Sugar Is Back on Food Labels, This Time as a Selling Point

My allergist told me we usually become allergic to what we love because that is what we are usually eating. Corn was my favorite vegetable until this allergy started up.

The immune system takes an innocent protein like a corn one and thinks it's a nasty germ that has to be killed and over reacts sometimes killing the person or causing severe pain and suffering.

The thought is that a person might have been exposed to a bacteria or virus that is similar to the corn, or other allergen protein, and mistakes the innocent protein as a nasty invader.

Please don't bracket my comments like that. I was referring to the impure and allergenic state of fractioned sugars and other corn derivatives as a class.

“The impure and allergenic state of fractioned sugars and corn derivatives?” What the hell does that even mean? I’ve worked in the food starch industry and can assure you the starch purification process doesn’t leave enough amino acids behind to create allergic reactions. We were very good at separating the protein from the starch. If you want to measure in ppb or ppt you can probably find some small peptides. But if people are going to have a serious reaction from microgram quantities, they would have died a long time ago when they were, undoubtedly, given a corn product where the protein was still intact. Any protein can cause an allergic reaction. If you look long and hard enough you can find someone allergic to it. Proteins have allergic responses because they have huge structures. Grain proteins are very large molecules.

examples included one sufferer, the cluster-headache guy, whose trigger happened to be HFCS.

And this guy is sure it’s the HFCS causing his headaches? Is it because of some trace amount of amino acids in the product or are they caused by something else? Please share the details of your double-blind placebo-controlled study.

I gather you are not an allergist by profession!

No, but I certainly have the education and experience to know when I’m dealing with someone who doesn’t really know what he’s talking about.

Those "trace amounts" of "minute quantities" are quite dangerous to an allergic person. Peanut allergies are a good example of the hazards of such thinking.

Measured in parts per billion or trillion? Again, if someone experiences a serious reaction from something measured in these quantities then they would have died from exposure to this particular substance a long time ago. Or do you believe that people with allergies to peanuts can go into anaphylactic shock from just smelling them? Same for the dextrose used on salt as a free flow agent. If that minute amount is causing the reactions you suggest then I don’t understand why that person is still alive today.

An astounding statement. I'd love a citation for that, if only to show to some prominent allergists of my acquaintance.

Astounding? You’re trying a little too hard here to show indignation. The fact that most allergists never see it was a point made by the very researcher who first proved that corn allergies do in fact exist. He was trying to dispel the myths that this is all some big conspiracy. Sound familiar? Your prominent allergist friends will certainly know who he is. Maybe you could share with us what percentage of the population suffers from corn allergies/sensitivities in this country. I’d be especially interested in the supporting data with as much detail as possible describing how they went about measuring this phenomenon. The numbers I’ve seen say it’s less than .020% of the population. That would tell you why most allergists will never see a person who suffers a real allergy to corn.

Checking Google Scholar, which scours research publications only, for ["corn allergy" OR "corn allergen"] results in eight pages of hits:

Wow. I typed aspartame + poison into Google Scholar and got 1,100 hits. All this proves is that we both know how to use Google.

Allergy to corn is, today, an active topic of research in allergic immunology.

Oh, I’m sure it is. It’s good to know that much of what passes for research today is still about grabbing money.

It may not be as familiar to allergists who have let their continuing education slide as, say, ragweed or cat dander, but its seriousness and prevalence is not something to be dismissed out of hand, as you continue:

Be careful, you’re superiority complex is beginning to show.

And Global Warming is settled science.

If you believe that science by consensus is legitimate.

If you expect any of us to say, "Oh well there you go, the government is always right," you're on the wrong forum!

Remind me again where I said anything remotely like “the government is always right?” Or did you just make that up for a cheap effect? Do you think you’re dealing with a guy who just finished freshman chemistry?

(Whew. That's a relief.)

LOL! Having spent years managing products through the maze that is the FDA, I find your flagrant condescension pretty funny. I am highly aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the FDA. You?

Let's agree that "allergy" has regrettably come to be used broadly, beyond its official definition of IgE-mediated inflammatory response.

You agree with me but I’m the one dancing on definitions? Uh, ok.

After all, some unfortunate folks go into apparently allergic anaphylaxis after exposure to some substances, yet a postmortem rules out classical allergy. The patient's still dead.

Ok. So what?

Perhaps the term "allergy" is misused because alternative and more accurate terms, such as "intolerance" or "sensitivity," lack a certain gravitas and don't command respect from folks like you?

Wow, now you’re beginning to sound schoolmarmish. What’s up with that? Is it a lack of gravitas that causes you to confuse immune responses with metabolic disturbances? One can cause death and the other gives you gas. And you’re confused?

"Belief" isn't my issue. But as a scientist I do object to reactionary fealty to trailing-edge conventional wisdom and herd mentality.

You’re a scientist? Damn. Do you believe in science by consensus? Or do you believe that science should deal with what we know to be factual?

Example: If you go back a few years you'll find that a vast, vast majority of medical scientists found the notion of a bacterial cause to peptic ulcers to be utterly comical and worthy of derision. Bacteria living in the acid environment of the stomach? How silly. Today, of course, helicobacter pylori is a recognized pathogen responsible for ulcers and more, and the Aussies who determined it have a rather fetching award glinting on their mantelpiece. So please, tread carefully when quoting the likes of the FDA as any sort of pinnacle of knowledge.

Wow, (you just keep wowing me) science advances at it learns. Who knew? Does your little story prove that picograms of amino acids can send people into anaphylactic shock and kill them? I didn’t think so. Now, again, please show me where I quoted the FDA as any sort of pinnacle of knowledge. Or did you just make that up too?

Sure, if you hang your hat on the IgE definition and thereby summarily dismiss the patient's complaint. Maybe we need a better term, but meanwhile I don't fault those folks with pounding Chop Suey migraines for using the term "allergy."

Still looking for the cause of Chinese Restaurant Syndrome? If you get migraines from consuming glutamate from added sources then you must get the same pounding migraines from naturally occurring sources. Do you? Since glutamate is found in most high protein foods, you must spend a lot of time in a dark room popping Zomig tablets.

Spoken like one who has never had an MSG headache. Why the consistent thread of needling judgmentalism, Mase? Some folks get headaches from consuming MSG, and you have a problem with that. Here you go:

Then ‘splain it to me Lucy…..how do you get a “MSG headache” (or any other reaction/sensitivity/allergy) from added sources of glutamate but not from natural sources of glutamate when the average American consumes 10 times more glutamate from natural sources than they do from added sources? How does that work?

See, you're giving me a headache now. But maybe I shouldn't mention that, or you'd go into lecture mode about how I'd get 10 times more hectoring schoolmarmishness from natural sources...

I see you have no answer for my previous question. I didn’t think so but I was hoping you’d wow me again with your scientific knowledge. If you were in a science class now the schoolmarm wouldn’t be very kind with your grade. She might even hector you for making claims you couldn’t support with anything other than anecdotes.

Look. I agree that "MSG allergy" is technically an inexact and incorrect term. But I have no problem respecting the physiological response some people experience from MSG.

The difference is I need to understand the cause of these responses and be able to support that understanding with sound science, not the junk that is so popular today. I’m old school like the schoolmarms.

There are, after all, many possible answers to the questions you pose. Grape juice isn't stir-fried; Parmesan is rarely mixed with bean sprouts; perhaps there is a combinatorial effect going on, or one related to preparation.

Maybe you should do a little experiment of your own. Take a tablespoon of Accent, eat it, and see what happens. It hasn’t been stir-fried and there is no combination effect going on nor is there anything related to preparation.

It would be an interesting subject to explore, but the unfortunate residents of Planet Mase will never know, because their throbbing temples are clearly not worthy of further inquiry. Dismissed

Good grief. Do you really think you’re the first one to think of these possibilities? Chinese Restaurant Syndrome was studied to death. MSG has been put through the wringer and it’s clear that there is no scientific merit in glutamate causing headaches. But you believe what you want to believe. Feelings are good if you're a feelings kind of guy.

Maybe because their medical professionals don't take their complaints seriously, hm?

Or maybe the medical profession is tired of dealing with people who want to believe they suffer from chemical sensitivities. You’re not a Clinical Ecologist, are you? I’ve seen studies where patients who believed they were hypersensitive to many foods had identified their allergies/sensitivities after simply reading a popular book on the subject. These same people were known to shop from doctor to doctor until they received the diagnosis they wanted. I don’t doubt that this diagnosis came as a relief to these patients who wanted a physical explanation for their problems to avoid facing their real problem which is psychiatric.

Mind that judgmentalism, Mase. It's unattractive.

You don’t think junk science is alive and well on the internet? You don’t have a website now do you?

Not everyone with an MSG headache is an imaginative hypochondriac.

They aren’t if they get the same headaches from eating foods with naturally occurring glutamate as they do from eating foods with added glutamate. You know anyone who does?

Fortunately, not every doctor idles along making pat diagnoses from the "hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras" school of lazy medicine.

Let me guess, your chosen field of science is Naturopathy? Personally, I try to avoid MD’s that didn’t get a solid training in chemistry, nutrition and physiology. You seem to like the opposite.

I'd be interested in what you think is the first thing "those folks" need.

Other than a good beating, I’d suggest the food Nazis be required to take, and pass, classes in chemistry and nutrition. But that’s not going to happen. They’ve become far too powerful because people have allowed junk science to drive far too many of the important decisions. Maybe you’re ready to embrace them but I have a problem with people who want to take away my freedoms based on information I know is bogus.

Because what you're engaging in, to my eye, is regrettably collectivist thinking.

Fact based science is akin to collectivist thinking? You’re the one who thinks our bodies don’t know what to do with corn and that we have had (Asians and Europeans) very little genetic time to adapt to corn as a foodstuff. That statement is beyond ridiculous. Our number one product in Japan was a corn powder used to make a corn soup sold through McDonalds. It is still one of the most popular items on their menu and the popularity of corn is huge in Japan. They’ve even come up with some bizarre ways to use it (think corn pizza). I don’t see massive allergies and intolerances in Japan. If we did, the consumption of corn would be dropping but just the opposite is happening. Will you now tell us that the Japanese enjoy all the intolerance discomforts and allergen induced anaphylactic shock inflicted on them by corn – a product their body doesn’t know what to do with? LOL!

Is this the kind of nonsense that passes for gravitas in your circles? I don’t know where you went to school but I am certain that this kind of thinking would get you laughed out of any legitimate food science program. You’d fare even worse in industry, unless you want to work for CSPI.

Just as those you criticize commit the rhetorical crime of referring to non-IgE-mediated physiological responses as "allergy," you seem to be lumping quite a few examples of very real, very debilitating and very avoidable conditions into a holding pen called "those folks."

I read your nonsense and think of all the times people cried wolf about food and food ingredients when they had no idea what they were talking about. I see the assault on restaurants and other industries, based on junk science, and I know the toxic terrorist will not stop there. Junk science feeds upon and breeds fear. Cyclamates, Alar, DDT, trans fats, artificial sweeteners, Olestra, saturated fats and the whole blame businesses for obesity industry are just a few that come to mind. You should read sometime about the StarLink corn debacle if you want to see what kind of trouble the fearmongers can cause. I see now where the English researcher who indicted mercury in vaccines has been exposed by his own people as a fraud. He cooked everything and now we have entire countries eschewing vaccines based on his evil. Forget about community immunity and be afraid that “those folks” will be traveling here to spread what they should have been vaccinated against.

You're clearly a smart guy, but I'm here to tell you that it's tiresome and counterproductive.

Thanks for the pat on the head dad, but you’re the only one in this debate that has no idea what he’s talking about. And yes, that would make you tiresome and counterproductive. I’ll leave you with a quote from Peter Huber that reminds me of you:

“Junk science is the mirror image of real science, with much of the same form but none of the same substance.… It is a hodgepodge of biased data, spurious inferences, and logical legerdemain, patched together by researchers whose enthusiasm for discovery and diagnosis far outstrips their skill. It is a catalog of every conceivable kind of error: data dredging, wishful thinking, truculent dogmatism, and, now and again, outright fraud.”

My allergist did the prick test and confirmed I am allergic to corn, oatmeal and bananas. My reactions aren't simply a stomach ache or intestinal disturbance such as a sensitivity might bring on. We are talking about life and death depending on what kind of corn I run into.

Popcorn makes me shakey, weak, and probably lowers my blood pressure. Other types of corn, depending on how they are processed cause other types of reactions.

I don't doubt that since I believe that corn allergies exist. Your earlier comments are spot on. Allergens can result when a body is repeatedly tested with some substance over and over. My mother loved red wine and was able to drink it well into her 70's. Then she became allergic to it and it's now to the point where consuming it requires immediate medical attention.

That still doesn't change the fact that trace amounts of peptides, measured in micrograms, is not enough to cause the sensitivities described much less a life or death reaction.

My allergist did a skin test and found I am also allergic to corn, one test was done 30 years ago an another one 2 years ago. Corn gives me a dull headache at the base of my skull. It is dose related and the more corn I consume the worse the headache. This includes fresh corn, corn starch, cornmeal, corn syrup and HFCS. The other corn based products dextros and Maltodestrin each have their own more serious reactions. Dextros causes a skin reaction of a burning feeling over my body but does not include hives (yet) that the doctor calls a type of skin reaction and Maltodextrin closes my throat up. I am seeing maltodextrin in more and more food, including baked goods even at Whole Food.

so what is “sucralose”?

so what is “sucralose”?

The opposite of "sucrawin"?

seriously, sucralose is appearing on some ingredient lists.

Above is sucrose. Below is sucralose.

3 chlorines replace 3 OH. It's 600 times sweeter than sugar and passes thru the body without being digested (so it's a zero calorie food).

is that the stuff that was notorious for “anal leckage”?

or was that the reverse rotaiting fat molecule?

You're thinking of Olestra.

That would be Olestra.

Good summary! I couldn’t have said it any better.

Unintentionally hilarious.

Yeah, I saw that earlier. Probably posted before reading the rest of the thread. Maybe not.

Beyond that though, who goes to the "Leaf Lady" (ROFL) as a source for anything -- especially on FR? That name radiates credibility. [sarc]

“...and a genius with food additives!” Clark!!!

"The crunch enhancer? That's a non-nutritive cereal varnish."

"It's semi-permeable. It's not osmotic."

"What it does is, it coats and seals the flake."

"It prevents the milk from penetrating it."

"Yeah, it's a beautiful product."

One of my all time favorite films.

Hahaha good luck with that.

The only pop I know of that always uses pure sugar in all there products is those made by the Natrona Bottling Company outside of Pittsburgh. They also derive their CO2 from dry ice, definately a pop like you used to get when you were a kid vs the stuff they sell today.

http://www.natronabottlingcompany.com/

Of course there is, if they have gone to real sugar and not HFCS and they are getting their CO2 from dry ice (finer bubbles), its a completely different pop even if every other ingredient remains the same.