How concerned should we be about emulsifiers? (like polysorbate 80 in pickled vegetables/pickles)?

[InquilineKea]

Virtually all the common brands of pickles have it, and emulsifiers can cause leaky gut

It's really sad b/c pickling cucumbers tends to remove pesticide residue AND pickles are among the most filling foods ever

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7592879/

 

Quote

 

Dietary polysorbate 80 (PS80) is an emulsifier commonly used in various processed foods. It has been shown that a continuous low dose of PS80 impairs intestinal permeability in mice (Chassaing et al., 2015). In addition, PS80 administration causes the development of obesity and metabolic dysfunction, associated with low‐grade inflammation and microbiota dysbiosis in the intestine (Chassaing et al., 2017). Thus, PS80‐induced intestinal permeability can expand to the impairment of whole‐body metabolism, potentially through leakage factors, such as bacteria and endotoxins. Additionally, it can be used as a diet‐induced leaky gut animal model.

The skeletal muscle functions as a major nutrient consumer—skeletal muscles consume >70% of blood glucose—and its proper metabolic functioning is a key factor that can prevent metabolic diseases (Egan & Zierath, 2013). It is well known that muscle metabolism dysfunction causes non‐communicable diseases, including type‐2 diabetes and dyslipidemia (Lavie et al., 2015; Milton et al., 2014). In addition, glucose and lipid metabolic functions also play a key role in maintaining muscle contraction (Hargreaves & Spriet, 2015). Therefore, muscle metabolic capacity influences endurance. These facts led us to hypothesize that intestinal permeability progression may decrease glucose tolerance and endurance associated with impaired glucose metabolism in the skeletal muscle. Here, we show systemic glucose intolerance with inactivating metabolic capacity of the skeletal muscle in the PS80‐induced leaky gut model.

 

Quote

 

The study found that low concentrations of two commonly used emulsifiers – carboxymethylcellulose and polysorbate-80 – induced inflammation in mice.  This altered micobiota decreased the capacity to digest foods and made it possible for toxins to infiltrate the mucus layer that lines the intestine. At this time the researchers are conducting additional studies in humans to see if the results in animal models  hold up in humans.

Ref: Nature. 2015 Mar 5;519(7541):92-6. doi: 10.1038/nature14232. Epub 2015 Feb 25.

 

3 comments on PubPeer (by: Unregistered Submission, Peer 2)

https://www.americanpharmaceuticalreview.com/Featured-Articles/569560-Polysorbate-the-Good-the-Bad-and-the-Ugly/

https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2022/fo/d2fo01689c

 

Edited June 2, 2023 by InquilineKea

[InquilineKea]

https://archive.ph/24G1w

Quote

What’s more, it's been suggested that by harming the lining of your gut, emulsifiers interfere with the way neurons in the digestive tract trigger the release of appetite-regulating hormones. This could then make it harder to regulate your appetite and lead to overeating that could spiral into weight management problems and metabolic conditions. This might be one reason why people are prone to overeating ultra-processed foods, which almost universally contain emulsifiers. But this science is still in its infancy and we need more evidence before we can say the gum arabic and carrageenan in the food supply can make it harder to practice portion control.

Quote

 

In a randomized controlled-feeding study published in the journal Gastroenterology, healthy adults who were housed at a designated study site for 11 days consumed an additive-free diet or an identical diet supplemented with 15 grams of carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), an emulsifier also known as cellulose gum that is added to a wide range of packaged foods. CMC consumption changed the make-up of bacteria populating the colon of participants, reducing select beneficial species. Fecal samples from CMC-treated participants showed a large depletion of bacteria-produced metabolites that are thought to help maintain a healthy colon. Lastly, the researchers noticed that a small subset of subjects consuming CMC displayed bacteria encroaching into the normally sterile gut mucus layer, which they say has previously been observed to be a feature of inflammatory bowel diseases like colitis and colon cancer as well as type 2 diabetes.

This is far from the only research to link dietary emulsifiers with the potential development of gut issues. A study of 20 commonly used emulsifiers by food manufacturers published in the journal Microbiome found that many of them appeared to have a negative impact on intestinal microbiota composition and function in a way that could drive up inflammation. Worth noting is that lecithin, an emulsifier used in various foods including dark chocolate, was not found to be problematic for microbiome health. This study using a model of the human intestinal ecosystem found that the emulsifiers carboxymethylcellulose (say that three times fast) and polysorbate 80 may increase the inflammatory potential of the microbiome. This occurred via the emulsifier’s power to alter microbiota to increase levels of flagellin, a protein that can lead to intestinal inflammation.

 

https://www.vegblogger.com/blog/2022/04/whats-wrong-with-many-plant-based-and-vegan-meat-products-a-lot.html (this is a bit sensationalist and not fully rigorous, but gives some good examples)

Edited June 2, 2023 by InquilineKea

[InquilineKea]

Quote

 

Dmitry Dzhagarov is feeling disappointed.

Favorites  · otnspreSodc7gl26i0h7f913c71mu1u8ht6t21uh37tmlih7a0u8ml53lcu8  ·

 

Carboxymethyl Cellulose as a Food Emulsifier: Are Its Days Numbered?

(May 2023) https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15102408

Carboxymethyl cellulose use in industry is ubiquitous. Though it is recognized as safe by the EFSA and FDA, newer works have raised concerns related to its safety, as in vivo studies showed evidence of gut dysbiosis associated with CMC’s presence. Herein lies the question, is CMC a gut pro-inflammatory compound? As no work addressed this question, we sought to understand whether CMC was pro-inflammatory through the immunomodulation of GI tract epithelial cells. The results showed that while CMC was not cytotoxic up to 25 mg/mL towards Caco-2, HT29-MTX and Hep G2 cells, it had an overall pro-inflammatory behavior. In a Caco-2 monolayer, CMC by itself increased IL-6, IL-8 and TNF-α secretion, with the latter increasing by 1924%, and with these increases being 9.7 times superior to the one obtained for the IL-1β pro-inflammation control. In co-culture models, an increase in secretion in the apical side, particularly for IL-6 (692% increase), was observed, and when RAW 264.7 was added, data showed a more complex scenario as stimulation of pro-inflammatory (IL-6, MCP-1 and TNF-α) and anti-inflammatory (IL-10 and IFN-β) cytokines in the basal side was observed. Considering these results, CMC may exert a pro-inflammatory effect in the intestinal lumen, and despite more studies being required, the incorporation of CMC in foodstuffs must be carefully considered in the future to minimize potential GI tract dysbiosis.

— feeling disappointed.

 

 

[InquilineKea]

A lot of these... are... all-natural. AND they help fill the stomach up/provide zero-calorie bulk..... Like cellulose. I would have never gotten concerned...

But the odds ratio of high consumption are barely over 1 that it's not *too much* of a concern

Quote

 

After an average follow-up of 7 years, higher intake of total celluloses (E460-E468), cellulose (E460) and carboxymethylcellulose (E466) were found to be positively associated with higher risks of CVD and specifically coronary heart disease.

Higher intakes of monoglycerides and diglycerides of fatty acids (E471 and E472) were associated with higher risks of all studied outcomes. Among these emulsifiers, lactic ester of monoglycerides and diglycerides of fatty acids (E472b) was associated with higher risks of CVD and cerebrovascular diseases, and citric acid ester of monoglycerides and diglycerides of fatty acids (E472c) was associated with higher risks of CVD and coronary heart disease.

High intake of trisodium phosphate (E339) was also associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease.

There was no evidence of an association between the other studied emulsifiers and any of the cardiovascular outcomes.

 

Quote

Emulsifiers are often added to processed and packaged foods such as pastries, cakes, ice cream, desserts, chocolate, bread, margarine and ready meals, to enhance their appearance, taste, texture and shelf life. They include celluloses, mono- and diglycerides of fatty acids, modified starches, lecithins, carrageenans (derived from red seaweed; used to thicken foods), phosphates, gums and pectins.

https://www.bmj.com/content/382/bmj-2023-076058

 

Quote

 

Food additive emulsifiers were mostly found in processed fruit and vegetables (eg, dehydrated soups) (contributing to 18.8% of total emulsifier intakes), cakes and biscuits (14.7%), and dairy products (9.9%) (fig 3, supplementary eTable1). The most important dietary sources of total celluloses were cakes and biscuits (43.4%) and processed potatoes and tubers (20.1%), whereas those of total monoglycerides and diglycerides of fatty acids were fats and sauces (eg, packaged mayonnaise) (22.5%) and cakes and biscuits (22.0%).

Fig 2

Contribution of individual emulsifiers to total emulsifier intakes (%) among participants from the NutriNet-Santé cohort, 2009-21 (n=95 442). Other emulsifiers included triphosphates (European code E451), gum arabic (E414), polyphosphates (E452), carob bean gum (E410), cellulose (E460), tricalcium phosphate (E341), monoacetyl and diacetyl tartaric acid esters of monoglycerides and diglycerides of FAs (E472e), hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (E464), polyglycerol esters of FAs (E475), lactic acid esters of monoglycerides and diglycerides of FAs (E472b), polydextrose (E1200), sodium stearoyl-2-lactylate (E481), sodium alginate (E401), ammonium salts of phosphatidic acid (E442), esters of monoglycerides and diglycerides of FAs (E472), polyglycerol esters of interesterified ricinoleic acid (E476), citric acid esters of monoglycerides and diglycerides of FAs (E472c), silicon dioxide (E551), tripotassium phosphate (E340), methylcellulose (E461), carboxymethylcellulose (E466), trisodium phosphate (E339), acetic acid esters of monoglycerides and diglycerides of FAs (E472a), agar (E406), sucrose esters of FAs (E473), propylene glycol esters of FAs (E477), gellan gum (E418), sorbitan tristearate (E492), processed Euchema seaweed (E407a), beeswax (E901), potassium alginate (E402), maltitol (E965), triethyl citrate (E1505), xylitol (E967), glycerol esters of rosin (E445), polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate (E433), potassium dihydrogen citrate (E332), calcium alginate (E404), calcium stearoyl-2-lactylate (E482), konjac flour (E425), cross linked sodium carboxymethylcellulose (E468), sucrose acetate isobutyrate (E444), sodium tartarate (E335), polyoxyethylene sorbitan monostearate (E435), sorbitan monostearate (E491), alginic acid (E400), propylene glycol (E1520), Quillaia extract (E999), sodium aluminium phosphate (E541), magnesium hydrogen phosphate (E343), propylene glycol alginate (E405), and dimethyl polysiloxane (E900). FAs=fatty acids

 

 

Edited September 10, 2023 by InquilineKea

[IgorF]

hm, in EU novadays there are just few chocolates 85%-90% cacao without lecitine, I wonder it makes any sensible extra palatability, thus I suspect it is a kind of production optimization

generally speaking they are added to make something that is not sensed as a food sensing less repulsive and an additional goal is to lower constipation caused by eating a lot of such substances

some of these things are natural but it is hard to say if this makes them better/worse in an unexpected context

it is sad that in the US these things are added to not upf but something that is processed but generally expected as not harmful like canned vegs/fruits, I never saw previously such practice in EU, so far I am skipping only sugar-added stuff or too much extra salt but malpractice of such production optimization is a bad sign..

for people who consume modern diets for whatever reason I think guar gum is preferred thing to have, at least it is started to be sold as a separate supplement that helps such people to have less luxative medicines but longtern consequences are murky and the whole such a practice is sad lifestory nuance..

 

I also have a guess that such things could confuse the carbs-sensing routines and artificially lower the postprandial values on cgms, allowing some people to draw far going conclusions but that is another story

Edited September 10, 2023 by IgorF

[InquilineKea]

Lecithin was *not* found to increase heart disease risk in this study