Monosodium glutamate intake, dietary patterns and asthma in Chinese adults

PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e51567. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051567. Epub 2012 Dec 11.

Abstract

Objectives: Emerging evidence shows that diet is related to asthma. The aim of this analysis was to investigate the association between monosodium glutamate (MSG) intake, overall dietary patterns and asthma.

Methods: Data from 1486 Chinese men and women who participated in the Jiangsu Nutrition Study (JIN) were analyzed. In this study, MSG intake and dietary patterns were quantitatively assessed in 2002. Information on asthma history was collected during followed-up in 2007.

Results: Of the sample, 1.4% reported ever having asthma. MSG intake was not positively associated with asthma. There was a significant positive association between 'traditional' (high loadings on rice, wheat flour, and vegetable) food pattern and asthma. No association between 'macho' (rich in meat and alcohol), 'sweet tooth' (high loadings on cake, milk, and yoghurt) 'vegetable rich' (high loadings on whole grain, fruit, and vegetable) food patterns and asthma was found. Smoking and overweight were not associated with asthma in the sample.

Conclusion: While a 'Traditional' food pattern was positively associated with asthma among Chinese adults, there was no significant association between MSG intake and asthma.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Asthma* / chemically induced
  • Asthma* / epidemiology
  • Asthma* / physiopathology
  • China
  • Diet*
  • Eating / physiology
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Overweight / metabolism
  • Smoking
  • Sodium Glutamate* / administration & dosage
  • Sodium Glutamate* / toxicity
  • Surveys and Questionnaires

Substances

  • Sodium Glutamate

Grants and funding

The study was funded by Jiangsu Provincial Natural Science Foundation BK2008464 and Jiangsu Provincial Health Bureau, China. The data analysis was supported a research grant from International Glutamate Technical Committee. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.