From: sns@bondi.jpl.nasa.gov (Sam Southard)
Subject: Re: MSG
Organization: SAR Systems Development & Processing, JPL
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 19:44:47 GMT

In article <84954@netnews.upenn.edu> crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:
>In article <1992Jul30.232522.14069@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> sns@bondi.jpl.nasa.gov (Sam Southard) writes:
>>
>>The fact is that there are some people who imagine this type of thing (I don't
>>mean MSG allergies specifically).  Even some people who imagine themselves into
>>the hospital.  

This item should be separated from the next one.  In this item I was simply
reminding people of the existance of hypochondriacs (sp?).  They can imagine
they have the symptoms for anything, including a reaction to MSG.

This was to make the point (as I did inbetween the two portions you extracted,
or perhaps just before the above text) that manufacturers should not be forced
to label their products with every single item that a group of hypochondriacs
decides is causing them illness.  Without scientifically obtained evidence (I
am not making the statement that there is no such evidence, but someone earlier
mentioned the lack of evidence and no one contested it - plenty of anecdotal
tales, but no scientific evidence), there is no reason to force manufacturers
to label their products as containing MSG.

>>It sounds like you believe that MSG causes you to get sick (minor or major).  I
>>believe you - my wife has the same type of reaction.  However, the MSG
>>possibility has been so widely publicised (whether it's true or not), that many
>>people are aware of it.
>>
>Boy, it would be fun to be married to someone who decided I was just
>_imagining_ getting violently ill over MSG.
>
>I sincerely hope I misunderstood your post.

You did.  I do not believe that he believes he has a reaction (well, I do, but
that was not the intent).  Since my wife has the same sort of reaction, and I
believe my wife is not inventing these symptoms, I believe that his symptoms
may be real, and not imagined.  Of course he may in fact be imagining them.
That does not prevent other people from actually having the same symptoms for
un-imagined reasons.

Also, without scientific evidence to the contrary, it is possible that every
single person who claims reactions could be imaginging it (both my wife and you
specifically are included).  I do not believe this to be the case, but it is
possible.  If so, some of the hypochondriacs will be "cured", and some will find
something else to make them sick.  Then the manufacturers will have to change
their labels to include something else.

Eventually if you want to avoid things you'll have to read something equivalent
in size to a CPU manual.  I can see it now: I'd like to order Campbell product
number CKN-0240-135, "Chicken Soup specification", revision number 24631.
Wouldn't it be better to restrict the required labeling to things which have
been proven to adversely affect a significant number of people?

Think of it as self interest.  If you really have an reaction to MSG that has a
physical basis, but force legislation to require manufacturers to label it
without any scientific evidence that it's harmful, what's the next ingredient to
be so handled?  Pretty soon they'll be enough things on a label that it will
take hours to read it, and you'll be likely to miss that a given product
contains MSG.

Instead of trying to force manufacturers to label it you should be trying to
force the FDA (or whoever) to do a scientific study to prove that it's harmful.
THEN you can introduce legislation (if it doesn't already exist) to require
it's inclusion.

The text after this portion went on to describe a simple way you could avoid MSG
the vast majority of the time without requiring manufacturers to label it.
This method would work whether your (specifically) symptoms were real or
imagined (unless yours were imagined and they transferred to something else).
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,news.answers