> Our observation of sodium intake correlating positively with life expectancy and inversely with all-cause mortality worldwide and in high-income countries argues against dietary sodium intake being a culprit of curtailing life span or a risk factor for premature death. These data are observational and should not be used as a base for nutritional interventions.
My understanding is generics make you more susceptible to blood pressure issues with salt, but if you consistently use too much salt, no matter your generics, your blood pressure will rise.
I for one am sticking to this view that there's a U-shaped benefit/risk curve and for healthy people eating salt according to taste lands us just where we need to be. I'll change my opinion when I see this theory debunked: https://necsi.edu/how-much-sodium-should-we-eat
Extra anecdotal info: when I had to take IV antibiotics 2/day for 10 days for an ugly pneumonia they were preparing those in a big syringe of isotonic salt solution aka. physiological serum. During that time of getting daily salt water injections I noticed many foods I was very familiar with and eating regularly suddenly started to taste waaay too salty to me, and it all returned to normal after stopping the injections. So I know for a fact that my body adapts its taste for salt depending on how much salt it already has available.
It's possible that people with underlying health conditions (that might make them more sensitive to salt) naturally tend to consume less salt because of their health issues. Similarly, those with certain health issues might be advised by doctors to restrict their salt intake, leading to the "low salt = poor health" part of the U shape.
It's reverse causality for the low end. Almost nobody is on a low sodium diet.
OK, interesting to think about, but it seems a pretty wild hypothesis - not only do we have to assume these studies that revealed the U shape were so bad they failed to control for some massive health issues of some participants, the intervention itself of severely restricting salt intake failed to do what was advertised and still put these people on a rising slope of negative outcomes.
I thought the same. Love to see an in depth exploration. Last week, it seemed iodized salt was getting a plug. So much uncertainty out there on what we should do. And I have grown rather low trust on so many health suggestions. :(
I'm not sure whose still plugging iodized salt these days. Around here, we just call it salt and you need to go out of your way to find the non-iodised stuff.
I also haven't seen anything suggesting that the iodine fortification is anything but good. It was never meant as a solution to the health problems of salt. Just to solve the problem of iodine deficiency; and salt happened to be a convenient place to put iodine. I don't even think there is a tradeoff with no or low sodium salt alternatives. Iodine enriched potassium salt is also available and should be just as effective at curing iodine deficiency.
There was a story just the other day. I was curious, as a chef a long time ago got us to switch to kosher salt. It is a bit easier to cook with, due to size.
I am still not clear if I should consider learning on iodized again. Did use it for bread today. But in general, not sure I should car
It really does seem like every 5 years nutrition science on random things like this flip. I think all you can really do is eat a wide variety of simply prepared natural foods
This one feels particularly obnoxious to me, for some reason. I'm growing all the more convinced that if I'm cooking my own food using non-cured meats or canned vegetables, it seems I can add as much salt as I want with almost reckless abandon.
I always wondered why a mix of sodium and potassium salts aren't the norm. The slightly higher cost and somewhat less "salty" taste are really insignificant compared to the huge health benefits. And yet, I still can't buy any potassium salt in my local supermarket. Really hope this catches on.
I'm never had any trouble finding potassium-enriched salt. But also, it really does have quite a different taste from regular salt. Having done both, I'd much rather just use less salt than deal with the sour, slightly off taste of potassium-enriched salt.
Fair. But, according to the linked article and the study, most people disagree and would rather use the same amount of enriched salt than less in total. I find the retention rate especially noteworthy.
The one that I use has "polyglutamate" additives, and that's the only one surviving in market environment. KCl only taste similar to salt, not practically identical to NaCl at all.
Thanks for the response. As best as I can tell, the potassium is naturally occurring in the dried garlic, red pepper, and onion. In neither country is there any added potassium. Possibly the formulation is the same and the two countries just have slightly different thresholds for what must be listed.
From what I heard, hyperkalemia is much less of an issue than high unregulated sodium intake for a large majority of the population. The highlighted issue of toxicity in high doses applies to many household foods in general, and I wouldn't think a slightly less salty salt could be posing the highest dangers. Happy to be corrected by more medically-versed people though.
Hyperkalemia can kill you. So can hypernatremia, but we have thirst mechanisms that respond very well to that. Most people who eat more sodium get thirsty, drink more, and then urinate it out.
I think that says more about your local supermarket than the availability of the product. Nu-Salt has been available for years at most supermarkets. Although I will say that my closet grocery store only has the 50% stuff and not the fully sodium free stuff.
This may also be a European issue. I live in Germany, we have dozens of brands of flavored salt for specific applications (e.g. scrambled eggs, chips or even feta cheese), most containing iodine, but outside of specialized stores none contain any potassium.
I switched to MSG and have definitely found it less salty and more delicious.
The sodium level is definitely lower. My blood pressure is still well regulated.
I’ve eaten MSG my entire life with no ill effects.
MSG got a bad rap but it’s really quite safe. It’s found in various forms in things like parmigianno reggiano cheese, seaweed, etc. It can be overused to cover up bad ingredients and make up for poor cooking skills but when used correctly it’s a great flavor enhancer that is better than salt.
MSG is about sensitivity. It is not safe for those sensitive to it. The logic is that glutamate is highly excitatory in the brain, in everyone's brain. Sensitive persons have lost the ability to regulate glutamate too well. Others do fine.
You don't look to know the first thing about excitotoxicity or even about glycotoxicity. If you keep abusing excitotoxins, they have a kindling effect which will cause brain damage and seizures in the long term. With sugar, similarly there is diabetes. Your gout is a hard indication that you have failed to filter your diet.
Oh I read it, but I am not sure if you did. The symptoms are listed. These symptoms are a good indication to avoid it in those that are sensitive to it. For those people, it will add up to be pretty bad for their health if they continue to take it.
If the body is signaling to not do something, then don't do it!!!
Whatever research - stick to whole foods as much as possible and salt using standard table products. Stay reasonable and regularly check your health. One thing noticed with many "substitutes" is the addition of other products not necessarily better or potentially challenging for your health (potassium -> possible liver challenges)
I’m willing to be further educated, but before agriculture was prominent we really had not many other options aside from seafood (which for the record I consume in similar amounts to red meat). A majority of non farmed or cross-bred vegetables and plants in the wild would have been toxic as they are today (try eat anything in a random forest that looks like lettuce - you won’t have a good time), and modern day fruits look nothing like they used to. Carbohydrates would have been far less dense in fruits and more fibrous. The carb exception being honey which is essentially pure sugar, but I don’t know the percentage of early humans that would have consumed it or how often. I see the example of the inuits and hunter gatherer tribes of Australia being key examples of low carb, high fat and protein civilisations which I would say would have been the norm up until around 25,000 years ago.
> Our observation of sodium intake correlating positively with life expectancy and inversely with all-cause mortality worldwide and in high-income countries argues against dietary sodium intake being a culprit of curtailing life span or a risk factor for premature death. These data are observational and should not be used as a base for nutritional interventions.
reply