DEAR DR. BLONZ: I recently watched a video on YouTube saying that the pasteurization process destroys critical enzymes needed to assimilate calcium from milk. Do you have any information as to whether this is true? -- E.B., Puma, Ariz.

DEAR E.B.: There are enzymes in raw (unpasteurized) milk, and some are indeed destroyed by the process of pasteurization. The question, though, is whether these enzymes are essential for the assimilation, or absorption, of the calcium in milk. The answer here is no -- or at least it has never been demonstrated in any study I have been able to find.

The enzymes in raw milk -- and there are a number of them -- come either from the cow or from bacteria that might be present. One of the main cow enzymes in milk, for example, is called plasmin. It is a protein-digesting enzyme that, if left to act, will eventually degrade the milk protein, leading to clumping and the development of "off" flavors and odors.

Please understand that while the pasteurization of milk does not make it a sterile product, it does help destroy potentially harmful microorganisms that can cause spoilage or disease. It does this by knocking out some, but not all, of the enzymes and bacteria. Pasteurized milk still needs to be refrigerated because the cold serves to slow bacterial growth and enzymatic action. All this explains why milk goes bad if it is allowed to sit too long or is stored at the wrong temperature. The storage time of milk can be extended if the milk product is processed with a higher temperature (ultra-pasteurized) and then packaged in aseptic containers.

The YouTube video you cite was incorrect if it stated that the enzymes in raw milk are needed for us to absorb calcium and other mineral elements. What you are hearing smacks of an unscientific milk attack. There are those who really do not like milk, and feel it is an unhealthy food.

It is up to each individual to decide whether he or she wants to consume milk or any dairy product. Not everyone wants to drink milk, and not everyone has to. Our freedoms allow us to make our own food choices. There is a growing amount of nonsense online, so when you encounter new information, I encourage you not to be influenced before checking out the facts from a reliable source. A good way to debunk claims is to investigate whether there is any scientific foundation to the concepts. Often, you can do this by searching among reliable sources such as government websites (ending in .gov) or academic ones (ending in .edu). I have a list of reliable sources at my blonz.com site (blonz.com/nut.htm).

Send questions to: "On Nutrition," Ed Blonz, c/o Universal Uclick, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO, 64106. Send email inquiries to questions@blonz.com. Due to the volume of mail, personal replies cannot be provided.

DEAR DR. BLONZ: Is there any problem with drinking salty soup? Our son has developed a taste for ramen and craves some every day. We know it's high in fat and salt, but since he is 14 and not overweight, should we be concerned about those issues? For a while he was using only half the flavoring packet, but lately he seems to want it saltier. What do you think? -- A.H., Watertown, Wis.

DEAR A.H.: It is not unusual for children and adolescents to develop preferences that oftentimes border on cravings. Regardless of how you try to instill balance in their diets, they insist on their favorites and you begin to wonder if they are getting the nourishment they need. Ramen-type soups provide convenience and a reliable flavor, and the flavoring packets of some brands can be high in sodium. Most, however, are relatively modest in fat.

Because there is brand-to-brand variety, you might be able to find an acceptable soup with better nutritional attributes. If he is stuck on a particular brand that offers little besides noodles and salty soup, I would take solace in the fact that your son will be eating other foods during the day and that they probably don't follow the same format. Another potential fix would be to give an OK on the ramen, but see if he would be amenable to adding some peas, corn or other vegetables to the soup. Perhaps you could strike a deal where points from the consumption of other "balancing" foods would have to be earned before the ramen is given the green light. In the end, keep in mind that these types of desires tend to pass with time.

DEAR DR. BLONZ: I recently bought packages of fish fillets that contained farm-raised catfish. When I got home, I noticed that the fish contained ingredients that I am questioning, especially since I watch my salt intake. They include sodium tripolyphosate, sodium hexametaphosate, acid pyrophosate, citric acid and salt. Since when is salt put on frozen fish fillets? All those sodium compounds sound like a no-no for a person with high blood pressure. I hate to toss them, but since I read the ingredients, I have lost my appetite for them. I would appreciate your help. -- J.P. Carlsbad, Calif.

DEAR J.P.: Chemical names can sound intimidating. A fresh or fresh-frozen fish wouldn't be using these additives, but the product wouldn't have much of a shelf life. As for your ingredients, the first four are there to help maintain quality of the product during its shelf life. They are often referred to as sequestrants: To put it simply, they keep the elements involved in spoilage reactions away from each other. This has the net effect of delaying the breakdown that makes food go bad. Although it may not be what you had intended on purchasing, there is no evidence that these compounds are harmful, and having them is certainly preferable to consuming a product that has begun to spoil.

There would only be minimal sodium supplied by these ingredients, as they are only there in very small amounts. Salt is added for flavor, and the amount added would depend on the manufacturer. If this is a packaged, processed fish fillet, the Nutrition Facts label will provide the total amount of sodium per serving, regardless of source.

Send questions to: "On Nutrition," Ed Blonz, c/o Universal Uclick, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO, 64106. Send email inquiries to questions@blonz.com. Due to the volume of mail, personal replies cannot be provided.

DEAR DR. BLONZ: I have a severe reaction to shellfish like crab and lobster, but eating shrimp doesn't bother me at all. My question relates to scallops: I want to be able to eat them, but am unsure if I can do so safely. The nutritionist I consult with said that my allergy was probably due to iodine, but I am not sure how this could be the case. -- S.I., San Jose, Calif.

DEAR S.I.: While some people may react to iodine, that is usually only when it's applied in large amounts as a disinfectant, as in surgery or other medical procedures. The typical shellfish allergy is not due to the presence of iodine. Iodine is an essential mineral needed by the body to make the thyroid hormone. It is found in most seafood, and is also present in foods made with iodized salt, which includes many restaurant foods.

When there is insufficient iodine, the thyroid gland, which is located in the throat, becomes enlarged and the condition referred to as "goiter" results. Goiter used to be common in the Great Lakes regions of the United States, but the condition was virtually eliminated following the addition of iodine to table salt in 1924.

Rather than iodine, allergies to shellfish -- including clams, crabs, lobster, oysters, shrimp and scallops -- tend to be caused by a protein found in the shellfish. It is unusual that you would tolerate shrimp when crab and lobster set you off. Because scallops are in that shellfish group, I suggest you refrain from any experimentation -- especially because you classify your reaction as "severe." What you need to do is to speak with your physician -- not a nutritionist -- and undergo a standard allergy test conducted by an allergist. In these tests, you will be exposed to very diluted extracts of shellfish, along with other substances that may be suspect. The test is done in a safe, controlled setting.

DEAR DR. BLONZ: I have been advised to seek a holistic medical doctor who uses a technique called "muscle testing" to determine which nutritional supplements I should be taking. In this type of testing, the doctor places supplements under my tongue. Then, while I am on my back, he has me raise my right leg about 10 inches. If he can press my leg down, he recommends that the supplement be taken. If he cannot force my leg back down on the table, he says I don't need the supplement. What is your opinion of this technique? -- B.R., Coolidge, Ariz.

DEAR B.R.: My opinion is that this test is questionable to say the least. I have never found any evidence to support the reliability of such a technique. I would approach with caution any other advice from the individual who told you to seek such stuff.

Send questions to: "On Nutrition," Ed Blonz, c/o Universal Uclick, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO, 64106. Send email inquiries to questions@blonz.com. Due to the volume of mail, personal replies cannot be provided.