Read up on glutamatic acid - sorta like LSD for your taste buds. And no, it's not quite the same as Monosodium glutamate. There's no Chinese Food Syndrome from my brews.
- Mike
"Better living though chemistry"
MSG does not contribute to the "Chinese Food Syndrome;" the problem is histamines found in soy sauce. MSG is merely the mono-salt of glumatic acid and 1 mol NaOH. MSG is a source of the amino acid glutamate, but we get tons of glutamate from other sources. You are right about our taste buds and glutamate . . . basically glutamate is a chemical signal to our brain that "protein is abundant in this food." Nucleotides such as disodium guanylate and disodium inosinate are signals to our brain that " this food comes from paraxial mesoderm" aka muscle tissue. We love foods that have these compounds. The end result is the same sort of deal as with MSG, lots of amino acid glutamate, which is no big deal. MSG has a bad rap because you can make money with "organic" and "chemical free" food, which usually is less healthy, less tasty, less developed, more rotten, or at least some combination of the four.
The lawyer has to file the initial claim by including any possible known reason to go after the product. Even flimsy evidence can be sufficient to at least move into discovery, at which time medical expertise will become involved and real evidence starts to be explored. I would assume the lawyer looked at the known side effects for the ingredients as reported by the FDA. The FDA reports pretty much anything they are notified to. If a handful of people developed ulcers from consuming irish moss, it will get listed as a side effect.
Well, it is actually a lower threshold than that. All he has to do is state the court's subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, give notice of the claims, how the plaintiff is entitled to relief, and damages, which is a low standard because we have notice pleading, not fact pleading. The court will not "go after the product," and as you correctly surmised, it is the FDA's power to investigate and approve food, drugs, food additives, and pretty much anything else it wants to. The FDA . . . is perhaps the most corrupt, inept, blatantly abusive, blatantly lethargic, schizophrenic agency. You can thank the SCOTUS for allowing such unconstitutional delegations of legislative power to bureaucracies like the FDA.
The attorney does not need to look at the known side effects for the complaint. Evidence might be an issue after the defendant has received the complaint and gives a call to the plaintiff and says "this is BS" or "there is no evidence, so what is your thought process" or "how much $ should we start with?" Then discovery, then pretrial conference, then trial, where expert witnesses (no need for an MD) can really do the damage.
No Way! I think if there is any truth to this I think you would have to be consuming mass amounts of it. Plus we are boiling one table spoon in 5 gallons.
This is highly rational. If only people understood this is how toxicity works. Some people are initially disposed to toxicity from low doses of compounds "allergies."
make your own "autolyzed yeast extract" 
