Hydrolyzed Pea Protein

Ingredients called “protein” on ingredient lists are not proteins.

Beef is “beef,” soy is “soy,” tomatoes are “tomatoes,” and peas are “peas.” Those are the FDA’s “common or usual names” for whole foods. “Pea protein” is made of man-made amino acids manufactured in food processing plants with peas as the starting material. And each and every man-made/manufactured hydrolyzed pea protein will contain the three potentially toxic amino acids* aspartic acid, L-cysteine, and glutamic acid. This is true for every hydrolyzed protein. It may be called “natural,” “organic,” or “raw,” but it will still contain potentially toxic aspartic acid, L-cysteine, and glutamic acid. There are no exceptions. And there are no toxic amino acids in whole protein.

Today, there is a widespread marketing effort to substitute hydrolyzed vegetable protein for real protein, and to expand the use of hydrolyzed proteins in general. While there certainly are other varieties of hydrolyzed vegetable proteins, pea protein is presently the favorite of food manufacturers.

Substituting vegetables for meat may have many benefits for consumers, but hydrolyzed vegetable proteins don’t deliver vegetables. What they provide are arrays of amino acids which are produced in food processing and/or chemical plants. And three of those amino acids (L-cysteine, aspartic acid, and glutamic acid) can be toxic to humans. These three amino acids are called “excitotoxins” by scientists. When consumed in amounts that exceed what a human needs for normal body function, they cause brain damage, endocrine disorders, and observable reactions such as asthma, migraine headache, a-fib, fibromyalgia, and seizures. Glutamic acid is the amino acid in MSG that causes brain damage, endocrine disruption, and adverse reactions.

Manufacturers’ claims of benefits for manufacturers

1) Hydrolyzed vegetable proteins are making great inroads into health and nutrition markets.

2) Every hydrolyzed protein will have flavor-enhancing properties. Glutamic acid, the amino acid that triggers taste buds to cause increased perception of taste, will be found in all hydrolyzed proteins.

3) Clean labels are certainly at the top of the list. Unfortunately, not all consumers have caught on to the fact that glutamic acid (a.k.a. glutamate), which is the toxic component of MSG, will be found in all hydrolyzed proteins. So while more and more consumers are attempting to avoid MSG, substituting a flavor-enhancing hydrolyzed vegetable protein for flavor-enhancing MSG would allow the product to have a “clean label” – one that would give the consumer no clue that it contained glutamate, MSG’s toxic component.

4) Hydrolyzed vegetable proteins will have great appeal for vegetarians, vegans and others who want to limit their intake of meat.

Manufacturers’ claims of benefits for consumers (which will also benefit industry)

1) Protein-rich, non-animal products are in great demand as more and more people look for substitutes for meat, fish, and poultry. Hydrolyzed proteins contain the arrays of amino acids that make up most proteins. So, properly promoted, hydrolyzed protein products will appeal to those looking for vegetarian or vegan sources of dietary protein. The fact that high-protein diets are being touted for weight-loss, makes these products even more attractive.

2) Chemical-free claims are another way the food industry is hyping hydrolyzed proteins. Although all hydrolyzed proteins are produced in food processing and/or chemical plants, industry’s promotional materials refer to hydrolyzed vegetable proteins as being “natural” – saying they are derived from a variety of “natural plant resources.”
That should be no surprise since MSG, which is made by fermentation of carefully selected genetically engineered bacteria that secrete glutamic acid through their cell walls, is referred to by industry as “naturally occurring.”

A production flow sheet for manufacturing hydrolyzed vegetable protein

3) Claims of health benefits from hydrolyzed vegetable proteins are typically made. Market-watchers claim that consumer awareness of these so-called benefits is increasing. The claim has been made that hydrolyzed vegetable proteins will help reduce intake of saturated fat and cholesterol, and because it’s an effective way to lower cholesterol, it will decrease the risk of heart disease.

But even with all that propaganda going for it, something is still bothering the glutamate industry.

You’d think that with all their research and planning, glutamate industry giants would feel secure in their efforts to sell hydrolyzed proteins to naïve consumers. But that doesn’t seem to be the case. It would appear that consumers’ growing recognition of the toxic effects of the manufactured glutamic acid in MSG, hydrolyzed proteins, maltodextrin, and some other 40+ ingredients is getting in the way of sales. One industry watcher said it this way, “The high contents of monosodium glutamate (MSG) in hydrolyzed protein products continues to be a bottleneck for pervasive adoption as consumers show an unprecedented alacrity** to read labels to spot ingredients with a bad rep in terms of potential side effects.”

The Truth in Labeling Campaign would like to take some of the credit for that greater consumer awareness and “alacrity.” So, let’s hear it for the Truth in Labeling Campaign — since 1994, providing consumers with the names of ingredients in which manufactured free glutamate, the brain-damaging, endocrine-disrupting, reaction-causing component of MSG, are hidden.

*killing brain cells and disrupting the endocrine system when present in quantity
**enthusiasm, readiness, quickness, promptness, speed, swiftness, rapidity, keenness, zeal

If you have questions or comments, we’d love to hear from you. If you have hints for others on how to avoid exposure to MfG, send them along, too, and we’ll put them up on Facebook. Or you can reach us at questionsaboutmsg@gmail.com and follow us on Twitter @truthlabeling.

Is the FDA doing its best to put CBD into the pockets of Big Food and Big Pharma?

Why would the FDA warn consumers against CBD? They don’t issue alerts about ingesting food with residues of glyphosate in it. They don’t warn about the excitotoxic amino acids in the low-calorie sweetener know as aspartame, Equal, or AminoSweet. They don’t even tell the consumer that “diet sodas” actually prevent weight loss. And for sure they don’t tell consumers about the excitotoxic amino acids in monosodium glutamate (MSG), hydrolyzed protein, and protein powders that cause brain damage, endocrine disorders, and reactions such as a-fib, asthma, migraine headache, and seizures.

Many years ago, I set out to uncover what was causing my husband to go into anaphylactic shock. We knew that monosodium glutamate was a trigger, but he’d have reactions at times when there was no monosodium glutamate in anything he had consumed. I read everything I could get my hands on, and along the way I realized that there were two kinds of information circulating about the safety of MSG — one published by independent scientists who found MSG to have toxic potential and another published by the people who manufacture MSG.

Another interesting discovery I made was that the FDA wasn’t looking out for the welfare of the individual consumer. The FDA was looking out for the welfare of people who worked at the FDA — those who looked out for Big Food and Big Pharma while they were at the FDA and took cushy jobs with Big Food and Big Pharma (or their law firms or PR firms) upon leaving the agency. Or people like Michael Taylor who moved between formal employment with Monsanto and the USDA, and Monsanto and the FDA, all the while guaranteeing that things like aspartame and bST were approved, directly or indirectly, for use in food.

My take on the FDA’s CBD warnings is that it has to do with Big Pharma’s long-term program for reaping great profits from CBD — starting with FDA approval of the obscenely priced drug Epidiolex, recently OK’d for childhood seizures. But for that to be successful, Big Pharma also has to obliterate its competition. Warning consumers about CBD is just the start of FDA attacks on CBD products that don’t put money into the pockets of Big Pharma and Big Food.

Adrienne Samuels

If you have questions or comments, we’d love to hear from you. If you have hints for others on how to avoid exposure to MfG, send them along, too, and we’ll put them up on Facebook. Or you can reach us at questionsaboutmsg@gmail.com and follow us on Twitter @truthlabeling.

Anyone had experience with headaches from MSG as much as 48 hours after ingestion?

We posed that question to our Facebook readers in July, and despite the fact that it’s known beyond a shadow of a doubt that MSG is a migraine trigger, and migraines are the most commonly-reported reactions to MSG, we were surprised at the immediate response and lengthy bouts of suffering reported.

Perhaps reading these postings will help if you, also, are the victim of migraines, or suffer other reactions after consuming foods containing MSG… even days afterwards.

For more information on MSG and headaches, check out this page at the Truth in Labeling Campaign website.

Debbie: Yes, depending on the food source and digestion time- anywhere from a few hours later to 48 hours later- I can wake up with the headache after eating some the day before.

Michael: When I first started having problems and trying to figure out what was going on it would often be 48 hours. That’s why I had such trouble identifying the problem back then. Now that I know the advanced warning signs it’s usually more like 12.

Jennifer: My symptoms used to start within seconds and lasted up to 4 months. Often the reaction hot worse and worse as time went on. I’ve been able to find treatment that has made me react less severely and not nearly as long. I absolutely would believe 48 hours.

Gürsel: Reading the labels and never buy, never consume. As far as it is not hidden in another ingredient. After I ate a sausage at a coffee shop I could not sleep because of tachycardia. Did anyone experienced this?

Mike: Yes. I have had Chinese restaurant syndrome symptoms as long as four days. I have found that inorganic compounds, sodium acids such as preservatives like sodium acid pyrophosphate and sodium benzoate, really push me towards metabolic acidosis. The time symptoms lasted four days it was a food I had that contained multiple sources of MSG and multiple preservatives. I’m making an educated guess in saying that MSG is dose dependent.

Gaynor: Mike, same here. It’s MSG plus a combination of added chemicals and preservatives. Chinese restaurant food or any chemical laden processed food makes my body retain so much fluid that the swelling is very noticeable. Maybe this is also acidosis.

Laurie: For those like me who get migraines that can last up to 3 days… usually they hit me at 4am when the liver does its thing, while the night before I’ve ingested some form of a Freed glutamate which is what MSG is in FULL FORCE 100%… Many of you know that there exist several other ingredients in the food supply that contain freed glutamates… To avoid them and AVOID the side effects~~>migraines/headaches/gastro-intestinal distress download the NxtNutrio Healthy Pantry App, turn MSG to On in your profile… and go ahead and scan the barcode… You will learn of all of the ingredients that fall under the msg umbrella and so much more…, but more importantly be headache free for months… 😉

Cathy: Yes! About 48 hours after ingestion, then horrible migraines lasting up to 72 hours. Then feeling like I had been hit by a train for another couple of days.

Chettle: yes me … two or three day headaches are common for me when I eat garbage that’s full of msg 🙁 you’d think I’d learn hey … the worst part is feeling like a truck ran me over and that I’ve been poisoned during the night uughh

Judy: I do! They can start anywhere from when I’m eating up to 48 hrs later. I get a lot of symptoms/side effects.

Vee: I experience chronic sneezing like back to back sneezing within hours after eating a fake cheese brand years back. Didn’t know that was a symptom of MSG poisoning until looking it up.

Stacey: My symptoms usually become apparent around 48 hours.
Sarah: Mine are actually 72 hours later. That’s why it was hard to figure out. Once I did it was like clockwork.

Virginie: YES after 20 minutes after ingesting some in prepared food

Sho: YES!!! But no problems since I went all fresh, organic.

Cheryl: Yes! And I get racing heart rate too.

Kim: I thought I was the only one.

Carol: I have within hours. It’s poison to me.

Topaz: My symptoms can start up to 72 hours

Tina: Absolutely!!!

Richard: seizures for me

Ambar: Yup… aurora migraines.

Vince: Yes…. all the time

Andrea: Yes. Within hours

Jodi: YES.

Dee: Yep…..

Louise: Yes!

If you have questions or comments, we’d love to hear from you. If you have hints for others on how to avoid exposure to MfG, send them along, too, and we’ll put them up on Facebook. Or you can reach us at questionsaboutmsg@gmail.com and follow us on Twitter @truthlabeling.

The tarnished ‘gold standard’ of peer-reviewed studies

“Why we shouldn’t take peer review as the ‘gold standard,’” (1) which appeared in the Washington Post on August 1st, should be read by everyone who values their health and well-being.

The authors, Paul Thacker and Jon Tennant, bring to light the fact that shoddy work often makes it past peer reviewers while excellent research gets shot down. They explain how peer reviewers “often fail to detect bad research, conflicts of interest and corporate ghostwriting,” and that the practice is “neither golden nor standardized.”

At the Truth in Labeling Campaign we have spent roughly 30 years monitoring badly flawed research published by glutamate-industry agents, and are very familiar with a wide variety of insidious journal/industry cooperation.

For years the International Glutamate Technical Committee (IGTC) was the primary front organization responsible for production and publication of research for Ajinomoto (principal producer of MSG in the US). During that time the IGTC amassed a number of double-blind studies concluding — but not demonstrating — that MSG is safe. The fact that these studies were often done at generally respected universities or medical schools, all of which required that the research be approved by medical research review committees, had, and still has, public relations value. Subsequently, those studies were published in peer reviewed journals — accepted by editors who, themselves, often had ties to the food and/or drug industries.

If the “peers” who review the work of glutamate-industry representatives are themselves glutamate-industry representatives (or very close friends), that work is very likely to be published. Also consider the fact that the journals may have close ties to industry.  For example, the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology accepts advertising, and The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, acknowledges the generous support of members of the food and/or drug industries. Both of those journals publish glutamate-industry sponsored studies. 

When professional peer review journals hesitated to take articles from glutamate industry researchers because the flaws in their badly designed studies – such as lacing their placebos with excitotoxic aspartic acid (in aspartame) — had been pointed out to journal editors, those researchers held seminars and/or presented their papers at professional meetings with abstracts printed in appropriate journals. Studies reported in abstract form are not peer reviewed, and letters to the editor criticizing abstracts are not generally published. In the 1990s, the principal forum for such papers was the American Academy of Asthma, Allergy, and Immunology. In addition, there were journals that, by policy, do not accept critical letters. Food Additives and Contaminants is one. 

Not to be overlooked is suppression of information. When contradictory or embarrassing information has been published, those in positions of power block dissemination of that information. When critiques of deceptive and misleading research reports are offered for publication, those in positions of power refuse to publish them. When, prior to publication, criticism of deceptive and misleading research reports are anticipated, researchers publish their questionable research in journals that do not accept comment following publication, present their findings orally at industry-sponsored or professional meetings, or publish their findings in abstract form only. Neither oral presentations nor published abstracts are subject to peer review or to published criticism. In no case is it immediately obvious that the data or criticism of that data have been suppressed.

References and additional information can be found in The toxicity/safety of processed free glutamic acid (MSG): a study in suppression of information, by A. Samuels.  Account Res.1999;6:259-310.

If you have questions or comments, we’d love to hear from you. If you have hints for others on how to avoid exposure to MfG, send them along, too, and we’ll put them up on Facebook. Or you can reach us at questionsaboutmsg@gmail.com and follow us on Twitter @truthlabeling.

Reference


  1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/why-we-shouldnt-take-peer-review-as-the-gold-standard/2019/08/01/fd90749a-b229-11e9-8949-5f36ff92706e_story.html

Ultra-processed foods: Little nourishment, lots of toxic amino acids

Although the typical U.S. supermarket contains a wide variety of packaged foods, that assortment emanates from 10 giant conglomerates.

These multinationals, such as Unilever, Coca-Cola and Mondelez, have their imprints on practically everything you eat. And more and more of these products are “ultra-processed.”

It used to be that food technologists designed processed foods.  Those would be whole foods that were canned, freeze-dried, or fermented, for example.  But in the 1980s ultra-processed food — products manufactured with substances extracted from foods or synthesized in laboratories — started to line supermarket shelves.

Ultra-processed foods are fractionated-recombined foods consisting of an extensive number of additives and ingredients, but little actual whole food.  They can be identified by the remarkably long list of ingredients – including many unpronounceable ones — found on their labels. According to a recent study, Canadians are taking in practically half of their daily calories from ultra-processed foods.

Not mentioned in any study of ultra-processed foods, however, are the toxic ingredients added for color, flavor, shelf life (preservatives), and protein, along with low-calorie sweeteners. Manufactured free glutamate (MfG), the toxic component of monosodium glutamate, and all of the ingredients in the following list are found in both flavor enhancers and protein enhancers. And some say because they mask the taste of old or rancid food, MfGs are used as preservatives as well. 

Names of ingredients that always contain MfG:

  • Glutamic acid (E 620)
  • Glutamate (E 620)
  • Monosodium glutamate (E 621)
  • Monopotassium glutamate (E 622)
  • Calcium glutamate (E 623)
  • Monoammonium glutamate (E 624)
  • Magnesium glutamate (E 625)
  • Natrium glutamate
  • Anything “hydrolyzed”
  • Any “hydrolyzed protein”
  • Calcium caseinate, Sodium caseinate
  • Yeast extract, Torula yeast
  • Yeast food, Yeast nutrient
  • Autolyzed yeast
  • Gelatin
  • Textured protein
  • Whey protein
  • Whey protein concentrate
  • Whey protein isolate
  • Soy protein
  • Soy protein concentrate
  • Soy protein isolate
  • Anything “protein”
  • Anything “protein fortified”
  • Soy sauce
  • Soy sauce extract
  • Protease
  • Anything “enzyme modified”
  • Anything containing “enzymes”
  • Anything “fermented”
  • Vetsin
  • Ajinomoto
  • Umami
  • Zinc proteninate

Names of ingredients that often contain or produce MfG during processing:

  • Carrageenan (E 407)
  • Bouillon and broth
  • Stock
  • Any “flavors” or “flavoring”
  • Natural flavor
  • Maltodextrin
  • Oligodextrin
  • Citric acid, Citrate (E 330)
  • Anything “ultra-pasteurized”
  • Barley malt
  • Malted barley
  • Brewer’s yeast
  • Pectin (E 440)
  • Malt extract
  • Seasonings

The following are ingredients suspected of containing or creating sufficient processed free glutamic acid to serve as MfG-reaction triggers in HIGHLY SENSITIVE people:

  • Corn starch
  • Corn syrup
  • Modified food starch
  • Lipolyzed butter fat
  • Dextrose
  • Rice syrup
  • Brown rice syrup
  • Milk powder
  • Reduced fat milk (skim; 1%; 2%)
  • most things “low fat” or “no fat”
  • anything “enriched”
  • anything “vitamin enriched”
  • anything “pasteurized”
  • Annatto
  • Vinegar
  • Balsamic vinegar
  • certain amino acid chelates (Citrate, aspartate, and glutamate are used as chelating agents with mineral supplements.)

Convenient, relatively inexpensive and heavily advertised, the future of ultra-processed foods seems to be assured (1).  And why not?  The FDA lets the people who manufacture ultra-processed foods declare that they are GRAS (generally recognized as safe), and the general public seems unaware that the fox is guarding the hen house.

If you have questions or comments, we’d love to hear from you. If you have hints for others on how to avoid exposure to MfG, send them along, too, and we’ll put them up on Facebook. Or you can reach us at questionsaboutmsg@gmail.com and follow us on Twitter @truthlabeling.

Reference

1. Open PR Worldwide Public Relations.  Press release. 7/3/2019. “What’s driving the Flavor Enhancers Market Growth?  Cargill, Synergy Flavors, Tate & Lyle, Associated British Foods pic, Corbion …”  https://www.openpr.com/news/1794737/what-s-driving-the-flavor-enhancers-market-growth-cargill.  Accessed 7/31/2019.