Early Research on MSG

/in /by

People have been ranting against MSG for decades, but I never paid attention until I read a study on a group of subjects who said they had a negative response to eating Asian foods. The subjects were tested under four scenarios consecutively, dependent on their response to the prior test results. The study demonstrated that when exposed to massive amounts of MSG versus a placebo, there were no consistent responses from this sensitive group of subjects. That’s meaningful because it challenged common knowledge.

That common knowledge began with a letter to the New England Journal of Medicine by a physician after reporting symptoms he felt after eating a meal of Asian foods; it wasn’t research, just a personal anecdote. At the same time, a researcher from Washington University in St. Louis began a series of studies on glutamate and other protein precursors that demonstrated the excitotoxicity affects on brain tissue; excitotoxicity (ex-SIGHT-o-tox-ISS-i-ty) refers to nerve cells being damaged or killed by excessive stimulation by the neurotransmitter glutamate. That was when the bulk of the negative research on MSG drew attention. However, over a period of years, other researchers attempted to duplicate those studies with unsuccessful results.

Where does that leave us? Other than a variety of conspiracy theories, MSG doesn’t seem to have the negative impact that has been attributed to it. I’ll finish this up on Saturday but my original question still stands: if you feel you respond negatively to MSG, reply to this email and I’ll let you know the results next week.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

References:
1. N Engl J Med 1968; 278:796.
2. Science. 1969 May 9;164(3880):719-21.

A Closer Look at Monosodium Glutamate

/in /by

People these days love salty, and as I’ve said before many times, I especially love salty: nuts, chips of any kind, cured meats such as ham. I believe if bacon weren’t salty, it wouldn’t be as popular as it is. Mix salt with amino acids, especially glutamine, and it creates a taste called umami. It’s an almost irresistible flavor that some people, if not most, can’t stop eating.

Now what if I told you that monosodium glutamate (MSG) had been added to those specific foods to give it that umami taste? (It hasn’t, so don’t throw out the bacon or jerky just yet.) What would you think then? You might not be so enamored with those foods because MSG has been linked to headaches and brain dysfunctions. Some people attribute symptoms of allergic reactions to MSG that include breathing issues, the aforementioned headaches, and many other neurological-type issues.

Would you believe that MSG probably doesn’t cause those symptoms in most people? That the “research” showing that MSG is bad was poorly done, and to some degree, wasn’t even really research? For sure, you don’t want to miss Thursday’s Memo. Until then, let me know if you’ve responded negatively to MSG by replying to this Memo.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Reference: Questions and Answers about MSG http://bit.ly/32tvELS.

That Sugar Film: A Fantasy

/in /by

Let me clear up a few things right away. I’m not a fan of overeating sugar, whether pure cane sugar or high fructose corn syrup. But glucose is the perfect fuel because it burns completely with only carbon dioxide and water as the by-products. I think what everyone should do is respect glucose for what it can do and what overconsumption can do: make us fat—but no more than the other carbohydrates we over consume. With that in mind, let’s take a look at the filmmaker’s weight gain.

He claims to have eaten the equivalent of 40 teaspoons of sugar a day, keeping his calories the same as his regular diet, and gaining almost 20 pounds. My simple opinion is: bull. People in the movie spent some time suggesting that a calorie is not just a calorie, that somehow you can get more from sugar. I’ll address that in a moment. The real problem is that while he thinks he didn’t over eat, he absolutely must have to gain close to 20 pounds in two months. Period. I’m not suggesting he intentionally lied, but I watched him eat and he was not measuring much of anything. Unless you weigh or measure, you can’t say that you ate what you claimed you ate.

But let’s say that he was correct, that he ate 2,300 calories per day with 800 calories coming from sugar. What that would require was somehow more calories are extracted from sugar. My question is how? To go molecular for a second, the energy we get from food is the energy stored in the chemical bonds of the food; if we take in more fuel than we need, the body stores the extra energy as fat. If sugar has only so much energy stored in the chemical bonds, how can it release more? Glucose or fructose, doesn’t matter. That would require some form of unknown chemical reaction that could create energy. That doesn’t happen in any biochemistry of food I’ve ever studied. If it could, it would come at a cost, an energy cost somewhere.

The idea that a calorie is not a calorie has always been a foolish argument because there’s no chemistry to support it. We cannot make more energy than we begin with. The only way he gains 20 pounds is he overate. A lot.

He spends a lot of the movie talking about sugar spikes and falls that made him “addicted” to sugar. I’ve never seen anyone drink that much fruit juice, to the extent that it wasn’t reasonable. I asked on Facebook how sugar affects people who drink juice or any other form of sugar, but not sodas. The results were 1:3 against a sugar rush of any kind. I also included physicians and other healthcare professionals. Was it a formal study? No. And neither was what the author did to himself in this film.

To me, his film was a real work of fiction. Add it to your collection of fantasy films.

If you reduce the amount of sugar in your diet after watching this film, that’s great. You really can’t go wrong getting your calories from better nutritional choices. But don’t base your decision on this pretend research.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

That Sugar Film: The Results

/in /by

I hope that this sunk in on Tuesday: Damon Gambeau, the filmmaker, was going to eat 40 teaspoons of sugar per day. The rest of the story was that he was not going to eat cakes and cookies or drink full-sugar soda. He was going to eat what might be considered health foods: low-fat yogurt, fruit juices, whole grain cereals with sugar added, and other things with Australian names I don’t recognize. By the end of each day, it had to equate to 40 teaspoons of sugar or about 168 grams, not counting all the other carbohydrates.

What happened after 60 days? One of his liver enzymes was off, up 20 points over the safety level, which was never really explained. His triglycerides were up significantly, from about 60 mg/dl to 132 mg/dl. While that’s up, it’s not really abnormal for a fasting triglyceride level.

The real change was in his weight. Based on weigh-ins, he gained 19.8 pounds in 60 days. He also gained 10 cm around his waist—that’s close to four inches. And here is the kicker: his estimated caloric intake before the self-study was around 2,300 calories per day. He claims that his caloric intake remained at 2,300 calories per day throughout the experiment. All the experts went nuts. Taubes said it’s got to be the sugar. Another said sugar has to be the problem.

Oh, really? I’ve got some comments on that on Saturday—and you won’t want to miss them.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Review: That Sugar Film

/in /by

Summer gives us a chance catch to up on reading or binge watch a television series, so I thought I’d watch some of the nutrition documentaries that I’ve been asked about. I’ve done some in the past such as Forks Over Knives. It gives me a chance to check the facts on what’s said and how true or relevant it is. That’s the case with the film titled That Sugar Film. It was written, directed, and starred in by an Australian filmmaker Damon Gambeau. Hugh Jackson even performed the opening scene.

The premise of the movie is that all sugar is bad. There was at least one anti-sugar and ketogenic diet proponent in Gary Taubes author of Good Calories, Bad Calories. The filmmaker also assembled a team of experts who were going to provide information and medical supervision during an experiment he wanted to conduct on himself. The experiment was to see how a high-sugar diet, one typical of the average Australian, would impact him. Based on what he claimed to eat, he was somewhere between the paleo diet and the ketogenic diet before that.

There was the requisite discussion of the cholesterol hypothesis and how fat was chosen as the demon to avoid instead of sugar as they relate to heart disease. The sugar industry conspiracy was also talked about in the same vein as the tobacco industry. But it’s what he did to himself that was by far the most interesting: switching to a diet that contained 40 teaspoons of sugar a day for 60 days. What happened to him? That’s coming on Thursday.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Making Burgers Leaner

/in /by

The series of Memos on meatless burgers generated many interesting comments. With the major holiday for grilling just two days away, I want to show you how to reduce calories in beef burgers.

First, use a leaner cut of meat for your burgers. Ground sirloin is often designated 90/10, ground round 85/15, ground chuck as 80/20, and hamburger meat as 70/30. The first number is the percentage of protein while the second is the percentage of fat by weight, but the grams of fat are vastly difference. A 4-ounce burger made of ground sirloin has eight grams of fat while the most commonly used cut for burgers at 80/20 has 21 grams of fat. That’s a difference of close to 120 calories, and those calories come from fat.

Second, you can consider the amount of fat lost while grilling. For 80/20 it can be up to seven grams of fat or about 60 calories while 90/10 only loses about one gram of fat or just 10 calories. However, the difference in shrinkage would be significant. The four ounces can drop to 2.6 ounces with the 80/20, but you lose just under one ounce in the 90/10. That means the ground sirloin will give you a bigger burger with a lot less fat.

How do you decide? It depends on whether burgers are a staple of your diet. If you have a burger or two only on outdoor-grilling holidays, who cares? If you grill burgers a couple times of week, the fat and calories begin to add up. Add lots of veggies——tomato, lettuce, onion, pickle—and use a whole wheat bun; check the calories in the buns because they can vary greatly.

You can have your burger, meatless or beef, and enjoy it, too. Of course, there are a whole lot more options for grilling, but to me there’s nothing like a good burger grilled outdoors.

Have a Happy 4th of July and enjoy your Independence Day celebration. I’ll be back next week with another health topic to discuss in detail. If you’re not in the U.S., I hope you’ll grill along with us.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Something Greater than Yourself

/in /by

Who’s going to analyze all of this data when data collection is complete? A better question might be who couldn’t analyze this data. The answer: anyone who has a good research question and agrees to abide by the guidelines of data usage can run an analysis. That could even be you. That’s correct; if you have a question and the ability to analyze the data, you could do it.

The goal is personalized medicine, and not just a pitch by a practice that’s talking about typical healthcare. The goal is to be able to identify the subgroups that will respond best to preventive health practices or to specific disease treatments. In that way, a profile of the best techniques based on genetics, environment, and lifestyle can be developed.

The only disappointment I have is that they didn’t include the microbiome. That would require a stool sample and add a greater degree of complexity to a data collection procedure that’s already very complicated. Maybe they’ll add that in the future.

If you go to the All of Us website, you’ll be able to find the local healthcare system in your area that’s responsible for data collection. In Grand Rapids, it’s Spectrum Health. I did the surveys online and scheduled an appointment for the physical data collection; that was it. In our area, we get a $25 gift card to a large grocery store chain, so I’m planning to get the whole family involved; Riley’s off the hook because you must be 18 and able to give consent. Whether you’re healthy or not doesn’t play a part in it; in fact, the info from people with current health conditions may be even more important.

The Bottom Line

The opportunity to become a part of something significant doesn’t happen all the time and almost never in preventive healthcare. This is time to do something greater than yourself, I can’t tell you whether it will benefit you personally, but it will benefit humanity. Maybe, just maybe, it will benefit a friend or relative. Check it out and check in to All of Us.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Reference: https://allofus.nih.gov/

All of Us: The Details

/in /by

Before I go further, I want you to consider this. For every variable, there will be a million data points. Height: one million. Weight: one million. Hip circumference: one million. You get the idea—and this is the simple stuff. The blood work alone could have 100 variables. Then we get into the DNA. Every gene has to be mapped to examine specific areas of DNA to see similarities or differences between healthy people and those with diseases.

If you volunteer, you will be called a partner instead of a subject. You’ll be giving the study plenty of information, but the information doesn’t just go one way. In the future, when there’s something that can benefit your health, you may be given information critical to preventing or treating a disease. The data collection includes giving Informed Consent and HIPAA for electronic data collection. Then there are several surveys and perhaps more in the future. There will also be blood and urine specimens as well as some baseline anthropomorphic data.

One thing that’s on everyone’s mind is information security. The researchers go into great detail to protect your identity. Data will be posted only with a number instead of a name, and the highest level of encryption available today will be used to protect your identity. I take security seriously, and I’m comfortable with it.

Check out the link in the Reference to find out more, and if you choose, to get started now yourself.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Reference: https://allofus.nih.gov/

All of Us

/in /by

Would you like to be part of one of the largest studies ever attempted in the U.S.? I decided I would and I think you should as well.

The study is called All of Us, and it’s an attempt to gather health data from one million or more volunteers and then track them over many years. The purpose is to examine how genetics, environment, and lifestyle can impact health and disease. The goal is to provide a database that researchers can use to determine the factors that can impact the development of disease and eventually, the most effective treatment.

I think that’s the real goal. We have no idea what causes many diseases, whether it’s arthritis, cancer, auto-immune, or many others. The same holds true for treatments. Why does one treatment work well on one person and not at all on another? The genetics and environment as well as lifestyle may all have a role; with a database so extensive, just about every type of human subgroup will be represented.

What’s involved? I’ll tell you that on Thursday. If you want to read about all the details involved, check out the link in the References.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet

Reference: https://allofus.nih.gov/

The Bottom Line on Meatless Burgers

/in /by

There are a couple more differences between the meatless burgers and beef burgers. To get the red color, the Impossible Burger uses soy leghemoglobin from the roots of soy plants, while the Beyond Burger uses beet juice. Both are vegan and give the burgers their red color. The Impossible Burger also adds some B vitamins and minerals. The Beyond Burger seems to add only some iron.

Are the meatless burgers healthy or not? From a strict look at fat content, no. Cholesterol level, yes. Sodium content, no, depending on how much salt you add to your beef burger; if you add more than one-sixth teaspoon of salt to your burger, you’ve lost that advantage. In effect, they’re very comparable to 80-20 burgers you would cook.

The real difference is that the meatless burgers are sourced from vegetable protein. Even that may strike up a debate because one uses soy protein while the other uses pea protein. Some people try to avoid soy, although there’s no real reason for it with the exception of being allergic to soy. (Check The Bottom Line on Soy Protein in the Store).

The other difference is that they both have carbohydrates and fiber because they’re sourced from plants. While there’s not a lot of fiber, that’s an advantage over beef.

The critical factor is how the burgers are prepared and presented. The final fat count will depend on how long the burgers are cooked: the longer any burger cooks, the more fat it loses to the grill. The presentation also matters. Buns, mayonnaise, cheese (for vegetarians who eat dairy), ketchup, and other condiments can take a 250 calorie burger and explode it to 700 calories or more.

There’s no information available about the environmental effects of meatless burgers, but usually vegan foods are environmentally friendlier than animal products even with the shipping and processing necessary for faux foods.

Beyond Patties

You can find Beyond Meat burger patties in some grocery stores in addition to their brand of plant-based bratwurst sausage, Italian sausage, and meat crumbles. Would your chili or meatloaf taste different with faux beef? We’ve tried cooking with other brands of vegan “beef” and noticed only a lack of fat, although if we use beef, we usually rinse it after browning it to remove most of the fat. The lower cholesterol in the meatless beef would be a big nutritional plus, but of course all this scientifically created food comes at a price: expect to pay two or three times as much as for plain old ground beef.

The Bottom Line

On paper, the meatless burgers could potentially be healthier than beef burgers. Whether they’re healthy or not is a different story. I haven’t seen research on how the meatless burgers respond to flames and whether they may produce undesirable chemicals. On top of that, the presentation mentioned earlier also matters.

Most likely whether they’re successful or not depends on the taste. I haven’t tasted either yet but I’ve planned a tasting barbecue soon, and I’ll let you know what I find out. Until then, it’s beef burgers for me. It would be exciting to have a plant-based burger that meets the taste test. Let me know how you feel if you try them.

What are you prepared to do today?

        Dr. Chet