I don’t live for MSG but I don’t like seeing foods or food components getting a bum rap for no reason. I just saw a television commercial with a turkey running down the isle of a grocery store trying to get away from a can of broth containing MSG. Why?

Here’s a paragraph from MSG on Wikipedia:

“MSG as a food ingredient has been the subject of health studies. A report from the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) compiled in 1995 on behalf of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) concluded that MSG was safe for most people when “eaten at customary levels”. However, it also said that, based on  anecdotal reports, some people may have an MSG intolerance which causes “MSG symptom complex” and/or a worsening of asthmatic symptoms. Subsequent research found that while large doses of MSG given without food may elicit more symptoms than a placebo in individuals who believe that they react adversely to MSG, the frequency of the responses was low and the responses reported were inconsistent, not reproducible, and were not observed when MSG was given with food. While many people believe that MSG is the cause of these symptoms, a statistical association has not been demonstrated under controlled conditions, even in studies with people who were convinced that they were sensitive to it. Adequately controlling for experimental bias includes a  experimental design and the application in capsules because of the strong and unique after-taste of glutamates.”

May people would read this paragraph and conclude that MSG is bad for you. People who interpret in this way can’t be helped. Some people are always searching for tragedy. They focus on emotion rather than facts. To the intelligent reader it clear that MSG is just like ALL other foods. Some people don’t react well to it. I know people allergic to bananas, chocolate, chicken, wheat, milk, soy, etc. With that said, most people declare themselves allergic based on one bad incident.

It’s simple, if you have a concern, perform a double blind study, with a large sample size and have the study managed by an independent body.

I found this at: http://askdoctorsears.com/html/4/T042700.asp.  I thought it was interesting. I think buying these different grains and adding them to bread, soup or whatever is a good thing. Flax isn’t mentioned, perhaps because it isn’t as common, but is also very good.  

Best Grains: How they Rank 

It’s misleading, if not impossible, to rank grains. Their relative value depends on what nutrients you are looking for. Is one nutrient more important than another? Is fiber more important than protein? Maybe, if you’re a senior citizen, but not if you’re a child. Do you judge nutritional value by nutrients per ounce, or nutrients per calorie? When you see any rating system for food, take it with a grain of salt and remember that variety is an important key to healthy eating. In spite of these difficulties, we decided to give it a try and rate the twelve most common grains according to the following nutrients: protein, fiber, iron, zinc, folic acid, vitamin E, riboflavin, niacin, thiamin, and calcium. If you assign one point for each of these nutrients, the ratings come out as follows:

The grains highest in calcium, ranked in order are: amaranth, quinoa, oats, barley, rye, and whole wheat. Gluten-free grains are: corn, rice, soy. (Buckwheat may contain a small amount of gluten.) The top five grains for iron are: quinoa, amaranth, oats, enriched rice, millet and barley. The top grains for zinc (an important immune-booster) are: wild rice, rye, amaranth, oats, and quinoa. The top grains for folic acid are: millet, wild rice, rye, amaranth, and oats. Even though nutritionally amaranth would rank as the greatest grain, overall the top grain in our book is whole wheat. Even though other grains may have slightly more nutrients, wheat is a whole lot more useful in a whole lot more foods. Whole wheat comes out as top grain.