FDA Docket 2007P-0500

Re: Petition to the FDA Revoke GRAS Status of Monosodium Glutamate
       Presented b John Erb

There was a time, in the 1950s, when removal of monosodium glutamate from the generally regarded as safe (GRAS) list would have benefited consumers.  However, when consumers began to be concerned about the toxic effects of the flavor enhancer monosodium glutamate, an ingredient that was recognized as containing processed free glutamic acid (MSG), food technologists began developing additional ingredients to replace the flavor enhancing properties of monosodium glutamate without revealing that there was MSG in those new ingredients.  Today, there is so much MSG in processed foods in ingredients such as autolyzed yeast extract, sodium caseinate, various hydrolyzed protein products, and various reaction flavor products; and there is so much MSG produced when enzymes are introduced at the time of processing or manufacture; that to eliminate the food ingredient monosodium glutamate (by removing it from the GRAS list, or otherwise) would do very little to cut down on the amount of MSG being offered to consumers.

Monosodium glutamate has never achieved the status of GRAS through scientific study.  There was discussion at the time the concept of GRAS was established that monosodium glutamate should be “grandfathered” onto the list because of industry’s claim that it had been used safely for approximately 50 years.  However, the safety of monosodium glutamate was not then, and has never been, properly evaluated.

There really is no controversy about the safety/toxicity of MSG in monosodium glutamate or elsewhere.  In 1969, Dr. John Olney first demonstrated that monosodium glutamate causes brain lesions and subsequent neuroendocrine disorders in laboratory animals. During the next decade there was repeated confirmation of his findings by researchers not supported by the glutamate industry. At that time, industry produced badly flawed studies that claimed that the brain lesions and neuroendocrine disorders found by Olney and others could not be duplicated.  In the face of overwhelming evidence of the toxicity of monosodium glutamate, the glutamate industry, in the late 1970s, began to claim that animal studies related to the safety of monosodium glutamate were not appropriate; and they proceeded to implement a series of carefully designed human studies using subjects who, in many cases, were not sensitive to MSG, to demonstrate that MSG fed to their subjects would not produce more reactions than would be produced by a placebo – which placebo, incidentally, was generally laced with material such as the aspartic acid in aspartame or MSG-containing ingredients that would cause allergic or sensitivity reactions in subjects fed the placebo.

In short, the safety of MSG has never been demonstrated.  Controversy about the safety of MSG is a public relations assault on the public set up to sell MSG-containing products.

It is true that the food ingredient monosodium glutamate should never have been on the GRAS list, and should be removed.  Millions of people are suffering unnecessarily from MSG-induced adverse reactions that vary from mild and transitory to debilitating and life threatening.  But at this point in time, solely to remove the food ingredient monosodium glutamate from GRAS status would probably do more to confuse consumers than to help them; for removing the food ingredient monosodium glutamate from the food supply would not be removing all processed free glutamic acid (MSG) from food.

The FDA must require that all processed foods, when introduced and/or when a recipe for an existing product is changed, be analyzed for free glutamic acid, post production.  If free glutamic acid is found to be present, the amount of free glutamic acid should be disclosed on the food label as “MSG,” with the amount present stated in milligrams.

The reactions to MSG are not allergic reactions, but are due to a sensitivity.  In the medical community, it is common knowledge that some sensitive individuals will react to minute amounts of a substance to which they are sensitive.  For that reason, it is imperative that even minute amounts of MSG be identified on food labels. According to the July 1995 FASEB report, “Analysis of Adverse Reactions to Monosodium Glutamate (MSG),” done under contract to the FDA, the Expert Panel was asked “Is it possible to classify adverse reactions based upon dose responsiveness? And the answer was “No.” Glutamate industry spin on research not withstanding, there has been no determination of the least amount of MSG to which an MSG-sensitive person will react.

Possibly because the FDA has limited funding, the FDA has chosen to not properly regulate and/or inspect mislabeled products containing MSG.  Furthermore, the FDA lacks the authority to protect consumers from the misinformation and outright lies given to consumers by companies marketing products with hidden MSG.

This makes it all the more imperative that the FDA must require that all processed foods, when introduced and/or when a recipe for an existing product is changed, be analyzed for free glutamic acid, post production.  If free glutamic acid is found to be present, the amount of free glutamic acid should be disclosed on the food label as “MSG,” with the amount present stated in milligrams.

Respectfully submitted,

Jack L. Samuels
President
Truth in Labeling Campaign
Chicago, Illinois

adandjack@aol.com
 
 
 

adandjack@aol.com 858/481-9333 http://www.truthinlabeling.org

This page was last updated on June 4, 2008.

IF MSG ISN'T HARMFUL, WHY IS IT HIDDEN?