Page 31 - Spring2012

anything else. The AI was arbitrarily set by the MYTH 2:
DRI committee at 1,500 mg sodium or a little Our knowledge of the major sources of salt in our diet (i.e., 80 percent
more than one half teaspoon of salt per day for from processed foods) is unquestionable.
young adults “…to ensure that the overall diet FACT: These data referred to in every medical publication is based on
provides an adequate intake of other important a single paper from 1991, which involved a dietary recall (a very unreliable
nutrients and to cover sodium sweat losses in method of data gathering) of a total of just sixty-two persons.
15
unacclimatized individuals who are exposed to
high temperatures or who become physically MYTH 3:
active…” However, no supporting information Our salt consumption continues to rise every year.
on young adults was provided to confirm that FACT: There has been no change in our consumption of salt since the
this arbitrary figure was in any way justified. mid-1950s. 16
In fact, this opinion has since been shown to be
incorrect. MYTH 4:
12
The case for setting the upper limit of salt The thirty-year public health initiative in Finland represents a suc-
consumption at the equivalent of 100 mmol cessful model of salt reduction.
(2,300 mg) sodium or one teaspoon of salt per FACT: While Finland was able to reduce salt consumption among its
day appeared even more problematic. Rather than population from 2.3 teaspoons of salt per day down to 1.3 teaspoons per
determining the body’s integrated response to day in the period from 1970 to 2000 (in much the same way that the U.S.
various levels of salt; i.e., the normal and rational did from 1945-1960), the health benefits that they have achieved during
dose response methodology used for all nutrients, the same time period were no better (and, in fact, marginally worse) than
it was clear from the start that the overwhelming neighboring and other countries that did not reduce salt consumption.
preoccupation with just one surrogate measure
for cardiovascular disease—blood pressure— MYTH 5:
would remain the singular focus: “The major Current levels of salt consumption result in premature cardiovascular
adverse effect of increased sodium chloride in- disease and death.
take is elevated blood pressure, which has been FACT: When average life expectancy in various countries is plotted
shown to be an etiologically related risk factor for against the average salt intake in those countries, it is clear that the higher
cardiovascular and renal diseases.” Furthermore, the salt consumption, the longer the life expectancy. (See Figure 3.) While
the use of precisely 100 mmol sodium (equivalent no cause-and-effect relationship between sodium intake and lifespan is
to six grams or one teaspoon of salt) was not the implied, the data clearly demonstrate the compatibility between life ex-
result of any dose-response relationship involv- pectancy and the associated levels of sodium intake.
ing an established suite of health outcomes. It was
nothing more than an arbitrary and convenient MYTH 6:
set point from which to observe any reductions Cutting back on salt will improve the overall diet.
in blood pressure (regardless of how small) when FACT: Salt makes the bitter phytochemicals in salad greens and veg-
sodium intakes were decreased.
Nevertheless, this was the intellectually
bankrupt basis upon which the recommenda-
tions for salt were set, with full confidence that
the public acceptance of salt-health mythology
would serve to allay any critical scrutiny. What
were these salt myths?

MYTH 1:
We eat more salt today than ever before.
FACT: Our current salt consumption (1.5 to
1.75 teaspoons per day) is about one half of the
amount consumed between the War of 1812 and
13
the end of World War II, which was about three FIGURE 3.
14
to 3.3 teaspoons of salt per day. InterSalt Life Expectancy
Wise Traditions SPRING 2012 SPRING 2012 Wise Traditions 31

89494_text.indd 31 3/19/12 11:40 AM