The August edition of IFT 's Food Technology , the most widely read journal in the food industry (monthly circulation of 35,000) just came out. The OpEd column, Perspectives, contains a hard-hitting look at those who pursue salt reduction instead of increased fruit and vegetable consumption as a means of controlling hypertension.
A Salty Red Herring describes how a diet high in fruit and vegetables leads to a much lower incidence of chronic disease and a decline in the majority of risk factors associated with cardiac disease and stroke. The Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet, high in fruits, vegetables, and low-fat dairy products demonstrated that hypertension can easily be reduced, even in salt-sensitive people (Appel et al., 1997). However, with a diet high in fruits and vegetables, not only is hypertension dramatically reduced, but all other cardiovascular risk factors are reduced as well.
Despite the evidence of fruit and vegetables benefits, the article asks why do AMA, FSA, and CSPI continue to aggressively push salt reduction (partially reducing one cardiovascular risk factor in a small proportion of the population) and say so little about dramatically increasing the consumption of fruits and vegetables (reducing the impact of all risk factors for the total population)? In other words, why do they insist on chasing the salted red herring when a much more meaningful and beneficial resolution to many diet-related health problems is so obvious?
