TIME tobacco

$23.6 Billion Lawsuit Winner to Big Tobacco: “Are You Awake Now?”

Cynthia Robinson with her attorneys Willie Gary (left) and Christopher Chestnut (right) as she speaks during an interview on July 21, 2014 in New York City.
Cynthia Robinson with her attorneys Willie Gary (left) and Christopher Chestnut (right) as she speaks during an interview on July 21, 2014 in New York City. Bebeto Matthews—AP

The widow who won a $23.6 billion lawsuit against R.J. Reynolds talks to TIME about the suit and what she hopes the victory will accomplish

“Are you awake now? Do you hear what the jury is saying? You have to stop,” Cynthia Robinson wants to tell the tobacco industry. The Florida widow recently won a $23.6 billion lawsuit against tobacco company R.J. Reynolds, one of the largest recent judgments on the industry, and in an interview with TIME, she says she hopes they listen to the jury’s message.

Robinson’s husband Michael Johnson died in 1996 at age of 36 from lung cancer, and in her lawsuit against R.J. Reynolds, she and her attorneys argued that the company was aware that cigarettes were addictive and caused lung cancer, but was negligent in telling smokers like Johnson about those risks.

Johnson got hooked on cigarettes when he was just 13-years-old, and eventually smoked up to three packs a day, often lighting his next cigarette with the burning end of the one he just finished. “He was a quiet person. He read the Bible every day, he took the kids swimming, he mowed the yards of all the elderly neighbors,” Robinson says. He was diagnosed with lung cancer in 1995 and lived for almost a year in constant pain. “The pain [from the cancer] was always there. When you’re on oxygen and you have to step outside for a cigarette, you can’t stop. You’re addicted.”

Johnson tried multiple times to stop smoking with no success. During one of her husband’s hospital visits, Robinson knew something was wrong when he began sweating and one of his eyes started to droop. The doctor said he would live for only a couple of months, but he survived for 10 more months. “He suffocated and died for so long, it was awful,” says Robinson, recalling how hard it was for her husband to breathe in the months before his death.

The day Johnson died, he could not stop coughing up blood. His brother tried to hold him up, and Robinson wanted to get him into an ambulance, but his mother told her that he was already gone. “The blood was everywhere, it was awful. Only 36 years old and he was already gone,” says Robinson.

Ten years later Robinson filled her lawsuit. It’s one of many Florida lawsuits referred to as an “Engle progeny,” stemming from a 2000 $145 billion verdict in a class action suit led Dr. Howard A. Engle, a Miami Beach pediatrician who smoked, and eventually died of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The case was overturned in appeals court, and it was ruled that smokers could not make up a class. But the Engle case established that the tobacco industry had deceived Americans, by knowingly putting addictive and cancerous products on the market, and paved the way for thousands of individual Florida cases to take on Big Tobacco. On Friday July 18, Robinson did, and won her bittersweet victory.

“It was justice. It was time, and it had been a long time,” Robinson says. “I thought, oh my God, we did it. We may have to keep fighting, and will. It’s for Michael, and anyone who lost their lives to lung cancer. There are thousands right now dying of lung cancer. Michael died so young, he missed graduations and weddings.”

“We expected every dime and more,” says Robinson’s attorney Willie E Gary. “Johnson started smoking when he was a teen. How aware of the risks can you be at that age? But [the tobacco industry] would market and target kids. To this day they are going after our youth, stuffing their pockets. It’s all about the profits and it’s nothing about the health and safety of the people.”

As TIME reported earlier this week, R.J. Reynolds plans to appeal, and based on the industry’s track record with lawsuits, the damages will likely be lowered. Gary isn’t deterred: ” We expect to win. Winning is not about getting everything that you want. We know that we made a difference.”

It’s small consolation for losing her husband, but Robinson is satisfied that her time, effort, and daily prayers were enough to topple Goliath, at least in court last Friday. “We had to go all the way no matter how many years it took. Life has been lost,” she says. For the thousands of other pending lawsuits, she urges plaintiffs to persevere. “Don’t give up no matter how much they try to discourage and belittle you, you fight them to the very end, and you’ll succeed,” she says.

 

TIME Infectious Disease

MERS Could Be Airborne, Research Indicates

The disease has already claimed 288 lives

Findings from a scientific paper published Tuesday indicated that Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) may be able to spread through the air.

A research team in Saudi Arabia collected air samples from a camel barn that the virus had previously plagued. Their analysis of the air sample tested positive for a strain of MERS RNA, CNN reports.

The possibility of MERS as an airborne illness has been previously floated after reports said that some of those infected previously had close contact to fellow MERS patients. The disease has claimed at least 288 live, according to the World Health Organization.

However, scientists are hesitant to jump to conclusions from these findings. “What they say is that virus particles can be airborne, but it’s premature to conclude that MERS is transmitted through aerosols,” said Dr. Mark Denison, a Vanderbilt University School of Medicine professor.

“Do we still need to consider the possibility of airborne transmission?” Denison added. “Yes, of course.”

[CNN]

TIME

Federal Appeals Court Deals Blow to Health Law

(WASHINGTON) — A federal appeals court has delivered a serious setback to President Barack Obama’s health care law, potentially derailing subsidies for many low- and middle-income people who have bought policies.

If upheld, the decision could mean premium increases for more than half of the 8 million Americans who purchased taxpayer-subsidized insurance under the law.

It affects consumers who purchased their coverage through the federal insurance marketplace — or exchange— that serves 36 states.

A three-judge panel in Washington ruled 2-1 that the law, as written, only allows insurance subsidies in states that have set up their own exchanges. That invalidated an Internal Revenue Service regulation that allowed subsidies in all 50 states.

TIME Cancer

It’s Unlikely Tobacco Company Will Pay $23.6 Billion

Based on the industry's track record, the second-largest tobacco company probably won't pay the billions in damages it owes to a Florida widow

Big Tobacco took a hit on Friday when a court ordered the second-largest tobacco company in the U.S. to pay damages to a Florida widow who had sued them for her husband’s smoking-related death. However, it’s unlikely that the company will pay full price for its negligence.

Although the verdict will likely stand, tobacco company R.J. Reynolds says it plans to appeal the $23.6 billion that the jury determined it owed widow Cynthia Robinson. Based on the industry’s track record, that will likely result in them paying far less.

Robinson’s husband, Michael Johnson, began chain-smoking when he was 13-years-old and died at the young age of 36 in 1996. A decade after her husband’s untimely death, Robinson took the cigarette-makers to court, saying they were not forthcoming about the extremely harmful effects of their product, suing them for not informing the public that smoking was addictive. And almost another decade later, she proved her case.

Unsurprisingly, R.J. Reynolds, whose holding company Reynolds American Inc. recently announced a $27 billion deal to buy out rival Lorillard, contested the verdict. “Regardless of the rhetoric surrounding this case, the damages awarded are grossly excessive and impermissible under state and constitutional law,” said Jeff Raborn, vice president and assistant general counsel for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company in a statement sent to TIME. “We will file post-trial motions with the trial court promptly, requesting that the verdict in the case be set aside. We are confident that the law will be followed and the punitive damages verdict will not be allowed to stand.”

Raborn is probably right.

“It is quite likely, bordering on certainty, that the amount of punitive damages will be reduced, though it is unclear how much,” says John Banzhaf, a law professor at George Washington University known for his successful litigations against the tobacco industry. There’s not a lot of dispute among the legal community that the verdict will be reduced–probably substantially. Prior verdicts against Big Tobacco demanding billions in court have been reduced to millions–something the industry, which spends about $23 million on cigarette marketing each day, can pay off rather comfortably. In 2009, Phillip Morris failed to overturn a $79.5 million punitive-damages ruling in the U.S. Supreme Court, and business continued as usual.

“This doesn’t set a legal precedent, but the result of this verdict has people asking how much money will it take to deter tobacco companies? Previous verdicts against tobacco companies have been treated as just the cost of doing business,” says Richard Daynard, a law professor at Northeastern University who specializes in tobacco control. So far, no verdict has changed the economic fundamentals of the industry. But this time, the industry might being feeling less confident.

“I think this is the first time in many years that tobacco companies are going to have to start thinking about really doing something different,” says Daynard. After all, it’s likely we will see many more cases like Robinson’s land similar verdicts in Florida, and it’s possible that similar lawsuits will start to pop up nationwide.

Robinson’s case is one of thousands of lawsuits referred to as an “Engle progeny,” which was developed after a $145 billion verdict in favor of a class action lawsuit led by Dr. Howard A. Engle, a Miami Beach pediatrician. The award was voided in appeals court, under the finding that individual smokers could not make up a class. Though the tobacco industry did not have to pay the award, which was the largest punitive damages payment decided by a jury, the decision opened the floodgates for individual cases to head to Florida court with the support of the Engle case, which proved that the tobacco industry knew cigarettes were addictive, and failed to warn the public.

“The [Robinson] case indicates that juries, when a case is properly presented, are willing to sock it to tobacco companies,” says Banzhaf. “They are angry as hell at these tobacco companies, and when an attorney presents a strong case, they are willing to hit them, and hit them hard.”

Banzhaf says the case will likely motivate attorneys in other states that are less gung-ho to take on Big Tobacco. Lawyers in states like New York, California, and Washington with good tobacco control track records, he said, are likely “salivating” at the future possibilities.

Banzhaf believes that the public is finally grasping the health implications of smoking and is now willing to punish those that profit from it. The numbers seem to support this claim: smoking rates are down 2.8% since 2005 according to CDC data, and smokers can be charged up to 50% more under Obamacare. “Clearly the public is angry. But the courts have to allow damages that are substantially higher than ordinary damages,” says Banzhaf.”Hitting them with $16 million is pocket change.”

It will be no surprise if the final bill for R.J. Reynolds is significantly lower than what the Florida jury determined to be sufficient, but it’s encouraging for the pending cases. “About 70% of Engle cases that have gone to verdict have gone in favor of the plaintiff,” says Daynard. “There are thousands more of these cases pending. Any of them could produce a jury verdict like this because it’s the same misbehavior.”

Unfortunately, the tobacco industry can also produce the same appeals solution they’ve achieved successfully in the past.

TIME Diet/Nutrition

Yogurt Could Lower Your Blood Pressure: New Study

The latest study links certain probiotics with better blood pressure control

Bacteria aren’t the first allies we turn to for staying healthy – there are enough strains that can cause serious illness, after all – but there’s growing evidence that certain strains of the bugs can actually be good for your health, and may even relieve symptoms of inflammatory conditions, allergies and possibly even obesity.

In the latest report on these microbial allies, researchers add one more possible benefit of probiotics – the live concoctions of bacteria contained in foods like yogurt. In an analysis of nine studies that looked at probiotic use and blood pressure, the report in the journal Hypertension found that people using probiotics tend to have lower blood pressure compared to those who didn’t eat them. The effects seemed to be stronger among those with higher blood pressure to begin with, and among those consuming multiple probiotic strains and in higher doses.

What do bacteria have to do with blood pressure? The researchers say that the micro-organisms could be helping to address hypertension in a variety of ways, from lowering cholesterol levels, which can contribute to less fatty buildup in the vessels and therefore reduce the chances of developing hypertension, to controlling blood sugar and keeping the enzymes and proteins that control blood flow and fluid volumes in check.

The results aren’t exactly a prescription for treating hypertension — at least not yet. But they raise the interesting possibility of incorporating a probiotic regimen into blood pressure management. The study authors admit, however, that more questions still need to be answered, such as which micro-organisms might be associated with the strongest effect on blood pressure, as well as which combinations of bacterial strains work best. The formulation of the probiotic may also be important, they say – in the studies they reviewed, participants consumed probiotics primarily from yogurt, but also from cheese, sour milk and supplements (liquid or capsules). Hitting the right threshold of microbes also seems to be important, and figuring out that volume is also essential before any advice about using probiotics to lower blood pressure is given.

TIME vaccines

RFK Jr. Joins the Anti-Vaccine Fringe

RFK, Jr.: Big bullhorn, bad ideas
RFK, Jr.: Big bullhorn, bad ideas Ethan Miller; 2014 Getty Images

A man who used to tell hard truths now peddles dangerous nonsense

There are lots of places to go if you want dangerous crazytalk. There are websites, blog threads, cable channels trafficking in all kinds of addled nonsense about birther conspiracies and one-world governments. And then there was Robert Kennedy, Jr., the tireless, honest climate hero long famous for fighting the very good fight.

But that was then. RFK, Jr. may still know a thing or two about global warming, but he has taken a disreputable plunge into the world of anti-science with his new and inexplicable crusade: warning people about the dangers of vaccines.

Let’s be clear: Kennedy will tell you he’s not against vaccines themselves, but rather, against thimerosal, a vaccine preservative purportedly responsible for the rise in autism in the U.S. He’s even publishing a new book—Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak—making this frightening point. The problem is: he’s wrong—utterly wrong, so wrong it’s hard even to know what the biggest piece of that wrongness is.

But let’s start with a single fact that ought to be, as the lawyers like to say, dispositive: the thimerosal ain’t there. With the exception of the flu vaccine, it was removed from or reduced to trace levels in all vaccines given to children under 6-years-old 13 years ago. You face a greater mercury risk eating seafood and fish—and even that danger is low enough that the EPA recently recommended that pregnant and nursing women increase their intake of certain kinds of fish because the nutritional benefits outweigh the theoretical dangers.

Kennedy is wrong on basic epidemiology too. Autism diagnoses have indeed risen steadily in the U.S. in recent years, but that has been happening in the same period in which thimerosal levels in vaccines plunged. When your cause goes away and your reputed effect increases, well, you really do need to review your class notes on what cause and effect mean in the first place.

Most fundamentally, Kennedy does not get chemistry. Thimerosal is an ethylmercury product. Mercury in general may be a neurotoxin, but it’s in its methylmercury form that it does its damage—and only in particular concentrations. The quantity of ethylmercury that was once in vaccines was so small that it was actually within acceptable limits for the more toxic, methyl form—but it wasn’t even in that methyl form to begin with.

Kennedy, more than most anti-vaxxers, really ought to know better. In his long career as a climate crusader he has had to answer the febrile claims from the denialists that the whole threat of global warming is a conspiracy cooked up by “grant-grubbing scientists” and liberal politicians looking to expand the role of government. Yet when it comes to vaccines, he clangs the same loony-tune bells. As long ago as 2005, he published an anti-vax article in Rolling Stone claiming to reveal how “how government health agencies colluded with Big Pharma to hide the risks of thimerosal from the public.” And Keith Kloor, the author of a new Washington Post Magazine profile of Kennedy, reports that last year, in response to a story he wrote on the Discover magazine website labeling this kind of thinking as the nonsense that it is, Kennedy called him up and said bluntly, “I’m trying to figure out whether you are a shill for Big Pharma.”

The worst—and the least explicable—thing about Kennedy and his new cause is the company he keeps. His book is being put out by Skyhorse Publishing—an outfit that also includes the disgraced Andrew Wakefield in its stable of authors. Wakefield is the U.K. investigator whose fraudulent 1998 paper purporting to link autism to the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine set off the entire anti-vaccine wildfire. In 2010, The Lancet formally withdrew the 1998 paper and Wakefield has since been banned from practicing medicine in the U.K. And as for the company Wakefield himself keeps? The foreword to his book was written by Jenny McCarthy.

Kennedy may deeply believe the rubbish he’s peddling—but science doesn’t care about your sincerity; it cares about the facts. That doesn’t mean he’s not in a position to do real harm. Like McCarthy, he has a big soapbox and a loud bullhorn, and every parent he frightens into skipping vaccinations means one more child who is in danger.

In the Washington Post profile, Kennedy complains about the trouble he’s having getting his anti-vaccine message across. “I’m completely f***ing alone on this,” he gripes. Well, good. He deserves to be alone, and if fewer people than he hoped are listening to him, that’s a positive sign.

TIME HIV

Researchers Find New Way to Kick Out HIV From Infected Cells

Scanning electron micrograph of HIV-1
Scanning electron micrograph of HIV-1 Getty Images

The technique addresses the problem of hidden reservoirs of HIV in the body, and could herald a new way of battling the viral infection

Once HIV invades the body, it doesn’t want to leave. Every strategy that scientists have developed or are developing so far to fight the virus – from powerful anti-HIV drugs to promising vaccines that target it – suffers from the same weakness. None can ferret out every last virus in the body, and HIV has a tendency to hide out, remaining inert for years, until it flares up again to cause disease.

None, that is, until now. Kamel Khalili, director of the Comprehensive NeuroAIDS Center at Temple University School of Medicine, and his colleagues took advantage of a new gene editing technique to splice the virus out of the cells they infected – essentially returning them to their pre-infection state. The strategy relies on detecting and binding HIV-related genetic material, and therefore represents the first anti-HIV platform that could find even the dormant virus sequestered in immune cells.

MORE: Treatment as Prevention: How the New Way to Control HIV Came to Be

Even more encouraging, they also used the system to arm healthy cells from getting infected in the first place, by building genetic blockades that bounced off HIV’s genetic material. “It’s what we call a sterilizing cure,” says Khalili.

His work was done on human cells infected with HIV in cell culture, but, he believes the results are robust enough to move into animal trials and eventually into testing the idea in human patients.

The key to the strategy is the gene editing technique known as CRISPR, a way of precisely cutting DNA at pre-specified locations. CRISPR acts as a customizable pair of molecular scissors that can be programmed to find certain sequences of DNA and then, using an enzyme, make cuts at those locations. Because HIV is a retrovirus, its genetic material comes in the form of RNA; the virus co-opts a host cell’s genetic machinery to transform that RNA into DNA, which it then inserts into the cell’s genome. HIV’s genes, which it needs to survive, then get churned out by the cell.

MORE: David Ho: The Man Who Could Beat AIDS

Khalili designed a CRISPR that recognized the beginning and end of HIV’s DNA contribution, and then watched as the enzyme snipped out HIV from the cell’s genome. “I’ve been working with HIV almost since day 1 [of the epidemic] and we have developed a number of molecules that can suppress transcription or diminish replication of the virus. But I have never seen this level or eradication,” he says. “When you remove the viral genes from the chromosomes, basically you convert the cells to their pre-infection state.”

The advantage of the system lies in the fact that CRISPR can recognize viral genes wherever they are – in infected cells that are actively dividing, and in infected cells in which the virus is dormant. Current drug-based strategies can only target cells that are actively dividing and releasing more HIV, which is why they often lead to periods of undetectable virus but then cause levels of HIV to rise again. That’s the case with the Mississippi baby, who was born HIV positive and given powerful anti-HIV drugs hours after birth and appeared to be functionally cured of HIV when the virus couldn’t be detected for nearly four years, but then returned.

MORE: Rethinking HIV: After Five Years of Debate, a New Push for Prevention

Khalili admits that more work needs to be done to validate the strategy, and ensure that it’s safe. But it’s the start, he says, of a potential strategy for eradicating the virus from infected individuals. That may involve excising the virus as well as bombarding it with anti-HIV drugs. “We can get into cells, eradicate the viral genome, and that’s it,” he says.

TIME Health Care

Johns Hopkins to Pay $190 Million to Victims of Secretly Recorded Exams

A sign stands in front of part of the Johns Hopkins Hospital complex on July 8, 2014, in Baltimore.
A sign stands in front of part of the Johns Hopkins Hospital complex on July 8, 2014, in Baltimore. Patrick Semansky—AP

A male gynecologist secretly filmed and took pictures during exams with female patients

Johns Hopkins Hospital announced on Monday that it reached a $190 million settlement with patients whose exams were secretly recorded by a gynecologist.

The class-action lawsuit involved more than 8,000 former patients of Dr. Nikita Levy, the Associated Press reports, and the deal marks one of the largest involving sexual misconduct by a doctor. Most of the discovered videos and photographs—about 1,200 videos and 140 photos—did not include the women’s faces and were taken with a pen-like camera he wore around his neck.

The case never led to criminal charges but essentially argued that Johns Hopkins should have been aware of what the doctor was doing. Levy committed suicide 10 days after he was fired in February 2013, which occurred after an employee came forward with suspicions.

Johns Hopkins released a statement in October on the discovery of Levy’s “misconduct and breach of trust,” writing: “We have redoubled our efforts to ensure that all of us in the Johns Hopkins community understand our responsibility, and we want to encourage you to speak up if you have any concerns about patient care or privacy.”

In a statement sent to reporters, Jonathan Schochor, the lawsuit’s lead attorney, said: “When learning of Dr. Levy’s behavior, our clients were extremely distraught. They felt a great breach of faith and trust. They felt betrayed. Now, with this proposed settlement, we can begin the process of healing our community.”

The settlement still needs final approval by a judge, the AP reports.

“We assure you that one individual does not define Johns Hopkins,” the hospital system said on Monday, acknowledging the settlement. “Johns Hopkins is defined by the tens of thousands of employees who come to work determined to provide world-class care for our patients and their families.”

TIME Education

School Administrators: Kids Like Healthy Lunches Just Fine

150968856
Female student carrying tray in cafeteria Tetra Images—Getty Images/Brand X

According to a new survey published in the Childhood Obesity journal

As the battle rages on over whether or not to scrap healthier options in public school lunch, a new survey suggests students actually like the nutritional meals they’re being offered. Well, at least they like it enough to keep from complaining to school administrators about it.

Last school year, administrators reported students started off complaining about the healthier take on lunch, after the USDA introduced new standards in 2012 that called for a reduction in sugar, sodium and fat in meals and the addition of more whole grains, vegetables, and fruit in an effort to confront childhood obesity.

But most had come around by the spring, they reported in a new study backed by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Now, around 70% of elementary school students “generally like the new lunch,” they said. Middle and high school administrators reported similar reactions, with 70% and 63% of students “generally” liking the new lunches, respectively.

Schools also report few drop-offs in school lunch participation with the advent of the new standards. About 64.6% of elementary schools said “about the same” number of students purchased school lunches last school year, compared to the year before.

“The updated meals standards are resulting in healthier meals for tens of millions of kids,” said Lindsey Turner, lead author of the first study, and co-investigator for Bridging the Gap, a research program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), which funded the study in a statement. “Our studies show that kids are okay with these changes, and that there have not been widespread challenges with kids not buying or eating the meals.”

Yet, according to the new survey to be published in an upcoming issue of the Childhood Obesity journal, high school students and students in rural schools have been more reluctant to accept the changes. About 25% of middle and high school administrators reported noticing “a little more” plate waste during the 2012-2013 school year, while 16% of middle schools and 20% of high schools reported noticing “much more” waste.

Administrators at rural schools also reported more plate waste and more complaints than their urban counterparts, which is troubling given the higher rates of obesity among youth in rural areas. But among poor urban youth, the researchers found higher rates of consumption and more meal purchases—suggesting those kids opting out of the school lunch program are those who can afford to eat elsewhere.

“It is possible that widespread implementation of national policy has been effective for improving the diets of socioeconomically disadvantaged children,” said the study’s authors, “but more research is needed to understand the effect of changes in the meal standards on children’s participation and dietary intake.”

There has been much debate over the Department of Agriculture’s updated school nutrition standards this year. In fact, Monday’s survey results stand in contrast to a recent USDA report that showed about 1 million fewer students chose to eat school meals every day during the 2012-2013 school year. The School Nutrition Association, a long time supporter of healthy options for kids, rolled back some of its support earlier this year due to the burden the standards place on already cash-strapped schools.

In May, House Republicans ok’d a spending bill that would allow schools to opt out of following the healthy school rules, which pump up the amount of fruit, vegetables, and whole grains served to kids at school while reducing fat, sugar, and sodium. But champions of the standards, including First Lady Michelle Obama, argue rolling back the standards would be a bad choice for kids.

In a statement Monday, the School Nutrition Association said the survey’s “perceptions about school meals do not reflect reality.”

“More kids aren’t buying lunches,” Diane Pratt-Heavner, spokesperson for the School Nutrition Association, tells TIME.

TIME Diet/Nutrition

Eat Umami, Eat Less

Calories count when it comes to weight, but taste may play a role as well.

If you’re feeling unsatisfied after a meal, perhaps wasn’t flavorful enough. A new study suggests that the taste umami may actually make you feel more full and satisfied.

Umami, a hard-to-describe flavor that tilts toward the savory, is considered the “fifth taste” after salty, sweet, sour and bitter. Long used in Japanese cooking, umami is actually glutamate, once it’s broken down by cooking a steak, for example, or by fermenting things like cheese and soy. For a quick dash of umami, cooks have turned to monosodium glutamate (MSG), a flavor enhancer that’s added to soups and other foods. Now a new study published in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, suggests that MSG can make food more appetizing and therefore help diners feel more full.

The researchers asked 27 participants to eat the same breakfast, then some ate a high-protein soup with an MSG-enzyme combination while other had soup without the pairing. Everyone then sat down for an identical lunch, and the scientists tracked how much the volunteers ate as well as asked them questions about their appetite and how full they felt. The diners who ate the MSG-laced soup consumed less of their lunch, but still say they felt satisfied, suggesting that umami may have a role in regulating eating.

It’s not the first taste linked to appetite — peppers and spicy foods, for example, have been associated with eating less. It’s not exactly clear how the flavors affect appetite — they may work in different ways — but the growing research suggests that how much you eat may be affected by which taste buds the food activates.

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser