![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I like your improvement to the text from the MSG article, but I wonder whether this wouldn't make more sense at Umami. I realize that the umami is somewhat conceptually different (and I believe that couple of other dissolved amino acids produce a similar though less intense umami sensations, though that's not currently reflected in the article), but it seems like the topics of these articles overlap extensively. Cool Hand Luke 21:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
This is a general claim and is properly misleading without proper wording. The general public in most Asian countries probably don't consider msg suspect, and it wouldn't surprise me if the same is ture in most African, Eastern European and South American countries don't consider it suspect either. The source used partially supports the claim but doesn't really provide proper context as to what areas the author is referring to although one suspects its the the Western world Nil Einne ( talk) 08:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Here is what I read in Japanese wikipedia. The syndrome may be due to a simple case of MSG overdose. Unlike salt, one can add large dose of MSG to food and food remain edible. Vapour ( talk) 17:42, 6 June 2008 (UTC) ...Which then leads to the individual suffering from Excitotoxicity -- Workanode ( talk) 00:31, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
This article talk page was automatically added with {{ WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot ( talk) 17:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
The glutamate levels of nutritional yeast. Badagnani ( talk) 05:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
CBS 60 minutes [1] produced a 13 minute news segment in 1991 about the risks with MSG and the politics behind MSG with interviews with the leading figures in this controversy. 60 minutes should be considered a WP:RS and the contents should therefore be integrated in the article. MaxPont ( talk) 09:11, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Kingoomieiii. What is the "evidence produced in the 18 years since then" (the 60 Minutes program), "that MSG has essentially NO health risks"? The research that I know of that makes that claim was double-blind done by Yang, and Geha et al, and Tarasoff and Kelly. And they all used aspartame in what they called "placebos." Truthinlabeling ( talk) 05:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Adding MSG is more and more becoming a liability for the food industry. One example is the marketing controversy between the two soup makers Campell and Progresso. RS that could be included in the article are here: "Mm-Mm Militant: Campbell Goes After Progresso" [2] and "Soup War Continues, Progresso Strikes Back" [3] MaxPont ( talk) 07:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I would like to discuss the section on "Research into health effects" that has just been edited, as well as the sections on "time line" and "excitotoxicity" that are clearly industry driven and need to be rewritten. Can you tell me how to start a new topic for discussion? I am new to Wikipedia. Truthinlabeling ( talk) 03:22, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
As a separate but related issue, your heavy insertion of links to truthinlabeling.com is problematic, particularly as you appear to be associated directly with that website. Please take a look at our guidelines on conflicts of interest and promoting one's ventures on Wikipedia. In most or all of these cases, the relevant points should instead be illustrated (if possible) with recourse to the scholarly literature, as described here and here. MastCell Talk 22:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I find the anecdotal reference to one chef with a Ph.D. (stating no proven toxicology) severely industry slanted and biased. This is a secondary source, at best, and mere say-so at worst. It also seems to flatly contradict the excitotoxicity section, in this same article, stating that brain lesions are proven to occur in primates. Wikipedia should not take part in smoothing over health dangers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.88.60 ( talk) 05:43, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Good call. But a 1959 statement by the FDA that it is generally recognized as safe should not put anyone at ease to consume it, especially in light of the later reports in the Timeline section. Speaking of which, on the 2002 FDA report, why do we use the jargon "order of magnitude" to describe the difference between the amount fed to the rats and ordinary human dietary consumption? It again gives the impression of trying to smooth over the dangers by making the amounts seem way out of the ballpark. An order of magnitude is just 10 times the amount, but sounds huge to the layman. It should not make anyone feel at ease that they are having 1/10th the dosage causing nerve degeneration in rats. I recommend saying "less than 1/10th the amount" rather than an "order of magnitude" different to discuss ordinary amounts vis a vis the amount fed to the rats in that study. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.91.12.76 ( talk) 21:27, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
And also nix the use of "extreme amounts" in that same section to describe the study, for the same reason. Ten times more than ordinary diet is not an "extreme amount" different. Have a whole bag of Doritos at once, and you're right there. This again is unbalanced editorializing, probably by someone tied to industry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.91.12.76 ( talk) 21:31, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
The FDA link in external links points to a 404 page.
I'm somewhat skeptical about the testing procedure for Chinese Restaurant Syndrome, which has supposedly ruled out MSG as the cause.
The article currently states: "Adequately controlling for experimental bias includes a placebo-controlled double-blinded experimental design and the application in capsules because of the strong and unique after-taste of glutamates."
It sounds plausible, but perhaps they've overlooked the possibility that the syndrome is actually caused by the MSG coming into localized contact with the mouth and throat? Swallowing capsules of MSG would negate this effect in the same way that swallowing capsules of underarm deodorant would be markedly less effective than rubbing the deodorant under the arms. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian Fieggen ( talk • contribs) 21:59, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The issue of health risks for humans based on MSG, in my view, is highly downplayed in this article and the related article Monosodium glutamate. There is much discussion on the MSG talk page about the possibility of pro-MSG people being involved in a consistent campaign to downplay the risks, and my sense is that this is a serious possibility. For example, when I added a well-referenced piece of information from a respected scientist ( Robert Sapolsky of Stanford) about MSG concerns, my addition was reverted. The lead sections of both articles don't even mention health risks -- the only clue that readers might get would be to look at the hatnote at the top of the MSG article with the mild-sounding wording "health concerns", but mostly the verbiage suggests there's no cause for worry. Both articles in my view are not addressing the issue of health concerns in a fair manner; it needs more attention, more prominence in the lead paragraphs, and more references.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 16:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Also, this appears as a redirect for Chinese Restaurant Syndrome, but entirely fails to elucidate what that syndrome might have been. I accept that the weight of evidence is on the side of MSG being safe, but I followed a link to it to find out what it was so I would recognize it's description and be familiar with the claims people make about it. Ideas that have been disproved by science must be recorded as well as ones that have been shown to be correct. This way if someone else duplicates the incorrect idea it can be recognized and discarded. In fact, science mainly proceeds by proving explanations wrong. (You may recall a science teacher or two talking about "disproving the Null hypothesis") — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.153.13 ( talk) 00:45, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
I arrived at this article because I wanted to find out what "Chinese Restaurant Syndrome" was. Not because I believe it's a real thing - just because I wanted to know what people said it was. It re-directed me here - and it doesn't tell me me what it was. So Wikipedia is not the place to look for this information. I don't usually use Wikipedia, for obvious reasons. The syndrome may be as mythical as the authors of the article seem to suggest, but if at some time someone went to the trouble of giving the syndrome a name, then the least you can do, before de-bunking it, is to say what it was alleged to consist of. It's almost as though dark forces are at work suppressing any mention of it. Why would they do that? The claim that this can't happen in the well-regulated medium of Wikipedia is as always laughable. Remember the saying - "suppressio veri est suggestio falsi". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.223.126 ( talk) 15:48, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
I just came across an article and paper discussing squid ink. Apparently glutamic acid is one of the free amino acids with highest concentration in it. Should anyone care to dig deeper and add this to the page, here are the links: http://www.gourmet.com/food/2009/02/squid-ink http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17393278 Vitriolum ( talk) 14:49, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Glutamic acid tastes sour not umami.The molecules that have umami properties are the salts of glutamate like calcium, sodium or potasium glutamate, not glutamic acid itself. This is the foundation of Professor Ikeda's discovery [2]. A recent study has described that glutamic acid is percieved as a sour compound by humans [3]. It is not scientifically correct to describe glutamic acid as a compound that gives umami flavor. I would consider to cancel this page, keep it as 'glutamate' or merge with monosodium glutamate.
There needs to more support for alternate names for this chemical. I myself don't like chemicals having alternate names, but there are many organic ones based around the food chain that still do.
MSG is known by other names on food products
Like with Caffiene, MSG can give some people headaches and the alternate names make it harder to track down. Eyreland ( talk) 21:15, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't think that MSG qualifies as an excitotoxin. It seems to me that the extended entry here and the "see also" link back to this article from the excitotoxin article are an attempt to state that MSG is dangerous without saying so directly. My question is, is the large section on excitotoxins appropriate for an article like this on the face of it (whether MSG is an excitotoxin or not), and should it be noted here that the excitotoxin article is itself in dispute?
I concur. The implication of that section is that MSG is dangerous, especially for people not knowing about the excitotoxin debate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.219.106 ( talk) 15:55, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't want to change the text without being sure, but does anyone agree with me that the simple preposition 'on' in the final sentence of the section changes the whole meaning of the sentence in a wrong direction, and that it should be replaced by 'in'? Asterisked in the extract pasted below.
"....and the potential long-term neurodegenerative effects of small-to-moderate spikes on* [?in] plasma excitotoxin levels."
Dmhball~enwiki ( talk) 13:27, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. ( non-admin closure) Red Slash 03:56, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Glutamic acid (flavor) →
Glutamate flavoring (or optionally
Glutamic flavoring ) – seems to be a better name than "glutamic acid (flavor)", as it is a flavoring compound, and most of the compounds are glutamates. --
76.65.128.112 (
talk)
13:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
Note related policy at WP:NATURAL, i.e. natural disambiguation is preferred over parenthetical disambiguation. — AjaxSmack 21:42, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
At the top of this article, we have "For the chemical compound monosodium glutamate (MSG), see monosodium glutamate." And then there is a large section in here about MSG. There are 32 refs to monosodium glutamate and 18 refs to MSG here. Since this is a slightly broader topic, including both the acid and its salts, I propose/plan to move MSG here or move the MSG info there. Alrich44 ( talk) 00:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
Most of the sources in this section are decades old, and it seems to focus extensively on the relatively fringe views of a single scientist, John Olney, who has been outspoken in his campaign for greater regulation of MSG. Are there any other sources we can cite, or any more recent papers we can reference? -- Aquillion ( talk) 08:15, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Did that big blue notice seriously have to be there? It is bothersome and has no good reason to be there except to show (all so loudly) that the editor directly quoted a whole book portion in that specific section. I thought a simple ref + paraphrasing would do fine, and would flow with the Wikipedia tone better. Hill Crest's WikiLaser! ( BOOM!) 05:25, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Blanked as copyvio. 04:36, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Glutamate flavoring. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:19, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Why is there no reference to neuron injury by MSG in the safety section? For example: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2802046/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.35.129.81 ( talk) 06:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Lately an addition was added to this entry: " It is often the subject of controversy due to multiple online rumours spread around Israel in 2011 but these are false." I'm curious whether it's true or not since it is not mentioned again in the entry and would like to get a source. Thank you YouKnowTwo ( talk) 16:38, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
The article would benefit from a description of what happens to ingested MSG in a human body. -- BjKa ( talk) 12:56, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Worst mistake of my life DragonMaster9817 ( talk) 16:19, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Funny how nobody ever thought to compare the effects of MSG vs Potassium Nitrate on people with purported MSG sensitivity. Chinese food doesn't just have one ingredient in it. And for that matter, why does nobody ever complain about the effect of using Ammonium Bicarbonate in Char Siu Bao dough?! 2600:1700:6AE5:2510:0:0:0:24 ( talk) 20:55, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I like your improvement to the text from the MSG article, but I wonder whether this wouldn't make more sense at Umami. I realize that the umami is somewhat conceptually different (and I believe that couple of other dissolved amino acids produce a similar though less intense umami sensations, though that's not currently reflected in the article), but it seems like the topics of these articles overlap extensively. Cool Hand Luke 21:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
This is a general claim and is properly misleading without proper wording. The general public in most Asian countries probably don't consider msg suspect, and it wouldn't surprise me if the same is ture in most African, Eastern European and South American countries don't consider it suspect either. The source used partially supports the claim but doesn't really provide proper context as to what areas the author is referring to although one suspects its the the Western world Nil Einne ( talk) 08:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Here is what I read in Japanese wikipedia. The syndrome may be due to a simple case of MSG overdose. Unlike salt, one can add large dose of MSG to food and food remain edible. Vapour ( talk) 17:42, 6 June 2008 (UTC) ...Which then leads to the individual suffering from Excitotoxicity -- Workanode ( talk) 00:31, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
This article talk page was automatically added with {{ WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot ( talk) 17:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
The glutamate levels of nutritional yeast. Badagnani ( talk) 05:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
CBS 60 minutes [1] produced a 13 minute news segment in 1991 about the risks with MSG and the politics behind MSG with interviews with the leading figures in this controversy. 60 minutes should be considered a WP:RS and the contents should therefore be integrated in the article. MaxPont ( talk) 09:11, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Kingoomieiii. What is the "evidence produced in the 18 years since then" (the 60 Minutes program), "that MSG has essentially NO health risks"? The research that I know of that makes that claim was double-blind done by Yang, and Geha et al, and Tarasoff and Kelly. And they all used aspartame in what they called "placebos." Truthinlabeling ( talk) 05:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Adding MSG is more and more becoming a liability for the food industry. One example is the marketing controversy between the two soup makers Campell and Progresso. RS that could be included in the article are here: "Mm-Mm Militant: Campbell Goes After Progresso" [2] and "Soup War Continues, Progresso Strikes Back" [3] MaxPont ( talk) 07:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I would like to discuss the section on "Research into health effects" that has just been edited, as well as the sections on "time line" and "excitotoxicity" that are clearly industry driven and need to be rewritten. Can you tell me how to start a new topic for discussion? I am new to Wikipedia. Truthinlabeling ( talk) 03:22, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
As a separate but related issue, your heavy insertion of links to truthinlabeling.com is problematic, particularly as you appear to be associated directly with that website. Please take a look at our guidelines on conflicts of interest and promoting one's ventures on Wikipedia. In most or all of these cases, the relevant points should instead be illustrated (if possible) with recourse to the scholarly literature, as described here and here. MastCell Talk 22:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I find the anecdotal reference to one chef with a Ph.D. (stating no proven toxicology) severely industry slanted and biased. This is a secondary source, at best, and mere say-so at worst. It also seems to flatly contradict the excitotoxicity section, in this same article, stating that brain lesions are proven to occur in primates. Wikipedia should not take part in smoothing over health dangers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.88.60 ( talk) 05:43, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Good call. But a 1959 statement by the FDA that it is generally recognized as safe should not put anyone at ease to consume it, especially in light of the later reports in the Timeline section. Speaking of which, on the 2002 FDA report, why do we use the jargon "order of magnitude" to describe the difference between the amount fed to the rats and ordinary human dietary consumption? It again gives the impression of trying to smooth over the dangers by making the amounts seem way out of the ballpark. An order of magnitude is just 10 times the amount, but sounds huge to the layman. It should not make anyone feel at ease that they are having 1/10th the dosage causing nerve degeneration in rats. I recommend saying "less than 1/10th the amount" rather than an "order of magnitude" different to discuss ordinary amounts vis a vis the amount fed to the rats in that study. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.91.12.76 ( talk) 21:27, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
And also nix the use of "extreme amounts" in that same section to describe the study, for the same reason. Ten times more than ordinary diet is not an "extreme amount" different. Have a whole bag of Doritos at once, and you're right there. This again is unbalanced editorializing, probably by someone tied to industry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.91.12.76 ( talk) 21:31, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
The FDA link in external links points to a 404 page.
I'm somewhat skeptical about the testing procedure for Chinese Restaurant Syndrome, which has supposedly ruled out MSG as the cause.
The article currently states: "Adequately controlling for experimental bias includes a placebo-controlled double-blinded experimental design and the application in capsules because of the strong and unique after-taste of glutamates."
It sounds plausible, but perhaps they've overlooked the possibility that the syndrome is actually caused by the MSG coming into localized contact with the mouth and throat? Swallowing capsules of MSG would negate this effect in the same way that swallowing capsules of underarm deodorant would be markedly less effective than rubbing the deodorant under the arms. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian Fieggen ( talk • contribs) 21:59, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
The issue of health risks for humans based on MSG, in my view, is highly downplayed in this article and the related article Monosodium glutamate. There is much discussion on the MSG talk page about the possibility of pro-MSG people being involved in a consistent campaign to downplay the risks, and my sense is that this is a serious possibility. For example, when I added a well-referenced piece of information from a respected scientist ( Robert Sapolsky of Stanford) about MSG concerns, my addition was reverted. The lead sections of both articles don't even mention health risks -- the only clue that readers might get would be to look at the hatnote at the top of the MSG article with the mild-sounding wording "health concerns", but mostly the verbiage suggests there's no cause for worry. Both articles in my view are not addressing the issue of health concerns in a fair manner; it needs more attention, more prominence in the lead paragraphs, and more references.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 16:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Also, this appears as a redirect for Chinese Restaurant Syndrome, but entirely fails to elucidate what that syndrome might have been. I accept that the weight of evidence is on the side of MSG being safe, but I followed a link to it to find out what it was so I would recognize it's description and be familiar with the claims people make about it. Ideas that have been disproved by science must be recorded as well as ones that have been shown to be correct. This way if someone else duplicates the incorrect idea it can be recognized and discarded. In fact, science mainly proceeds by proving explanations wrong. (You may recall a science teacher or two talking about "disproving the Null hypothesis") — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.153.13 ( talk) 00:45, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
I arrived at this article because I wanted to find out what "Chinese Restaurant Syndrome" was. Not because I believe it's a real thing - just because I wanted to know what people said it was. It re-directed me here - and it doesn't tell me me what it was. So Wikipedia is not the place to look for this information. I don't usually use Wikipedia, for obvious reasons. The syndrome may be as mythical as the authors of the article seem to suggest, but if at some time someone went to the trouble of giving the syndrome a name, then the least you can do, before de-bunking it, is to say what it was alleged to consist of. It's almost as though dark forces are at work suppressing any mention of it. Why would they do that? The claim that this can't happen in the well-regulated medium of Wikipedia is as always laughable. Remember the saying - "suppressio veri est suggestio falsi". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.223.126 ( talk) 15:48, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
I just came across an article and paper discussing squid ink. Apparently glutamic acid is one of the free amino acids with highest concentration in it. Should anyone care to dig deeper and add this to the page, here are the links: http://www.gourmet.com/food/2009/02/squid-ink http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17393278 Vitriolum ( talk) 14:49, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Glutamic acid tastes sour not umami.The molecules that have umami properties are the salts of glutamate like calcium, sodium or potasium glutamate, not glutamic acid itself. This is the foundation of Professor Ikeda's discovery [2]. A recent study has described that glutamic acid is percieved as a sour compound by humans [3]. It is not scientifically correct to describe glutamic acid as a compound that gives umami flavor. I would consider to cancel this page, keep it as 'glutamate' or merge with monosodium glutamate.
There needs to more support for alternate names for this chemical. I myself don't like chemicals having alternate names, but there are many organic ones based around the food chain that still do.
MSG is known by other names on food products
Like with Caffiene, MSG can give some people headaches and the alternate names make it harder to track down. Eyreland ( talk) 21:15, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't think that MSG qualifies as an excitotoxin. It seems to me that the extended entry here and the "see also" link back to this article from the excitotoxin article are an attempt to state that MSG is dangerous without saying so directly. My question is, is the large section on excitotoxins appropriate for an article like this on the face of it (whether MSG is an excitotoxin or not), and should it be noted here that the excitotoxin article is itself in dispute?
I concur. The implication of that section is that MSG is dangerous, especially for people not knowing about the excitotoxin debate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.219.106 ( talk) 15:55, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't want to change the text without being sure, but does anyone agree with me that the simple preposition 'on' in the final sentence of the section changes the whole meaning of the sentence in a wrong direction, and that it should be replaced by 'in'? Asterisked in the extract pasted below.
"....and the potential long-term neurodegenerative effects of small-to-moderate spikes on* [?in] plasma excitotoxin levels."
Dmhball~enwiki ( talk) 13:27, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. ( non-admin closure) Red Slash 03:56, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Glutamic acid (flavor) →
Glutamate flavoring (or optionally
Glutamic flavoring ) – seems to be a better name than "glutamic acid (flavor)", as it is a flavoring compound, and most of the compounds are glutamates. --
76.65.128.112 (
talk)
13:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
Note related policy at WP:NATURAL, i.e. natural disambiguation is preferred over parenthetical disambiguation. — AjaxSmack 21:42, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
At the top of this article, we have "For the chemical compound monosodium glutamate (MSG), see monosodium glutamate." And then there is a large section in here about MSG. There are 32 refs to monosodium glutamate and 18 refs to MSG here. Since this is a slightly broader topic, including both the acid and its salts, I propose/plan to move MSG here or move the MSG info there. Alrich44 ( talk) 00:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
Most of the sources in this section are decades old, and it seems to focus extensively on the relatively fringe views of a single scientist, John Olney, who has been outspoken in his campaign for greater regulation of MSG. Are there any other sources we can cite, or any more recent papers we can reference? -- Aquillion ( talk) 08:15, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Did that big blue notice seriously have to be there? It is bothersome and has no good reason to be there except to show (all so loudly) that the editor directly quoted a whole book portion in that specific section. I thought a simple ref + paraphrasing would do fine, and would flow with the Wikipedia tone better. Hill Crest's WikiLaser! ( BOOM!) 05:25, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Blanked as copyvio. 04:36, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Glutamate flavoring. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:19, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Why is there no reference to neuron injury by MSG in the safety section? For example: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2802046/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.35.129.81 ( talk) 06:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Lately an addition was added to this entry: " It is often the subject of controversy due to multiple online rumours spread around Israel in 2011 but these are false." I'm curious whether it's true or not since it is not mentioned again in the entry and would like to get a source. Thank you YouKnowTwo ( talk) 16:38, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
The article would benefit from a description of what happens to ingested MSG in a human body. -- BjKa ( talk) 12:56, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Worst mistake of my life DragonMaster9817 ( talk) 16:19, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Funny how nobody ever thought to compare the effects of MSG vs Potassium Nitrate on people with purported MSG sensitivity. Chinese food doesn't just have one ingredient in it. And for that matter, why does nobody ever complain about the effect of using Ammonium Bicarbonate in Char Siu Bao dough?! 2600:1700:6AE5:2510:0:0:0:24 ( talk) 20:55, 4 July 2024 (UTC)