Skip to comments.CDC: Turns Out There's No Benefit to Reducing Salt At All
Posted on 07/11/2013 12:41:32 PM PDT by servo1969
The only people I can think of who have a wider gap between Asserted Expertise and Actual Expertise than the media are nutritionists.
I don't think this applies to people specifically diagnosed with hypertension or other salt-sensitive conditions, but for most of us:
A recent report commissioned by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) reviewed the health benefits of reducing salt intake and the take-home message is that salt, in the quantities consumed by most Americans, is no longer considered a substantial health hazard. What the CDC study reported explicitly is that there is no benefit, and may be a danger, from reducing our salt intake below 1 tsp per day. What was absent about the report was is the difference between healthy mineral salts and iodized table salt.
It may be that were better off with more salt than less, up to 2 or even 3 tsp per day. How did it happen that such standard medical advice drifted astray, then went un-corrected for so long?
Because arrogant, controlling people, who really should just be kindergarten teachers, have a certain way they live their lives, or a way they think you should live your life, and they gloss over things like actual science in order to reach the conclusion that you should Do What They Want You To Do.
CDC: Turns Out There’s No Benefit to Reducing Salt At All
Oh crud. I better start reducing my intake of sale. Right away. If the CDC says there is “No Benefit to Reducing Salt At All’, then I better reduce.
No, now they’re telling us fish oil supplements promote prostate cancer.
I figure that my salt use is for preservation.
I figure that my salt intake is for preservation.
And I heard that additional fish oil cause prostrate cancer in men. Sooner or later the sheeple will tire of all the junk science and those that "Know what's best for YOU".
All those crappy bland Moochelle fries for naught...
***Because arrogant, controlling people, who really should just be kindergarten teachers***
Sounds like a NYC mayor I know.
So here is the current medical thinking: Exercise regularly, maintain a low body mass index, don’t smoke, drink alcohol only in moderation, keep cholesterol in goal range, eat fruits and vegetables, consume only “approved” medicines and supplements.
Do this and you are likely to live to age 85 at which point you’ll have a 50% likelihood of developing Alzheimer’s disease and then you won’t care about anything...
CDC: Turns Out Theres No Benefit to Reducing Salt At All
Well, by God, Lay’s better get their chips salted back to pre-Mooch requirements.
We stopped buying them when they cut back on their salt- and Campbell’s soups as well.
Great... now I will not feel guilty about eating potato chips.
I tried to tell everyone this, but who listens to me? ;-)
For much better info on food and the current scares, try reading junkfoodscience.blogspot.com and http://www.consumerfreedom.com/
Speaking of consumer issues, Consumer Reports has about totally gone over to the dark side. One of their main guys is now on some UN panel on global consumer issues. What a crock.
Yes, who, what is the CDC?
While I would support a constitutional amendment which would give the feds the power to monitor diseases, it remains that the states have never delegated to the feds the power to regulate, tax and spend for healthcare purposes.
In addition to the restrictions mentioned in the article, kidney problems should have been mentioned as well.
This reminds me of Algore telling us that trace amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere are going to cause the earth to burn to a crisp.
Most of these studies are bogus, and this one is no exception.
First of all, they didn’t say how old the men were in this study. Most elderly men get prostate cancer, it’s just that it’s slow-growing and something else will take them away first.
Second, I didn’t see anywhere if they reported this in terms of relative or absolute risk. If 6 men out of 10,000 were the ones with high omega-3 levels and got cancer but only 2 men with low levels got cancer, then what does that mean? Not much.
There is so much bad science out there that you really can’t believe much of anything. This group analyzes medical stories in the news and points out the errors: http://www.healthnewsreview.org/
Yeah, yeah. And eggs and sugar are bad for ya too.
If it weren't for bad science, we wouldn't have any science at all. :0\
And THAT article is based on this May 14th CDC scientific study. And that study appears to have been a compilation of results from other studies...
The true believers will not believe this and keep preaching the old way.
“If it weren’t for bad science, we wouldn’t have any science at all. :0\ “
I love it! I should send this to one of my sons, a hotshot scientist. ;-)
I am old enough to now be living through my THIRD complete cycle of “eggs and coffee are gonna kill you”.....”No, they’re not”......”uhhh, yes they are”......”No, they’re not”
I remember when tomahtoes were gonna kill you, but that was when they were vegetables, before they became fruits.
Yes, pretzels have been similarly ruined, and I now have to add salt to cans of nuts also.
ah... the homo agenda strikes again...
So, everybody goes back to using salt, then a little later, oh, no, salt is evil again and everybody should ban salt (Mayor Bloomberg for instance). Now, again, oops, we were wrong.
Can we just stop listening to these people. The last time we went thru something like this (I think is was the avian flu thingy), I ended up deciding that the Govt. and the media want to keep us hysterical. Because, then, we are looking to the Govt. to DO SOMETHING!
Yeah, I'm right there with you, age and all. Eggs, IMHO, are a perfect food. And, I believe sometime last year a study came out that had found that a certain enzyme in eggs (colene, cholene -- something like that) actually helped to mitigate the cholestoral in the egg. So, yes eggs have cholesteral; but, they also have the enzyme to help you deal with it -- voila! perfect food.
Clearly McDonalds, Frito Lay, Rold Gold and Morton Salt aren’t paying off the right people.
This illustrates a problem with EVERY form of singular top expert authorities on ANYTHING - making them the top offical experts does not make them right.
What we need is to reject the paradigm that accepts the creation of and authority given to “top official experts” of any kind.
We need “expert information” and dissemination of it, but single source, a single top offical source does not provide ALL the best expert information, it presents an official orthodoxy, that’s all.
Salt free diets administered to old people in nursing homes serves one purpose. The food is so tasteless that the quit eating and slowly starve. Mission accomplished.
I think we should take this study with a grain of salt...
the old rules of avoiding gluttony and all things in moderation accepted, have been good nutrional advice for ages
Depends on where you put the supplement.
CDC: We were wrong about salt and a bunch of other things too, but we’re not wrong about vaccines. Nope. Not at all. Especially that Gardisil vaccine. You need to inject your kids with Gardisil. By the way, if you feed those same kids raw milk we’ll have CPS take them away from you.
He eventually started to get episodes of very low blood pressure, so I asked his cardiologist about adding salt back into his diet; his answer, "Sure - of course".
Ditto with that coumadin racket, that keeps the blood labs in business. His got so out of whack that I asked the cardio about alternatives; his answer, "Quit the blood thinner and give him an 81 aspirin daily".
But none of them are salt related - although he's been putting an inch and a half on everything for decades.
Please note the term “salt intake” not what we might add ourselves. Salt is so common in foods we can throw away the salt shaker and still have plenty in the diet.
Some folks take flax seed oil capsules instead of fish oil supplements.
Well I need em for dry skin, but am not interested in cancer. So I’ll give the flaxseed oil a try.
So much of "scientific research" is done in a vacuum. They do test groups by adding a single item such as Omega 3 and report their findings never taking into consideration that the subject may well be deficient in a variety of nutrients.
The coumadin is ok til the elder person gets to the point where a potential bleed from a fall makes thinning the blood counter productive in other words the potential benefits have ceased to outweigh the side effects
My favorite snack is potato chips dipped in ketchup. However, there is one benefit to reduced salt - lower ringing in the ears. There is a direct connection to high salt and tinnitus.
I love salt.
I’ve never listened to them about salt, butter or milk.
Fie on them!
Don’t worry about the salt - drink a lot more water, though, and eat high potassium foods. And knock off the heavy carbs, get yer butt out for a walk on a regular basis, and remember to eat those green vegetable thingies.
For the adventurous, look up “kettlebell.”
The study you cite does not conclude anything so strong as the thread title/post claims. All it says is that nothing supports trying to get ridiculous salt restriction (which almost no one does) of 1500 mg daily in POPULATIONS.
People get too exited about anything counter-current, SEE, SEE TOLD YA SO, etc. Too many worry on one hand, but too many are idiots on the other hand.
Some who worry about salt don’t need to.
Lots of INDIVIDUALS get quite ill from eating too much salt. Eating one jar of pickles can put certain congestive heart failure patients or a kidney patients in the hospital ICU.
No one should be idiotic and over-do salt, especially if you are not healthy. Use some common sense.
That said, many people can follow their NORMAL taste and thirst and do not have to WORRY about salt.
The committees report provides additional insight concerning the nations efforts to stem the health effects of high dietary sodium intake, based on newer types of studies focused directly on health outcomes. The new studies support current efforts to reduce excessive sodium intake in order to lower risk of heart disease and stroke. However, the evidence on health outcomes is not consistent with efforts that encourage lowering of dietary sodium in the general population to 1,500 mg/day. Further research may shed more light on the association between lower 1,500 to 2,300 mglevels of sodium and health outcomes.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.