Re: bone broth and free glutamate

[Guest guest]

-> mistaken for glutamate reactions. I'm wondering if reactions to

> amines formed in improperly cooled stock might be frequently mistaken

> for glutamate reactions.

----> Hi

Could you say a bit more about amines forming in improperly cooled

stock? What constitutes " improperly cooled " ?

Thanks

Lynn

[Guest guest]

Lynn,

> Could you say a bit more about amines forming in improperly cooled

> stock? What constitutes " improperly cooled " ?

Leaving it out on the stovetop to cool before putting it in the

fridge, or putting it directly in the fridge without first rapidly

cooling it constitutes improper cooling of stock.

The stock should be immediately cooled as quickly as possible once the

heat is turned off, before refrigerating. The easiest way to do this

is probably to submerge the pot in a sink full of ice water, and to

add ice to the water as it melts. Alternatively, if you have a type

of plastic that you are sure will not leach anything into the stock,

you can freeze water in them to make ice packs and put them right into

the stock, but I don't know what types of plastic are safe to do this

with.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

> Leaving it out on the stovetop to cool before putting it in the

> fridge, or putting it directly in the fridge without first rapidly

> cooling it constitutes improper cooling of stock.

I've never heard of amines forming in slowly cooled stock?? Where did

you read this? I'm very curious as I've always cooled my stock slowly

then refrigerated it. IT would take a ton of ice to cool a really

large stock pot!

Bye

Lynn

[Guest guest]

> I've never heard of amines forming in slowly cooled stock?? Where did

> you read this? I'm very curious as I've always cooled my stock slowly

> then refrigerated it. IT would take a ton of ice to cool a really

> large stock pot!

I do it in the sink with ice water, now that this issue has surfaced.

Just Sunday, I poured 36 hour beef stock into a 1/2 gallon mason jar

and placed it in the sink with cold water, to which I added ice

gradually. A stock pot would also work for this. It cooled off

quickly and I refrigerated it soon after (less energy and danger than

warming up the contents of the frig). Today I took it out for French

onion soup - and I don't know if it is a coincidence or not - but it

was the thickest beef jello of a stock I ever made. If it were hot

outside, I would make an aspic with this stuff. Really nice gel going on.

Deanna

[Guest guest]

Lynn,

> I've never heard of amines forming in slowly cooled stock?? Where did

> you read this? I'm very curious as I've always cooled my stock slowly

> then refrigerated it. IT would take a ton of ice to cool a really

> large stock pot!

You'll grow tons of bacteria and they'll make tons of toxins and other

compounds. If any of the bacteria are amine-forming, they'll make

amines.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

Okay you're talking bacteria...now i've got you. Was there a

discussion earlier I missed on this as I hate to have you keep

repeating info.

Didn't see it when I kinda searched...am wondering how common bacteria

producing amines in broth is?

Lynn

[Guest guest]

> warming up the contents of the frig). Today I took it out for French

> onion soup - and I don't know if it is a coincidence or not - but it

> was the thickest beef jello of a stock I ever made. If it were hot

> outside, I would make an aspic with this stuff. Really nice gel

going on.

-----> So you're noticing a difference in taste also??/

The reason I'm pursueing this question is because a couple of times my

husband and I have had digestive problems with my beef stews. I can't

figure out what the heck is wrong as there's no consistency.

This last time I used stock purchased from an Amish farm in Penn.

The stew tasted fabulous but both of us complained of a slight gut

ache the next day...nothing like food poisoning more like something

just wasn't digesting right and we had very mild headaches too.

Now you've got me wondering about the broth. I'll make some your way

and see what happens.

Thanks

Lynn

[Guest guest]

Lynn,

> -----> So you're noticing a difference in taste also??/

Yeah yeah. got me thinking about this over the weekend, so when

dem bones were done stewing, I did the quick cool thingy. Um, how to

explain: a smoother, cleaner taste maybe? Less acidic or metallic

tasting maybe? And these bones were roasted first and had the vinegar

splash in them, fwiw.

> This last time I used stock purchased from an Amish farm in Penn.

> The stew tasted fabulous but both of us complained of a slight gut

> ache the next day...nothing like food poisoning more like something

> just wasn't digesting right and we had very mild headaches too.

Too bad. A good tasting meal that doesn't go down isn't a good thing.

Best wishes for good taste and no headaches in your own stock! I

have some chicken stock going now. I'll let ya know if I notice a

difference in taste with that when it's done. Chicken stock is my

main standby for most soups and such, so I am more likely to note a

difference in that.

Deanna

[Guest guest]

Lynn,

> The reason I'm pursueing this question is because a couple of times my

> husband and I have had digestive problems with my beef stews. I can't

> figure out what the heck is wrong as there's no consistency.

All the bacteria and bacterial toxins that are undoubtedly in your

slowly cooled stock is a prime candidate to entertain, considering

that random bacterial growth will never be consistent.

> This last time I used stock purchased from an Amish farm in Penn.

> The stew tasted fabulous but both of us complained of a slight gut

> ache the next day...nothing like food poisoning more like something

> just wasn't digesting right and we had very mild headaches too.

You can't really judge whether it is " like food poisoning " or not

because there are abundant different types of toxins, amines, and

other biologically active chemicals produced by bacteria such that

there are practically infinite possible reactions that food poisoning

could consist of. Of course, only the few of them that cause a narrow

set of clinically serious problems are usually noticed as food

poisoning.

> Now you've got me wondering about the broth. I'll make some your way

> and see what happens.

I think that is the standard professional way to cool soups, stews and

stocks. Even if you aren't reacting, it seems like very little effort

to expend in making sure your food has less toxins in it that put

stress on your body to detoxify.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

Lynn,

> Okay you're talking bacteria...now i've got you. Was there a

> discussion earlier I missed on this as I hate to have you keep

> repeating info.

> Didn't see it when I kinda searched...am wondering how common bacteria

> producing amines in broth is?

Since you are slowly passing through every temperature, you are

allowing the growth of practically every kind of organism. Since

amine production is fairly common, and since all bacteria have

metabolic byproducts whether they are amines or not, the chances are

pretty slim that you wouldn't have tons of bacterial byproducts, at

least some of which (and always varying amounts) would be amines.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

> Since you are slowly passing through every temperature, you are

> allowing the growth of practically every kind of organism. Since

> amine production is fairly common, and since all bacteria have

> metabolic byproducts whether they are amines or not, the chances are

> pretty slim that you wouldn't have tons of bacterial byproducts, at

> least some of which (and always varying amounts) would be amines.

It must depend on the time to cool. Plus, stock will be pretty dead

microbial-wise to begin with. It's not like kraut where it stays raw

and wriggling with starter culture on the cabbage and begins major

microbial life a day or two later. Stock is cooked long dead and

cooled within 8 hours tops, even at room temp for 6 of it. What kind

of life will it have going after such a time, I wonder.

Deanna

[Guest guest]

That's the ONLY good thing about winter - I can't wait for the first

snowbank, here in New England. Been outdoor " cooking " in this way for years.

Ice bath au natural.....

Sharon

On 10/24/06, Lynn <lyn122@...> wrote:

>

> IT would take a ton of ice to cool a really

> large stock pot!

>

> Bye

> Lynn

>

[Guest guest]

Deanna,

> It must depend on the time to cool. Plus, stock will be pretty dead

> microbial-wise to begin with. It's not like kraut where it stays raw

> and wriggling with starter culture on the cabbage and begins major

> microbial life a day or two later. Stock is cooked long dead and

> cooled within 8 hours tops, even at room temp for 6 of it. What kind

> of life will it have going after such a time, I wonder.

Probably billions of bacteria.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

Emma,

> I was under the impression that stock is the result of the natural

> hydrolysis of proteins, and that a significant amount of the flavour

> of stock is attributable to free glutamates.

You certainly leach out proteins, mainly collagen, but if you were to

hydrolyze all the collagen, it wouldn't gel. And if you hydrolyze the

collagen, I kind of doubt you hydrolyze it completely. I think most

peptide bonds, but not all, are pretty resistant to boiling. I'm not

saying you don't get free glutamates, but I just don't see how it can

be assumed that you get any particular quantity of them.

> I can only really say to you what is considered failsafe wisdom on the

> subject, and also give you my own testimony.

Your anecdotes do seem to indicate glutamates, although I think it

could contain plenty of amines if it was cooled first. And I imagine

you must have cooled it for quite a while to be able to drink it?

> I must have missed this?

It's right on the main page that lists the various food chemical intolerances.

>I suppose every dietician has their own

> opinion. I have a book on food chemical sensitivities which refutes

> the existence of glutamate reactions as " one in a thousand " , based on

> that dreadful study done in the eighties that was done under the guise

> of testing a new soft drink - and the placebo given was aspartame,

> which deliberately fudged the results.

LOL. That's funny.

> I personally know that I am sensitive to glutamates. I realised I

> reacted to MSG (and aspartame) long before I found failsafe. My

> partner and I must be two in two thousand, because we had a mutual

> very bad MSG reaction when we were in a Thai reastaurant in Nice.

> First we both got a bit of a headrush, zingy feeling, then we felt

> depressed, then we got heavy legs and numb faces. We both had numb

> faces *all night*, which was very disturbing, and also I had a kind of

> a feeling as though I was disembodied or talking to people from a long

> way away. We only compared notes later that night because we were with

> company. Then we started tracing things back to different occasions

> when we'd felt like that, for example after some tinned French onion

> soup with MSG in it.

The most I've ever noticed from glutamate or aspartate is a mild

euphoric or energizing buzz. Very mild. I've taken things labeled as

having glutamic acid and had no reaction.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

Hi Chris

I know you will probably not read my mail the way I intend to, because from

over here in Europe you americans give out the impression to be a little bit

on the bacterophobic side.

I am a 51-y o very sensitive person as far as salicylates, amines and stuff

is concerned. I have not had a reaction to bone broth the old way (and the

old refrigerating way too like my grand mother did it). I let it cool

overnight over the stove after twelve hours cooking. I refrigerate it then.

I have even used in on

holidays

without ever refrigerating it (enought and too much white wine in it, or

vinegar, will have it acidic enough I guess). No bacteria has attacked us in

these situations. I use broth nearly every day (chicken and beef, lots of

bones, all organic), in small quantities though (base of soup or base of

sauces).

I recommend it to most of my students who are nutrient

deficient. Noone over here has ever complained of digestive problems like

the ones you describe.

there must be something else ...

Cordialement

Taty Lauwers

taty@...

www.taty.be/nouveau.htm

Re: Re: bone broth and free glutamate

> Lynn,

>

>> I've never heard of amines forming in slowly cooled stock?? Where did

>> you read this? I'm very curious as I've always cooled my stock slowly

>> then refrigerated it. IT would take a ton of ice to cool a really

>> large stock pot!

>

> You'll grow tons of bacteria and they'll make tons of toxins and other

> compounds. If any of the bacteria are amine-forming, they'll make

> amines.

>

> Chris

> --

> The Truth About Cholesterol

> Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

> http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Alladdin,

> I know you will probably not read my mail the way I intend to, because from

> over here in Europe you americans give out the impression to be a little bit

> on the bacterophobic side.

Well if you want someone to take your email the right way, avoiding

stereotyping them in the introduction is a good start. ;-)

> I am a 51-y o very sensitive person as far as salicylates, amines and stuff

> is concerned. I have not had a reaction to bone broth the old way (and the

> old refrigerating way too like my grand mother did it). I let it cool

> overnight over the stove after twelve hours cooking. I refrigerate it then.

> I have even used in on

> holidays

> without ever refrigerating it (enought and too much white wine in it, or

> vinegar, will have it acidic enough I guess). No bacteria has attacked us in

> these situations. I use broth nearly every day (chicken and beef, lots of

> bones, all organic), in small quantities though (base of soup or base of

> sauces).

> I recommend it to most of my students who are nutrient

> deficient. Noone over here has ever complained of digestive problems like

> the ones you describe.

> there must be something else ...

I don't see why. Bacterial production is going to be widely variable,

and how someone responds is going to be widely variable. If you want

to reduce your exposure to potential toxins or stresses on the body,

cool the stock quickly. If you don't care, don't. I'm not sure what

the drawback is to quick cooling of stock.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

Hi

My name is actually Taty (Aladdin is my school's name, I used the wrong

email when subscribing I am afraid).

I am an old wise lady and I knew you would misread me. I am sorry to be

right. I am extreeeeemely sensitive to bacterial impact of any sort. I have

had serious diseases in the past (fibromyalgia, cancer and ulcerative

colitis, all gone, thank you). This resulted in my being much more fragile

than before. I get much more sick than other people in my surroundings

whenever we eat in a restaurant that is not too clean.

I do care about health and cleanliness. So I repeat my question: could you

maybe find out another track, there must be something else people have

trouble with in this night long standing broth? Maybe as abiologist you

could find out better than me. Something else than bacterial overgrowth of

course.

I am a professional writer (in French). I write a book about milk and the

present debates about the no-milk way. I have discovered incredible info on

how avoidance of bacteries can be worse than what you expect as a scientist.

Sorry, this is becoming way too complicated for me to write in a foreign

language. But there is a point there. Bacteries are not always enemies.

Drawback of having hot broth refrigerated is I would not want phtalates to

leach into my food. I would not want to have a warm liquid in my fridge,

warming everything around it since I am very careful to keep my fridge at

below 10°C.

Am I wrong?

Cordialement

Taty Lauwers

taty@...

www.taty.be/nouveau.htm

Re: Re: bone broth and free glutamate

> Alladdin,

>

>> I know you will probably not read my mail the way I intend to, because

>> from

>> over here in Europe you americans give out the impression to be a little

>> bit

>> on the bacterophobic side.

>

> Well if you want someone to take your email the right way, avoiding

> stereotyping them in the introduction is a good start. ;-)

>

>> I am a 51-y o very sensitive person as far as salicylates, amines and

>> stuff

>> is concerned. I have not had a reaction to bone broth the old way (and

>> the

>> old refrigerating way too like my grand mother did it). I let it cool

>> overnight over the stove after twelve hours cooking. I refrigerate it

>> then.

>> I have even used in on

>> holidays

>> without ever refrigerating it (enought and too much white wine in it, or

>> vinegar, will have it acidic enough I guess). No bacteria has attacked us

>> in

>> these situations. I use broth nearly every day (chicken and beef, lots of

>> bones, all organic), in small quantities though (base of soup or base of

>> sauces).

>> I recommend it to most of my students who are nutrient

>> deficient. Noone over here has ever complained of digestive problems like

>> the ones you describe.

>> there must be something else ...

>

> I don't see why. Bacterial production is going to be widely variable,

> and how someone responds is going to be widely variable. If you want

> to reduce your exposure to potential toxins or stresses on the body,

> cool the stock quickly. If you don't care, don't. I'm not sure what

> the drawback is to quick cooling of stock.

>

> Chris

>

> --

> The Truth About Cholesterol

> Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

> http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

On 10/26/06, Aladdin <aladdin@...> wrote:

>

>

> there must be something else ...

>

> Cordialement

> Taty Lauwers

>

Maybe Europeans haven't disrupted their guts and immune systems to the

extent Americans have by eating American-processed, factory-farmed,

chemical-laden " food " .

Sharon

[Guest guest]

Taty,

> Bacteries are not always enemies.

No kidding. I'm not anti-bacteria.

> Drawback of having hot broth refrigerated is I would not want phtalates to

> leach into my food. I would not want to have a warm liquid in my fridge,

> warming everything around it since I am very careful to keep my fridge at

> below 10°C.

> Am I wrong?

Yes. Putting hot stock in the fridge is exactly what I said NOT to do.

I suggested cooling the stock in ice water in the sink quickly, and

then putting it in the fridge when cool. Whether you react to the

stock or not, an enormous amount of random bacteria can grow and

secrete metabolites into the stock over 8 hours of cooling. Maybe

you're lucky; maybe you don't take the cover off the stock the whole 8

hours so you minimize the chance of any bacteria getting in from the

air; maybe the bacteria that tend to grow in your stock aren't the

types that tend to make products you don't tolerate well. I don't

know. But it isn't a controlled ferment of any kind and it isn't the

type of environment that specifically fosters good bacteria, so it is

a very reasonable precaution to take to chill the stock quickly rather

than let it cool over 8 hours or more.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

Taty,

I just finished reading Buhner's amazing book " The Lost

Language of Plants " where he talks about exactly that. He says that

we are all descended from bacteria, and that we are still in some

ways just different kinds of bacteria working together with some

organization. We need bactreria in us to help us function - they

provide antibiotics against invaders, help digest our food, and make

us vitamins and nutrients. The key is to make yourself the right

kind of ecosystem so the right bacteria live in/on you and behave

themselves.

Anyways, I hope I did him justice, it was a brilliant book. Nice

hearing from you.

--- In , " Aladdin " <aladdin@...>

wrote:

> I have discovered incredible info on

> how avoidance of bacteries can be worse than what you expect as a

scientist.

> Sorry, this is becoming way too complicated for me to write in a

foreign

> language. But there is a point there. Bacteries are not always

enemies.

>

[Guest guest]

Renate,

> I just finished reading Buhner's amazing book " The Lost

> Language of Plants " where he talks about exactly that. He says that

> we are all descended from bacteria, and that we are still in some

> ways just different kinds of bacteria working together with some

> organization. We need bactreria in us to help us function - they

> provide antibiotics against invaders, help digest our food, and make

> us vitamins and nutrients. The key is to make yourself the right

> kind of ecosystem so the right bacteria live in/on you and behave

> themselves.

That's all true, but way off the point. Letting your stock cool

slowly over many hours does nothing whatsoever to improve your own

bacterial ecology, and the stock itself doesn't have an ecology

because you sterilized it by boiling/simmering it. You're unlikely to

wind up with a serious pathogen in it, but if you open the cover

before it finishes cooling, stick your finger in, or a spoon, or

whatever, and innoculate it, with, say, a single cell of a common

non-pathogenic strain of E. coli, you'll wind up with roughly

17,000,000 E. coli cells after 8 hours on the stove. Boiling the

stock will probably kill most or all of them, and then you'll be

eating an enormous load of dead bacteria that is coated in

lipopolysacharide, which you'll digest into endotoxin. So you'll wind

up with a toxic load to clear and some subchronic inflammation from

it.

Thankfully the glycine in the stock will help your detoxification

system, but it would be more efficient to consume the glycine without

all the toxin.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

I actually wasn't trying to respond to you in that post, but since

you brought it up, I don't know what all living in the air in our

kitchens could get in the stock besides e. coli, many bacteria have

never been studied or even identified. But I'd guess it would be a

whole mix of things - yeasts, bacteria, etc. Especially if you

tasted it, which would introduce a lot of bacteria from the

body/digestive system. Would they be ones that are helpful and you

want to colonize your gut with? Isn't the body already used to

dealing with dead e. coli because it's naturally found in the gut?

Who knows? The point is, some are more comfortable with trusting

wild bacteria and yeasts and others are more on the fearful side of

the spectrum. I never leave my stock out all night without the

burner on, but that's how I was raised and I really don't know what

would happen if I did. I know many who would never eat my kimchi

after finding out it sits out for a week at room temperature and is

fermented by wild bacteria. I think it's the digestive medicine to

end all digestive medicines (and a wonderful salad dressing!)

>

> Renate,

>

> > I just finished reading Buhner's amazing book " The Lost

> > Language of Plants " where he talks about exactly that. He says

that

> > we are all descended from bacteria, and that we are still in some

> > ways just different kinds of bacteria working together with some

> > organization. We need bactreria in us to help us function - they

> > provide antibiotics against invaders, help digest our food, and

make

> > us vitamins and nutrients. The key is to make yourself the right

> > kind of ecosystem so the right bacteria live in/on you and behave

> > themselves.

>

> That's all true, but way off the point. Letting your stock cool

> slowly over many hours does nothing whatsoever to improve your own

> bacterial ecology, and the stock itself doesn't have an ecology

> because you sterilized it by boiling/simmering it. You're

unlikely to

> wind up with a serious pathogen in it, but if you open the cover

> before it finishes cooling, stick your finger in, or a spoon, or

> whatever, and innoculate it, with, say, a single cell of a common

> non-pathogenic strain of E. coli, you'll wind up with roughly

> 17,000,000 E. coli cells after 8 hours on the stove. Boiling the

> stock will probably kill most or all of them, and then you'll be

> eating an enormous load of dead bacteria that is coated in

> lipopolysacharide, which you'll digest into endotoxin. So you'll

wind

> up with a toxic load to clear and some subchronic inflammation from

> it.

>

> Thankfully the glycine in the stock will help your detoxification

> system, but it would be more efficient to consume the glycine

without

> all the toxin.

>

> Chris

> --

> The Truth About Cholesterol

> Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

> http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

>

[Guest guest]

Renate,

> I actually wasn't trying to respond to you in that post, but since

> you brought it up, I don't know what all living in the air in our

> kitchens could get in the stock besides e. coli, many bacteria have

> never been studied or even identified. But I'd guess it would be a

> whole mix of things - yeasts, bacteria, etc. Especially if you

> tasted it, which would introduce a lot of bacteria from the

> body/digestive system. Would they be ones that are helpful and you

> want to colonize your gut with?

It would be pretty variable and unreliable.

> Isn't the body already used to

> dealing with dead e. coli because it's naturally found in the gut?

No. First of all, dead E. coli doesn't hang out in your gut. E. coli

*lives* in your gut, and comes out the other end alive. Living E.

coli isn't toxic. Dead, digested E. coli is toxic. Second of all,

you can't " get used to " being poisoned. You have to clear out the

poison every time, and it takes work and wastes resources and elicits

inflammation.

> Who knows?

The toxic nature of endotoxin released from the breakdown of gram

negative cell walls (such as E. coli, which was just an example) is

well known and non-controversial.

>The point is, some are more comfortable with trusting

> wild bacteria and yeasts and others are more on the fearful side of

> the spectrum.

I am not afraid of wild bacteria. I'm offering a reasoned and

pragmatic approach to minimizing the stress load your food places on

your body and maximizing the efficiency with which you get nourished

from it that seems relatively simple, easy, and without any apparent

drawbacks.

> I never leave my stock out all night without the

> burner on, but that's how I was raised and I really don't know what

> would happen if I did. I know many who would never eat my kimchi

> after finding out it sits out for a week at room temperature and is

> fermented by wild bacteria. I think it's the digestive medicine to

> end all digestive medicines (and a wonderful salad dressing!)

The kimchi is first innoculated with natural bacteria that inhabit and

feed on the vegetables, and it is prepared with an environment that

encourages a certain set of organisms that tend to be beneficial,

create nutrients, and produce compounds that can enhance the natural

flora of the digestive tract. Slowly cooling stock does none of those

things.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com