Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu misc.consumers:67737 sci.med:58867 rec.food.cooking:65271 sci.environment:29473
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!zabriskie.berkeley.edu!spp
From: spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,sci.med,rec.food.cooking,sci.environment
Subject: Re: Is MSG sensitivity superstition?
Date: 17 Apr 1993 01:52:00 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley -- ERL
Lines: 13
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <1qnns0$4l3@agate.berkeley.edu>
References: <1993Apr15.190711.22190@walter.bellcore.com> <1qmlgaINNjab@hp-col.col.hp.com> <1qmqpfINNjiq@gap.caltech.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: zion.berkeley.edu

Carl Lydick:

> And you're condemning one particular ingredient without any 
> evidence that that's the ingredient to which you reacted.

Believe what you will.

The mass of anectdotal evidence, combined with the lack of
a properly constructed scientific experiment disproving
the hypothesis, makes the MSG reaction hypothesis the
most likely explanation for events.

Steve