NationStates Jolt Archive

This question is for medical doctors and other people in the industry; I don't usually trust other websites because the academic opinion seems to be more consistent (every physics teacher I had claims that anybody claiming the doomsday LHC theory is not a very good physicist).

Googling "msg health effects" yields various websites that describe mostly the same thing from the FDA warning:


* Headache, sometimes called MSG headache
* Flushing
* Sweating
* Sense of facial pressure or tightness
* Numbness, tingling or burning in or around the mouth
* Rapid, fluttering heartbeats (heart palpitations)
* Chest pain
* Shortness of breath
* Nausea
* Weakness


Other websites discuss the long term effect (does not cite the FDA report) such as increased cancer risk, and brain growth stunting. They also recommend pregnant women and children to not consume any MSG.

However, the wiki article on MSG reports on none of these health effects. The forementioned articles do not describe any information on dosage and context of the MSG use.

Even more confusing is this article:


It does not matter whether you select glutamate-rich foods and ingredients, like tomatoes, Parmesan cheese, walnuts, MSG, or soy sauce; the glutamate in each is the same.

Medical specialists have known for decades that your body does not distinguish between the glutamate found naturally in foods and that in MSG. In fact, even today’s state-of-the-art technology can’t separate them. For example, if you analyzed a plate of spaghetti you could identify the total amount of glutamate in the dish. However, there is no way to determine whether the glutamate came from tomatoes, Parmesan cheese, or MSG.

from http://www.msgfacts.com/lookatfacts.html . The website also claims that it is safe for infants and pregnant women to consume MSG, and is a generally safe additive.


Here's the question:

Are those who eat ramen/canned soup everyday, in no more of a risk than people who chronically eat homemade pastas or use soya sauce, if taken in relatively same proportion?

Do people in your field generally consume foods that include non-heavy MSG?


Extra unrelated question: do fancy bar soaps act as antibacterials? What about dish washing detergents?

Thanks

This question is for medical doctors and other people in the industry; I don't usually trust other websites because the academic opinion seems to be more consistent (every physics teacher I had claims that anybody claiming the doomsday LHC theory is not a very good physicist).

<snip>

And those physics teachers were right. There were no valid scientific concerns about the LHC from people informed about the subject.

Consider this a reasonable lesson about what can happen when the press report on information they don't really understand.

Wow, spending 5 minutes reading this stuff on MSG after eating potentially MSG spiced food made me sweat, short of breath and heart ache :confused:

And those physics teachers were right. There were no valid scientific concerns about the LHC from people informed about the subject.

Consider this a reasonable lesson about what can happen when the press report on information they don't really understand.

My opinion/position was that the doomsday scenario would likely not happen, because of conventional reasons, rather than a purely scientific/statistical one. That would make me just as ignorant and blind as the non-scientific doomsday believers on the matter.

You can try searching google "site:.edu MSG" -- all of those links will be .edu based. You can also try online libraries if you're in college, most of that stuff is peer reviewed.

The world would be out of asians if MSG were very dangerous. Yeah, it's bad for you in high doses, but I doubt it's much worse than regular salt.

I'll try looking at .edu websites, thanks.

The world would be out of asians if MSG were very dangerous.

Exactly, MSG is perfectly ordinary for daily consumption in somewhere like Japan (miso soup, various pickles and sauces), not to mention how much sodium is consumed every meal. Not to mention that almost every Chinese/Vietnamese kitchen stocks fish sauce and chicken or wonton flavored bouillon.

The first golden rule is to always remember to ignore the FDA. The FDA says whatever it is paid to say.

If you want to know if something is good or bad for you, try looking for your answers in Europe. That's where all the real research is done. (The stuff the FDA ignores if it doesn't like it).

The first golden rule is to always remember to ignore the FDA. The FDA says whatever it is paid to say.

If you want to know if something is good or bad for you, try looking for your answers in Europe. That's where all the real research is done. (The stuff the FDA ignores if it doesn't like it).

Very sadly and angrily: this. :(

The first golden rule is to always remember to ignore the FDA. The FDA says whatever it is paid to say.

If you want to know if something is good or bad for you, try looking for your answers in Europe. That's where all the real research is done. (The stuff the FDA ignores if it doesn't like it).

Eh. They aren't *that* bad. Or at least, they're only as bad as the hands that happen to be manipulating the puppet strings at the moment. Either way, most of what I eat isn't FDA-approved. :tongue:

Eh. They aren't *that* bad. Or at least, they're only as bad as the hands that happen to be manipulating the puppet strings at the moment. Either way, most of what I eat isn't FDA-approved. :tongue:

Rather depends on your definition of 'that bad'.

Approving drugs like Ritalin, whilst simultaneously allowing common usage of additives that - in Europe - have long been identified as causing attention deficit and overactivity in children... just for example. Is that 'bad'?

Withholding contraceptive products based not on science, research or testing... but on political pressure. Is that bad?

Vioxx had been approved by the FDA too, keep that in mind.

If you want to know if something is good or bad for you, try looking for your answers in Europe. That's where all the real research is done. (The stuff the FDA ignores if it doesn't like it).

Real research gets done in the US too. It just very often doesn't see the light of day is all.

But yah, the FDA can be all clusterfucky quite often.

Vioxx had been approved by the FDA too, keep that in mind.

That's another point - the FDA chooses to push some products much faster than others because of market pressures. When the bottomline trumps adequate testing, there's a problem.

Real research gets done in the US too. It just very often doesn't see the light of day is all.

But yah, the FDA can be all clusterfucky quite often.

Most of the legitimate research gets done in Europe. Most of the legitimate research that gets done for US products, even, gets done in Europe.

But, regardless, whether it's done 'over there' or 'over here', the FDA cherrypicks results. And chooses to ignore (sometimes decades) of research, if it doesn't want it.

Rather depends on your definition of 'that bad'.

Approving drugs like Ritalin, whilst simultaneously allowing common usage of additives that - in Europe - have long been identified as causing attention deficit and overactivity in children... just for example. Is that 'bad'?

Withholding contraceptive products based not on science, research or testing... but on political pressure. Is that bad?

What additives? I'd like to know for future reference.