Salt may not be as bad as you think

[Storm]

I read an interesting article in the NY Times about how salt has been demonized, and cutting salt from your diet can actually have negative health effects.  It's really interesting to me how some bad research and media stories can cause people to believe certain popular myths.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/03/opini ... wanted=all

[Gumby]

The Weston Price Foundation — which advocates for returning to the seemingly unhealthy diet of our pre-1900 ancestors, when heart disease, obesity and cancer were very rare — had two in-depths article a few months ago about why salt is a vital nutrient...

Weston Price: Salt and Our Health
Weston Price: The Salt of the Earth

I was actually going to mention it in the 'saturated fats are good for you' thread, but I figured claiming saturated fats are good for you was already a bit much for most people to handle.

Salt used to be a significant part of people's diets — to preserve meats — especially during the long winters. People used to eat a LOT more (natural) salt, back when heart disease was rare. Salt was actually crucial to winning the Civil War, as an army that has salt can adequately feed its men.

It is of great interest that available data suggest Western societies consumed between three and 3.3 grams of salt per day from the early 1800s until the end of World War II, based on military archives for prisoner-of-war and soldier rations around the world. During the Anglo-American War of 1812, despite its high cost, salt rations amounted to three teaspoons per day.[37] American prisoners of war, incarcerated in Britain’s Dartmoor prison, bitterly complained that the 1.5 teaspoons of salt per day they received was part of "…scanty and meager diet for men brought up in the land of liberty, and ever used to feast on the luscious fruits of plenty..."[38] Declassified World War II documents regarding rations fed to American prisoners of war show a ration of one hundred forty grams per week or 3.3 teaspoons per day.[39]

After World War II, when refrigeration began to displace salt as the main means of food preservation, salt consumption in the U.S. (and somewhat later in other countries) dropped dramatically to about half that rate, or nine grams (1.5 teaspoons) per day and, based on twenty-four hour urinary sodium data, has remained flat for the last fifty years.[40] During that time, rates of hypertension have increased,[41] thus casting doubt on any linkage between the two.

37. Rations: The History of Rations, Conference Notes, Prepared by The Quartermaster School for the Quartermaster General, January 1949, accessed at http://www.qmfound.com/history_of_rations.htm on 12/20/2011.
38. James Adams, Dartmoor Prison, A Faithful Narrative of the Massacre of American Seamen, to Which is added a Sketch of the Treatment of Prisoners During the Late War by the British Government (Pittsburgh, S. Engles, 1816), accessed at http://www.archive.org/stream/prisoners ... earch/salt on 12/20/2011.
39. American Prisoners of War in Germany, Prepared by Military Intelligence Service War Department, November 1945, Restricted Classification Removed - STALAG 17B (Air Force Non-Commissioned Officers) accessed at http://www.valerosos.com/AMERICANPRISONERSOFWAR.pdf on 12/20/2011.
40. Bernstein AM, Willett WC. Trends in 24-h urinary sodium excretion in the United States, 1957-2003: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;92(5):1172-1180. Epub 2010 Sep 8.
41. Ayala C, Croft JB, Wattigney WA, Mensah GA. Trends in Hypertension-Related Death in the United States: 1980- 1998. J Clin Hypertens. 2004;6(12):675-681.

Source: http://www.westonaprice.org/vitamins-an ... our-health

So, I've recently come to the conclusion that most nutritionists — who base their theories on flawed studies to support unproven hypotheses — likely have no idea what they are talking about. Our diet has radically changed since pre-1900 and people are fatter, starving for natural vitamins and minerals, and are more unhealthy than ever before. No worries, the pharmaceutical corporations now have more patients to cater to.

As for me, I've been more liberal with traditional sea salts. Though, I try to avoid modern table salts — which have a fair amount of chemicals and anti-caking agents in them.

[WildAboutHarry]

Gumby,

Many sea salts also have goodly amounts of magnesium, also good for you!

[Gumby]

Gumby,

Many sea salts also have goodly amounts of magnesium, also good for you!

Yes! I actually just purchased some magnesium-rich bath salts the other day as well.

[Storm]

Great article, Gumby.  Thanks for sharing it.

[Gosso]

I am quite generous with the salt shaker as well.  Although I have always thought sea salt was a bit of a scam, but I'm willing to have this belief corrected.  Isn't it still 99% NaCl, with the other 1% coming from 100's of different random elements.  Doesn't seem like it would make a difference.

Although I used to add a few drops of concentrated minerals to my water, which gave it a fantastic taste...I should order some more.

[Gumby]

I am quite generous with the salt shaker as well.  Although I have always thought sea salt was a bit of a scam, but I'm willing to have this belief corrected.  Isn't it still 99% NaCl, with the other 1% coming from 100's of different random elements.  Doesn't seem like it would make a difference.

I believe Sea Salt is roughly 85% NaCl and 15% trace minerals. The FDA says that anti-caking agents, such as calcium silicate, in table salt is "safe when used at levels not exceeding 2 percent in table salt" (Source) — which implies that it's not so great to eat trace amounts of anti-caking agents. Morton started adding anti-caking agents to their salt in 1911 (Source).

Either way, I prefer eating trace minerals rather than trace amounts of anti-caking agents.

[Gosso]

I am quite generous with the salt shaker as well.  Although I have always thought sea salt was a bit of a scam, but I'm willing to have this belief corrected.  Isn't it still 99% NaCl, with the other 1% coming from 100's of different random elements.  Doesn't seem like it would make a difference.

I believe Sea Salt is roughly 85% NaCl and 15% trace minerals. The FDA says that anti-caking agents, such as calcium silicate, in table salt is "safe when used at levels not exceeding 2 percent in table salt" (Source) — which implies that it's not so great to eat trace amounts of anti-caking agents. Either way, I prefer eating trace minerals rather than anti-caking agents.

Well I consulted Google and this is what I found.  It seems to vary from where it comes from, but generally it is greater than 90% NaCl.  I'd bet the "sea salt" at the local grocery store is 99.5% NaCl, although they typically do not contain the anti-caking agents, which is a plus.  The main reason why I have stuck with regular iodized salt is because I'm worried about not getting enough iodine.  I suppose I could eat seaweed, or take a kelp supplement, but I'm far too lazy for that.

[Gumby]

Well I consulted Google and this is what I found.  It seems to vary from where it comes from, but generally it is greater than 90% NaCl.  I'd bet the "sea salt" at the local grocery store is 99.5% NaCl, although they typically do not contain the anti-caking agents, which is a plus.

The data you've cited was Parts Per Million — which doesn't really tell you very much. But, I was citing relative concentration, by total mass.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_salt#Composition

SEA SALT: COMPOSITION
ElementRelative concentration (by mass) [%]
Chloride (Cl)55.03
Sodium (Na)30.59
Sulfate (SO42)7.68
Magnesium (Mg2)3.68
Calcium (Ca2)1.18
Potassium (K)1.11
Bicarbonate (HCO3)0.41
Bromide (Br)0.19
Borate (BO33).0.08
Strontium (Sr2+)0.04
Miscellaneous constituents0.01
Although the salinity of sea water varies worldwide, the relative proportions of its constituent ions remain constant
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_salt#Composition

The main reason why I have stuck with regular iodized salt is because I'm worried about not getting enough iodine.  I suppose I could eat seaweed, or take a kelp supplement, but I'm far too lazy for that.

As long as you eat a balanced diet, you'll get enough iodine. Here is a list of sources of iodine:

Food Sources of Iodine
PLANT FOODS: Any food grown near the sea is likely to contain iodine, but especially rich sources include asparagus, garlic, lima beans, mushrooms, strawberries, spinach, pineapple and leafy greens. Coconut products, which always grow near the ocean, are good sources of iodine. Blackstrap molasses also provides iodine.

SEAFOOD: Iodine levels vary widely in fish and shellfish, but all seafoods contain some iodine. In published reports, cod, haddock, whiting, oysters and mussels test high. The hepatopancreas (yellow “butter”? or “mustard”?) in lobster tested as an extremely rich source and it is likely that the hepatopancreas of other saltwater shellfish would contain high levels of iodine as well.

BUTTER: Butter from cows pastured on iodine-rich soil will contain iodine. Look for butter from farms located near the ocean, or that have used seaweed or fish meal as a soil amendment. The cows should also be fed sea salt. The combination of iodine with selenium and vitamin A in butter make this traditional fat an ideal food for the thyroid gland.

SEAWEED: Levels of iodine in seaweed vary widely according to species and how the seaweed is dried. One study found a huge range of 2-817 mcg iodine per 100 grams. Iodine content is reduced when seaweed is dried in the sun, and iodine may vaporize during cooking and humid storage conditions. Some Asian seaweed dishes contain in excess of 1,100 mcg iodine (Thyroid Oct 2004, 14(10):836-841). Seaweed contains lignans, phytoestrogens that can depress thyroid function. This may explain why thyroid problems (except for goiter) are common among the Japanese, even though they eat a lot of seaweed.

SALT: Five grams (one teaspoon) of unrefined sea salt, a conservative estimate of the amount typically consumed in a day, provides only about 3 mcg iodine; iodized salt provides over 1,500 mcg iodine per five grams. The FDA’s Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) for adults is 1,100 mcg per day; thus, it is possible to greatly exceed the UL by using iodized salt.
Source: http://www.westonaprice.org/metabolic-d ... ine-debate

When they put the iodine and anti-caking agents in, they're doing it based on the intake of a low-sodium diet. So, by increasing your table salt consumption you'll be getting too much iodine (and perhaps too much anti-caking agent).

Now you have no excuse not to switch to sea salt.

[Gosso]

Gumby,

I seem to recall reading on a health/diet blog that iodized salt will slowly lose it's iodine content from oxidation and evaporation over a period of a few weeks once the box is opened.  So adding iodine to salt might be a pointless exercise in the first place.  Although it did cure the goiter belt problem...

The iodine topic is one that I have never really found a satisfactory answer for.  I eventually came to the conclusion that eating seafood and other whole foods would be good enough, but then I decided to throw in the iodized salt as well.  Seems to work well enough.

[Gumby]

Iodized salt loses iodine to evaporation very slowly over time. So, unless your salt is many years old, you could easily exceed the FDA's upper-tolerable limit of iodine with three teaspoons of daily iodized salt. I only point this out because the subject of this thread is about potentially increasing one's intake of salt. If you're going to consume a lot of salt, it's much safer to do so with sea salt.

[MediumTex]

So, I've recently come to the conclusion that most nutritionists — who base their theories on flawed studies to support unproven hypotheses — likely have no idea what they are talking about. Our diet has radically changed since pre-1900 and people are fatter, starving for natural vitamins and minerals, and are more unhealthy than ever before. No worries, the pharmaceutical corporations now have more patients to cater to.

Maybe someone should provide an educational program for investment advisors, economists and nutritionists.

The program could be called something like: "How to be an effective witch doctor in the information age."

The pattern of sloppy thinking among many so-called "professionals" is discouraging.

While today's doctors have purged their minds of many silly beliefs from the past and are for the most part now solid thinkers, it is kind of wild to think that as recently as the 1840s the medical establishment saw fit to repay Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis, an early pioneer in the germ theory, with the destruction of his career.  His simple recommendation for surgeons to wash their hands between procedures was probably one of the most important breakthroughs in the history of human health care and for his trouble its discoverer found himself unemployed and the object of scorn and professional ridicule.

SEMMELWEIS AND HANDWASHING

Semmelweis discovered that puerperal sepsis (a type of septicaemia) commonly known as childbed fever in new mothers could be prevented if doctors washed their hands. Based on his analysis, he established a simple but revolutionary prophylaxis system in 1847. He insisted upon the use of chlorinated lime solutions for handwashing by medical students and doctors before they treated obstetrical patients.

The application of his method instantly reduced the cases of fatal puerperal fever from 12.24% to 2.38%, while in some months there were no deaths from childbed fever at all. Besides the hands, he initiated using preventive washing for all instruments making contact with the patients which literally removed puerperal fever from the hospital. This was the beginning of an antiseptic era.

REACTION TO SEMMELWEIS’ DISCOVERY

Although hugely successful; Semmelweis’ discovery directly confronted with the beliefs of science and medicine in his time. His colleagues and other medical professionals refused to accept his findings mainly because they did not find it convincing that they could be responsible for spreading infections. The reaction reflected on his job as well when he was declined a reappointment in 1849.

Ignaz Semmelweis was himself reluctant to publish or demonstrate his research and findings publically but some of his students and colleagues wrote letters and delivered lectures explaining his work. But later, he somehow got convinced and during 1850, he delivered a few lectures in Vienna on the Origin of Puerperal Fever. He returned to Budapest in 1851 and joined St. Rochus Hospital remaining there till 1857. His antiseptic methods proved to be fruitful here as well. In 1861, he eventually published a book in German about his significant discovery followed by a series of letters written in reaction to his critics.

HIS DEMISE

The continued criticism and lash out finally broke him down. By 1865, he was suffering from depression, forgetfulness and other neural complaints and was eventually committed to an asylum. He only lasted there for two weeks and died on August 13, 1865 at the age of 47.

[smurff]

Iodized salt loses iodine to evaporation very slowly over time. So, unless your salt is many years old, you could easily exceed the FDA's upper-tolerable limit of iodine with three teaspoons of daily iodized salt. I only point this out because the subject of this thread is about potentially increasing one's intake of salt. If you're going to consume a lot of salt, it's much safer to do so with sea salt.

Don't forget to count the salt included in restaurant and processed food, which is not easy to do, since often the information is hard to come by.

Salt is so important to mammals that many will go out of their way to find it.  I remember a documentary a few years ago that showed elephants regularly visiting a cave to lick the walls for the salt.  Farmers put out salt licks for their cattle and horses, and hunters used to attract deer by setting out salt licks (essentially, large blocks of salt).

[MachineGhost]

I seem to recall reading on a health/diet blog that iodized salt will slowly lose it's iodine content from oxidation and evaporation over a period of a few weeks once the box is opened.  So adding iodine to salt might be a pointless exercise in the first place.  Although it did cure the goiter belt problem...

The iodine topic is one that I have never really found a satisfactory answer for.  I eventually came to the conclusion that eating seafood and other whole foods would be good enough, but then I decided to throw in the iodized salt as well.  Seems to work well enough.

Goiter is making a come back because of that evaporation problem and that people are cutting down their salt intake.  The real issue is dehydration and and the potassium to salt ratio, not salt per se.

As far as sea salt goes, you can tell if it is just refined or true sea salt with trace minerals.  If its white, its refined and no different than table salt.  If its grey, it is unrefined and has the trace minerals.  Although, sea salt generally does not have those anti-caking ingredients like sugar, etc. in it, whether refined or unrefined.  I prefer pink Himalayan salt because it is cheaper and lighter tasting then unrefined sea salts.

Iodine is actually deficient in the typical Western diet.  It's very critical for cancer (esp breast) protection.  The Japanese eat about 1000+mcg of iodine a day.  I take 800mcg.

[BearBones]

Hey folks, check out my new salt lick...



This is really me. No bull!

[smurff]

BearBones, I see you like pink salt, too.