Is MSG the solution to high salt in our food?

On ABC last night (now available on iview)

Michael Mosley’s Secrets Of Your Food
A Matter Of Taste: Michael Mosley & James Wong explore the sensations, tastes & flavours of food. Unpack the >>evolution of our sense of taste & smell, when delicious food became more than a choice but a matter of survival.

he discussed naturally occurring glutamate in foods.

3 Likes

Will endeavour to check this out. Thanks for the heads up :+1:

2 Likes

Thanks for letting us know Gordon, I will watch this and see what he has to say.

Michael Mosley is a qualified Doctor and is not one for mincing facts, even if his own opinions differ.
Thanks again.
Cheers Natalie :slight_smile:

1 Like

Watched the show and was interesting. It is worth seeing so one can make their own judgement about risks of eating glutimates at normal levels in a balanced diet.

There seems to be a lot of hysteria about a lot of naturally occurring compounds…which humans have consumed as part of their diets for generations. Such evidence based information as in the TV show can be useful when deciphering myths from facts.

2 Likes

No, please no! I’m sensitive to msg (glutamate) and have a very low dose threshold before I break out in a nasty rash and facial swelling. This is a common intolerance and I have been diagnosed with this through the RPA allergy clinic in Sydney.
There are so many foods I can’t eat anymore and seeing as I have low blood pressure, added salt is a good thing for me.
Im just one person though a lot of my health focused friends avoid food additives and wouldn’t buy food with flavour enhancers. (MSG)

2 Likes

Hi everyone! Here’s an unbiased view of the MSG debate. Totally worth a watch to learn the truth about this additive. :slight_smile:

4 Likes

Here’s the link to the episode.

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/thecheckout/episodes/s06ep07.htm at the 10-minute mark.

1 Like

Many views in many debates seem to be unbiased according to the people who hold and/or promote those views - with their agenda often being one of truth or the greater good, at least as stated. Of course given their view is unbiased, the truth is a natural conclusion, in their view, so if you get people over the first line, they are sold. In some cases these debates pit people who have experienced something bad against people who, well, haven’t, but for some reason take the opposing view because they either see no evidence to support the cause and effect (and it’s their duty to correct anyone around them who is ‘wrong’, in their view) or because they are just the kind of person who takes an opposing view or (believe it or not) because it is hurting their wallet … in my view. Sometimes the people who have experienced something bad simply know how to avoid it, and take steps accordingly, which might not be evidence based but if it works for them it doesn’t seem that wrong either … The video to me seems a little like what I’d expect to hear in a church or a used car yard :slight_smile:

2 Likes

I agree that the video lacks a great deal in style. It is horridly dressed up with plenty of oversimplification, corny scripting and hammy acting. It is very evangelical and glossy-selling in style. Some producers don’t believe you can get people to pay attention to “science” without going completely over the top.

But what about the substance? Strip off all the gloss and it looks to me to be a fair summary of the history of MSG and the current position of the science, albeit very simplified.

4 Likes

I think its part of a bigger picture, and I have to tell you I’m a incurable cynic.

I could tell you about a little boy, 5 years old, who was out of control. Totally. Got the ‘standard’ diagnosis of ADD or ADHD or whatever, labels to me are dodgy sometimes, but we need to take things somewhere. Cure was apparently drugs - Ritalin - but the psych, probably seeing the look of horror on the parents face, said there might be an alternative. Avoiding flavour enhancers was a part of that, and no, there was little ‘scientific evidence’ in what the parents saw, but a lot of anecdotal. Some few months later that 5 year old was a different child, it was so obvious - and the whole family was more aware of the additives they had been eating and yes, very anecdotally, felt better for it. Of course its good to feel better about a journey that was hard. The 5 year old had 2 siblings with similar concerns, one dramatically more prominent - all ‘controlled’ at worst and eliminated mostly by what seemed to be witchcraft in some ways … especially to a cynic. That 5 year old is consistently achieved high distinctions in his uni course - his 2 younger siblings, different kids in their own ways, both doing very very well - and all doing far better than their father, who by the way is an incurable cynic.

The family was told by a somewhat ‘fringe’ doctor (BSc Med) in Melbourne that there was a good chance the kids would grow out of the more obvious symptoms … and in many ways they have.

Now that’s a much bigger picture than just MSG - it’s about food additives in general, environmental things like cleaning products, perfumes, etc - and is there a shred of scientific evidence? possibly not - but sometimes incurable cynics are driven to actions in desperation and outcome overrides cynicism. The cynic in our story - the dad - saw many examples of people who seemed to take things way too far by his assessment, maybe they had it much worse, maybe they just thought if reducing is good then permanently eliminating is best - of course you can’t eat air alone, though there are some who claim to.

Now there’s not a bee’s pecker of science in my story above - I know that, and I don’t really care - because I’m aware that stuff was done, actions were taken, for reasons largely anecdotal, to try something - when the alternative according to science was Ritalin, and the outcome of this witchcraft was good. Could the outcome have been achieved in another way? I don’t know. Was other damage done? I don’t know. Were some good things wrongly grouped with bad things? I don’t know. Is this good for everyone because it appeared to address a certain set of problems? I don’t know. Don’t know much do I - I know from my point of view it met a need and worked, and I’m OK with that. That doesn’t fit with the approach of an incurable cynic does it :slight_smile:

As far as the video goes - to me it oozes agenda. There’s a lot of leaps - so what if you can find a chemical compound in something? There’s all sorts of chemicals at certain levels in our environment and our food, that doesn’t mean they are good for us, and how do we know the context of other chemicals they are delivered with? Salt occurs naturally, but we don’t just add it because it does. So do sugars - then argue delivery methods of juice in an orange you eat verses drinking a litre of the stuff and not eating the solids of 12 (or however many) oranges. It just seemed way too simplified to me, with some big leaps - way to big for an incurable cynic who on this subject can afford not to just focus on outcome because he is a desperate dad trying to avoid a drug.

Do I eat MSG - sure - sometimes, but I choose to avoid it when I can - along with as many other food additives I can avoid without cutting off my nose to spite my face. I don’t understand why we ‘need’ so much stuff to make our food ‘better’. Classic example (because I like them) is rice biscuits. Sakata have additives in their flavoured bikkies, or most of them, so be it - but in their plain rice biscuits, they have no flavour enhancer. No surprise, say most people - they are plain after all … but of the brands I have checked, not exhaustive, they are the only brand who do not add flavour enhancers to their plain variety of rice biscuits. So how do you enhance the flavour plain ?? is there a plain plain and an enhanced plain - new improved plain with extra plain flavour? I don’t need a sign saying “dodgy as hell” to know something a company is doing is “dodgy as hell” … you do not need to enhance something that is plain, and Sakata prove that. I like the idea that food companies can make processed food products using only food, in most cases. Now if I’ve spent 16 hours battling computer issues at work and I go to the vending machine to get a Sui-Min in a foam cup - just add boiling water and the chemicals will make you feel good? I do that in full knowledge that “it is not food” but in some way it might help preserve my existence on this mortal coil long enough for me to get home and eat something real then have a nip of Glenlossie 20 Year Old Single Cask Single Malt which I know full well is not professional psychological therapy, even if the outcome seems far more therapeutic …

2 Likes

To make up for lack of freshness, cultivars grown for appearance and durability instead of taste and people who cannot understand that they actually do have time to cook properly.

As long as you sip it, inhale it and roll it around, take it in modest amounts and ponder while you do, it is good for you. If you bolt it down to prevent yourself from pondering it is just a drug. Much more expensive than many but not as expensive as some.

Slàinte!

1 Like

That is only one part of it. The spice trade was in full swing before modern flavourless varieties. My premise is supported by the reality that people seem enthralled with ‘not the flavours’ as well as ‘enhanced flavours’ starting with salt and pepper. Conceptually there is no difference between (eg) salt and pepper and thyme and MSG as they are all enhancements.

Eg, the simple crisp. Chicken flavour, nacho flavour, salt and vinegar flavour, pickle(!), cheese and onion, honey dijon, bacon mac and cheese, marmite, roast beef and yorkshire pudding and on it goes. (search on potato chip flavours and look at the images!) One needs to look hard for potato flavoured crisps, and yes many labels show ‘potato flavoured’ as just ‘salted’ (or ‘unsalted’).

1 Like

I understand why ‘they’ need it/what it is - it was the collective ‘we’ and the conjured ‘need’ - why ‘we’ ‘need’ it. ‘We’ have been sucked in… nothing new there, I do understand it, but I don’t :wink:

Indeed - I cringe when someone uses the words ‘drink’ and ‘scotch’ loosely in the same sentence … most likely Vat 69 ‘mixed’ with Coke … might as well use Fanta for that real flavour experience :wink:

1 Like

It should be noted that MSG should not be confused with other food additives. There is also confusion in relation to MSG and other additives used to enhance the flavour of the processed food. There are numerous other non-MSG additives, including other non-sodium (NA) glutamate forms and also other synthesised/naturally forming flavour enhancers. The list includes:

E621 Monosodium glutamate
E622 Monopotassium glutamate
E623 Calcium diglutamate
E624 Monoammonium glutamate
E625 Magnesium diglutamate
E626 Guanylic acid
E627 Disodium guanylate
E628 Dipotassium guanylate
E629 Calcium guanylate
E630 lnosinic acid
E631 Disodium inosinate
E632 Dipotassium inosinate
E633 Calcium inosinate
E634 Calcium 5’-ribonucleotides
E635 Disodium 5’-ribonucleotides
E640 Glycine and its sodium salt

Acids and common salt (NaCl) added to food also are considered food flavour enhancers, but usually are categorised as other food additives rather than under the food enhancer categories.

There are many journal articles on each of these food additives which address their safety and metabolism in the body.

It should also be noted that if one is consuming added flavour enhancers, it will be that added to processed food, it is likely that these same processed foods contain other additives which have been reported to cause problems in sensitive people. Such additives include:

Food colourings – sunset yellow FCF (E110), quinoline yellow (E104) carmoisine (E122), allura red (E129), tartrazine (E102) and ponceau 4R (E124)

Preservatives – benzoates 210, 211, 212, 213; nitrates 249, 250, 251, 252; sulphites 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225 and 228

Artificial sweetener – aspartame 951.

The above food colours have had proven associations with hyperactivity in some children. It is worth noting that in the EU, there is mandatory labelling of food containing the above colours. The label must carry the warning ‘may have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children’. The same mandatory labelling is not required for food enhancers, including MSG.

Choice has also addressed some of the reported health consequences of those sensitive to some food additives, consuming such additives.

While some additives may cause reactions in sensitive individuals, it appears that the sensitives may be caused by non-food enhancer additives…and blaming MSG as it has had bad/misinformed press over the years. Possibly the ‘Chinese restaurant syndrome’ and the assertions made about MSG have clouded the potential sensitives associated with other additives, causing one to bundle all food additives into the same food sensitivity category.

It is also worth reading information on the Food Standards Australia and New Zealand website about food additives as well.

5 Likes

Agree, and without doing any research, it is likely that flavour enhancers used in processed foods or added to cooking are chemically the same as the flavour enhancers present in the spices or ‘natural’ foods.

Salt is a flavour enhancer (and also food preserver) which has been used for centuries. Likewise the addition of acids to foods for both preservation and taste (flavour enhancer or for pH balance).

Like all food additives, the problems are likely to potentially arise when additives are added to foods above and beyond that which exists naturally. If high doses are taken, such as salt (well really the sodium in salt) in the long term, health affects are well know.

Consuming large dose of anything could lead to either short term or long term health impacts. This is why regulators often nominate the maximum amount allowed to be added to foods so that the amounts consumed, are never likely to exceed the levels where problems are likely to occur.

7 Likes

It is a fairly big picture - you raise an interesting point about colours because while I found it fairly easy to avoid flavour enhancers and sweeteners, avoiding potentially problematic colours and preservatives was, at least 20 or so years ago, much more of a challenge.

MSG is definitely the “easy target”, “the poster child of all food evil” so to speak, so whether it contributes to a particular individuals woes or not, it takes the fall because it is the most well known of all the alleged bad things we add or that occur naturally and it lives in the 600’s “group”. So-called “elimination diets” administered without clinical oversight and guidance probably have a case to answer here I feel … which is not to say they don’t have a place, but they need to be done properly, with rigour and no faith/emotion …

… as radio station KDND in Sacramento CA found out … we come back to one of the most dangerous substances on the planet, oxidane. Not likely to see that banned any time soon though … :slight_smile:

3 Likes

Me too. My BP goes up if I have too much. A friend of mine used to carry antihistamines in her purse just in case, and one night at a Chinese restaurant, I watched her flush begin from her neck up to her face, she was glowing like a light… she had to take her antihistamines PDQ because that happened really fast after the first bite. I think the dangers are probably overblown to a degree but theres no harm in being careful.

2 Likes