Talk:Modified starch

A fact from Modified starch appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 October 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that modified starch is added to processed frozen foods to prevent them from dripping when defrosted?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/October.

Wikipedia

Food and drink

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Chemistry Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Why?[edit]

why do they want to modify it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.221.226 (talk • contribs)

Starches are modified for a number of reasons. Starches may be modified to increase their stability against excessive heat, acid, and freezing; also to change their texture, and to lengthen or shorten gelatization time. I'll add this info to the article. —Pengo ^{talk · contribs} 23:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Health effects?[edit]

In my experience, any natural substance that's 'modified' or 'enriched' really reduces the likelihood that it's good for you, not to mention the taste. Any word yet from the science-types on what modified starch will do to you over the long term? -- Chris 15:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, I believe, the modified versions of starch would also be found in nature, and it's hard to imagine glucose chains being harmful. However having starch listed as an ingredient (whether modified or not) is probably a good indication you're not eating a wholefood, which may be considered healthier for non-reductionists. —Pengo ^{talk · contribs} 12:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the starch is modified with Nitric Acid, Bleach or who knows whatever generally foreign and/or toxic agent (it seems the book is completely open on that), it's simply false to claim those substances do not exist in the final product. Furthermore, with the FDA recently saying that High Fructose Corn Syrup is not "natural" ( http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/news/ng.asp?n=84404-fcs-natural ) for similar reasons, suspicions ought to be rightly heaped upon such inorganic and highly unnatural processes. Surely modified food starch is not "natural" if HFCS isn't, likewise arguably for bleached flour, Hydrogenated Oils, Olestra, and countless other dietary nasties. The term "natural" has become so co-opted by U.S. industry in recent years, and few consumers realize that it holds essentially no real meaning in a legal sense. If consumers and the public in general had even a cursory understanding of what some of these so-called innocuous, "natural" ingredients are and contain, there would likely be a swift trend away from the use of such ingredients. To call these products "natural," and to (experimentally) introduce low levels of known poisons or carcinogens into the food supply of enormous populations of unknowing people is patently unethical. Such societal trends ought to be noted, discussed, and acted upon - food (and what's in it) is one thing that people still have the ability to produce autonomously for themselves and for their families and communities. Food sovereignty and Organic Food are relevant in the discussion of such additive ingredients. 98.164.98.31 (talk) 00:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to know if modified food starch is gluten-free or not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.163.112.46 (talk) 19:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the modified starch is high quality (no residues), then you can say that modified starch (E1401) is one of the safest food additives. starch is glucose units linked to each other (many chains), so it is quite harmless (unless you have diabetes). modified starch is when you break some of these chains. two problems could happen:

The purification of starch from corn (one of the largest sources) is not efficient (now unlikely) that some of the gluten is present in the resulting starch.
If they use nitric acid in the modification process, that would lead to the formation of nitrates during neutralization. Nitrates are very toxic. I don't think manufacturers are using nitric acid, they are probably using HCl which is very safe (results in common salt).--Alnokta (talk) 20:10, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the health effects of modified starch, I would ask what it's made from since Coeliac UK recommends that it be avoided. Could gluten be one of the starches that are modified? Sheogorath 62.231.136.1 (talk) 21:32, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, what? Alnokta said: The purification of starch from corn (one of the largest sources) is not efficient (now unlikely) that some of the gluten is present in the resulting starch. You do know that corn isn't a gluten grain, right? Sheogorath 149.254.180.237 (talk) 04:00, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Contents?[edit]

What does modified starch actually contain - where does the original starch come from? Specifically, does it have vegetable or animal origins? --72.190.110.84 17:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, starch is always from plant origins. —Pengo 22:29, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photo?[edit]

What kind of photo subject would best illustrate this article? Modified food starch is a white powder. A picture of a package (or pile) of powder seems inapt. I have a bag of it, but hesitate to post a photo of just the powder or even the bag full of powder. Any ideas? Geoff ^T ^C 17:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I went and uploaded a photo of the exciting (not!) bag of modified starch and removed the reqphoto tag. If another editor has a better photo, be my guest to replace it here and in Commons! Geoff ^T ^C 00:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can think of two kinds of images that might work better than a bag of white powder: A schematic chemical structure, showing linked sugar units and perhaps even what it means (at the molecular level) for the starch to be "pre-gelatinized" or otherwise "modified", or a photo of some preparation of modified food starch running off a spoon to show the texture. —Keenan Pepper 19:34, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Terrific ideas! Go for it! Geoff ^T ^C 18:52, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Undid the photo deletion because it serves as a placeholder pending an editor's replacing it with something better. Is a commercially labeled bag of powder any better for illustrative purposes? Or a pile of white powder? I liked Keenan Pepper's ideas and would love to see them executed. Geoff ^{Who, me?} 14:08, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging[edit]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 17:42, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese translations of the term are based on the following.....[edit]

--222.64.222.138 (talk) 05:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.cqagri.gov.cn/detail.asp?pubID=84793

--222.64.222.138 (talk) 06:00, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean the dead interwiki link to zh:变性淀粉? Since that page does not exist on zh.Wikipedia, I have removed the link to the chinese language page for the time being. See WP:IL#Links to pages that do not exist for information on when and how such links should be added.

Also, when providing external links to pages in a language other than English, it is a good idea to warn people. For example, you could easily attach "(in Chinese)" to each of the above links. Astronaut (talk) 10:45, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ref section needs to be closely examined and ......[edit]

it is up to ISO 690 panelles to administrate it --222.64.223.252 (talk) 01:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you mean panels? I doubt anyone from ISO will edit this page in an official capacity, though I suppose someone there might happen to be a Wikipedia editor. Astronaut (talk) 02:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]