cut down on sodium! !!
Replies
-
Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?0
-
No, it isn't. High blood pressure isn't a binary condition, for one thing. If one is eating a lot of sodium and blood pressure is increasing, that's possibly a concern. There's no need to wait for full-blown hypertension to address that concern.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
So saying "If you don't have a medical condition..." is the same thing to you as willy-nilly telling everyone to ignore sodium intake? Wow. Just wow.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
If you look back over the thread, like the sugar threads, there's a whole lot of "If you don't have a medical condition..." prefacing the comments. Do you see those? Do you agree that that's not the same thing as will-nilly telling every user to ignore sodium intake?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »Yes. A little info, indeed.
It seems mostly to revolve around high blood pressure. If you don't have high blood pressure and your blood pressure isn't turning into a problem...
Mostly, yes. That is the biggest concern. Do you know the statistics on high BP?
http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fs_bloodpressure.htm
Exceeding the sodium recommendation is obviously not going to be a problem for everyone. That's true of any RDA. They are general rules. But what sense if there in telling every user that asks about sodium that it's okay to ignore the RDA when it is likely to be harmful more often than not?
No, because high sodium is associated with causing disease not just exacerbating it. Just because your BP is high today doesn't mean it won't be later. 1/3 of Americans have high BP. Another 1/3 have pre-hypertension. For some populations the numbers are much higher. Eat all the sodium you want. It's your life, but saying it's fine for everyone who doesn't have a disease right now makes no sense given the available data.
It's implying that there is no danger until you have the disease, is it not?
0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
From what I've read no. Some groups have proposed lowering it, but so far there isn't enough consensus on that recommendation for the general public.
Did the RDA for cholesterol change?0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
I've heard some mumblings from the doctors at work but I don't think they have anything concrete yet.0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
No, it isn't. High blood pressure isn't a binary condition, for one thing. If one is eating a lot of sodium and blood pressure is increasing, that's possibly a concern. There's no need to wait for full-blown hypertension to address that concern.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
So saying "If you don't have a medical condition..." is the same thing to you as willy-nilly telling everyone to ignore sodium intake? Wow. Just wow.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
If you look back over the thread, like the sugar threads, there's a whole lot of "If you don't have a medical condition..." prefacing the comments. Do you see those? Do you agree that that's not the same thing as will-nilly telling every user to ignore sodium intake?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »Yes. A little info, indeed.
It seems mostly to revolve around high blood pressure. If you don't have high blood pressure and your blood pressure isn't turning into a problem...
Mostly, yes. That is the biggest concern. Do you know the statistics on high BP?
http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fs_bloodpressure.htm
Exceeding the sodium recommendation is obviously not going to be a problem for everyone. That's true of any RDA. They are general rules. But what sense if there in telling every user that asks about sodium that it's okay to ignore the RDA when it is likely to be harmful more often than not?
No, because high sodium is associated with causing disease not just exacerbating it. Just because your BP is high today doesn't mean it won't be later. 1/3 of Americans have high BP. Another 1/3 have pre-hypertension. For some populations the numbers are much higher. Eat all the sodium you want. It's your life, but saying it's fine for everyone who doesn't have a disease right now makes no sense given the available data.
It's implying that there is no danger until you have the disease, is it not?
Rising BP that isn't hypertension or pre-hypertension isn't a "medical condition". But, I'm done arguing this. I've posted data from reliable sources for anyone that is interested.0 -
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
The only people I've seen giving the advice that you should not watch your sodium are MFP posters. Real experts all recommend limiting it.
Real experts do not say, "Wait until your salt intake has caused you to develop a cardiovascular issue, then limit your salt." They tend to suggest limiting your salt intake so that you don't develop a cardiovascular issue.
It's kind of a common-sense thing, too. If your body is bloating up to fight the salt off, maybe you're taking in too much salt.
Most people are taking in too much salt. Also, too little potassium. Why MFP posters insist the opposite to be the case, I don't know. I'm always seeing people say, "You're probably getting enough potassium" and "Don't worry about salt. Worry about not getting enough salt." Since the opposite is the case for most people, why assume that everyone is probably the exception?
0 -
That's completely laughable. You should tell my doctor so he'll know.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
No, it isn't. High blood pressure isn't a binary condition, for one thing. If one is eating a lot of sodium and blood pressure is increasing, that's possibly a concern. There's no need to wait for full-blown hypertension to address that concern.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
So saying "If you don't have a medical condition..." is the same thing to you as willy-nilly telling everyone to ignore sodium intake? Wow. Just wow.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
If you look back over the thread, like the sugar threads, there's a whole lot of "If you don't have a medical condition..." prefacing the comments. Do you see those? Do you agree that that's not the same thing as will-nilly telling every user to ignore sodium intake?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »Yes. A little info, indeed.
It seems mostly to revolve around high blood pressure. If you don't have high blood pressure and your blood pressure isn't turning into a problem...
Mostly, yes. That is the biggest concern. Do you know the statistics on high BP?
http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fs_bloodpressure.htm
Exceeding the sodium recommendation is obviously not going to be a problem for everyone. That's true of any RDA. They are general rules. But what sense if there in telling every user that asks about sodium that it's okay to ignore the RDA when it is likely to be harmful more often than not?
No, because high sodium is associated with causing disease not just exacerbating it. Just because your BP is high today doesn't mean it won't be later. 1/3 of Americans have high BP. Another 1/3 have pre-hypertension. For some populations the numbers are much higher. Eat all the sodium you want. It's your life, but saying it's fine for everyone who doesn't have a disease right now makes no sense given the available data.
It's implying that there is no danger until you have the disease, is it not?
Rising BP that isn't hypertension isn't a "medical condition".
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
That's completely laughable. You should tell my doctor so he'll know.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
No, it isn't. High blood pressure isn't a binary condition, for one thing. If one is eating a lot of sodium and blood pressure is increasing, that's possibly a concern. There's no need to wait for full-blown hypertension to address that concern.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
So saying "If you don't have a medical condition..." is the same thing to you as willy-nilly telling everyone to ignore sodium intake? Wow. Just wow.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
If you look back over the thread, like the sugar threads, there's a whole lot of "If you don't have a medical condition..." prefacing the comments. Do you see those? Do you agree that that's not the same thing as will-nilly telling every user to ignore sodium intake?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »Yes. A little info, indeed.
It seems mostly to revolve around high blood pressure. If you don't have high blood pressure and your blood pressure isn't turning into a problem...
Mostly, yes. That is the biggest concern. Do you know the statistics on high BP?
http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fs_bloodpressure.htm
Exceeding the sodium recommendation is obviously not going to be a problem for everyone. That's true of any RDA. They are general rules. But what sense if there in telling every user that asks about sodium that it's okay to ignore the RDA when it is likely to be harmful more often than not?
No, because high sodium is associated with causing disease not just exacerbating it. Just because your BP is high today doesn't mean it won't be later. 1/3 of Americans have high BP. Another 1/3 have pre-hypertension. For some populations the numbers are much higher. Eat all the sodium you want. It's your life, but saying it's fine for everyone who doesn't have a disease right now makes no sense given the available data.
It's implying that there is no danger until you have the disease, is it not?
Rising BP that isn't hypertension isn't a "medical condition".
Haven't you heard? Doctors should be ignored when they disagree with the MFP forums. They have no training in nutrition.0 -
I'm pretty sure if you go back to a previous post of mine, I specifically said 'electrolytes'. All electrolytes are a concern, and get reduced when dietary changes are made when people try to lose weight. This is one of the reasons that I always encourage people NOT to eliminate foods from their diet when starting a weight loss program. Eliminating foods and then increasing water intake, especially when increasing activity levels, such as starting an exercise program, will wash out all types of electrolytes from the body and cause problems.
And to assume that just because someone is an MFP poster makes them not a health care expert is a pretty silly assumption. People can be both. I've worked in medical care for more than a decade, and I know several others who are nurses, and other medical experts. Don't discount our advice just because it appears here on MFP. We are using real-world knowledge and experience.0 -
I'm pretty sure if you go back to a previous post of mine, I specifically said 'electrolytes'. All electrolytes are a concern, and get reduced when dietary changes are made when people try to lose weight. This is one of the reasons that I always encourage people NOT to eliminate foods from their diet when starting a weight loss program. Eliminating foods and then increasing water intake, especially when increasing activity levels, such as starting an exercise program, will wash out all electrolytes from the body and cause problems.
And to assume that just because someone is an MFP poster makes them not a health care expert is a pretty silly assumption. People can be both. I've worked in medical care for more than a decade, and I know several others who are nurses, and other medical experts. Don't discount our advice just because it appears here on MFP. We are using real-world knowledge and experience.
Nurse =/= expert on nutrition. The RDA are set by the people who teach nurses and doctor and dieticians and those that do research and peer review research. Those are experts. If the choice is 'assume people on MFP are experts' vs. 'assume people on MFP are not experts', which is more often going to be a correct assumption?0 -
They do have training with blood pressure, though. As do the doctors at the hypertension clinic my dad goes to every six months. They seem to be of the opinion that blood pressure issues exist on a continuum and that blood pressure is more complicated than being "normal" or being "hypertensive."Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
That's completely laughable. You should tell my doctor so he'll know.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
No, it isn't. High blood pressure isn't a binary condition, for one thing. If one is eating a lot of sodium and blood pressure is increasing, that's possibly a concern. There's no need to wait for full-blown hypertension to address that concern.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
So saying "If you don't have a medical condition..." is the same thing to you as willy-nilly telling everyone to ignore sodium intake? Wow. Just wow.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
If you look back over the thread, like the sugar threads, there's a whole lot of "If you don't have a medical condition..." prefacing the comments. Do you see those? Do you agree that that's not the same thing as will-nilly telling every user to ignore sodium intake?Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »Yes. A little info, indeed.
It seems mostly to revolve around high blood pressure. If you don't have high blood pressure and your blood pressure isn't turning into a problem...
Mostly, yes. That is the biggest concern. Do you know the statistics on high BP?
http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fs_bloodpressure.htm
Exceeding the sodium recommendation is obviously not going to be a problem for everyone. That's true of any RDA. They are general rules. But what sense if there in telling every user that asks about sodium that it's okay to ignore the RDA when it is likely to be harmful more often than not?
No, because high sodium is associated with causing disease not just exacerbating it. Just because your BP is high today doesn't mean it won't be later. 1/3 of Americans have high BP. Another 1/3 have pre-hypertension. For some populations the numbers are much higher. Eat all the sodium you want. It's your life, but saying it's fine for everyone who doesn't have a disease right now makes no sense given the available data.
It's implying that there is no danger until you have the disease, is it not?
Rising BP that isn't hypertension isn't a "medical condition".
Haven't you heard? Doctors should be ignored when they disagree with the MFP forums. They have no training in nutrition.
0 -
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
Isn't salt sodium? <confused>0 -
Well, and deadly chlorine. Maybe that's the real issue here. Plus, sodium chloride is a chemical.snickerscharlie wrote: »
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
Isn't salt sodium? <confused>
0 -
Salt contains sodium. There is sodium in there. It's not 100% sodium.snickerscharlie wrote: »
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
Isn't salt sodium? <confused>0 -
I am someone that needs to watch their sodium due to hypertension...1500mg is my target. I try.
I try to make sure that I hit my potassium level.
I also drink a lot of water...liquids in general.
I live in an area where the temperature has held between 95-105.
I like to walk...outside.
All of this combined makes for difficulty in keeping it all in balance. Too much sodium the BP goes up...ankles swell...etc...etc.
Too little sodium...tired...nausea...cramps...etc...etc.
Cut back on water...feel dehydrated...nagging headaches...etc...etc.
I don't give sodium intake advice because of the above.
The minimum intake on sodium that I have seen is 500mg. Some will need less...some more. However this all depends on your activity level...water intake...climate that you live in. In other words...there is no level of sodium that is applicable to everyone.
I failed to mention...I like salt...salty stuff...even salty sweet desserts. I am not an anti-salt advocate.0 -
Salt contains sodium. There is sodium in there. It's not 100% sodium.snickerscharlie wrote: »
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
Isn't salt sodium? <confused>
But salt cannot be salt without the sodium component, so what's your point?
0 -
True. It's only 39.3% sodium, by weight. Is this talk of which you speak related to the chlorine in the salt?
Salt contains sodium. There is sodium in there. It's not 100% sodium.snickerscharlie wrote: »
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
Isn't salt sodium? <confused>
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »Yes. A little info, indeed.
It seems mostly to revolve around high blood pressure. If you don't have high blood pressure and your blood pressure isn't turning into a problem...
Mostly, yes. That is the biggest concern. Do you know the statistics on high BP?
http://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fs_bloodpressure.htm
Exceeding the sodium recommendation is obviously not going to be a problem for everyone. That's true of any RDA. They are general rules. But what sense if there in telling every user that asks about sodium that it's okay to ignore the RDA when it is likely to be harmful more often than not?
(1) People usually know when they have high BP or even slightly elevated BP vs. really good BP levels. Similarly, there are other risk factors that people will know about.
(2) Unfortunately, the advice one gets from other users on sodium sometimes goes way beyond lowering it -- and as the sources you cite indicate, the assumption is that Americans get tons of sodium from highly processed foods and not much potassium, which is certainly true on average, but is not for many here -- to cutting out the normal use of salt in cooking and generally being freaked out about it. I don't think that's helpful or necessary UNLESS you have been told to do that by your doctor.
I also have seen lots of questioning of the recommendations (especially the new lower one) as not being connected to any actual health benefits for most, and despite searching have not seen a good justification for the low numbers that would make it seem worthwhile to cut out or to try to track added salt. One thing is that they seem to assume that most Americans eat FAR more sodium than they realize (which is likely true), so the numbers are likely low to account for that.0 -
-
I wasn't making a point to fight about. I was clarifying for you, since you didn't know the difference between sodium and salt.snickerscharlie wrote: »
Salt contains sodium. There is sodium in there. It's not 100% sodium.snickerscharlie wrote: »
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
Isn't salt sodium? <confused>
But salt cannot be salt without the sodium component, so what's your point?
0 -
-
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1311889#t=articleTopThe Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study is a large-scale epidemiologic cohort study that enrolled and followed 156,424 persons, 35 to 70 years of age, residing in 628 urban and rural communities in 17 low-, middle-, and high-income countries (Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, India, Iran, Malaysia, Pakistan, Poland, South Africa, Sweden, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, and Zimbabwe).20-23 Selection of the participants is described in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org. Recruitment began in January 2003. For the current analysis, we included 101,945 participants who collected early-morning fasting urine samples suitable for analysis. The study was coordinated by the Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.In conclusion, we investigated the association of estimated sodium and potassium excretion with the risk of death and cardiovascular events in a large, international, prospective cohort study. An estimated sodium intake between 3 g per day and 6 g per day was associated with a lower risk of death and cardiovascular events than either a higher or lower estimated level of sodium intake. As compared with an estimated potassium excretion of less than 1.50 g per day, higher potassium excretion was associated with a reduction in the risk of the composite outcome.
Sounds like it's all about moderation with 3-6K being the optimal amount...0 -
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
The only people I've seen giving the advice that you should not watch your sodium are MFP posters. Real experts all recommend limiting it.
Real experts do not say, "Wait until your salt intake has caused you to develop a cardiovascular issue, then limit your salt." They tend to suggest limiting your salt intake so that you don't develop a cardiovascular issue.
It's kind of a common-sense thing, too. If your body is bloating up to fight the salt off, maybe you're taking in too much salt.
Most people are taking in too much salt. Also, too little potassium. Why MFP posters insist the opposite to be the case, I don't know. I'm always seeing people say, "You're probably getting enough potassium" and "Don't worry about salt. Worry about not getting enough salt." Since the opposite is the case for most people, why assume that everyone is probably the exception?
Always and never are loaded statements, which leaves no room for the exceptions. Nobody is assuming anything, they are simply saying there are people who should not eat within the sodium guidelines. Some people mentioned medical conditions which require extra sodium in their diets. I, for one, have very low blood pressure because I'm a runner (my MD said low blood pressure is common in avid runners), so there is no way I'm going to lower my sodium. In fact, if I were to watch it at all, I would be watching to make sure I get enough.
Also, from the American Heart Association:How much sodium should I have each day?
The American Heart Association recommends that Americans consume less than 1,500 mg/day sodium, which is the level with the greatest effect on blood pressure. The recommendation for less than 1500 mg/day does not apply to people who lose large amounts of sodium in sweat, such as competitive athletes and workers exposed to extreme heat stress (for example, foundry workers and fire fighters), or to those directed otherwise by their healthcare provider.
American Heart Association.
Also, who are the "real experts"? I'm pretty sure it's not any of us here at MFP, unless they are sharing they are an expert.
If people want to reduce sodium, great. If their doctor tells them to reduce sodium, then it needs to be done. But, there are always exceptions to every rule--no assumptions necessary.
0 -
I wasn't making a point to fight about. I was clarifying for you, since you didn't know the difference between sodium and salt.snickerscharlie wrote: »
Salt contains sodium. There is sodium in there. It's not 100% sodium.snickerscharlie wrote: »
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
Isn't salt sodium? <confused>
But salt cannot be salt without the sodium component, so what's your point?
I understand perfectly the difference between sodium and salt. Salt is a chemical combination of two elements: sodium and chlorine - which becomes sodium chloride aka table salt when bonded. Since table salt cannot exist without sodium, your previous statement - "There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem" - makes absolutely no sense.0 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »
I wasn't making a point to fight about. I was clarifying for you, since you didn't know the difference between sodium and salt.snickerscharlie wrote: »
Salt contains sodium. There is sodium in there. It's not 100% sodium.snickerscharlie wrote: »
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
Isn't salt sodium? <confused>
But salt cannot be salt without the sodium component, so what's your point?
I understand perfectly the difference between sodium and salt. Salt is a chemical combination of two elements: sodium and chlorine - which becomes sodium chloride aka table salt when bonded. Since table salt cannot exist without sodium, your previous statement - "There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem" - makes absolutely no sense.
It does if chlorine is the issue...0 -
0 -
So, you lied to create a fight? Really?snickerscharlie wrote: »
I wasn't making a point to fight about. I was clarifying for you, since you didn't know the difference between sodium and salt.snickerscharlie wrote: »
Salt contains sodium. There is sodium in there. It's not 100% sodium.snickerscharlie wrote: »
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
Isn't salt sodium? <confused>
But salt cannot be salt without the sodium component, so what's your point?
I understand perfectly the difference between sodium and salt. Salt is a chemical combination of two elements: sodium and chlorine - which becomes sodium chloride aka table salt when bonded. Since table salt cannot exist without sodium, your previous statement - "There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem" - makes absolutely no sense.
There is lots of talk and much studying being done about salt. It's not new.
It may even be googleable. I don't know. I didn't google it and won't be googling it.
I'm also done arguing about this ridiculous thing.
I 100% agree that people should really ask their doctors about their salt.
0 -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/04/06/more-scientists-doubt-salt-is-as-bad-for-you-as-the-government-says/Both sides agree that eating too much salt, especially for people with high blood pressure, can be dangerous.
The critical disagreement concerns how to define “too much.”
Under the current dietary guidelines, too much is more than 2,300 milligrams of sodium per day - the amount of sodium in a teaspoon of salt. (For people over 50, and for African-Americans, the current recommended intake is even lower - 1,500 milligrams per day.)
If the U.S. salt warnings are correct, Americans are indeed endangering themselves on a massive scale. Americans typically go way over the limit, ingesting about 3,500 milligrams per day.
If the skeptics are correct, on the other hand, most Americans are fine. In their view, a typical healthy person can consume as much as 6,000 milligrams per day without significantly raising health risks. But consuming too little - somewhere below 3,000 milligrams - also raises health risks, they say....
“The current [salt] guidelines are based on almost nothing,” said Oparil, a distinguished professor of medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. “Some people really want to hang onto this belief system on salt. But they are ignoring the evidence.”...
In 2013, the Institute of Medicine published a major review of the evidence connecting salt consumption and health outcomes. There was insufficient proof, the panel concluded, that heeding the U.S. recommended limit on sodium consumption improved health outcomes.
Then, this past August, the New England Journal of Medicine published the results of a massive research effort known as the PURE study. It indicated that people who conform to the U.S. recommended limits actually have more heart trouble.
To explain their findings, these researchers pointed to studies suggesting that low sodium may stimulate the production of renin, a hormone that may have harmful effects on blood vessels.
The whole article is worth reading, and so is this one: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/04/06/how-to-know-when-diet-advice-is-worth-it/0 -
So, you lied to create a fight? Really?snickerscharlie wrote: »
I wasn't making a point to fight about. I was clarifying for you, since you didn't know the difference between sodium and salt.snickerscharlie wrote: »
Salt contains sodium. There is sodium in there. It's not 100% sodium.snickerscharlie wrote: »
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
Isn't salt sodium? <confused>
But salt cannot be salt without the sodium component, so what's your point?
I understand perfectly the difference between sodium and salt. Salt is a chemical combination of two elements: sodium and chlorine - which becomes sodium chloride aka table salt when bonded. Since table salt cannot exist without sodium, your previous statement - "There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem" - makes absolutely no sense.
There is lots of talk and much studying being done about salt. It's not new.
It may even be googleable. I don't know. I didn't google it and won't be googling it.
I'm also done arguing about this ridiculous thing.
I 100% agree that people should really ask their doctors about their salt.
She didn't lie. She asked a question because you made 0 sense...
0 -
Absolutely, as a question of logic, that would make sense. I can't find anything online that suggests the chlorine in sodium chloride is problematic, though. Maybe the person who made the claim will support it.snickerscharlie wrote: »
I wasn't making a point to fight about. I was clarifying for you, since you didn't know the difference between sodium and salt.snickerscharlie wrote: »
Salt contains sodium. There is sodium in there. It's not 100% sodium.snickerscharlie wrote: »
There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem.PeachyCarol wrote: »Just throwing this monkey wrench into the works, but aren't there murmurs that they're going to revise the guidelines on sodium just like they did on cholesterol?
Isn't salt sodium? <confused>
But salt cannot be salt without the sodium component, so what's your point?
I understand perfectly the difference between sodium and salt. Salt is a chemical combination of two elements: sodium and chlorine - which becomes sodium chloride aka table salt when bonded. Since table salt cannot exist without sodium, your previous statement - "There is a LOT of talk about the fact that salt itself, and not sodium necessarily, is more of a problem" - makes absolutely no sense.
It does if chlorine is the issue...
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions