The issue is consumed by conflicts of interest. Every salt-reduction advocate accuses the Salt Institute of muddying the waters with their industry 'lobby', while, at the same time, members of the World Action on Salt and Health try to pass themselves off as being objective and, as a consequence, trustworthy.

Somewhere between 60 - 80% of all papers recommending salt reduction have been authored by members of WASH – which is an activist, advocacy group committed to salt reduction. Yet, none of these authors have ever admitted to any conflict of interest. The chief proponent of salt reduction at the CDC as well as the Chairperson of the Electrolyte subgroup of the US Dietary Guideline Advisory Committee are also listed members of WASH. Motives are not a justification for conflict of interest. It does not matter if someone has a lofty passion to save the world. The moment individuals become committed to a particular point of view, they have lost their objectivity have a conflict of interest. The fact that all WASH authors have refused to admit their conflict of interest when it comes to the impact of salt on health is a clear indication of the quality of their interpretation of the evidence. Their views have to be considered with the same degree of skepticism as those of the Salt Institute – in fact even more skepticism, because they refuse to fess up to their conflict of interest.