In the good old days, processed free glutamic acid (MSG) was hidden in cosmetics, drugs, vaccines, processed food, baby food, and infant formula. However, raw produce purchased at a market or in a grocery store used to be "safe."  But all that has changed.

In 1997, a company called Auxein Corporation (now known as Emerald BioAgriculture) asked the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to approve spraying processed free glutamic acid (MSG) on all growing agricultural commodities including grass, nuts, seeds, fruits, grains, and vegetables. Auxein/Emerald BioAgriculture also asked the EPA to register their pesticide product called AuxiGro WP Plant Metabolic Primer (AuxiGro) as a plant growth enhancer for use to increase yields and the quality of crop plants and early ripening in certain vegetables.  AuxiGro contains processed free glutamic acid (MSG).

Testing of AuxiGro was approved by the EPA in September, 1997, and test crops that had been sprayed with processed free glutamic acid (MSG) were brought to market without telling consumers.  By and large, individual states rubber stamped the EPA's approvals.  For those few exceptions, Auxein/Emerald BioAgriculture set in motion the processes needed for individual state approvals.  At the same time, Auxein/Emerald BioAgriculture was working to secure organic certification for its AuxiGro and the processed free glutamic acid (MSG) contained in it.

On January 7, 1998, processed free glutamic acid (MSG) used as a plant growth and crop yield enhancer was granted an exemption from establishment of a tolerance limit by the EPA -- meaning that processed free glutamic acid (MSG) could be used as a plant growth and crop yield enhancer without restriction.  The January 7, 1998 Final Rule sanctioned the use of unregulated amounts of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) (calling it "the biochemical glutamic acid") regardless of how much processed free glutamic acid (MSG) residue might be left in or on any or all food commodities when bought by consumers -- when the processed free glutamic acid was applied as a plant growth and crop yield enhancer. Shortly thereafter, the EPA began to approve AuxiGro for use on specific crops.  By the time the Truth in Labeling Campaign became aware that the EPA had approved spraying processed free glutamic acid (MSG) on crops, it was too late to formally object to the 1998 Final Rule.

On December 6, 2000, Auxein/Emerald BioAgriculture petitioned the EPA to remove all restrictions from use of processed free glutamic acid (MSG), and asked, also, that all restrictions be removed from a second neuro-active amino acid, Gamma Aminobutyric Acid (GABA).  Both are used as active ingredients in AuxiGro.  Prior to December 6, 2000, AuxiGro had been approved in California for use as a fungicide, but at that time, the EPA had not approved the processed free glutamic acid (MSG) in AuxiGro for use as a fungicide; the EPA had only approved processed free glutamic acid (MSG) for use as a plant growth enhancer.  So this new broader approval was needed before California approval of AuxiGro for use as a fungicide could be finalized.  In its December 6, 2000 petition, Auxein/Emerald BioAgriculture asked that there be no limits to the amounts of those chemicals when used on any food commodities for any uses regulated by the EPA.

As required by law, the Auxein Corporation petition was published in the Federal Register.  But the law evidently doesn't require that the public be told what is being proposed, because when the EPA published the petition on December 6, 2000, they called it a "Notice of Filing Pesticide Petitions to Establish Tolerances for Certain Pesticide Chemicals in or on Food," -- never mentioning glutamic acid, L-glutamic acid, glutamate, monosodium glutamate, MSG, or GABA in the title.

The December 6, 2000, Notice to "Establish Tolerances for Certain Pesticide Chemicals in or on Food" asked the EPA to sanction the use of unregulated amounts of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) --

Regardless of how much processed free glutamic acid (MSG) residue might be left in or on raw agricultural commodities when purchased for eating;

No matter what the product containing the processed free glutamic acid (MSG) might be called, i.e., a fertilizer, fungicide, pesticide, plant growth enhancer or anything else regulated by the EPA;

No matter what crops or plants the processed free glutamic acid (MSG) might be used on;

Without mentioning, in either the title or the summary, that those "Certain Pesticide Chemicals" were processed free glutamic acid (MSG) and GABA, and that the product in which they would be used was called AuxiGro.

Clever, wasn't it?  Both Auxein/Emerald BioAgriculture and the EPA knew that we were vehemently opposed to use of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) on food crops and other plants.  They both knew that given the opportunity, we would formally object to additional EPA approvals of use of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) and/or AuxiGro.  So the Notice, that by law the EPA was required to publish in the Federal Register, gave no clue to the fact that it had anything to do with processed free glutamic acid (MSG) or AuxiGro.

The Notice that was published on December 6, 2000 became a Final Rule on June 21, 2001.  But unlike the Notice, and for reasons we may never know, the EPA used the words "L-glutamic acid" in the words used to describe the June 21, 2001 Final Rule, and a concerned consumer brought the Final Rule to our attention.  Thus, for the first time, the Truth in Labeling Campaign had the opportunity to file a formal Objection to the use of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) on crops.

The period for filing objections to the June 21, 2001 Final Rule ended on August 20, 2001. The Objection filed by the Truth in Labeling Campaign on August 20, 2001 with the EPA was an objection to the June 21, 2001 Final Rule: L-Glutamic Acid and Gamma Aminobutyric Acid; Exemptions from the Requirement of a Tolerance.  It was an objection to the exemption granted to processed free glutamic acid (MSG) -- which was then (and is) still being referred to as "L-glutamic acid" by Auxein/Emerald BioAgriculture and the EPA.

The text of the June 21, 2001 Final Rule contains very little information, but refers the reader to the December 6, 2000 Notice.  In turn, the December 6 Notice states that the petitions to establish tolerances for "certain pesticide chemicals in or on food" should be granted; saying only that supporting data were submitted with Pesticide Petitions 7F4842 and 7F4843, but not even alluding to what those data were.  Thus, to see how the EPA excused itself in 2001 for feeding consumers to the glutamate industry while laying the groundwork for lining the glutamate industry's pockets, you will have to go all the way back to the January 7, 1998 Final Rule.

On June 21, 2001 the EPA published the Final Rule stemming from the December 6, 2000 Notice. The June 21, 2001 Final Rule says that unrestricted amounts of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) can be sprayed on crops and other plants -- food crops -- all crops -- any crops -- without any restrictions on the amount sprayed, on the amount that would remain on fruit, grains, seeds, nuts, and vegetables when brought to market, and without any restriction on the amount of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) that could have been taken up by the treated produce and be in those fruit, grains, seeds, nuts, and vegetables when eaten.

The exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance were based on a series of unproved assumptions, on data from the 1970s that have long since been refuted, on a number of studies that are irrelevant to the safety of amino acids, and on short term acute toxicity studies that neither reflected the real world conditions under which the amino acids would be applied, nor considered their endocrine disrupting potential.  In sanctioning the unregulated use of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) -- which was then being calling  "L-glutamic acid" -- the EPA used words like "expected to be minimal;" "not likely to result in potential chronic exposure" and "exposure is anticipated to be negligible."  No relevant data from non-industry researchers were examined.

A formal Objection to the June 21, 2001 Final Rule was filed with the EPA by the Truth in Labeling Campaign prior to the cut off date of August 20, 2001.  You will find a copy of the Objection on this web site. We have put it on the Internet because --

We think consumers have the right to know what is in and on their food;

We think that Americans need to see, close up and personal, how a company gets government approval for a product that places consumers at risk;

We think that Americans need to see, first hand, how government agencies like the EPA cooperate with the companies they are are supposed to be regulating -- even violating the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act;

Everything we see and hear from the EPA says that they have approved a toxin and endocrine disrupter that causes adverse reactions in MSG-sensitive people, for spray on crops -- placing the health of every American at risk -- with the greatest risk faced by fetuses, newborns, infants, children, and the elderly.

It has been our observation, however, that the EPA does not always do what is required by law, so we made inquiry.  In September, 2001, we asked and were told that the EPA was drafting a draft Final Order that should be available for review and comment approximately 6-8 months from that time -- and that we would be notified when the draft Final Order was done.

On July 30, 2002, we asked again when the draft Final Order would be available to consumers, and Janet Andersen, Ph.D., Director of the Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (BPPD), told us they were working on it and would let us know as soon as they had a draft for distribution and comment.

Let there be no mistake.  Today, we know of no crop that has not been approved for spray with processed free glutamic acid (MSG) by the EPA. The EPA has approved the use of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) and the use of AuxiGro, a product that uses processed free glutamic acid (MSG) and GABA as active ingredients. Those approvals remain in force, and those products will continue to be used, even though objections have been filed protesting them. Those chemicals have been used, and will continue to be used without restriction in accordance with the June 21, 2001 Final Rule in every state except California unless the EPA withdraws its approval of the June 21, 2001 Final Rule.  The Truth in Labeling Campaign has asked the EPA to do that.

Federal Register notices chronicling the application and approval of processed free glutamic acid (MSG) are available on the Internet via GPO Access, the Federal Register, through: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html  Copies of a number of the EPA's Notices and Final Rules have been included on this Web site.

Copies of the draft final order pertaining to the Objection of the Truth in Labeling Campaign can be obtained by writing to Dr. Janet Andersen, Director of the Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (BPPD), EPA at Andersen.Janet@epamail.epa.gov

A list of what has been filed in the docket pertaining to this matter (Docket #OPP-301136) can be requested from the EPA at opp-docket@epa.gov.  You can also ask for copies of anything you might want to read; but be sure to ask about charges/fees before you do so.  When we last inquired, only a limited number of copies could be obtained free of charge each time a new request for copies was made; but there was no limit on the number of requests that could be made.
 

>>>Return to:
     Home page
 

Truth in Labeling Campaign, 850 DeWitt Place, Suite 20B, Chicago, IL  60611
adandjack@aol.com     (858) 481-9333     http://www.msgfacts.NET

The content on this page was last updated on March 3, 2008