Close
DIY today i learned (til)

Butterfly Pea Flower Tea

April 5, 2019

A cup of tea brings feelings of peace and serenity to mind.  Whether it be a rainy day or cold evening, drinking a warm cup of tea has never failed to help me feel calm and happy.   There’s an amazing selection of tea for all types of different palates to choose from like your classic green, black, and white tea, but my personal, newfound favorite is butterfly pea flower tea!  Befitting its exquisite name, this tea also has an appearance like no other.

Butterfly pea flower tea may seem like a new and recent addition to tea shelves, but this tea has been consumed in Southeast Asian countries like Thailand and Malaysia for centuries.  It is a caffeine-free beverage made from oftentimes dried lemongrass and blue flowers and leaves of a plant known as Clitoria ternatea (Centeno, 2018).  It is said to have an earthy taste similar to green tea despite its color (Goldberg, 2016).

What makes this tea unique, however, is not just its natural, blue color, but its ability to change color depending on pH.  Adding lemon will allow this beverage to take on a purple color (see below).  Add more and it’ll turn hot pink, adding a perfect and mesmerizing ombre. Like other plants that function as pH indicators, butterfly pea consists of anthocyanins, allowing it to change color.  The plant has been tested as a pH indicator to successfully differentiate pH levels between 2-12 (Amaolo, 2017).

Anthocyanins also contain high amounts of antioxidants, making blue tea a common use in traditional medicine and a source of many health benefits (Kungsuwan, Singh, Phetkao, & Utama-ang, 2014).  Butterfly pea flower extract has been found to have anti-inflammatory and pain-relieving abilities (Kumar and Ishwar, 2012) as well as the potential to relieve diabetic complications caused by advanced glycation end products (AGEs).  AGEs are compounds that can clog vessels and form more often in diabetics when sugars combine with particular amino acids (Barone, 2017).  Clitoria ternatea extract has also been found to improve memory and acetylcholine levels (Taranalli & Cheeramkuzhy, 2011) and has anti-depressant, anti-stress, anti-convulsant, and anti-microbial properties (Jain et al., 2003).   Its antioxidant activity has also been applied in cosmetics (Kamkaen & Wilkinson, 2009).

Try making your own tea by seeping 1-2 teaspoons of butterfly pea flower with a cup of water and add honey, lemon, juice, or milk for more flavor.  You can also make ice cubes with the tea to add color to any drink!

 

References
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Amaolo, A. (2017). The Butterfly Pea Flower as a pH Indicator. Retrieved from http://isjos.org/ISJOSv11p2-ButterflyPeaIndicator.pdf

Barone, J. (2017, February 28). What Are AGEs (Advanced Glycation End-Products)? Retrieved from http://www.berkeleywellness.com/healthy-eating/food-safety/article/abcs-ages-advanced-glycation-end-products

Centeno, E. (2018, July 03). What is Butterfly Pea Flower Tea? Retrieved from https://spoonuniversity.com/lifestyle/what-is-butterfly-pea-flower-tea-hint-it-changes-color

Goldberg, E. (2016, January 31). The Science Behind This Mesmerizing Color-Changing Tea. Retrieved from https://www.bonappetit.com/drinks/non-alcoholic/article/butterfly-pea-flower-color-changing-tea

Jain, N. N., Ohal, C. C., Shroff, S. K., Bhutada, R. H., Somani, R. S., Kasture, V. S., & Kasture, S. B. (2003, June). Clitoria ternatea and the CNS. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12895670

Kamkaen, N., & Wilkinson, J. M. (2009, November). The antioxidant activity of Clitoria ternatea flower petal extracts and eye gel. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19367668

Kumar, S. & Ishwar, B. (2012, March 19). Anti Inflammatory, Analgesic and Phytochemical Studies of Clitoria Ternatea Linn Flower Extract. Retrieved from https://irjponline.com/admin/php/uploads/935_pdf.pdf

Kungsuwan, K., Singh, K., Phetkao, S., & Utama-ang, N. (2014). Effects of pH and anthocyanin concentration on color and antioxidant activity of Clitoria ternatea extract. Retrieved from https://www.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/fabjournal/article/view/77397

Taranalli, A., & Cheeramkuzhy, T. (2011, January 10). Influence of Clitoria Ternatea Extracts on Memory and Central Cholinergic Activity in Rats. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1076/1388-0209(200001)3811-BFT051

Tags:
0Likes
Anna Ho
About Author

Anna is a pre-medicine Neuroscience undergraduate at Georgia Tech. In her free time, she enjoys watching anime, drinking bubble tea, and spending time on her piano. She is also obsessed with cats.

You May Also Like

today i learned (til)
The Black Dot vs The Highlighter
today i learned (til)
AI and VR: A New Reality
today i learned (til)
Megalodon: Fact or Fiction?
today i learned (til)
Choking in Basketball

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.