A story in today's Washington Post introduced the concept of "Big Salt" -- ostensibly, the Salt Institute is a powerful political force in Washington (see earlier post). Later in the day, I had a chance to read another story that quotes another expert: "Salt is big."
What a difference between the stories.
Peggy Townsend's "Salt Rocks " story in the August 30 Santa Cruz Sentinel (yes, I'm a bit backed up because of travel) makes the point that gourmet salts are all the rage despite a few naysayers like Robert Wolke:
Chemistry professor and author of the book "What Einstein Told his Cook," Robert Wolke told the Associated Press that mineral concentrations in salt are so small they don't contribute any meaningful taste to food. No matter how "unprocessed" gourmet salt companies say their products are, the act of evaporation - whether by wind, sun or machine - purifies out most minerals. And while someone might be able to tell the difference between certain salts when tasted raw, the flavors fade to nothing when added to food.
A salt-using chef begs to differ:
Michael Rech, executive chef at the California Culinary Academy, says no one will taste the difference if you use fleur de sel in the water you are using to cook rice.
But use it in pate or foie gras "and you get this all-around flavor of salt which you don't get from an iodized salt," he says. And, when you want to set out salt for a dinner party, nothing is better than a small bowl of blushing pink Himalayan salt or stunning red Hawaiian salt crystals.
"All you need is a pinch of the gourmet salts," says Jennifer Jones, who owns Jones and Bones food and kitchen shop in Capitola. "It's like a good olive oil or a balsamic vinegar."
Jones, who carries 13 kinds of salts and offers free salt tastings, says customers have long sought out the fleur de sel but with the popularity of rubs and brining are now branching out even further to flavored salts like fennel salt and truffle salt to enhance their dishes.
People are dusting lavender salt on scrambled eggs and sprinkling truffle salt into mashed potatoes. They're brining fish in Hawaiian sea salt and rubbing salt seasoned with cranberry, rosemary and orange oil into turkey or chicken.
"Salt," says Jones, "is big."
That's the kind of "Big Salt" we like to talk about.
It was somewhat of a surprise to read the Washington Post's latest conspiracy theory - it must be the influence of the Da Vinci Code.
No one has ever disputed the impact of salt on blood pressure, nor for that matter has anyone ever disputed the impact of the myriad stresses we routinely encounter on blood pressure. There is, however, a great debate on whether these impacts per se lead to negative health events.
Hypertension is not a proxy for death, nor is it a surrogate for cardiac disease. Yet the anti-salt lobby ask us to believe it is, without the benefit of any scientific data. They rely exclusively on epidemiological studies using hypertension as an end point, ignoring all other variables. They rely on the famous Intersalt Study (Brit. Med J., v. 297, July, 1988) which compared per capita salt consumption to blood pressure in populations around the world. What they did not do was compare salt consumption to longevity. Using the same Intersalt data on salt consumption and the US Census Bureau data on life expectancy across the world, the resulting curve draws the inescapable conclusion that those populations which consume the most salt live the longest! No joke, no fudging figures - those populations which consume the most salt live the longest.
Of course, there are many other factors involved in longevity just as there are many other factors associated with blood pressure, but it still remains that the more salt a population consumes, the longer they live.
Indeed, one of the most outspoken and effective British anti-salt advocates, when confronted with data from Japan, whose citizens are amongst the highest per capita salt consumers in the world and also have the longest lifespan, dismissed this simply by stating that they would probably live even longer if they didn't eat so much salt. Some analysis, some science, no?
Before we all go around hoisting placards claiming Bland is Grand, let's consider the science and the data a bit more carefully.
Rather than join in a constructive debate on the policy options based on scientific evidence, anti-salt activists continue to finger-point at personalities and "special interests" to divert public attention to the fact that scientific studies do not identify an improved health outcome from reducing dietary salt.
The latest blast, typified in today's Washington Post , attributes the controversy to economic interests including "Big Salt" -- the Salt Institute. I've submitted this response to the Post:
"Big salt"? As president of the Salt Institute: thanks for the compliment. A few years ago, Gene Weingarten's Below the Beltway profiled the Salt Institute as a prime example of the notion that even the smallest and most insignificant interests have a not-for-profit organization (see http://www.saltinstitute.org/pubstat/beltway.html) . But that's another matter.
The article says "Too much salt is bad for you, right?" By definition, "too much" is, well "too much" ergo "bad."
But who's to say that the amount of salt Americans eat (and we're very average around the world) is "too much"?
I guess it depends on who you ask. The Cochrane Collaboration, inventors of "evidence-based medicine" feel there is no evidence supporting a population intervention. So, too, does the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, guardians at the HHS of the "evidence-based" approach to public health nutrition policy.
This is an enduring debate among scientists. While we don't fund research due to our modest means, we've seen the debate transform itself from the old debate: will lowering salt help a significant number of people reduce their blood pressure? to a new, better line of inquiry: will reducing dietary salt lower the risk of heart attacks and improve health outcomes?
Surprise. When the question is framed in terms of health outcomes, the answer is clear: none of the studies show a population benefit by reducing dietary salt. Some show increased risk. The president of the International Society of Hypertension published an article earlier this year, using a massive HHS database, and found 37% greater mortality among those following the Dietary Guidelines' recommedation.
We've reviewed the controversy on our website, http://www.saltinstitute.org/28.html and comment regularly on our blogs http://www.saltinstitute.org/rss/health-other/ and http://www.saltinstitute.org/rss/saltsensibility/ . We are a very transparent organization and you can also find all our public statements on this issue online at http://www.saltinstitute.org/advocate.html .
Dick HannemanPresidentSalt Institute
This may be David and Goliath, but we're not Philistines, in Webster's terms: "disdainful of intellectual values."
