Search

MSG is back. Is the idea it’s bad for us just a myth or food science?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/evangeline-mantzioris-153250">Evangeline Mantzioris</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> MSG is making a comeback. The internet’s favourite cucumber salad recipe includes fish sauce, cucumber, garlic and – as the video’s creator Logan tells us with a generous sprinkle from the bag – “MSG, obviously”. But for many of us, it’s not obvious. Do you have a vague sense MSG is unhealthy but you’re not sure why? Here is the science behind monosodium glutamate, how it got a bad rap, and whether you should add it to your cooking. <h2>What is MSG?</h2> Monosodium glutamate (MSG) is a sodium salt of glutamic acid, one of the amino acids that make up proteins. It occurs naturally in <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10942912.2017.1295260#d1e167">foods</a> such as mature cheeses, fish, beef, mushrooms, tomatoes, onion and garlic. It provides their savoury and “meaty” flavour, known as <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022316622140186">umami</a>. MSG has been used to season food for <a href="https://wjpsonline.com/index.php/wjps/article/view/effects-monosodium-glutamate-human-health-review">more than 100 years</a>. Traditionally it <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/ed081p347?ref=article_openPDF">was extracted</a> from seaweed broth, but now it’s made by fermenting starch in sugar beets, sugar cane and molasses. Today it’s widely used as a flavour enhancer in many dishes and pre-packaged goods, including soups, condiments and processed meats. There is no chemical difference between the MSG found in food and the additive. <h2>Is it safe?</h2> For most people, yes. MSG is a safe and authorised additive, according to the Australian agency that regulates food. This corresponds with food standards in the <a href="https://www.fda.gov/food/food-additives-petitions/questions-and-answers-monosodium-glutamate-msg">United States</a>, <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02008R1333-20201223#tocId3">European Union and United Kingdom</a>. Two major <a href="https://www.foodstandards.gov.au/sites/default/files/consumer/additives/msg/Documents/MSG%20Technical%20Report.pdf">safety reviews</a> have been conducted: one in 1987 by a United Nations expert committee and another 1995 by the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology. Both concluded MSG was safe for the general population. In 2017 the <a href="https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4910">European Food Safety Authority</a> updated its stance and set a recommended limit based on body weight, aimed to prevent headaches and increased blood pressure. That limit is still higher than most people consume. The authority says an 80kg person should not have more than 2.4g of added MSG per day. <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/1602526">For reference</a>, Europeans average less than a gram per day (0.3-1 gram), while in Asia intake is somewhere between 1.2-1.7 grams a day. Food Standards Australia New Zealand says the European update does not raise any new safety concerns not already assessed. <h2>Isn’t it bad for me?</h2> Despite the evidence, the idea MSG is dangerous persists. Its notorious reputation can be traced back to a <a href="https://news.colgate.edu/magazine/2019/02/06/the-strange-case-of-dr-ho-man-kwok/">hoax letter</a> published in the <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM196805162782014">New England Journal of Medicine</a> in 1968. A doctor claiming to have experienced palpitations, numbness and fatigue after eating at a Chinese restaurant suggested MSG could be to blame. With a follow-up article in the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1968/05/19/archives/-chinese-restaurant-syndrome-puzzles-doctors.html">New York Times</a>, the idea of “Chinese Restaurant Syndrome” took off. Eating MSG was associated with a range of symptoms, including headache, hives, throat swelling, itching and belly pain. However an <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/027869159390012N?via%3Dihub">early randomised control trial</a> showed no difference in these symptoms between people who were given MSG versus a placebo. This has since been confirmed in a <a href="https://ift.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1541-4337.12448">review of many studies</a>. <h2>Can MSG cause reactions?</h2> A very small percentage of people may have hypersensitivities to MSG. The reported reaction is now known as MSG symptom complex, rather than so-called Chinese restaurant syndrome, with its <a href="https://www.jandonline.org/article/S2212-2672(21)00068-X/abstract#:%7E:text=A%20New%20York%20Times%20piece,connecting%20MSG%20to%20health%20outcomes.">problematic</a> racial connotations. Symptoms are usually mild, short-term and don’t need treatment. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091674999703714">One study</a> looked at 100 people with asthma, 30 of whom believed they had hypersensitivities to MSG. However when participants were blinded to whether they were consuming MSG, not one reported a reaction. If you believe you do react to added MSG, it’s relatively easy to avoid. In Australia, it is <a href="https://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumer/additives/msg">listed</a> in ingredients as either monosodium glutamate or flavour enhancer 621. <h2>Is it better than table salt?</h2> Using MSG instead of regular salt may help <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6893472/">reduce</a> your overall sodium intake, as MSG <a href="https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/msg-what-the-science-says-about-its-safety#Uses-of-MSG">contains</a> about one third the amount of sodium. <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21372742/">One study</a> found people who ate soup seasoned with MSG rather than salt actually liked it more. They still found it salty to taste, but their sodium intake was reduced by 18%. MSG still contains sodium, so high use is associated with increased <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21372742/">blood pressure</a>. If you’re using MSG as a substitute and you have high blood pressure, you should closely monitor it (just as you would with other salt products). <h2>Should I use MSG in my cooking?</h2> If you want to – yes. Unless you are one of the rare people with hypersensitivities, enhancing the flavour of your dish with a sprinkle of MSG will not cause any health problems. It could even help reduce how much salt you use. If you’re <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25765299.2020.1807084#d1e199">vegetarian or vegan</a>, cooking with MSG could help add the umami flavour you may miss from animal products such as meat, fish sauce and cheese. But buying foods with added MSG? Be aware, many of them will also be <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/public-health-nutrition/article/un-decade-of-nutrition-the-nova-food-classification-and-the-trouble-with-ultraprocessing/2A9776922A28F8F757BDA32C3266AC2A">ultra-processed</a> and it’s that – not the MSG – that’s associated with poor physical and mental <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/1/174">health outcomes</a>.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/237871/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/evangeline-mantzioris-153250">Evangeline Mantzioris</a>, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/msg-is-back-is-the-idea-its-bad-for-us-just-a-myth-or-food-science-237871">original article</a>.

Food & Wine

Put the baking soda back in the bottle: Banned sodium bicarbonate ‘milkshakes’ don’t make racehorses faster

The controversial and banned practice of giving horses baking soda “milkshakes” before a race doesn’t work, according to our analysis of the available research. Racing folklore says sodium bicarbonate milkshakes can boost racehorses’ endurance because the alkalinity of the baking soda helps counter the buildup of lactic acid in the blood when running. But our systematic research review, <a href="https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1bv2Z2dbxqYqLj">recently published in the Journal of Equine Veterinary Science</a> reveals milkshakes don’t boost horses’ athletic performance. This means any trainer still tempted to flout the ban on this tactic would be endangering their horses’ welfare and risking heavy sanctions over a practice that is basically snake oil. Despite the fun-sounding name, milkshakes are anything but. The process involves inserting a tube up the horse’s nose, down its throat and into the stomach, and then pumping in a concentrated solution of sodium bicarbonate dissolved in water. This can be stressful to the horse, and potential <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jevs.2004.08.014">side-effects</a> include lacerations to the nasal cavity, throat and oesophagus, gastrointestinal upset, and diarrhoea. It can even be fatal if the tube is mistakenly inserted into the trachea and the solution is pumped into the lungs. It’s little wonder Racing Australia has <a href="https://www.racingaustralia.horse/uploadimg/Australian_rules_of_Racing/Australian_Rules_of_Racing_01_March_2019.pdf">banned</a> the use of “alkalising agents” such as milkshakes on race day, with potentially career-ending ramifications for trainers caught doing it. No boost after all The effect of baking soda on athletic performance has been studied in human athletes for decades with <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31191097">inconclusive results</a>, but has only been analysed in horses since the late 1980s. Our analysis included data from eight experimental trials featuring 74 horses. Overall, sodium bicarbonate administration in the hours before treadmill tests or simulated race trials did not improve horses’ running performance in either type of test. In fact, in treadmill exercise tests in which horses were not ridden by jockeys, sodium bicarbonate actually had a very small negative effect on running performance, albeit not a statistically significant one. Whereas human athletes might gain a placebo effect from sodium bicarbonate, this is unlikely to apply to horses who don’t understand the intended point of the milkshake. And while some racehorse trainers may be educated in exercise physiology and the importance of blood pH, others may believe they work simply because received wisdom and racing folklore say so. Racing aficionados steeped in tradition might respond with scepticism, or argue that research can’t replicate the unique conditions of race day. But given that our comprehensive analysis of a range of research trials shows no evidence that milkshakes work, we argue any recalcitrant trainers have a moral responsibility to listen to the science. Milkshakes are already banned. But our research shows they deliver no benefit anyway. Trainers who are happy to continue this illicit practice and run the gauntlet of potential sanctions should consider whether it is worth it at all, and whether instead they should reconsider on moral, medical and scientific grounds. Written by <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/joshua-denham-1165121">Joshua Denham</a>, RMIT University and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/adam-hulme-401293">Adam Hulme</a>, University of the Sunshine Coast. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/put-the-baking-soda-back-in-the-bottle-banned-sodium-bicarbonate-milkshakes-dont-make-racehorses-faster-148907">The Conversation.</a>

Caring

What is sodium lauryl sulfate and is it safe to use?

If you’ve ever Googled the causes of a skin complaint or damaged hair, chances are someone on the internet has pointed the finger at SLS, or sodium lauryl (or laureth) sulfate, a common ingredient in beauty products, washes, toothpastes and even cleaning products. So what does this ingredient do, why is it in everything, and what does the evidence say about how safe it is? <h2>Why SLS?</h2> When we use a wash or beauty product on our skin, it’s probably a liquid made of a water phase and an oily phase. As we know, oil and water don’t mix, so something is required to keep the ingredients together. That something is called a surfactant. A surfactant allows the oil and water molecules to bind together – it’s what’s found in soaps and detergents so we can wash our oily faces or dishes with water and get the grime to disappear. Sodium lauryl sulfate is a surfactant, and its efficacy, low cost, abundance and simplicity mean it’s used in a variety of cosmetic, dermatological and consumer products. <h2>Is it harmful?</h2> Our skin’s outermost layer is specially designed to keep harmful stuff out, and this is where a surfactant can cause problems. Using a chemical that weakens this defence mechanism can <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302244511_Sodium_Lauryl_Sulfate_Water_Soluble_Irritant_Dermatitis_Model">potentially cause our skin harm</a>. And some surfactants are more irritating to our skin than others. For something to be harmful, irritant or allergenic, it has to fulfil <a href="https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:719752">two criteria</a>. It has to have been found in studies to irritate human skin, and it has to have the ability to penetrate the skin. SLS ticks both of these boxes. <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1034/j.1600-0536.2003.480209.x">Researchers from Germany tested</a> 1,600 patients for SLS irritancy and found 42% of the patients tested had an irritant reaction. Another <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16283906">study</a>, on seven volunteers over a three and a half month period, found regular contact caused irritation, and the irritation subsided once the skin was no longer exposed to SLS. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7758326">Another study found</a> the warmer the water used with SLS, the more irritating it will be. In fact, SLS is so known to cause irritation, it’s used as a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022202X9091287L">positive control in dermatological testing</a>. That is, new products being tested to see how irritating they might be to human skin are compared to SLS - something we know definitely to be irritating. If a person is sensitive to SLS, they might find the area that has been in contact is red, dry, scaly, itchy or sore. It’s also important to note there’s <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4651417/">no scientific evidence</a> SLS causes cancer, despite what you may read on the internet. <h2>So why is it allowed?</h2> So if it’s known to be irritating to human skin, why don’t the regulatory authorities ban its use? For SLS to be considered dangerous, it would have to be in contact with the skin for a long period of time. Generally, with consumer products such as washes that contain SLS, it’s assumed they won’t be on the skin for very long, meaning the chance of your skin being affected is pretty low. So authorities don’t ban its use, but instead cap the maximum percentage at which it can be used in products. This cap varies based on how long the product is likely to be in contact with the skin. So products that will be on the skin for a prolonged time can contain no more than <a href="https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/iig/index.cfm?event=BasicSearch.page">0.05-2.5% SLS</a> in most countries. All consumer and cosmetic product manufacturers are required to conduct thorough testing and include any adverse findings in the form of warnings on their labels. So on products containing SLS, you should see something like “if this product causes any skin redness or irritation, discontinue use and consult a medical practitioner”. <h2>Who should avoid SLS?</h2> People with a history of sensitive skin, hyperirritable skin and patients suffering from skin conditions such as atopic dermatitis (eczema), rosacea and psoriasis are best to avoid products containing SLS. There are many safer alternatives available (look for fatty alcohol ethoxylate, alkyl phenol ethoxylate or fatty acid alkoxylate on the label). If you think it might be SLS causing a skin irritation, stop the use of the product and ask your pharmacist or GP for advice. Skin care products also have hotline numbers on the packaging that can be contacted to report adverse effects.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/125129/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> Written by Yousuf Mohammed, Dermatology researcher, The University of Queensland. Republished with permission of <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-sodium-lauryl-sulfate-and-is-it-safe-to-use-125129" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.

Body

Salt doesn’t make you thirsty

Salt actually makes you hungrier not thirstier, according to a new study. German researchers at the Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine (MDC) studied two separate groups of 10 men during a simulation of a trip to Mars at the German Aerospace Center. Over 200 days the "cosmonauts" were given identical diets except for their salt intake. Results of the investigations published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation found that a salty diet actually caused the men on the high salt diets to drink less. The men who ate more salt, retained more water, weren't as thirsty and needed more energy, according to the findings. Scientists have known that increasing a person's salt intake stimulates the production of urine and it has been assumed that the extra fluid comes from drinking more because they were thirsty. But it now appears that salt triggers a mechanism in the kidney that causes the kidneys to hold onto water and produce urea - a process which consumes energy, causing hunger not thirst. "Nature has apparently found a way to conserve water that would otherwise be carried away into the urine by salt," said Freidrich Luft from the MDC. Studies in mice have previously hinted that the production of urea was responsible for this increased appetite, Luft added. Urea is a compound and is the end product of protein metabolism. It is formed in the liver and excreted by the kidneys in the urine. It is generally thought of as a waste product but Luft said that's wrong. "Instead it turns out to be a very important osmolyte, a compound that binds to water and helps transport it," said Prof Luft. "Its function is to keep water in when our bodies get rid of salt." Written by Sarah Wiedersehn. First appeared on <a href="http://Stuff.co.nz" target="_blank">Stuff.co.nz</a>.

Body

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Entertainment

Property

Information

Keep up to date

Search

MSG is back. Is the idea it’s bad for us just a myth or food science?

Put the baking soda back in the bottle: Banned sodium bicarbonate ‘milkshakes’ don’t make racehorses faster

What is sodium lauryl sulfate and is it safe to use?

Salt doesn’t make you thirsty