Talk:4-Methylimidazole

IUPAC name

is 5-methyl-1H-imidazole really an acceptable IUPAC name for this compound? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.81.47 (talk) 05:33, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes. You can verify at the ChemSpider and PubChem links provided in the infobox. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:47, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Review by Consumer Reports

Hello! I work for Consumer Reports. My organization just did a study related to the subject of this article and I posted this text into the toxicology section. I think that everything is well-cited to good sources and I hope that I avoided making any kind of health claim by keeping the focus on safety testing, government guidelines, and the concept of product testing. If anyone has any questions or comments then ping me. What I wrote here is my own interpretation of the news. Thanks. Also - I cross posted this to caramel color. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:20, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Deleted content

The information I added was removed by someone no longer editing wiki. Here it is -

Extended content

Review in United States In January 2014, a consumer review of various beverages in the United States reported measurements of the amounts of 4-MEI found in them. The study found that Pepsi ONE and Malta Goya contain the chemical in excess of 29 micrograms per can or bottle, with that being California Proposition 65's daily allowed amount for foods without a warning label. Various other media sources reported the story, noting that the FDA says that there is no reason to believe that the products tested are unsafe but that they are conducting additional safety studies on 4-MEI found in foods and beverages. Pepsi challenged the conclusions of this study because "the average amount of diet soda consumed by those who drink it is approximately 100 [milliliters] per day, or less than a third of a 12 [ounce] can". Because of this, Pepsi argues, consumers of its beverage would not get 29 micrograms of 4-MEI when drinking them.

The stated reason was "Trimmed excessive emphasis on California standard for exposure - FDA and EFSA have stated levels are safe. WP:NPOV states we must emphasize viewpoints according to their preeminence, and not on a single authority". The situation was that a region in the United States passed a law that the level of this chemical was not supposed to be over a certain amount, and tests found companies which sold the product in that region which sold the project with amounts over the local limit. It was not my intent in posting this to add a health claim, but instead, I think any laboratory research which finds extra chemical can report a finding of fact. I wish that the article could convey that for this chemical, in some cases regulation is lax and companies include chemicals in amounts contrary to food regulations. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:38, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Too much weight to caramel color controversy?

The intro section talks about the various ways in which the chemical can occur. Then the rest of the article does not elaborate on any of these besides caramel color, instead focusing solely on the public controversy surrounding its presence in caramel color in soft drinks and beer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.210.74.14 (talk) 21:42, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

128.210.74.14 I agree. If you identify sources which talk about other aspects then I could help add them to the article. The information in an article is determined by the sources identified. Controversies get a lot of press attention, so that is what is here now. Can you find other sources to add? Google Scholar is returning some results which seem a bit dry to me. Thanks for asking. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:48, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

I was wondering why there isn't a concern with this chemical when formed through browning of meat and other foods. Though there was concern a couple decades ago about hamburgers cooked at high heat on a grill.71.218.250.190 (talk) 23:52, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

4-Mel is produced by a number of processes related to caramelisation - as part of the Mailard reaction. This ludicrous controversy has been driven by interested parties like the CSPI and Food Babe (pressuring the big food companies) while completely ignoring the fact this compound is found in regular coffee as part of the roasting process and as a by product off cooking many foods - including breads! The CSPI is not a reliable source of information any more than the Food Babe is. There is ZERO evidence (to date) that 4-Mel causes cancer in humans - just an assumption that massive overdoses in rats did so that must translate to us. Smidoid (talk) 16:37, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I think the fact that it is getting enough press that companies feel pressured to change their formulations makes it pretty notable, even if the concerns are highly overblown (which they almost certainly are). But feel free to add other material you think is notable, including the concentrations in other food sources. Formerly 98 (talk) 16:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Edit to Health Concerns Section

Hi, I work for PepsiCo in Corporate Communications. I'd like to propose edits to the 4-Methylimidazole (4-MEI) Wikipedia page. The following sentence under "Health Concerns" is incorrect: "The recipe is not changing in Europe, so the 4-MEI level will remain the same." I would like to propose the official suggested edit to replace it: "PepsiCo has globally committed to making all caramel meet the regulatory requirements in California. As of 2014 the concentrate Pepsi uses in Europe complies with California 4-MEI levels." Thank you for your consideration and happy to discuss further if there are any concerns or questions.

NureenG (talk) 19:16, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

@NureenG:, I need a source for that other than an anonymous post here on the Talk page. Can you point to a press release or other corporate communication as a source for "PepsiCo has globally committed to making all caramel meet the regulatory requirements in California. As of 2014 the concentrate Pepsi uses in Europe complies with California 4-MEI levels."? Thanks Formerly 98 (talk) 01:35, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Stability of 4-methylimidazole?

Since it is made from methyl-glyoxal, formaldehyde and ammonia, with the loss of water, it seems likely that a reverse reaction occurs. glyoxal and formaldehyde are both carcinogens, so this aspect really needs to be addressed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ribazole (talk • contribs) 23:16, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

That is just one possible pathway for its synthesis. So it must also have multiple breakdown products. (Skoot13 (talk) 00:10, 20 August 2015 (UTC))

Ribazole, irreversible reactions are common in organic chemistry. There is no reason to suppose that because 4-methylimidazole can be made from methylglyoxal, formaldehyde, and ammonia that it will either metabolize or breakdown in the environment into those components. Also, to address Skoot13's comment, the number of pathways for its synthesis is completely independent of how many breakdown products there will be. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:48, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

John Hopkins University Research

To the creators of this Wikipedia article: I recently encountered this article on the internet that is related to this page. Title: Popular soda ingredient, caramel color, poses cancer risk to consumers Link: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/02/150218191653.htm I do not have the time to read the article and update this Wikipedia article accordingly. If someone else would do that then that would be nice ;) --Brentjee (talk) 22:11, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out, but we exclusively use high quality secondary sources for content. Formerly 98 (talk) 22:37, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Here is the original study.

• Smith, Tyler J. S.; Wolfson, Julia A.; Jiao, Ding; Crupain, Michael J.; Rangan, Urvashi; Sapkota, Amir; Bleich, Sara N.; Nachman, Keeve E.; Buchowski, Maciej (18 February 2015). "Caramel Color in Soft Drinks and Exposure to 4-Methylimidazole: A Quantitative Risk Assessment". PLOS ONE. 10 (2): e0118138. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118138.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

It describes itself by saying "This is the first study to estimate 4-MEI concentrations in common soft drinks as well as corresponding cancer risks and burdens." This seems like a quality source to me. It is not making a medical judgement, but instead reporting practical measurement of the chemical in food and comparing those amounts to the judgements made elsewhere. I think it would be nice to incorporate this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:43, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

According to Chemical Abstracts, ~2099 reports, patents, and journal articles describe 4-MeIm, 603 in the preceding 5 years. So let's stick to reviews. Furthermore, who cares if the research is "John Hopkins University Research". Keep it neutral, keep it general, and happy editing.--Smokefoot (talk) 22:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Smokefoot Can you suggest where to find review articles outside the field of medicine? Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:45, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

The only pubmed review articles in last 5 years

• Pflaum, T; Hausler, T; Baumung, C; Ackermann, S; Kuballa, T; Rehm, J; Lachenmeier, DW (29 June 2016). "Carcinogenic compounds in alcoholic beverages: an update". Archives of toxicology. PMID 27353523.
• Hengel, M; Shibamoto, T (30 January 2013). "Carcinogenic 4(5)-methylimidazole found in beverages, sauces, and caramel colors: chemical properties, analysis, and biological activities". Journal of agricultural and food chemistry. 61 (4): 780–9. PMID 23294412.

Current as of now. Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:45, 25 July 2016 (UTC)