Not the point, if it causes an adverse reaction in a significant proportion of people (15% in the US) then all food should be clearly labelled if it is added, regardless of the source of the food.
What is the highest fluoride toothpaste available?
- Thread starter One More Solo
- Start date
Not the point, if it causes an adverse reaction in a significant proportion of people (15% in the US) then all food should be clearly labelled if it is added, regardless of the source of the food.
No where does it mention in that quote the amount of MSG used. Your assuming.
But do you really think that these scientists would be stupid enough not test it at sufficient levels on the rodent as a human model to be comparable to the effects on a human brain? The experiment would be utterly pointless otherwise.
If you look at an MSDS (material data safety sheet) of a particular chemical they will give an LD50 -(lethal dose) the amount of the chemical sufficient to kill 50% of the tested population of rodents as an indicator to the toxicity to humans. The reason being that they can't give lethal doses to test on humans. The rodents are used as a model for the effects on the human.
Last edited:
Yeast extract is a source of MSG, so it is simply relabelling to hide that fact if it is used as an alternative. The labelling should (as with aspartame) show that it is a source of MSG.
Yes, well they are not stupid. These tests are often done to find the upper limits. Tests like this are done all the time and are far above any concentration a normal person would consume.
It's clearly labelled, do you want the break down of what every ingredient is?
Should meat be broken down and % of glutamate acid.
Why dopn't people learn what is in food and simply read the ingredients list.
There is an allergen scale, certain allergens are high risk and included in an allergen box, others are simply labelled on the food.
Last edited:
Yeast extract is just one of the many names used to hide MSG in your foods. Why the need to hide it?
MSG is a refined white crystal, yeast extract is not.
it is not a high risk allergen, so if we put it in the allergen box, we would have to put pretty much every allergen in that box. The box would become an ingredients list and would add no benefit.
Allergen boxes are for quick identification or for possibility of cross contamination. Ingredients list still shows what is in it(mainly).
when is it included without food
and more interestingly
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
From reading the article you quoted. The reason they don't put it on the label is because they don't use it in the product. They use an alternative, called yeast extract. It appears that yeast extract contains glutamates, of which some are monosodium glutamates. So their labelling would appear to be correct, they label the product they use as an ingredient, rather than the constituents of said product.
Orange Juice, made from concentrated orange juice 35% would be an equivalent label. I frankly have absolutely no idea of the break down of what 'orange juice' is. Its an ingredient, it'll have various sugars, some protein, some fibre no doubt, maybe vitamins, maybe they were lost in processing, but when it says orange juice, they've labelled it correctly.
As Castiel said, good luck avoiding amino acids in your diet, guess we won't be hearing from you around Christmas, you'll be dead long before.
Some products are better when things are used as favour enhancers and to thicken them. Rather than use straight MSG manufacturers found an alternative. Personally I will choose to eat a balanced diet, than worry my existance and the rest of the worlds will end, or my brain will melt to mush because one doctor in American who's peers review his work and disagree thinks it will.
Can't believe we've went from toothpaste concentrations to CTs on MSG.
"Dr. Blaylock: Sure, but you see, all of these types of glutamate are bound. They're in oligopeptides,polypeptides. They are bound in amino acids groupings. They're not free amino acids. If you have it as a complex protein, you absorb it slowly in your GI tract. In the GI tract, there are almost no free amino acids if you eat foods such as tomatoes. The level of free amino acids is nil; it's almost all absorbed as combined amino acids, and then it's only broken down in the liver, where it's released in very low concentrations that the body can deal with. Our bodies were never intended to have free amino acids in such high concentrations. Well, when you hydrolyze these proteins—or you use yeast extract or enzymes to break down these
various proteins into their free, released amino acids—they're not natural any longer. What you've done is artificially release the amino acids in an unnatural way, and when they enter your GI tract, they
are absorbed as free amino acids, then your blood level of that glutamic acid goes up significantly. As I said, it can go up as high as 20-fold, in some cases 40-fold. Your blood brain barrier is not constructed
to handle such high levels of glutamate, because it doesn't naturally occur that way. It can handle the lower levels, but it can't handle these very high levels. So this argument, "Oh, it's natural," is just a lot
of nonsense."
This taken from www.truthpublishing.com an interview with Dr.Russell Blaylock
Just to be clear this is what my previous post was in response to.
I can see your point, but clear labelling on food with additives is a pet gripe of mine.
You needn't label unprocessed food product such as fresh meat etc as long as it has not had anything added. Fresh Chicken Breast for example commonly has water and glucose added to it, why? what is the point other than to extend shelf-life or in the case of chicken the appearence you are getting more than you really are.
Clear Food labelling should be stricter and that includes labelling the sources of ingredients of concern such as MSG.
How could it have been. the post Hikari is refering to was posted after your "response". How does that work?
I caught this thread before it kicked off into this - wish I had rejoined it sooner. I am against putting anything in our water supply that is not there to make the water safe to drink - anything else has no place in our water supply.
Water fluoridation is a slippery slope and its benefit to dental health is highly questionable and unproven - select data has been manipulated, much like the hockey stick graph has been in the global warming scam.
There was a long thread in speakers corner a year or so ago debating this. This link is recommended for those interested in the subject.
One apt quote from the link:
As one doctor aptly stated, "No physician in his right senses would prescribe for a person he has never met, whose medical history he does not know, a substance which is intended to create bodily change, with the advice: 'Take as much as you like, but you will take it for the rest of your life because some children suffer from tooth decay.’ It is a preposterous notion."
Water fluoridation is a slippery slope and its benefit to dental health is highly questionable and unproven - select data has been manipulated, much like the hockey stick graph has been in the global warming scam.
There was a long thread in speakers corner a year or so ago debating this. This link is recommended for those interested in the subject.
One apt quote from the link:
As one doctor aptly stated, "No physician in his right senses would prescribe for a person he has never met, whose medical history he does not know, a substance which is intended to create bodily change, with the advice: 'Take as much as you like, but you will take it for the rest of your life because some children suffer from tooth decay.’ It is a preposterous notion."
How could it have been. the post Hikari is refering to was posted after your "response". How does that work?
I think you need to go read the last few posts again! My post was in response to Hikari's.
Read what he says about amino acids, then read what I posted about how they are ingested!
You seem to be looking at older posts, from what I can tell by your screen shot.
Very good short documentary.
We have a winner!
I'm very concerned about adding stuff to the water. Don't forget that Fluorine is one of the most reactive elements and extremely poisonous, and in the same family as Chlorine. There are simply too many unknown effects to start mass exposure to it. http://www.nofluoride.com/what_doctors_donot_tell.cfm
For some reason the UK is bringing in more fluoridation, whereas most of western Europe has banned it. http://www.bfsweb.org/facts/wf_uknworld/f_wf_uknworld.htm
Actually you need to reread what you have said to Hikari:
Hikari stated this: post #187
to which your reply post #189
Well the previous post you are refering to is post #178, and I did not mention avoiding amino acids until post #179.
Your inaccurate posts about metabolic processes have nothing to do with your attempt to deflect Hikari when he called you on the fallacy you are perpetrating.
The post I was referring to was actually was 188. By accident I quoted all of Hakari when I just wanted to quote his sentence on amino acids, so my 189 post was to try and clear that up. See?
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 3,251
This is the second time i have seen you posting spurious rubbish. You are either a) a troll or b) a chronic conspiracy theorist.
Everything, when not taken in moderation, is potentially harmful and can kill you. Everything. You can drown drinking too much water for crying out loud.
Then why add something to our water that not essential, debatable whither it actually works, already consumed by people from other sources and therefore where you cannot control the amount each individual receives?
Yes of course no one must question things like this for fear of being named a conspiracy theorist, what a classic method of putting down dissent and alternate opinions on these forums if someone finds something questionable a government, business or organization does.
I remember seeing a piece from some news channel in America about how adding lithium to the water might help a little with suicide rates, crazy, next they'll probably say tiny amounts of mercury is good for the brain!?
