In my recent blog, “Good Tidings ,” I mentioned that Food Standards Agency (FSA) chief executive Tim Smith claimed that the UK has “turned the tide” on salt consumption, basing his case upon the disputed FSA analysis survey showing that average adult salt intakes dropped from 9.5g/day in 2001 to 8.6g/day in 2008. However, there was a strange tone in his public address that led me to believe that something was afoot. I got the impression that, with the new government installed in the UK, the FSA’s chief executive was indicating that they would be cutting their anti-salt campaign, which is which is why I felt that the tide had turned.

Well, there was more news on this front this week. On Monday, July 12, the Guardian wrote that Andrew Lansley, the British Health Secretary indicated that the Food Standards Agency may be abolished entirely. As part of the changes, the FSA's regulatory role – including safety and hygiene –would be reassigned to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) from whence it originally came.

There were the inevitable cries of foul – that the government could not get rid of a much needed watchdog agency , but I for one couldn’t be more pleased. The FSA was the poorest possible model of a watchdog agency and it's about time it was abolished.

The function of a watchdog agency is to make sure everyone is honest – everyone – a hard task to accomplish when the agency itself was dishonest and used taxpayers' money to advance an activist agenda totally driven by misinformation rather than concrete evidence. The agency completely ignored every bit of science that did not support their agenda, as though it didn't exist. They tried to bundle together bits and pieces of poor, incomplete information or opinion and pass it off as a real evidence - talk about putting lipstick on a pig! The FSA became the chief promoters of the big lie on the benefits of salt reduction.

Yes, we may need certain watchdog agencies - not pawns of any interest group, but honest scientists who can objectively evaluate scientific evidence and who have enough backbone and honesty to forgo advancing gratuitous solutions until sufficient evidence is available, rather than giving half-baked advice that will never benefit anyone except themselves.