[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Try It For 5 Days! - The Most EFFICIENT Way To LOSE FAT

Number Of US Student Visas Issued To Asians Tumbles

Range than U.S HIMARS, Russia Unveils New Variant of 300mm Rocket Launcher on KamAZ-63501 Chassis

Keir Starmer’s Hidden Past: The Cases Nobody Talks About

BRICS Bombshell! Putin & China just DESTROYED the U.S. Dollar with this gold move

Clashes, arrests as tens of thousands protest flood-control corruption in Philippines

The death of Yu Menglong: Political scandal in China (Homo Rape & murder of Actor)

The Pacific Plate Is CRACKING: A Massive Geological Disaster Is Unfolding!

Waste Of The Day: Veterans' Hospital Equipment Is Missing

The Earth Has Been Shaken By 466,742 Earthquakes So Far In 2025

LadyX

Half of the US secret service and every gov't three letter agency wants Trump dead. Tomorrow should be a good show

1963 Chrysler Turbine

3I/ATLAS is Beginning to Reveal What it Truly Is

Deep Intel on the Damning New F-35 Report

CONFIRMED “A 757 did NOT hit the Pentagon on 9/11” says Military witnesses on the scene

NEW: Armed man detained at site of Kirk memorial: Report

$200 Silver Is "VERY ATTAINABLE In Coming Rush" Here's Why - Mike Maloney

Trump’s Project 2025 and Big Tech could put 30% of jobs at risk by 2030

Brigitte Macron is going all the way to a U.S. court to prove she’s actually a woman

China's 'Rocket Artillery 360 Mile Range 990 Pound Warhead

FED's $3.5 Billion Gold Margin Call

France Riots: Battle On Streets Of Paris Intensifies After Macron’s New Move Sparks Renewed Violence

Saudi Arabia Pakistan Defence pact agreement explained | Geopolitical Analysis

Fooling Us Badly With Psyops

The Nobel Prize That Proved Einstein Wrong

Put Castor Oil Here Before Bed – The Results After 7 Days Are Shocking

Sounds Like They're Trying to Get Ghislaine Maxwell out of Prison

Mississippi declared a public health emergency over its infant mortality rate (guess why)

Andy Ngo: ANTIFA is a terrorist organization & Trump will need a lot of help to stop them


Health
See other Health Articles

Title: MSG Causes Obesity, Hides
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.rense.com/general88/msg.htm
Published: Dec 4, 2009
Author: Staff
Post Date: 2009-12-04 11:43:41 by Horse
Keywords: None
Views: 2248
Comments: 88

MSG hides behind 25 or more names, such as "Natural Flavoring". MSG is even in your favourite coffee from Tim Horton's and Starbucks coffee shops.

I wondered if there could be an actual chemical causing the massive obesity epidemic, and so did a friend of mine, John Erb. He was a research assistant at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada, and spent years working for the government. He made an amazing discovery while going through scientific journals for a book he was writing called "The Slow Poisoning of America".

In hundreds of studies around the world, scientists were creating obese mice and rats to use in diet or diabetes test studies. No strain of rat or mice is naturally obese, so scientists have to create them. They make these creatures morbidly obese by injecting them with MSG when they are first born.

The MSG triples the amount of insulin the pancreas creates, causing rats (and perhaps humans) to become obese. They even have a name for the fat rodents they create: 'MSG-Treated Rats.'

When I heard this, I was shocked. I went into my kitchen and checked the cupboards and the refrigerator. MSG was in everything -- the Campbell's soups, the Hostess Doritos, the Lays flavoured potato chips, Top Ramen, Betty Crocker Hamburger Helper, Heinz canned gravy, Swanson frozen prepared meals, and Kraft salad dressings, especially the 'healthy low-fat' ones. The items that didn't have MSG marked on the product label had something called 'Hydrolysed Vegetable Protein,' which is just another name for Monosodium Glutamate. It was shocking to see just how many of the foods we feed our children everyday are filled with this stuff. MSG is hidden under many different names in order to fool those who read the ingredient list, so that they don't catch on. (Other names for MSG are 'Accent, 'Aginomoto, 'Natural Meat Tenderiser,' etc.) But it didn't stop there.

When our family went out to eat, we started asking at the restaurants what menu items contained MSG. Many employees, even the managers, swore they didn't use MSG. But when we ask for the ingredient list, which they grudgingly provided, sure enough, MSG and Hydrolysed Vegetable Protein were everywhere.

Burger King, McDonald's, Wendy's, Taco Bell, every restaurant -- even the sit-down eateries like TGIF, Chili's, Applebee's, and Denny's -- use MSG in abundance. Kentucky Fried Chicken seemed to be the WORST offender: MSG was in every chicken dish, salad dressing and gravy. No wonder I loved to eat that coating on the skin -- their secret spice was MSG!

So why is MSG in so many of the foods we eat? Is it a preservative, or a vitamin?

Not according to my friend John Erb. In his book "The Slow Poisoning of America", he said that MSG is added to food for the addictive effect it has on the human body.

Even the propaganda website sponsored by the food manufacturers lobby group supporting MSG explains that the reason they add it to food is to make people eat more.

A study of the elderly showed that older people eat more of the foods that it is added to. The Glutamate Association lobbying group says eating more is a benefit to the elderly, but what does it do to the rest of us?

'Betcha can't eat [just] one,' takes on a whole new meaning where MSG is concerned! And we wonder why the nation is overweight!

MSG manufacturers themselves admit that it addicts people to their products. It makes people choose their product over others, and makes people eat more of it than they would if MSG wasn't added. Not only is MSG scientifically proven to cause obesity, it is an addictive substance.

Since its introduction into the American food supply fifty years ago, MSG has been added in larger and larger doses to the pre-packaged meals, soups, snacks, and fast foods we are tempted to eat everyday.

The FDA has set no limits on how much of it can be added to food. They claim it's safe to eat in any amount. But how can they claim it's safe when there are hundreds of scientific studies with titles like these: ''The monosodium glutamate (MSG) obese rat as a model for the study of exercise in obesity.'' Gobatto CA, Mello MA, Souza CT, Ribeiro IA. Res Commun Mol Pathol Pharmacol. 2002.

''Adrenalectomy abolishes the food-induced hypothalamic serotonin release in both normal and monosodium glutamate-obese rats.'' Guimaraes RB, Telles MM, Coelho VB, Mori C, Nascimento CM, Ribeiro. Brain Res Bull. 2002 Aug.

''Obesity induced by neonatal monosodium glutamate treatment in spontaneously hypertensive rats: An animal model of multiple risk factors." Iwase M, Yamamoto M, Iino K, Apparatchik K, Maraschinos N, Seminarians Fujishima Hyper tens Res. 1998 Mar.

''Hypothalamic lesion induced by injection of monosodium glutamate in suckling period and subsequent development of obesity.'' Tanaka K, Chimaera M, Nakamura K Kusunoki. Exp Neural. 1978 Oct.

(Hypothalamic dysfunction is a problem with the region of the brain called the hypothalamus, which helps control the pituitary gland and regulate many body functions, particularly in response to stress. The pituitary, in turn, controls the:

*Adrenal glands,

*Ovaries

*Testes

*Thyroid gland

No, the date of that last study was not a typo; it was published in 1978. Both the ''medical research community'' and ''food manufacturers'' have known about the side effects of MSG for decades.

Many more of the studies mentioned in John Erb's book link MSG to diabetes, migraines and headaches, autism, ADHD, and even Alzheimer's. So what can we do to stop the food manufactures from dumping this fattening and addictive MSG into our food supply and causing the obesity epidemic we now see?

Several months ago, John Erb took his book and his concerns to one of the highest government health officials in Canada. While he was sitting in the government office, the official told him, 'Sure, I know how bad MSG is. I wouldn't touch the stuff.' But this top-level government official refuses to tell the public what he knows.

The big media doesn't want to tell the public either, fearing issues with their advertisers. It seems that the fallout on the fast food industry may hurt their profit margin. The food producers and restaurants have been addicting us to their products for years, and now we are paying the price for it. Our children should not be cursed with obesity caused by an addictive food additive.

But what can I do about it? I'm just one voice! What can I do to stop the poisoning of our children, while our governments are insuring financial protection for the industry that is poisoning us?

This message is going out to everyone I know in an attempt to tell you the truth that the corporate-owned politicians and media won't tell you.

The best way you can help to save yourself and your children from this drug-induced epidemic is to forward this article to everyone. With any luck, it will circle the globe before politicians can pass the legislation protecting those who are poisoning us.

The food industry learned a lot from the tobacco industry. Imagine if big tobacco had a bill like this in place before someone blew the whistle on nicotine?

If you are one of the few who can still believe that MSG is good for us and you don't believe what John Erb has to say, see for yourself. Go to the National Library of Medicine at www.pubmed.com. Type in the words 'MSG Obese' and read a few of the 115 medical studies that appear.

We the public do not want to be rats in one giant experiment, and we do not approve of food that makes us into a nation of obese, lethargic, addicted sheep, feeding the food industry's bottom line while waiting for the heart transplant, the diabetic induced amputation, blindness, or other obesity-induced, life-threatening disorders.

With your help we can put an end to this poison. Do your part in sending this message out by word of mouth, e-mail, or by distribution of this printout to your friends all over the world and stop this 'Slow Poisoning of Mankind' by the packaged food industry.

Blowing the whistle on MSG is our responsibility, so get the word out.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 70.

#2. To: Horse (#0)

A study of the elderly showed that older people eat more of the foods that it is added to. The Glutamate Association lobbying group says eating more is a benefit to the elderly, but what does it do to the rest of us?

If this is as detailed as the "so called study got", then it is criminal junk-science. There is no mention of the subject's real ages. Also, weight gain and weight loss can radically shift either way for a number of reasons, such as illness and medicine.

Also, the other study mentioned, the one taken in 1978, is over three decades out of date.

Monosodium glutamate (MSG) back then was made from "wheat gluten", now MSG is made from bacterial fermentation. So the 1978 study is invalidated as well.

The people pushing these studies are just like the people pushing the fake global warning studies.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-04   12:02:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: PaulCJ (#2)

Ever consider the fact that if it were good for you, companies wouldn't bother trying to hide the fact they put it in their product?

It IS a toxic substance, causes serotonin imbalances (gee, I wonder why there are so many people who need anti-depressants today), and adrenal gland disorders, besides making you eat like a pig.

Yeah, great stuff. Go chow down at KFC dude, just go buy some private health insurance so that the rest of us won't need to pay your doctor and hospital bills when the inevitable happens.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-12-04   14:51:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: FormerLurker (#13)

1. Ever consider the fact that if it were good for you, companies wouldn't bother trying to hide the fact they put it in their product?

2. It IS a toxic substance, causes serotonin imbalances

1. I view it as negligence on their part. I am more concerned with the agendas of those who fund and do these studies.

2. At what amount per day?

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-04   20:43:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: PaulCJ (#16)

1. I view it as negligence on their part. I am more concerned with the agendas of those who fund and do these studies.

Willfully renaming an "ingredient" in order to trick people into thinking that ingredient is not in the product is not negligence, it's willful deceipt.

And why are you so worried that there are legitimate researchers out there who are trying to alert the public to dangers in our food supply? Why aren't you worried about the fact there are unscrupulous people out there who don't give a rat's ass about your health, where their only concern is their profit margin?

2. At what amount per day?

Who knows, but since it's in practically everything most people eat, I'm sure the threshold for harm is reached by many on a daily basis.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-12-05   21:37:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: FormerLurker (#17)

And why are you so worried that there are legitimate researchers out there who are trying to alert the public to dangers in our food supply?

Because "studies" are the foundation for tyranny caused by government. Most of the government regulations that deny us are freedoms were started by creating "studies" to justify such tyranny.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-05   21:43:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: PaulCJ (#18)

Tell me, what benefit for the consumer is there by companies spiking their food with MSG? It's not a nutrient, nor is it necessary. So then, why do you vehemiently defend the practice of putting it in foods, where consumers are largely unaware it's even there?

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-12-06   12:36:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: FormerLurker (#20)

Tell me, why do you support studies created by those who support tyranny?

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-06   12:50:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: PaulCJ (#22)

Tell me, why do you support studies created by those who support tyranny?

So you're trying to say those who oppose corrupt industry practices and perform scientific analysis proving that a substance is harmful (a substance which is NOT even supposed to be in food in the first place), that they somehow support tyranny?

I guess perhaps you have a different notion of what tyranny is, sort of an Orwellian perspective. Corrupt corporate entities poisoning us is freedom, informing the public of the fact it is happening equates to tyranny, according to you.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-12-06   16:29:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: FormerLurker (#30)

So you're trying to say those who oppose corrupt industry practices and perform scientific analysis proving that a substance is harmful (a substance which is NOT even supposed to be in food in the first place), that they somehow support tyranny?

And thirty years later, those studies will have been discredited, just like the studies three decades ago that got DDT banned were finally discredited.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-06   16:44:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: PaulCJ (#31)

And thirty years later, those studies will have been discredited, just like the studies three decades ago that got DDT banned were finally discredited.

Tell me Paul, why do YOU want ME and my FAMILY to eat MSG?

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-12-06   17:14:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: FormerLurker (#34)

Tell me Paul, why do YOU want ME and my FAMILY to eat MSG?

I could care less what you and your family it.

Though, government will likely someday demand people only eat tofu and soybean products at the rate the tyranny is going.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-06   20:40:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: PaulCJ (#42)

I could care less what you and your family it.

Then why are you siding with those who slip it into most foods, where it's virtually impossible NOT to eat it?

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-12-07   7:53:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: FormerLurker (#44)

Why do you support using "safety" for justification for tyranny by government?

Come on, admit it, you want government to ban anything you don't like.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-07   12:14:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: PaulCJ (#45)

Why do you support using "safety" for justification for tyranny by government?

Come on, admit it, you want government to ban anything you don't like.

Why do you support fascist who poison the US population in order to enrich themselves? You support tyranny as long as the rich get richer, yet scold those who try to alert people to the fact they're being poisoned for profit.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-12-07   13:11:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: FormerLurker (#46)

Why do you support fascist who poison the US population in order to enrich themselves?

Because they are not fascists. They are not forcing you to eat their products. And there is a large enough variety of food products you can get that does not have any additives.

You on the other hand support the studies that lead to tyranny, where government DEMANDS you do something it wants, there is not choices, no variety, you do what it wants or you go to jail, or worse. That is the fascism YOU SUPPORT!!!

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-07   13:57:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: PaulCJ (#48)

You on the other hand support the studies that lead to tyranny, where government DEMANDS you do something it wants, there is not choices, no variety, you do what it wants or you go to jail, or worse. That is the fascism YOU SUPPORT!!!

How many people do you think actually WANT MSG in their food? Feel free to go buy some and slather it all over your fucking meal dude, but DON'T toss it into my food without ASKING me if I want it there.

YOU support those who FORCE people to eat shit they don't want.

FormerLurker  posted on  2009-12-07   14:54:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: FormerLurker (#50)

1. How many people do you think actually WANT MSG in their food?

2. YOU support those who FORCE people to eat shit they don't want.

1. How many people do you think actually WANT GOVERNMENT in their IN THEIR LIVES? Government forces them by telling them what to eat, where to work, who to talk too. This is the type of fascist these studies create, the studies you support.

2. And how are companies forcing people to eat their products?

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-07   16:21:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: PaulCJ (#51)

2. And how are companies forcing people to eat their products?

By not labeling their GMO products as such. People should have a choice to eat it or not, but you have no choice when you do not know. This happens because the EPA and the FDA are filled with Monsanto executives who waltz from one side to the other for the benefit of Monasanto and not the people. Government is forcing GMO products on the people by doing the bidding of the corporations.

There is no distinction between the corporation and the government these days Paul. Slow creep to fascism, but we have arrived. You might have a point if the government wasn't filled with corporate execs and lobbyists who rarely implement any regulation on the side of the people.

How many people do you actually think want DDT in their lives?

abraxas  posted on  2009-12-07   16:33:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: abraxas (#52)

How many people do you actually think want DDT in their lives?

To prevent deaths from insect caused diseases.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-07   16:47:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: PaulCJ (#53)

To prevent deaths from insect caused diseases.

Why do you think that DDT is the only option for irradication? This was true when it hit the market in WWII, but that isn't true today.

abraxas  posted on  2009-12-07   17:35:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: abraxas (#54) (Edited)

Why do you think that DDT is the only option for irradication?

It is the safest option. You on the other hand support going back to the stone age, except for yourself.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-07   17:57:12 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: PaulCJ (#55)

FYI Paul: The evolution of resistance to DDT in mosquitoes has greatly reduced its effectiveness in many parts of the world, and current WHO guidelines require that before the chemical is used in an area, susceptibility of local mosquitoes to DDT must be confirmed.

It's been 50 years since DDT was used extensively and deemed the best form of irradiction of mosquitos, especially since mosquitos have EVOLVED in the same manner that effective irradication has evolved from extensive DDT usage.

abraxas  posted on  2009-12-07   18:14:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: abraxas (#58)

The evolution of resistance to DDT in mosquitoes has greatly reduced its effectiveness in many parts of the world, and current WHO guidelines require that before the chemical is used in an area, susceptibility of local mosquitoes to DDT must be confirmed.

Just more BS by environmentalists.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-07   18:28:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: PaulCJ (#60)

Just more BS by environmentalists.

For crying out loud, Paul, the ineffetiveness and resistance to DDT was first reported in 1956.

Resistance was noted early in spray campaigns, with Paul Russell, a former head of the Allied Anti-Malaria campaign, observing in 1956 that eradication programs had to be wary of relying on DDT for too long as "resistance has appeared after six or seven years."

NOTE SOURCE: Allied Anti-Milaria campaign.

I've noted that you haven't coughed up one bit of date to substantiate your claims, Paul.

abraxas  posted on  2009-12-07   18:33:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: abraxas (#61)

For crying out loud, Paul, the ineffetiveness and resistance to DDT was first reported in 1956.

It was banned on a pack of lies (thinning of bird eggshells). And not the reasons you stated, which means the reasons you state, which means those reasons are not true.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-07   18:54:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: PaulCJ (#62)

It was banned on a pack of lies (thinning of bird eggshells). And not the reasons you stated, which means the reasons you state, which means those reasons are not true.

Paul, I am giving you the information on DDT that is necessary for you to understand that it isn't as effective as you claim it to be. BTW, not one shred of evidence regarding effectiveness for ag usage or as an insecticide have you offered--not one.

When the resistance was first noted, back in 1956, there was no Rachel Carson or environmentalists on the scene. Despite this noted resistance, DDT use continued up to the peak of using 82,000 tons per year in 1963.

I don't think you even realize that the massive overuse of DDT in agriculture is what led to the mosquito mutations and resistance.

FYI: As early as the 1940s, scientists in the U.S. had begun expressing concern over possible hazards associated with DDT, and in the 1950s the government began tightening some of the regulations governing its use.

This was before the environmentalists and Rachel Carson were around. Were you aware of this information, Paul?

What pack of lies Paul? There is a large body of evidence that you are completely unaware of that begins in the 1940's, long before Carson came on the scene and, to be honest, I don't know a lot about her claims or research. What I do know is that regulation and concern began in the 1940's.

I've verified all of my facts, Paul. Why don't you do the same? You keep making these outlandish statments and opinions that are far removed from any facts about DDT.

abraxas  posted on  2009-12-07   19:10:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: abraxas (#63)

Paul, I am giving you the information on DDT that is necessary for you to understand that it isn't as effective as you claim it to be.

You are not hearing me. Those were not the reasons DDT were banned.

You on the other hand keep coming up one with false reason after another to oppose DDT. The reason, it worked and because it worked, it against the plans of the enviro-fascism pushed by governments and elitists.

Today, the EPA is going to start restricting levels of CO2. This logically will lead to the genocide of the people, because human exhale CO2.

All of this fascism is based on lies.

PaulCJ  posted on  2009-12-07   19:27:46 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: PaulCJ (#64)

Those were not the reasons DDT were banned.

Those are the salient points that concern your argument.

I have given you no false reasons, merely facts about DDT. It worked initially because the mosquitos hadn't built resistence. I've even offered you commentary from Allied Anti Malaria dating back to 1956 that resistence was evident then, yet you claim, without any evidence to the contrary, that this isn't true.

If DDT was so great and safe and effective, why did the goobermint begin restricting usage in the 1950's? Why were scientists putting up red flags regarding usage in the 1940's? Why do you ignore everything prior to Rachel Carson? Do you realize that Rachel Carson never pushed for a ban on DDT? She was a non-fiction author who wrote a story.

BTW: DDT resistant mosquitoes have generally proved susceptible to pyrethroids, an alternative to DDT.

abraxas  posted on  2009-12-07   19:39:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#70. To: abraxas, PaulCJ (#66)

BTW: DDT resistant mosquitoes have generally proved susceptible to pyrethroids, an alternative to DDT.

And they do not develop resistance to pyrethin based insecticides because it works mechanically plugging up bodily orofices. Just as Iron Phospate, non-toxic to humans and larger mammals, kills slugs deader than a doornail without adding poisons to the environment.

The entire Petro-chemical based Insecticide business is built upon old science continued by fraud and failure to research and produce less toxic natural substitutes.

Original_Intent  posted on  2009-12-07   19:46:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 70.

#75. To: Original_Intent (#70)

And they do not develop resistance to pyrethin based insecticides because it works mechanically plugging up bodily orofices. Just as Iron Phospate, non-toxic to humans and larger mammals, kills slugs deader than a doornail without adding poisons to the environment.

I use diatomaceous earth on some of my critters. Insects rarely develop a resistance to that either.

mininggold  posted on  2009-12-07 21:12:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 70.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]