Quick Links

Feed aggregator

Vitriolic attacks

Our OSS Blog - Mon, 2014-09-08 21:21

In the Sherlock Holmes story, The Case of the Illustrious Client, a former paramour seeks revenge on the dastardly Baron Adelbert Gruner by splashing the Baron’s face with sulphuric acid, which at the time was commonly known as vitriol.  The effect was accurately described by Conan Doyle, which is not surprising, given that the author of the Sherlock Holmes stories was a physician: “The vitriol was eating into it everywhere and dripping from the ears and the chin. One eye was already white and glazed. The other was red and inflamed. The features which I had admired a few minutes before were now like some beautiful painting over which the artist has passed a wet and foul sponge. They were blurred, discoloured, inhuman, terrible.”  Such vitriolic attacks are terrible indeed.

Credit for the discovery of sulphuric acid is usually attributed to Jabir ibn Hayyan, an Arabian alchemist of the eight century.  Our term “gibberish” supposedly derives from his English name Geber, in reference to the alchemists’ use of secret codes that to others were incomprehensible, or “gibberish.”  But it seems Jabir’s experiments with hydrated sulfate salts of iron and copper were recorded well enough for him to be credited with the discovery of vitriol.  The term “hydrated” refers to the inclusion of water in the crystal structure of these substances.  Hydrated iron sulphate or copper sulphate decompose on heating to yield sulphur trioxide and water, which then combine to yield sulphuric acid, or vitriol.  Vitreus is the Latin word for glass, and since crystals of sulphate salts have a glass-like appearance, “oil of vitriol” became a reasonable name for the acid that was derived from the heat treatment of these salts.  Indeed, copper sulphate still has the common name blue vitriol, iron sulphate is green vitriol and cobalt sulphate is red vitriol.

Sulphuric acid is an extremely corrosive substance and can cause permanent disfigurement when splashed on the skin.  Unfortunately such vitriolic attacks are not limited to fictional detective stories, they happen in real life.  An attack by extremists on girls on their way to school in Afghanistan is a recent horrific example.  Believing that girls would be polluted by education, they carried out an attack leaving some of the students scarred for life, both figuratively and literally.  Used in this way, sulphuric acid is a terrible chemical weapon.  But it is also the most important industrial chemical in the world, without which the steel, fertilizer and plastics industries would be crippled.  There are no safe or dangerous chemicals, there are only safe and dangerous ways to use chemicals.

Read more

Streptomycin and Blueberries

Our OSS Blog - Thu, 2014-09-04 21:13

A story is blazing around the blogosphere about a ten year old girl having an anaphylactic reaction to a blueberry pie. Physicians supposedly traced the reaction to streptomycin used as a pesticide on the blueberries. The account is spreading like wildfire with warnings about how an “antibiotic reside in food may cause severe allergies.” The reference is to a paper in the September issue of Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, a reputable publication. But there is a problem. The September issue is not yet out. So how do we know about the case? Because the Journal has put out a press release hyping the story. Scientific journals, just like any other publication, vie for readership and subscriptions, so they do seek attention. But here we are talking about a story that has some questionable features that cannot be checked because the actual paper is not yet available.

So what are these questionable features? First of all, the use of antibiotics as pesticides is rare. In Canada, streptomycin is registered only for use against “fire blight,” a destructive bacterial disease that can strike pear and apple trees. It cannot be used on blueberries. In the U.S. it may also be used on tomatoes and is even allowed in organic agriculture because it comes from a natural source, the bacterium Streptomyces griseus. The use of streptomycin is uncommon. Any suggestion that antibiotics are widely used as pesticides is simply wrong. The press release states that “as far as we know, this is the first report that links an allergic reaction to fruits treated with antibiotic pesticides.” Since streptomycin has been allowed for decades, and this is the first time a problem has cropped up, we are not looking at a highly significant problem. If indeed the problem was streptomycin.

We’ll have to wait to see what the case report actually says about how the reaction was linked to the antibiotic. Streptomycin breaks down quickly in the environment and the prescribed pre-harvest interval for its use is long so it would not be expected to show up in any marketed food. It is worth mentioning that at one time or another traces of fifty two pesticides have been detected on blueberries, but never streptomycin. For now, the story is more along the lines of the impropriety of an alarmist press release before the details of the actual study are made available.

  Read more

A nail polish to detect drugs?

Our OSS Blog - Wed, 2014-09-03 21:49

The press went crazy jumping all over a report that four North Carolina students invented a nail polish to detect "date rape" drugs. Just dip a finger into a drink, and watch for a colour change that is indicative of the beverage having been doctored with rohypnol, Xanax or gamma hydroxybutyrate, the classic date rape drugs. At least so goes the story.. Actually, the nail polish doesn't yet exist, it is just a concept. It is, however, a legitimate idea, given that test strips, coasters, straws and even glasses that change colour in response to the presence of certain drugs do exist.

The chemistry here is fascinating but very complex. It is based on a polymer which is cross linked after being treated with the drug that is to be eventually detected. The drug forges a space in the polymer matrix according to its molecular shape. It is then washed out leaving a cavity in the shape of the drug molecule. The same drug is then coupled to a dye and is added to occupy the spaces that have been vacated. When the polymer, which in theory could be incorporated into nail polish, is then dipped into a beverage, should any of the same drug be present, it will displace some of the the embedded molecules which after being bumped out release the dye that was attached.

Just how well the technology works still has not been properly established. There are many substances such as juices or milk that can interfere with the reaction.Furthermore there is a whole host of other potential date rape drugs like ketamine, zolpidem, barbiturates, chloral hydrate, opiods and phencyclidine that would not be detected. And of course the most widely used date rape drug is alcohol. Then there is also the issue that such products suggest that it is a potential victim's responsibility to detect the presence of a drug. As is far too common, press reports have been far too zealous in hyping this "invention."

Read more

You Asked: Why is Canada banning citronella-based insect repellants?

You Asked? - Wed, 2014-09-03 21:43

Health Canada is set to ban topical mosquito repellants that contain oil of citronella. The oil contains methyleugenol, a compound that has caused liver tumours in rats fed in large doses, but this really has no relevance to topical application by humans While there is no evidence of harm from any topical application, other than the rare allergic reaction, no formal studies of safety have been carried out. In this case Health Canada seems to be applying the letter of the law. Insecticides, whether natural or synthetic, are regulated by Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) which is distinct from the Natural Products Directorate. The law is that any pesticide has to be backed up by appropriate safety studies and the requirements here are far more stringent than those for natural products. The required safety studies for citronella have never been carried out because the product is not patentable and no company wants to invest the necessary funds.

Contrary to arguments voiced by some conspiracy theorists, Big Pharma, producers of DEET, is not behind the ban. Citronella isn’t a significant competitor for the simple reason that it doesn’t work very well. Basically, what Health Canada is saying to citronella repellant producers is, “hey, you are claiming your product is an insecticide, then it has to be regulated as one and the same rules apply as for any other insecticide.” And since the safety studies are not available, the law says citronella cannot be sold as an insecticide.

What is disturbing here is that Health Canada has gone after what almost certainly is an innocuous product while allowing a nonsensical homeopathic mosquito repellant, Mozi-Q, to be sold, even furnishing it with a homeopathic drug identification number. This absurdity comes about because homeopathic products fall under different regulations. There is no requirement for safety or efficacy. A ridiculous situation. Especially given that Mozi-Q presents a real risk. People apply it, believing the homeopathic hype and then go out and get bitten by a mosquito that potentially injects a non-homeopathic dose of West Nile virus.

Anyone wishing to still use citronella extracts will have purchase them in the U.S. where FDA or EPA see no problems. Don’t look for citronella in Europe though, their regulations are even stricter than Canada’s. But dog owners who have been using oil citronella to condition dogs from barking don’t have to worry, citronella scents will still be allowed for the device that hangs around their pet’s neck. And citronella extract will continue to be used extensively in the perfumery industry. Nobody smells a problem there.

Read more

You Asked: Why is Canada banning citronella-based insect repellants?

Our OSS Blog - Wed, 2014-09-03 21:43

Health Canada is set to ban topical mosquito repellants that contain oil of citronella. The oil contains methyleugenol, a compound that has caused liver tumours in rats fed in large doses, but this really has no relevance to topical application by humans While there is no evidence of harm from any topical application, other than the rare allergic reaction, no formal studies of safety have been carried out. In this case Health Canada seems to be applying the letter of the law. Insecticides, whether natural or synthetic, are regulated by Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) which is distinct from the Natural Products Directorate. The law is that any pesticide has to be backed up by appropriate safety studies and the requirements here are far more stringent than those for natural products. The required safety studies for citronella have never been carried out because the product is not patentable and no company wants to invest the necessary funds.

Contrary to arguments voiced by some conspiracy theorists, Big Pharma, producers of DEET, is not behind the ban. Citronella isn’t a significant competitor for the simple reason that it doesn’t work very well. Basically, what Health Canada is saying to citronella repellant producers is, “hey, you are claiming your product is an insecticide, then it has to be regulated as one and the same rules apply as for any other insecticide.” And since the safety studies are not available, the law says citronella cannot be sold as an insecticide.

What is disturbing here is that Health Canada has gone after what almost certainly is an innocuous product while allowing a nonsensical homeopathic mosquito repellant, Mozi-Q, to be sold, even furnishing it with a homeopathic drug identification number. This absurdity comes about because homeopathic products fall under different regulations. There is no requirement for safety or efficacy. A ridiculous situation. Especially given that Mozi-Q presents a real risk. People apply it, believing the homeopathic hype and then go out and get bitten by a mosquito that potentially injects a non-homeopathic dose of West Nile virus.

Anyone wishing to still use citronella extracts will have purchase them in the U.S. where FDA or EPA see no problems. Don’t look for citronella in Europe though, their regulations are even stricter than Canada’s. But dog owners who have been using oil citronella to condition dogs from barking don’t have to worry, citronella scents will still be allowed for the device that hangs around their pet’s neck. And citronella extract will continue to be used extensively in the perfumery industry. Nobody smells a problem there.

Read more

You Asked: Can ASEA improve health as advertised?

You Asked? - Wed, 2014-09-03 02:52

When I first came across a “wonder” product called ASEA on the web, I thought someone had come up with a clever parody.  The Internet of course is full of of ads for supplements, drinks and gimmicks of every conceivable variety that promise to keep us out of the clutches of the grim reaper.  There are extracts of exotic berries and herbs.  There are miraculous minerals and mushrooms.  There are oxygenated and magnetized waters.  And then there is ASEA.

The product’s name derives from the word “sea” and the Latin prefix “a” meaning “from.”  From the sea!  A very appropriate name.  The ingredients on the label tell the story.  Distilled water and salt!  What we have here is sea water!  That’s why I thought this was a parody.  Selling salt water as an anti-aging regimen?  Isn’t that sort of like selling ice to Arctic explorers?  I thought someone was making fun of all the nonsensical products being sold.  But it turns out that is not the case.  This is a real product, sold for very real money.  Lots of very real money.

Asea is promoted in ads as “Time machine in a bottle,” the message obviously being that imbibing in this salt water will turn back the clock.  Of course you can’t make any such claim on the product itself because that would require some sort of evidence, so the bottle simply says, “advancing life.”  A nebulous, meaningless statement.  I suppose one could say that since salt is essential to life, it does advance life.  But if you are going to make a case for selling salt water as a rejuvenation therapy, you have to come up with something a bit more impressive than “advancing life.”  So what claim did ASEA come up with?  “The world’s only Redox Signaling supplement.”

Someone must have been reading the scientific literature and came across “redox signaling,” an interesting and evolving area of research.  Our nerve cells communicate with each other through chemicals called neurotransmitters.  Some of these chemical messengers are free radicals, which are highly reactive species that can either gain or loose electrons, or in proper terminology, take part in oxidation or reduction reactions.  The term redox signaling is used when the chemical messengers between cells are free radicals.  What this has to do with ASEA is a mystery.  And we don’t get much help from the information on the label which states that “ASEA is a proprietary blend of naturally occurring reactive molecules derived from a patented redox balance process.  This unique process rearranges the constituent components into a beneficial mixture that is critical to to proper balanced cellular chemistry enabling the immune system to function at its optimum level.”  This is nothing more than meaningless double talk.  What reactive molecules are they talking about?  The only ingredient listed is salt.

I thought that perhaps I could learn something about the mysterious chemistry involved by watching the company’s video entitled “The Science Behind Asea.”  Turned out to be nothing more than a comic series of testimonials about improved mood and energy.  Of course you can get testimonials about anything either by hiring actors to play the role of satisfied customers or by interviewing people who are experiencing a placebo effect.  I’m still not convinced that this whole thing didn’t start out as a joke by someone wondering if they could sell something as ridiculous as salt water as a health product.  They found it worked, and now they are in the business that amounts to selling hair dye to bald people.  What I have to say to people promoting ASEA is “see ya.”

Read more

You Asked: Can ASEA improve health as advertised?

Our OSS Blog - Wed, 2014-09-03 02:52

When I first came across a “wonder” product called ASEA on the web, I thought someone had come up with a clever parody.  The Internet of course is full of of ads for supplements, drinks and gimmicks of every conceivable variety that promise to keep us out of the clutches of the grim reaper.  There are extracts of exotic berries and herbs.  There are miraculous minerals and mushrooms.  There are oxygenated and magnetized waters.  And then there is ASEA.

The product’s name derives from the word “sea” and the Latin prefix “a” meaning “from.”  From the sea!  A very appropriate name.  The ingredients on the label tell the story.  Distilled water and salt!  What we have here is sea water!  That’s why I thought this was a parody.  Selling salt water as an anti-aging regimen?  Isn’t that sort of like selling ice to Arctic explorers?  I thought someone was making fun of all the nonsensical products being sold.  But it turns out that is not the case.  This is a real product, sold for very real money.  Lots of very real money.

Asea is promoted in ads as “Time machine in a bottle,” the message obviously being that imbibing in this salt water will turn back the clock.  Of course you can’t make any such claim on the product itself because that would require some sort of evidence, so the bottle simply says, “advancing life.”  A nebulous, meaningless statement.  I suppose one could say that since salt is essential to life, it does advance life.  But if you are going to make a case for selling salt water as a rejuvenation therapy, you have to come up with something a bit more impressive than “advancing life.”  So what claim did ASEA come up with?  “The world’s only Redox Signaling supplement.”

Someone must have been reading the scientific literature and came across “redox signaling,” an interesting and evolving area of research.  Our nerve cells communicate with each other through chemicals called neurotransmitters.  Some of these chemical messengers are free radicals, which are highly reactive species that can either gain or loose electrons, or in proper terminology, take part in oxidation or reduction reactions.  The term redox signaling is used when the chemical messengers between cells are free radicals.  What this has to do with ASEA is a mystery.  And we don’t get much help from the information on the label which states that “ASEA is a proprietary blend of naturally occurring reactive molecules derived from a patented redox balance process.  This unique process rearranges the constituent components into a beneficial mixture that is critical to to proper balanced cellular chemistry enabling the immune system to function at its optimum level.”  This is nothing more than meaningless double talk.  What reactive molecules are they talking about?  The only ingredient listed is salt.

I thought that perhaps I could learn something about the mysterious chemistry involved by watching the company’s video entitled “The Science Behind Asea.”  Turned out to be nothing more than a comic series of testimonials about improved mood and energy.  Of course you can get testimonials about anything either by hiring actors to play the role of satisfied customers or by interviewing people who are experiencing a placebo effect.  I’m still not convinced that this whole thing didn’t start out as a joke by someone wondering if they could sell something as ridiculous as salt water as a health product.  They found it worked, and now they are in the business that amounts to selling hair dye to bald people.  What I have to say to people promoting ASEA is “see ya.”

Read more

Flowers, bells, birds didn’t lift the plague from all their houses

Our OSS Blog - Sun, 2014-08-31 19:13

Because of the Ebola crisis, the word “quarantine” is appearing with increased frequency in news reports and daily conversations.

The term derives from “quaranta giorni,” meaning 40 days, and traces back to the 14th century when the city of Dubrovnik, now in Croatia, was under Venetian rule. The Great Pestilence, or the Great Plague, as it was known at the time, was devastating Europe. As a form of protection, Dubrovnik declared that all ships and people had to be isolated for 40 days before entering the city. Later, the disease would be referred to as the Black Death — probably because of the gloom it brought, although some theorize that the “black” referred to the terrible dark bruising of the skin due to internal bleeding, a hallmark of the disease.

Between 1345 and 1360, the plague wiped out roughly half of Europe’s population. The cause was unknown, but it was clear that the disease was contagious. Once it took hold, it spread like wildfire. In Milan, doctors advised that victims should be walled up in their homes along with healthy family members — a measure that apparently worked, since Milan had the lowest death rate from the plague in all of Italy.

It would not be until 1894 that Alexandre Yersin of France’s Pasteur Institute would identify a bacterium as the causative agent while investigating an outbreak of the plague in Hong Kong. The bacterium, eventually named Yersinia pestis in his honour, is thought to have originated in Asia, where it found a hospitable environment in fleas, which would readily transmit it through their bites. Since fleas infested rats and mice, rodents that were regular passengers on ships, the disease spread throughout the Mediterranean and Europe.

Infection with the bacterium can take several forms, with “bubonic plague” being the most notorious. This term originates from the Greek for “groin,” due to the characteristic swellings of the lymph glands particularly in the groin, an area close to the legs, where flea bites are most likely to occur. In “septicemic” and “pneumonic plague,” bacteria enter the bloodstream and can be transmitted from person to person, especially though the coughing associated with pneumonic plague.

When science fails to find an explanation for a phenomenon, superstition and quackery rush in to fill the void. And there certainly was no scientific explanation for the plague in the 14th century. The Church decreed that the Black Death was punishment for human sin. Lepers, because of their outward signs that resembled the plague, were blamed, as were astrological alignments and volcanic eruptions.

“Flagellants” believed God’s punishment could be avoided by stripping to the waist and whipping themselves as they marched from town to town. Jews were also targeted, accused of poisoning wells. Many Jewish communities in Europe were exterminated in hopes of bringing an end to the plague. In Cologne, thousands of Jews were burned alive after being accused of starting the plague. Black cats also became victims. They were thought to be witches in an animal form, casting their spell on the population. Since cats were a natural enemy of the disease-carrying rats, hunting them actually increased the spread of the plague.

As far as treatments went, there were none. Since the plague was often accompanied by a terrible smell, people walked around with flowers under their noses hoping to ward off the stench and the disease. This, of course, did nothing. Neither did the burning of aromatic woods to purify the atmosphere. Other attempts to remedy the “bad air” included the ringing of bells and the firing of guns. Birds were released indoors so that the flapping of their wings would break up the pestilence. Bathing was thought to be dangerous, as was the consumption of olive oil. And one of the most bizarre pieces of advice given to men was that if they valued their lives, they must preserve their chastity. Apparently no such advice was given to women.

The belief that pleasant smells were of some help persisted through the 17th century, when the Great Plague once again terrified Londoners. The classic children’s rhyme about a “pocketful of posies” dates back to that time. Posies were flowers, but as the lyrics indicate, they did not do much good against the “ring of rosies,” the rose-coloured rash in the form of a ring around flea bites. The outcome of the disease was clear: “Atishoo, atishoo, we all fall down.” And some 100,000 citizens of London did.

Holding garlic in the mouth, swishing vinegar or burning sulphur to get rid of the “bad air” did no good. Smoking was also thought to be protective, and even children were forced to smoke tobacco, with threats of being whipped if they didn’t.

Cases of the plague still occur today, but they are rare. The first effective treatment appeared in 1932 with the advent of the sulphonamide drugs, but today the standard treatment is in the form of such antibiotics as streptomycin, chloramphenicol, tetracycline and the fluoroquinolones.

Unfortunately, the possibility of using the bacterium as a form of biological warfare exists. Indeed, recognition of the contagious nature of the plague resulted in the first example of biological warfare in 1347, when in an attack on the Crimean city of Caffa, the Mongols catapulted the bodies of plague victims over the city walls. More recently, in 1940, a Japanese plane dropped a load of infected rat fleas over a Chinese town, causing a local plague. Today, stories circulate about various countries having developed strains of the bacterium that are resistant to all drugs as bacterial warfare agents.

But for now, our major worry is the Ebola virus, and quarantine is the most effective way to halt its spread. In this case, about 21 days after exposure to an infected person is sufficient, that being the incubation period for the disease. If no symptoms appear after this period, there is no worry about the infection being passed on. It appears that contagion occurs only when symptoms are present. But if quarantine isn’t instituted when appropriate, we may have to confront a scourge that will outdo the Black Death.

Read more

You Asked: Is fish really brain food?

You Asked? - Sun, 2014-08-31 01:07

Is fish really brain food? P.G. Wodehouse certainly thought so. In his wonderful “Jeeves” stories, Bertie Wooster encourages his brainy butler to eat more fish whenever a particularly challenging problem arises. But to what extent does fiction mirror real life? One can make a theoretical case for fish consumption based on the fact that docosahexaenoic acid, or DHA, the famous omega-3 fat in fish, is the main component of brain cell membranes, and that communication between brain cells is a function of the integrity of these membranes.

There is actually some experimental evidence to support a link between fish consumption and brain health. Infants born to mothers who consumed more fish during pregnancy have been shown to have improved verbal intelligence, better fine motor skills and pro-social behavior. A study has also correlated fish intake during pregnancy with IQ in 8-year old children. It is likely that these effects are due to increased blood levels of DHA in the offspring, but as is generally the case, the scenario is complicated. When blood is drawn from umbilical cords, it turns out that the concentration of the various fatty acids depends on the genetics both of the mother and the baby. In other words, depending on genotypes, an infant may benefit more or less from fish in the mom’s diet.

What about brain function at the other extreme of life, senior citizens? To get some insight here, researchers examined MRI brain scans of 260 individuals over the age of 65 who had normal cognitive function looking for differences associated with fish consumption as determined by dietary surveys. Subjects who ate baked or broiled but not fried fish every week had larger grey matter volumes in the areas of the brain responsible for memory and cognition. Interesting, but there was no determination as to whether these increased volumes translated to any change in brain power.

Curiously, no relationship was found with omega-3 fat intake as calculated from the diet surveys, suggesting that eating fish weekly may prevent brain ageing regardless of omega-3 content. But it may also be that eating fish is a marker for some other effect. People who ate fish were more likely to have a university education than those who didn’t. So perhaps it is mental exercise that was responsible for the changes in brain volume. There is also evidence that eating fish reduces the risk of heart disease. Maybe eating fish makes people smarter and more capable of understanding why they should be following the guidelines designed to reduce the risk of heart disease.

Read more

You Asked: Is fish really brain food?

Our OSS Blog - Sun, 2014-08-31 01:07

Is fish really brain food? P.G. Wodehouse certainly thought so. In his wonderful “Jeeves” stories, Bertie Wooster encourages his brainy butler to eat more fish whenever a particularly challenging problem arises. But to what extent does fiction mirror real life? One can make a theoretical case for fish consumption based on the fact that docosahexaenoic acid, or DHA, the famous omega-3 fat in fish, is the main component of brain cell membranes, and that communication between brain cells is a function of the integrity of these membranes.

There is actually some experimental evidence to support a link between fish consumption and brain health. Infants born to mothers who consumed more fish during pregnancy have been shown to have improved verbal intelligence, better fine motor skills and pro-social behavior. A study has also correlated fish intake during pregnancy with IQ in 8-year old children. It is likely that these effects are due to increased blood levels of DHA in the offspring, but as is generally the case, the scenario is complicated. When blood is drawn from umbilical cords, it turns out that the concentration of the various fatty acids depends on the genetics both of the mother and the baby. In other words, depending on genotypes, an infant may benefit more or less from fish in the mom’s diet.

What about brain function at the other extreme of life, senior citizens? To get some insight here, researchers examined MRI brain scans of 260 individuals over the age of 65 who had normal cognitive function looking for differences associated with fish consumption as determined by dietary surveys. Subjects who ate baked or broiled but not fried fish every week had larger grey matter volumes in the areas of the brain responsible for memory and cognition. Interesting, but there was no determination as to whether these increased volumes translated to any change in brain power.

Curiously, no relationship was found with omega-3 fat intake as calculated from the diet surveys, suggesting that eating fish weekly may prevent brain ageing regardless of omega-3 content. But it may also be that eating fish is a marker for some other effect. People who ate fish were more likely to have a university education than those who didn’t. So perhaps it is mental exercise that was responsible for the changes in brain volume. There is also evidence that eating fish reduces the risk of heart disease. Maybe eating fish makes people smarter and more capable of understanding why they should be following the guidelines designed to reduce the risk of heart disease.

Read more

Tempest in a K cup

Our OSS Blog - Fri, 2014-08-29 08:48

A question came up about the risks of chemicals leaching out of those convenient coffee K cups. Yes, chemicals do leach out. That of course is the idea, you want to leach out the hundreds of compounds that contribute to coffee flavour and aroma and you also want a good shot of the stimulant caffeine. However, the likely reason for the question was concern about chemicals leaching out from the plastic. Yes, that happens too.

Anytime two surfaces come into contact, especially if one is a liquid, there will be transfer of chemicals. I don't know exactly what plastic is used in these cups since the company maintains that this is proprietary information. By its texture, it seems the plastic is either polystyrene or polypropylene. It certainly is not polycarbonate which would be a source of bisphenol A (BPA). Traces of styrene, the compound from which polystyrene is made, may leach out. But styrene also occurs naturally in coffee beans, so all coffee will have some styrene. This is really not much of an issue because styrene is quickly metabolized and excreted.

If anyone has concerns about styrene, they had better stay away from cinnamon which can have as much as 39,000 ppb of styrene as opposed to the 5 ppb that may be leached out from polystyrene. They will also have to stay away from beer which has up to 25 ppb of naturally occurring styrene. If the K cup is made of polypropylene, there is no issue whatsoever. No compound of any consequence leaches out of this plastic. Basically what we have here is a tempest in a Kcup. If there is to be a concern, it centers in the environmental unfriendliness of these little cups which may pose a big problem in terms of where they end up.

Read more

But it comes from the Earth!

Our OSS Blog - Wed, 2014-08-27 17:53

You may have heard of propylene glycol in several contexts. It is used as a safer alternative to ethylene glycol in antifreeze, as a preservative in foods and cosmetics, as a solvent in some pharmaceuticals and as a carrier of nicotine and flavours in electronic cigarettes. Propylene glycol also appears in the list of substances used by Tom’s of Maine, a company that prides itself on using natural ingredients in the consumer products they sell. According to Tom’s: “We’re always thinking about natural ingredients, where they come from and what they can do for a healthy world. That’s because ingredients derived from nature and handled responsibly tell you something important about a product. Something that feels good. And feeling good is what our ingredients list is all about.”

In that ingredients list the source of propylene glycol is described as “natural gas from the earth.” This is ridiculous on many levels. Propylene glycol is made via standard synthetic methods from propene oxide which in turn is made from propene. It is true that propene does occur in small amounts in natural gas, but that is not from where it is sourced. Propene is made by the catalytic cracking of larger molecules in petroleum. Of course, whether the starting material for the synthesis of propylene glycol comes from natural gas or not is totally irrelevant. Petroleum is no less natural than natural gas.

This is not meant to impugn propylene glycol in any way. It is a safe enough chemical. But trying to build up its image by claiming that it comes from “natural gas in the earth” is pure nonsense. And I won’t even mention that there are all sorts of gases “in the earth,” hydrogen sulphide for example, which will do away with people quite nicely. Basically, the term “natural” which has become so common in marketing has also become meaningless. If one ignores processing, every substance in the world can be described as natural because all raw materials come from nature. Where else would they come from? A car could be described as natural since the metals, leather and plastics used all can somehow be traced back to substances that can be found in nature. We either need some proper definition of the term natural that can be applied to marketing or eliminate its use completely.

Read more

Joe Schwarcz’s The Right Chemistry: Paraben phobia is unjustified

Our OSS Blog - Mon, 2014-08-25 00:39
The public mistrust of preservatives can be traced back to a 2004 paper by Dr. Philippa Darbre of the University of Reading

Stories about recalls of various consumer products are all too common these days, but one about contaminated children’s sunscreen lotion caught my attention. Not because it posed a significant risk, which it didn’t, but because the report mentioned “glucono delta lactone.” This is a compound I worked with extensively back in my graduate school days, using it as a starting material for the synthesis of various carbohydrates. What was it doing now, in a story about a sunscreen recall?

Cosmetic products, particularly those that are water-based, are prone to contamination by bacteria, moulds and fungi. This is not only a “cosmetic” problem, as it were, it is also a health issue. One would therefore presume that the inclusion of preservatives to ensure a safe product would be seen by consumers as a positive feature, but such is not the case. Preservatives are regarded by many as nasty chemicals that are to be avoided.

This mistrust can be traced back to a 2004 paper by Dr. Philippa Darbre of the University of Reading that described finding traces of parabens, a commonly used class of preservatives, in breast tumours. The study received extensive press coverage, with few accounts pointing out that there had been no control group. Since parabens are widely used in foods and cosmetics, they can conceivably be detected in most everyone.

Although Darbre admitted that the presence of parabens did not prove they caused the tumours, she did alarm women by pointing out that these preservatives have estrogen-like activity and that such activity has been linked to breast cancer. What she failed to mention was that the estrogenic activity of the various parabens is thousands of times less than that of estrogenic substances found in foods such as soybeans, flax, alfalfa and chickpeas, or indeed of the estrogen produced naturally in the body.

Regulatory agencies around the world have essentially dismissed Darbre’s study and maintain that there is no evidence linking parabens to cancer. Dr. Darbre, undoubtedly disturbed by being rebuffed, has continued to publish research about parabens, attempting to justify her original insinuation of risk. Her latest paper describes the enhanced migration of human breast-cancer cells through a laboratory gel after 20 weeks of exposure to parabens. One is hard pressed to see the relevance of this “in vitro” experiment to the use of 0.8% parabens in a topically applied cosmetic.

Nevertheless, because of the concerns that have been raised about parabens and other synthetic preservatives, the cosmetics industry is turning toward the use of “natural” substances that have an unjustified public image of being safer.

As I have said many times before, the safety and efficacy of a chemical does not depend on whether it was made by a chemist in a lab, or by Mother Nature in a bush.

Its chemical and biological properties depend on its molecular structure and the only way to evaluate these is through appropriate experiments.

It is through such experiments that glucono delta lactone’s ability to impair the multiplication of microbes was determined. In solution, the compound slowly converts to gluconic acid, creating an inhospitable acidic environment for bacteria and fungi. Marketing-wise, glucono delta lactone can be labelled as “natural” because it can be found in honey and various fruits where it is formed from glucose by the action of enzymes released from the Aspergillus niger, a ubiquitous soil fungus that commonly taints plants.

Industrially, glucono delta lactone is produced by fermenting glucose derived from corn or rice with the same fungus. But acidification alone is not enough to eliminate the risk of microbial contamination, so the producers of the children’s sunscreen turned for help to that spicy mix of vegetables known as kimchee.

Korea’s national dish is traditionally made by fermenting cabbage, cucumber and radishes with the bacterium, Leuconostoc kimchii. One of the products secreted by the bacteria during the fermentation process is a peptide (a short chain of amino acids) that has antimicrobial properties.

“Leucidal Liquid” is a commercial extract of the antimicrobial peptide produced by the action of Leuconostoc kimchii on radishes. In combination with glucono delta lactone, it forms an effective preservative system; but as evidenced by the sunscreen recall, not in all cases. The lotions were free of contaminants before being shipped to retailers but some samples on the shelf were later found to contain bacteria and fungi that could have caused a problem if absorbed through cuts or lesions.

Contamination would most likely not have occurred if parabens, a far more effective preservative, had been used. But the label could then not have declared the product to be “natural.”

And here we have a curiosity.

Compounds in the parabens family actually do occur in nature. Methylparaben can be found in blueberries and interestingly, in the secretions of the female dog where it acts as a pheromone notifying the male that its advances are welcome. But since extracting parabens from berries or canine secretions is not commercially viable, the compounds are produced synthetically. This means that even though the final product is identical to that found in nature, it cannot legally be called “natural.”

A further issue, at least in the eyes of the chemically unsophisticated, is that benzene, the starting material for the synthesis, is derived from petroleum. Thanks to activist dogma, labelling any chemical these days as “petroleum-based” is tantamount to calling it toxic.

So far, no manufacturer has tried to counter this assault by describing petroleum as an organic substance formed through the natural decomposition of biological matter by soil-dwelling microbes, but similar seductive innuendo about “natural” ingredients is not uncommon in the cosmetics industry.

Phenoxyethanol is sometimes advertised as a natural alternative to parabens because it occurs in green tea, but in fact is commercially made from petroleum-derived phenol.

Some companies tout sodium hydroxymethylglycinate as a natural preservative, basing on the fact that it is made from glycine, an amino acid abundant in the human body. But glycine has to be put through a series of synthetic modifications to produce the preservative.

The demonization of synthetic preservatives has led not only to the glorification of less-effective natural products but to a host of “preservative-free” ones as well. These should only be trusted if they come in either single-use vials, or if the sterilized contents are sealed in a container with a pump that prevents entry of microbes when it is used.

Otherwise “preservative-free” can quickly become “bacteria-filled.”

Read more

Green tea extracts and liver disease

Our OSS Blog - Sat, 2014-08-23 09:06

I think we are safe in saying that green tea doesn’t make taste buds frolic. So why do people drink it? The same reason for which the Chinese have been consuming it for millennia. Its supposed health benefits. Green tea doesn’t contain the flavourful compounds that form when tea leaves are allowed to ferment. During fermentation enzymes are released that convert the naturally occurring polyphenols in the leaves to a host of tasty compounds. Instead of being fermented, green tea is made by steaming or drying fresh tea leaves in order to prevent oxidation of the polyphenols. It is these polyphenols that in laboratory and animal studies show anti-cancer effects as well as increased rates of metabolism.

But how can on benefit from tea’s polyphenols without having to put up with green tea’s unappealing flavor? Supplement manufacturers have found a way. Just extract the catechins, the main class of polyphenols in tea, and plunk them in a pill. Then promote the pill as a cancer-fighting or fat burning supplement. But here we run into a problem. Such dietary supplements are poorly regulated and the amount of catechins they contain can be far greater than that available from drinking tea. The high doses may indeed help to increase metabolism and result in weight loss but possibly at a high cost. Just ask the teenager who walked into the emergency room at Texas Children’s Hospital with his chest, face and eyes bright yellow due to severe liver damage after using a concentrated green tea extract he bought at a nutrition store as a “fat burning” supplement. Doctors feared he may need a liver transplant but luckily his liver, an organ that has regenerative properties, managed to recover. He did, however, have to give up sporting activities and will require regular checkups of his liver function.

Unfortunately this is not an isolated case and such cases are not limited to green tea extracts. Various herbal supplements have been linked with liver damage, some because of undeclared ingredients, such as steroids. These are promoted as bodybuilding supplements and may actually have an effect because of the hidden steroids. People generally assume that herbal products that are sold are tested for safety and efficacy but this is not the case. Until regulations are tightened the incidence of liver damage from dietary supplements is going to continue to increase.

Read more

The Problem of Herbicide Resistance

Our OSS Blog - Sun, 2014-08-17 22:08

Farmers who are growing herbicide resistant crops such as corn or soy may start to identify with Audrey Jr. in Little Shop of Horrors. In that film, later made into a Broadway musical, a dorky florist’s assistant cultivates a plant he names Audrey Jr. after the co-worker he pines for. This is no ordinary plant, this one craves blood to grow and its constant cry to “feed me” wreaks havoc with human lives. While there are no plants that suck blood, although ones like the Venus fly trap do dine on insects, there are ones which at least figuratively suck farmers’ blood. We are talking about weeds that can no longer be killed by herbicides. Weeds along with insects are farmers’ great enemies. They compete with crops for nutrients in the soil, reducing crop yields. Various herbicides are available to kill weeds but the problem is that they damage crops as well. That’s why farmers welcomed the introduction in the 1990s of soybeans and corn that were genetically engineered to resist the herbicide glyphosate. Fields could be sprayed to wipe out weeds without harming crops. Yields and profits increased. But in the long run, you can’t beat biology. It was no secret from the beginning that eventually weeds would develop resistance to glyphosate.

This is what farmers are now seeing. The lifeblood sucking weed that corn, cotton and soy growers are worried about is called palmer amaranth. It has already devastated cotton fields in the south and is moving into corn and soy fields in the Midwest, probably introduced by manure from cows fed cottonseed contaminated with palmer seeds. Short of pulling out weeds by hand, which is possible but very labour intensive, farmers will have to look for new technologies. On the horizon are crops that have been genetically engineered to resist 2,4-D and glufosinate, two very effective herbicides that traditionally cannot be sprayed on growing crops because they will kill them just like they kill weeds. But 2,4-D will kill weeds that are resistant to glyphosate and will not harm the crops that have been engineered to resist the chemical. Of course this isn’t a long term solution because the weeds will eventually develop a resistance to 2,4-D as well. And 2,4-D doesn’t have quite as good a safety profile as glyphosate. Weeds that cannot be destroyed by herbicides are a farmer’s bane, and eventually, like Audrey Jr. they come out on top.

  Read more

Fenugreek and Sotalone

Our OSS Blog - Wed, 2014-08-13 07:36

If you have eaten curry, you have probably tasted fenugreek. The seeds of this plant as well as its fresh leaves are commonly used as ingredients in curries. They are added for taste but they also impart a smell that is due to sotalone, a compound that at low concentrations has a distinct maple syrup-like odour. Since sotalone passes through the body unchanged, it can impart a scent both to the urine and sweat. The compound is actually used as one of the flavor components in artificial maple syrup and can be isolated from fenugreek seeds. Facilities that process the seeds often smell strongly of maple syrup and the scent can be carried quite some ways by the wind. Back in 2005 Manhattanites began to complain of a strong maple syrup odour and rumours circulated about it being some sort of chemical warfare. It took a while but eventually the smell was traced to a company in New Jersey that was processing fenugreek seeds. That rumor even made it on to an episode of 30 Rock, the popular sit com.

It is not only curry eaters who can smell of maple syrup. It can be an issue for lactating mothers who take fenugreek supplements to increase milk production. While there is much anecdotal evidence that this works, the few studies that have been carried out have shown mixed results. There is always a question of just how much to take, which is tough to answer because herbal supplements are difficult to standardize and often there is a mismatch between what is indicated on the label and what is actually in the product.

Herbal remedies are drugs and like any drug can have side effects. As a food fenugreek rarely causes problems but as a supplement it can result in loose stools and intestinal discomfort. Allergy to fenugreek is possible especially in people who have allergies to peanuts and chickpeas which are in the same botanical family. Since fenugreek can lower blood glucose, it can in some cases cause hypoglycemia. This is of special concern in diabetics because fenugreek may enhance the effect of antidiabetic drugs. On the other hand, because it can lower blood glucose, fenugreek may be of some benefit to diabetics, but again there is the problem of knowing how much to take because of lack of standardization.

Since fenugreek can cause uterine contractions, it should not be taken during pregnancy.When taken for lactation, the advice that is often offered is to slowly increase the dosage until the sweat or urine begins to smell like maple syrup. Breast fed babies may also smell of maple syrup if the mom has been ingesting fenugreek and that can lead to false diagnosis of “maple syrup urine disease.” This is a serious genetic disorder characterized by a deficiency in enzymes that metabolize the common amino acids valine, leucine and isoleucine. A buildup of these amino acids and their breakdown products can lead to severe neurological damage and eventually death. One of these breakdown products is sotalone, the odour of which was usually a clue to the diagnosis of maple syrup odour disease. Today, should the condition be suspected based on a baby’s failure to thrive, testing of the blood amino acids can detect the condition even before any scent appears. Serious consequences can then be avoided by adhering to a diet that is based on a special formula free of the problematic amino acids.

Some women take “Blessed Thistle” along with fenugreek because this herb also has a reputation as a lactating agent. In this case there is insufficient evidence for efficacy or about the safety of taking this herb during pregnancy or while breast feeding. Blessed thistle is not the same as “milk thistle” which in spite of its name has nothing to do with encouraging milk production. The plant derives its name from the characteristic white streaks on its leaves. An extract of milk thistle, often called “silymarin” is composed of several compounds that have a protective effect on the liver. Some strudies have shown a benefit in cirrhosis as well as fatty liver disease. One study even claimed effective treatment of poisoning caused by Amanita phalloides, one of the most deadly mushrooms known. It contains compounds that attack the liver.

Read more

Gelotophobia

Our OSS Blog - Mon, 2014-08-11 21:40

Gelotophobia can best be defined as the “potentially debilitating fear of being laughed at.” A person suffering from gelotophobia may hear a stranger’s laugh and believe it is aimed at him or her. In extreme cases the response may be palpitations, breaking out in a sweat, or even violence. Some school shootings have apparently been triggered by classmates having made fun of the shooter. Gelotophobes have a fear of being ridiculed and unfortunately often cannot distinguish playful teasing from ridicule. Psychologist Willibald Ruch of the University of Zurich has attempted to put gelotophobia on a scientific footing by surveying over 23,000 people in 73 countries. He found that the condition affects anywhere from two to thirty percent of the population. The highest incidence was in Asia where “saving face” is particularly important.

And how does one find gelotophobes? Ruch did it by devising a questionnaire that gauged agreement with statements such as “I avoid displaying myself in public because I fear that people could become aware of my insecurity and could make fun of me,” or “while dancing I feel uneasy because I am convinced that those watching me assess me as being ridiculous.” I can add a few personal observations here. When I teach organic chemistry I sometimes ask students to come and solve a problem on the blackboard. Usually there is a shortage of volunteers. But then if I say, “don’t worry, nobody is going to laugh at you,” the hands start to go up. Interestingly, if instead I say “why not try it, the worst thing that can happen is that we will laugh at you,” some hands begin to wave wildly. These are the “gelotophiles,” or people who enjoy being laughed at. Maybe they could give some pointers to the gelotophobes.

  Read more

The Lorne Trottier 2014 Public Science Symposium

Our OSS Blog - Mon, 2014-08-11 20:34
Are We Alone?

How did life originate and are we alone? Perhaps the two most intriguing questions that have puzzled mankind since the dawn of civilization. Countless science fiction stories and movies speak to our infatuation with the possibility of intelligent alien life but so far such accounts remain firmly in the realm of science fiction. But for how long? Famed science popularizer and astrophysicist Carl Sagan expressed his wonderment at the vastness of space and time with his conclusion that "the total number of stars in the Universe is larger than all the grains of sand on all the beaches of the planet Earth." Since those stars likely have planets orbiting them, it stands to reason that some of them would have conditions conducive to life. Even if intelligent life occurs on only a minute proportion of these planets, there could be numerous civilizations in our own Milky Way galaxy alone. So far we have discovered no evidence of their existence. It isn’t for lack of trying.

Investigators of unidentified flying objects (UFOs) have found no sign of aliens despite thoroughly scrutinizing numerous sightings. The Center for Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) has been scanning the heavens with its alien-hunting radio telescopes since the 1980s without any success. On the other hand, since the 1990s a number of “exoplanets,” that is planets around other stars, have been detected by space telescopes. At least one, Kepler-186f, has caused a great deal of excitement because of its presence in the “Goldilocks zone,” a habitable orbit that is “not too hot and not too cold” for the presence of liquid water. That planet is practically in our back yard, being only 490 light years away, but that still makes it far enough to make visiting it out of the question. However, taking the next step into space to look for signs of life is a possibility. That would be a trip to Mars. Our astronauts will not be encountering any Martians, but unmanned exploration has already suggested that the “red planet” may at one time have fostered some sort of microbial life. Star Trek may have been science fiction, but real science stands ready to take up the challenge to “explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations and to boldly go where no man has gone before.” Our expert speakers will fascinate us with research that is simply out of this world.

Speaker Biographies:

Dr. Joe Nickell

Well into his fourth decade as an investigator of historical, paranormal, and forensic mysteries, myths and hoaxes, Dr. Joe Nickell has been called "the modern Sherlock Holmes" and the "real-life Scully" (from the X-Files), believing that mysteries should actually be investigated with a view towards solving them.

Nickell is the world's only full-time professional paranormal investigator, travelling around the world investigating strange mysteries at the very fringes of science which he then recounts in the "Investigative Files" for the science magazine, Skeptical Inquirer. Nickell’s work as a former stage magician, private investigator, and academic has helped him succeed in this role.

Nickell has exposed many forgeries, including the notorious "Jack the Ripper Diary," and has authenticated many treasures. He also has many books on the subject, including Pen, Ink, and Evidence and Detecting Forgery.

Dr. Jim Bell

Jim Bell is a Professor in the School of Earth and Space Exploration at Arizona State University in Tempe, Arizona, an Adjunct Professor in the Department of Astronomy at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, and a Distinguished Visiting Scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California.

Jim is an active planetary scientist and has been heavily involved in many NASA robotic space exploration missions, including the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR), Mars Pathfinder, Comet Nucleus Tour, Mars Exploration Rovers Spirit and Opportunity, Mars Odyssey Orbiter, Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, and the Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity rover mission. Jim is the lead scientist in charge of the Panoramic camera (Pancam) color, stereoscopic imaging system on the Spirit and Opportunity rovers, and is the Deputy P.I. of the Mastcam camera system on the Curiosity rover.

Jim is also an extremely active and prolific public communicator of science and space exploration, and is President of The Planetary Society. He is a frequent contributor to popular astronomy and science magazines like Sky & Telescope, Astronomy, and Scientific American, and to radio shows and internet blogs about astronomy and space. He has appeared on television on the NBC "Today" show, on CNN's "This American Morning," on the PBS "Newshour," and on the Discovery, National Geographic, Wall St. Journal, and History Channels. He has also written many photography-oriented books that showcase some of the most spectacular images acquired during the space program.

Dr. Sara Seager

Professor Sara Seager is a planetary scientist and astrophysicist. She has been a pioneer in the vast and unknown world of exoplanets, planets that orbit stars other than the sun. Her ground-breaking research ranges from the detection of exoplanet atmospheres to innovative theories about life on other worlds to development of novel space mission concepts. Now, dubbed an "astronomical Indiana Jones", she on a quest after the field's holy grail, the discovery of a true Earth twin. Dr. Seager earned her PhD from Harvard University and is now the Class of 1941 Profesor of Planetary Science and Professor of Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Professor Seager is a 2013 MacArthur Fellow and was named in Time Magazine's 25 Most Influential in Space in 2012.

Dr. Jill Tarter

Jill Tarter holds the Bernard M. Oliver Chair for SETI Research at the SETI Institute in Mountain View, California and serves as a member of the Board of Trustees for that institution. Tarter received her Bachelor of Engineering Physics Degree with Distinction from Cornell University and her Master’s Degree and a Ph.D. in Astronomy from the University of California, Berkeley. She has spent the majority of her professional career attempting to answer the old human question “Are we alone?” by searching for evidence of technological civilizations beyond Earth. She served as Project Scientist for NASA’s SETI program, the High Resolution Microwave Survey and has conducted numerous observational programs at radio observatories worldwide. She is a Fellow of the AAAS, the California Academy of Sciences, and the Explorers Club, she was named one of the Time 100 Most Influential People in the World in 2004, and one of the Time 25 in Space in 2012, received a TED prize in 2009, public service awards from NASA, multiple awards for communicating science to the public, and has been honored as a woman in technology. Since the termination of funding for NASA’s SETI program in 1993, she has served in a leadership role to design and build the Allen Telescope Array and to secure private funding to continue the exploratory science of SETI. Many people are now familiar with her work as portrayed by Jodie Foster in the movie Contact.

  Dr. Joe Schwarcz, Moderator Read more

New use for soap?

Our OSS Blog - Mon, 2014-08-11 20:08

On my radio show today the story of putting a bar of soap under the sheet to cure leg cramps came up again. When science leaves a void, as it does with the treatment of leg cramps, unconventional therapies rush in to fill it. Just take a bar of soap, some say it has to be Ivory, place it on the mattress under the sheet and ..pleasant dreams! There are testimonials galore from people who say they thought it was a ridiculous notion, but they decided to try it anyway out of desperation, and it worked! Anecdotes are scientifically meaningless, and the plural of anecdote is not data. Scientific validity can only be ascertained by randomized, controlled double blind trials. None such have been carried out on the soap question. Why not? Because such trials are difficult and expensive to carry out, and to justify mounting one, there has to be some plausibility of a meaningful outcome. Aside from far-fetched ideas about subliminal scents, there is no conceivable way that a bar of soap under the sheets can have an effect on leg cramps. It is possible that some people who have struggled long and hard with such cramps want so much to believe that something will help, that they will respond to the presence of the soap. That's what we call the placebo effect. Of course if the sufferer feels better, it doesn't much matter why. I suppose there is no harm in telling a sufferer that "some people believe the soap helps" and suggest they give it a shot. That little white lie doesn't break the number one rule of medicine: "first of all, do no harm." It is hard to imagine how a bar of soap might do harm, although I suppose there is a chance it can drop to the floor due to the motion generated by a leg cramp attack and cause someone to slip on it.

Read more

Instant Noodles

Our OSS Blog - Mon, 2014-08-11 19:05

At the turn of the millennium a Japanese poll asked about the best Japanese invention of the previous century. Instant noodles was the answer. Japan as well as China have a long history of eating noodles, mostly wheat although rice noodles are also popular. In 1958 along came Momofuko Ando with an idea. If noodles were hot air dried or quickly fried after they were steamed, they would last a long time and could be readily cooked by dumping into boiling water. The instant noodles could be mixed with various flavor additives to yield a quick soup. Ramen noodles, using the Japanese term, are high in salt and some can contain a significant amount of fat. But the noodles are not “deadly.”

Why should that idea even come up? Because of headlines floating around the web about “what happens in your stomach when you consume packaged Ramen noodles with a deadly preservative.” This bit of nonsense refers to a video that has been making the rounds about an experiment carried out by gastroenterologist Dr. Braden Kuo at the Massachusetts General Hospital. Dr. Kuo had a subject swallow a “pill camera” capable of transmitting images from inside the gut. He found that processed noodles churned around in the stomach longer than fresh noodles before breaking down. This doesn’t have much significance since nutrient absorption takes place in the small intestine after food has been broken down in the stomach, but how long that breakdown takes is not important. Why the processed noodles take longer to disintegrate in the stomach can have many reasons. The moisture and fat content of the noodles can be quite different, the gluten content which depends on the kind of flour used and the amount of kneading makes a difference, as does the shape of the noodles. But one thing that will not have an effect is the trace amount of a preservative known as tertiary butyl hydroquinone or TBHQ that may be present in some instant noodles.

Yet this is the ingredient that generated the nonsensical information that is being spread around the web. The claim is that it is the preservative that prevents the noodles from being broken down and the failure of the noodles to be broken down as quickly as fresh noodles represents some kind of danger to health. Both of these claims are absurd. The preservative, which in fact is not commonly used in noodles, prevents fat from going rancid, which is a process that can indeed produce toxins. The amount of TBHQ used is trivial, 0.02% by weight of the fat content of the food. That translates to a few milligrams, a tiny fraction of the amount that can cause any harm in an animal.

Of course the scary emails do not take amounts into account. Rather they blather on about nausea, diarrhea and ringing in the ears which may happen at huge doses of TBHQ that cannot be attained from food. And most assuredly, TBHQ has nothing to do with the rate at which noodles decompose in the stomach. This is not an argument for eating processed Ramen noodles, which are not great, particularly because of the salt content. But it is a plea for rational thinking, and the investigation of claims made by Internet bloggers who do not know what they are talking about. Dr. Kuo himself was not troubled by his findings and says that he eats processed noodles himself.

Read more