Dean,
I am fully aware that wort has a greater risk of contamination. However, I fail to see how using a sanitized stirrer for two minutes raises a significant risk of contamination. For years, homebrewers have been told to shake a carboy back and forth to add oxygen to wort or to splash wort during racking from a kettle to fermenter to achieve aeration. I fail to see the significant risk if sanitation practices arestrictly followed. I have not had any problems since my first year of brewing 12 years ago with off flavors due to contamination, and even that was due to the lack of a wort chiller and letting wort sit for hours to cool before pitching yeast. I also am curious why we use a stirrer to drive CO2 OUT ofsolution, but believe it will drive oxygen INTO solution at the same quantity as anaeration stone. I think for most wine musts, aeration is not a critical factor. But I think aeration is very important for meads and the possiblity of adding an aeration stone to a stuck fermentation may have merit. When I first began making wine and beer in 1994, I was told to boil wort for an hour as an extract brewer to avoid contamination. Now we know that is not necessary, as late extract addition demonstrates. When I began, I was told to boil honey to sanitize it. Then I was told to hold it at 160 F to pasteurize it. Now, as Masta informed me, the preferred method is no heat at all based on scientific evidence that honey does not raise the same sanitation concerns.I wish we would not accept past assumptions that arose when homebrewers and winemakers had poor sanitation practices andinadequate resources and knowledge, and poor quality homebrewing supplies and apply the scientific methodolgyto current homebrewing and home winemaking, just as the Aussies are doing for commercial winemaking. Are there any studies of how much oxygen is added by stirring with a drill, versus hand-stirring, versus an aeration stone? Perhaps this material is available, but I have not read it in my extensive review of hobby literature.