Why the WHO has recommended switching to a healthier salt alternative | Hacker News Reader

Why the WHO has recommended switching to a healthier salt alternative

theconversation.com

24 pointsgnabgib46 comments

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33351135/

> 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.

> These data are observational and should not be used as a base for nutritional interventions.

And yet you post this in a thread about a nutritional intervention

That's exactly why I included that disclaimer from the original. A dishonest person would have trimmed it.

I thought only people with specific genetics had blood pressure issues from too much salt. Am I misinformed?

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. :(

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'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

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 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 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'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.

Probably because you’ll die if you eat too much.

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.

How much?

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.

Not salt, but Mrs Dash has potassium and can be used as part of the DASH diet.

It tastes pretty good but it does have herbs and spices so it’s not versatile like salt. You can’t add Mrs Dash to everything

> Mrs Dash has potassium

Are you sure? Their Original version does not have any added potassium: https://mrsdash.com/products/original-blend/

None of the other flavors I checked have any either. Do they sell other products that have added potassium?

Here.

https://mrsdash.ca/product/mrs-dash-original-blend/

I just noticed that this is Mrs Dash in Canada (where I’m from). Curious why the US version is different?

Edit: check other flavors on the US site other than original blend, like tomato basil. They all have 10mg potassium.

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.

I've found that cooking with MSG has reduced my salt intake. The Umami taste seems to me at least related to salt.

Whether it's a good change or not.. No idea.

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.

No. Some people are sensitive to it yes. But it is not unsafe. There are no proven long term effects and no treatment is needed.

(Some people are also sensitive to sugar like me — due to gout — but sugar is not unsafe)

Please read the research claims critically instead of posting a knee jerk reaction.

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.

Wait, isn't MSG even worse for your health than salt?

Nope it is not. It’s a myth. MSG, like butter, has been maligned over the decades.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-h...

Please don't spread lies about MSG. Its sensitivity is real, not a myth. Not everyone is affected.

Did you even read the link? Read it.

I highly object to your pejorative insinuation.

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!!!

Right back at you. Stop spreading lies about MSG, or if you claim they are not lies, show some actual evidence.

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)

Stay active and challenge your body regularly.

I have found a dramatic increase in my quality of life doing the exact opposite of authoritative health guidelines.

- More red meat - Less to zero carbs - More salt - Zero vegetables

n=1 I know, but when will they start to get this right? It feels like with every published recommendation, we move further from our evolutionary diet.

At what point of our evolution do you think we ate primarily salted red meat, no carbs and no vegetables?

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.

I hope prices come waayyyyy down then. Currently (in Germany) this seems to be only available as a specialty item for high blood pressure

Doesn't it also matter how much water you drink as well? Like if you drink a ton of water, you can generally have more salt.

I wonder if salt intake is only a problem for people that eat lots of processed food?

This is absurd, too much potassium is much more dangerous than too much salt.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com