Adam Nason has reported a list of beers which were considered to be infected. The information came in over twitter on the 22nd of May at 22:42. Here is the original text:

"A list of craft beers that have been reported as infected over the past few years http://bit.ly/me6Y3z"

The link leads to a Google Doc spreadsheet where a list of beers / breweries which sell infected beers could be found. The list was put together in a common effort (also called crowd sourcing) and is managed by the guys at the
beeradvocate forum. The problem with this spreadsheet is that it contains almost no sources. From a buyers' point of view I am not able to verify if the given information is correct or just badmouthing. In fact, that brings the reliability of this list close to zero.

To gain trust this list should at least contain a column where it is stated if an infection was confirmed by a laboratory and if yes, which laboratory confirmed it. If no laboratory has confirmed the infection, the person who put the beer on the list should write down their name and contact details.

In the meantime the reported beers / breweries with no sources available should be deleted from the list. Currently, we should consider to not trust this list. Breweries on the list should check the reported problem and confirm it - or if it the listing is untrue, ask to be taken down from the list.

If we are going to produce a blacklist of breweries and beers there needs to be more to it than what is being done at this time. We need quality control in place and we mustn’t rely just on information of friends and Twitter acquaintances. This could destroy trust in breweries for the sake of the Internet. We need at least to make sure that an authority can confirm the information that leads to blacklisting.

What authority that should be is point of discussion. In my opinion every reported beer has to be checked by an unbiased microbiological institute.