Mineral Oil vs Monosodium Glutamate: which is worse?

What is Mineral Oil?

Mineral oil (E905) is a refined petroleum product used as a food-grade lubricant, coating agent, and glazing agent in food processing and production. Food-grade mineral oil is a highly refined grade of petroleum distillate with specifications limiting impurities. It differs from pharmaceutical-grade (Vaseline) and cosmetic-grade mineral oils in refinement level.

What is Monosodium Glutamate?

Monosodium glutamate (MSG) is the sodium salt of glutamic acid, a naturally occurring non-essential amino acid found in many proteins. It is used as a flavor enhancer to intensify umami (savory) taste. MSG was first isolated from seaweed in 1908 by Japanese chemist Kikunae Ikeda and has been used commercially since then.

Documented risks

Mineral Oil: EFSA has raised significant concerns about mineral oil hydrocarbons (MOH) contamination in food through two pathways: (1) deliberate food-grade mineral oil use in coatings and processing, and (2) migration from recycled paper and cardboard food packaging into food. MOH comprises two types: mineral oil saturated hydrocarbons (MOSH), which accumulate in human adipose tissue, liver, and spleen, and mineral oil aromatic hydrocarbons (MOAH), which include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) that are potentially carcinogenic. A 2011 Swiss study found mineral oil hydrocarbons in human liver and spleen samples from autopsy, demonstrating real bioaccumulation. EFSA's 2023 preliminary opinion identified MOAH contamination in food as a safety concern that cannot be dismissed, recommending ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) minimization. Untreated and mildly treated mineral oils are IARC Group 1 human carcinogens for occupational inhalation. Highly refined food-grade mineral oil (E905) is not classified as a direct carcinogen, but MOAH contamination in even food-grade mineral oil is an ongoing concern.

Monosodium Glutamate: MSG safety has been one of the most extensively debated food additive questions in the past 50 years. The 'Chinese Restaurant Syndrome' — a cluster of symptoms (headache, flushing, sweating, chest tightness) reported after eating Chinese food — was attributed to MSG in a 1968 letter in the New England Journal of Medicine. This set off decades of controversy. Multiple rigorous double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have failed to consistently demonstrate that MSG at doses present in food causes these symptoms when participants do not know whether they received MSG or a placebo. A comprehensive 1993 review by the FDA-commissioned Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) found that while some sensitive individuals may experience symptoms at high doses (>3g of pure MSG on an empty stomach), the doses in typical food servings do not consistently produce symptoms in double-blind conditions. The FDA classifies MSG as GRAS (generally recognized as safe). EFSA's 2017 re-evaluation set an ADI of 30 mg/kg body weight per day, acknowledging that very high doses could affect neurological function but concluding typical dietary exposure is safe. Critics including Dr. Russell Blaylock and advocacy groups have argued that MSG is an 'excitotoxin' — a compound that overstimulates glutamate receptors in the brain and could cause neuronal damage. While glutamate is indeed a neurotransmitter and high-dose glutamate can cause neurotoxicity in animal models, the blood-brain barrier and normal metabolic regulation are generally considered sufficient to prevent dietary MSG from affecting brain glutamate levels. A 2018 EFSA re-evaluation noted that combined exposure to glutamates from all sources (including naturally occurring glutamate in protein-rich foods and other added glutamates E621-E625) could approach the new lower ADI in high consumers — a concern particularly for children with high processed food intake.