46 ms·

Incidentally, this successful ad might have killed a lot of people. https://www.healthdata.org/results/gbd_summaries/2019/diet-high-in-sodium-level-3-risk http

Incidentally, this successful ad might have killed a lot of people. https://www.healthdata.org/results/gbd_summaries/2019/diet-high-in-sodium-level-3-risk https://www.healthdata.org/results/gbd_summaries/2019/diet-h...

b112 4y ago
You'll die without enough salt, and prior to modern prepackaged food, and over salty snacks, and over salted restaruant food, you needed salt in your diet. Badly! If you want to eat healthy, and decide to cook all your own food, be prepared to use more salt. You'll need it compared to that prepackaged food. Especially in the summer, when you sweat more. Failure to do so may leave you craving salty snacks, or lacking in energy. So food in 1911 needed salt for your good health!
- ghaff 4y ago
  And iodine to at least some degree. Although probably using iodized salt is not a particular issue in developed countries.
- danuker 4y ago
  I agree with you that salt is necessary. But currently, much more people suffer because of too much salt rather than too little. My point is to watch one's salt intake. The relative mortality risk from 5g of sodium per day is 1.0 to 1.1 (most likely a 5% shorter lifespan).
  - refurb 4y ago
    Most people handle excess salt just fine. Your kidneys Will excrete any excess. Small groups have blood pressure that is sodium sensitive and people with kidney disease have trouble too. But high salt diets aren’t in and of themselves a problem.
    - danuker 4y ago
      > But high salt diets aren’t in and of themselves a problem. You are directly contradicting my link: > In 2019, a diet high in sodium was responsible for 44·9 million (95% UI 13·0–94·7) DALYs and 1·89 million (0·477–4·19) deaths. It was the leading dietary risk factor for attributable DALYs. https://www.healthdata.org/results/gbd_summaries/2019/diet-high-in-sodium-level-3-risk https://www.healthdata.org/results/gbd_summaries/2019/diet-h... Please provide data to back up your statements.
      - refurb 4y ago
        Your one paper is based on on study using health and diet surveys. A comprehensive review of the literature found that: "When reviewing the evidence for an upper level of 5.8 g/day, it becomes apparent that neither the supporting studies selected by the health institutions, nor randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies disregarded by the health institutions, document that a salt intake below this 5.8 g, has beneficial health effects. Although there is an association between salt intake and blood pressure, both in randomized controlled trials and in observational studies, this association is weak, especially in non-obese individuals with normal blood pressure. Furthermore a salt intake below 5.8 g is associated with the activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosteron system, an increase in plasma lipids and increased mortality." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033062018300835 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S003306201...
        danuker 4y ago
        Interesting! From the study: Fig. 3. shows normotensive studies plotted with blood pressure on the Y-axis. So, if you have normal blood pressure, reducing salt won't reduce it further. Am I getting it right? According to data here, 46 percent of US adults has B.P. at least 130 systolic or 80 diastolic, and 32 percent have >= 140 systolic or 90 diastolic. https://newsroom.heart.org/news/high-blood-pressure-redefined-for-first-time-in-14-years-130-is-the-new-high https://newsroom.heart.org/news/high-blood-pressure-redefine... The Sacks study in the paper you linked (ref 15) shown in Fig 1 shows a strong benefit for people with 130 systolic.
- cheese_goddess 4y ago
  What you say makes no sense. It makes no sense that "prior to modern prepackaged food", throughout the hundreds of thousands of years that anatomically modern humans have existed, we needed salt in our diet "badly". If we did, we would have died out as a species, because for most of the time we existed we did not have access to salt. We had no salt mines, no salt flats, etc etc. What makes a lot more sense is that we can get all the sodium we need from the food we eat, given a balanced and varied diet, like the omnivores that we are. In fact, this is the only thing that makes sense: that our bodies are tuned to our natural diet and that we can get enough nutrition from the food our bodies expect without the need for any additives. So let's be honest here: the only reason that modern people salt their food is for the taste, and nothing else (not even preservation is an issue anymore, with modern refrigeration technology). Which is fine and dandy, but not when it becomes an obsession and it causes overconsumption that can cause health problems.
  - b112 4y ago
    We have an extensive salt trade going back through all of recorded history, along with most people living near the ocean. Salt used to be extremely expensive, and there have even been wars fought over the salt trade. As cited elsewhere in this thread, birth defects, and health issues abound without idodine too, which is why iodised salt is a law in many countries. Through most of history, you ate salt water fish and also shellfish, or became sickly, and died. Please do a little research. This isn't a guess, it's fact.
    - cheese_goddess 4y ago
      It's nonsense is what it is. Do you think the steppe nomads ate "salt water fish and also sellfish"? The people who lived in mountains, in the center of Europe or Africa and far away from sea? Recorded history is 5000 years btw but we've been around for more than 200,000 years, and most people definitely did not live near the ocean for all that period. Instead of telling me to "do a little research" you show me what "research" you did that supports your preposterous ideas.
0xcde4c3db 4y ago
It's not that simple. Sodium intake is primarily correlated with processed/snack food intake (or probably, in some regions, with salt-heavy reductions served by restaurants or street food vendors), not with excessive use of table salt.
pstuart 4y ago
Read the attached and your mind should be changed: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/its-time-to-end-the-war-on-salt/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/its-time-to-end-t... Plenty of other mistakes over the years like this (fat is bad for you, dietary cholesterol is bad for you, etc.) There are exceptions where these concerns are valid -- but they're exceptions.

b112 4y ago

You'll die without enough salt, and prior to modern prepackaged food, and over salty snacks, and over salted restaruant food, you needed salt in your diet. Badly! If you want to eat healthy, and decide to cook all your own food, be prepared to use more salt. You'll need it compared to that prepackaged food. Especially in the summer, when you sweat more. Failure to do so may leave you craving salty snacks, or lacking in energy. So food in 1911 needed salt for your good health!

ghaff 4y ago
And iodine to at least some degree. Although probably using iodized salt is not a particular issue in developed countries.
danuker 4y ago
I agree with you that salt is necessary. But currently, much more people suffer because of too much salt rather than too little. My point is to watch one's salt intake. The relative mortality risk from 5g of sodium per day is 1.0 to 1.1 (most likely a 5% shorter lifespan).
- refurb 4y ago
  Most people handle excess salt just fine. Your kidneys Will excrete any excess. Small groups have blood pressure that is sodium sensitive and people with kidney disease have trouble too. But high salt diets aren’t in and of themselves a problem.
  - danuker 4y ago
    > But high salt diets aren’t in and of themselves a problem. You are directly contradicting my link: > In 2019, a diet high in sodium was responsible for 44·9 million (95% UI 13·0–94·7) DALYs and 1·89 million (0·477–4·19) deaths. It was the leading dietary risk factor for attributable DALYs. https://www.healthdata.org/results/gbd_summaries/2019/diet-high-in-sodium-level-3-risk https://www.healthdata.org/results/gbd_summaries/2019/diet-h... Please provide data to back up your statements.
    - refurb 4y ago
      Your one paper is based on on study using health and diet surveys. A comprehensive review of the literature found that: "When reviewing the evidence for an upper level of 5.8 g/day, it becomes apparent that neither the supporting studies selected by the health institutions, nor randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies disregarded by the health institutions, document that a salt intake below this 5.8 g, has beneficial health effects. Although there is an association between salt intake and blood pressure, both in randomized controlled trials and in observational studies, this association is weak, especially in non-obese individuals with normal blood pressure. Furthermore a salt intake below 5.8 g is associated with the activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosteron system, an increase in plasma lipids and increased mortality." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033062018300835 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S003306201...
      - danuker 4y ago
        Interesting! From the study: Fig. 3. shows normotensive studies plotted with blood pressure on the Y-axis. So, if you have normal blood pressure, reducing salt won't reduce it further. Am I getting it right? According to data here, 46 percent of US adults has B.P. at least 130 systolic or 80 diastolic, and 32 percent have >= 140 systolic or 90 diastolic. https://newsroom.heart.org/news/high-blood-pressure-redefined-for-first-time-in-14-years-130-is-the-new-high https://newsroom.heart.org/news/high-blood-pressure-redefine... The Sacks study in the paper you linked (ref 15) shown in Fig 1 shows a strong benefit for people with 130 systolic.
cheese_goddess 4y ago
What you say makes no sense. It makes no sense that "prior to modern prepackaged food", throughout the hundreds of thousands of years that anatomically modern humans have existed, we needed salt in our diet "badly". If we did, we would have died out as a species, because for most of the time we existed we did not have access to salt. We had no salt mines, no salt flats, etc etc. What makes a lot more sense is that we can get all the sodium we need from the food we eat, given a balanced and varied diet, like the omnivores that we are. In fact, this is the only thing that makes sense: that our bodies are tuned to our natural diet and that we can get enough nutrition from the food our bodies expect without the need for any additives. So let's be honest here: the only reason that modern people salt their food is for the taste, and nothing else (not even preservation is an issue anymore, with modern refrigeration technology). Which is fine and dandy, but not when it becomes an obsession and it causes overconsumption that can cause health problems.
- b112 4y ago
  We have an extensive salt trade going back through all of recorded history, along with most people living near the ocean. Salt used to be extremely expensive, and there have even been wars fought over the salt trade. As cited elsewhere in this thread, birth defects, and health issues abound without idodine too, which is why iodised salt is a law in many countries. Through most of history, you ate salt water fish and also shellfish, or became sickly, and died. Please do a little research. This isn't a guess, it's fact.
  - cheese_goddess 4y ago
    It's nonsense is what it is. Do you think the steppe nomads ate "salt water fish and also sellfish"? The people who lived in mountains, in the center of Europe or Africa and far away from sea? Recorded history is 5000 years btw but we've been around for more than 200,000 years, and most people definitely did not live near the ocean for all that period. Instead of telling me to "do a little research" you show me what "research" you did that supports your preposterous ideas.

0xcde4c3db 4y ago

It's not that simple. Sodium intake is primarily correlated with processed/snack food intake (or probably, in some regions, with salt-heavy reductions served by restaurants or street food vendors), not with excessive use of table salt.

pstuart 4y ago

Read the attached and your mind should be changed: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/its-time-to-end-the-war-on-salt/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/its-time-to-end-t... Plenty of other mistakes over the years like this (fat is bad for you, dietary cholesterol is bad for you, etc.) There are exceptions where these concerns are valid -- but they're exceptions.