no. it's mainly the people who are given the guns that need to be properly checked. the guy who killed 49 people in orlando had mental health problems and trouble with the fbi was still given a gun. this doesn't make sense at all to me. yeah he probably has knives and stuff at home which could do just as much harm- so is the gun necessary in the first place? No one is given a gun. A person has to acquire a permit, and then has to buy a gun for themselves.  Okay, yes, mental health is an obvious issue. But it needs to be for specific mental health problems. It can't be just because someone has a mental illness, because many mental illnesses won't effect the operation and use of a gun, or make it more likely for a person to hurt someone else with a gun. I support background checks which would include mental health history, but only if it's done right. Similarly, the guy who killed 49 people in Orlando was taken off the FBI watchlist. This tells me that there are flaws with the way that the watchlist is currently being used. Once that system is redone, then we can restrict those on it from buying firearms. But at its' current success rate? Not a chance.  And it's not about what's necessary...well to an extent it is, but hear me out. Weapons are used for self defense. No matter how many gun laws you have, criminals will still use firearms in their crimes. Citizens require at least an equal amount of protection that criminals use to break the law.  In other words, if you were to be the victim of gun violence, would you rather have with you a knife or a gun? Would you honestly bring a knife to a gun fight?  First of all, I agree with you. Mental health is definitely an issue! But together these issues can be addressed!!!! And as I said earlier, we can control our weapons. The government can create a harder way to get a gun or any weapon. Look at criminal records!!!! Even before getting a permit, or a license, CHECK THE RECORDS!!! This will help prevent these mass shootings.
    reply about 2 hours
    Hoellu
    Hoellu posted in Debating:
    "-Gwen9--" wrote:The second amendmant in the United States Constitution is the right to bare arms. If they take away our weapons, then they take away the second amendmant. The amendmant is there for a reason. Weapons are useful for protection. Protection is going to keep us alive. The human population, as a nation, and as a world! If we take away our weapons now we are all dead! We don't want that.  Now, killing 50 people in the Orlando shooting. That is just not right at all. It was not the gun's fault, it was the person. Same thing with the death of Christina Grimmie. Now, I personally believe that we should not take guns away, but we should find a harder process into buying a gun or some other weapon, and we should be trained properly! Look at people's criminal records, look at their other records. I don't care! As long as we still have protection, but less mass shootings! Omg, so true.
    reply about 2 hours
    AdeleQxeen
    AdeleQxeen posted in Electronics:
    I have one. I got it for my birthday last year, it's a Samsung Core Prime.
    reply about 2 hours
    Hoellu
    Hoellu posted in Debating:
    If there are polices, why are there weapons for almost anyone?Or at least they should have an special permission.
    reply about 2 hours
    AlphaT
    AlphaT posted in Debating:
    "donteatcarrots" wrote:​no. it's mainly the people who are given the guns that need to be properly checked. the guy who killed 49 people in orlando had mental health problems and trouble with the fbi was still given a gun. this doesn't make sense at all to me. yeah he probably has knives and stuff at home which could do just as much harm- so is the gun necessary in the first place? No one is given a gun. A person has to acquire a permit, and then has to buy a gun for themselves.  Okay, yes, mental health is an obvious issue. But it needs to be for specific mental health problems. It can't be just because someone has a mental illness, because many mental illnesses won't effect the operation and use of a gun, or make it more likely for a person to hurt someone else with a gun. I support background checks which would include mental health history, but only if it's done right. Similarly, the guy who killed 49 people in Orlando was taken off the FBI watchlist. This tells me that there are flaws with the way that the watchlist is currently being used. Once that system is redone, then we can restrict those on it from buying firearms. But at its' current success rate? Not a chance.  And it's not about what's necessary...well to an extent it is, but hear me out. Weapons are used for self defense. No matter how many gun laws you have, criminals will still use firearms in their crimes. Citizens require at least an equal amount of protection that criminals use to break the law.  In other words, if you were to be the victim of gun violence, would you rather have with you a knife or a gun? Would you honestly bring a knife to a gun fight? 
    reply about 2 hours