How silly, you take the salt out of the products, then the people will just add it right back in by buying the salt.

Maybe we should come up with a better substitute for salt.

LP

Soylent Green? Come on, LP. Do you really not understand the difference between guidelines and rules? Do you really not want information about how to eat a more healthy diet?

Shugga-Shugga

You can add the salt back, if you wish, but this article said nothing about less salt in the foods on the market ..... most of the prepared foods still have way too much salt. This article an encouragement to seek out low-sodium choices if you care about your cardiovascular health..

Personally, I wish that more canned food and other convenience food had lower salt levels. It's much easier to add salt than to remove it. I cook without adding salt and because my taste buds have been conditioned for low salt many canned soups and other prepared foods are unpalatable.

Bring on the Nutrition Nazis!

One word comes to mind that describes this story... DUH!

A word of caution on the salt issue: Too little salt in ones diet will lead to fainting spells, cognitive disorders, and physical illness. Too much water can wash out salt from the body, with equal results. My mother and I have both been ill from too low sodium, caused by too much water intake, coupled with a low sodium diet.

Everything in moderation, please. And you shall remain healthy.

Tell us to have this, tell us not to have that. My goodness, aren't we capable to decide for ourselves. I particulary am tired of the powers to be telling me how to run my life. I don't need Big Brother looking over my shoulder. What is next, daily intake of what we breathe.

I have no problem with the government putting out information or guidelines like this as long as they remain simply guidelines. I live in a city (NYC) who's mayor (Bloomberg and his billions) has seen fit to require food establishments to minimize salt, trans-fats, and whatever else he doesn't like, whether the citizens want it or not...basically, a nanny-state. And that is flat-out wrong. Look, even the densest of us can walk into a supermarket and basically figure out for ourselves what's good or bad for us just by looking around. People choose to eat what they want, and no amount of legislating, as Bloomberg is doing, is going to change that. I personally think that the bigger problem is people eating a "bad" diet while leading an almost completely sedentary lifestyle. I'll use myself as an example. I eat basically what I want: red meat, pasta, dairy...and all can be considered "bad" for you in their own ways. But I also walk an hour a day (to and from work, and during lunch hour), and work out five nights a week. I'm just under 6 feet tall and weigh around 200, and as of my last check-up three months ago, my cholesterol and blood pressure are fine. I don't think I could say the same if I sat my butt on the couch every night and did nothing physical. Bottom line: moderation and at least some form of physical exercise will go a long way to helping people feel better, no matter what guidelines our government decides to throw out there.

Guess Big Brother's food nazis will soon be issuing new Federal rules on the elimination of salt. And, city governments in California will also soon be out in force adopting new rules for salt content in publicly served foods. It's an absolute wonder that mankind has survived and progressed for 10,000 years without the input of today's damn Federal Government's "I know what's best" bureaucrats! I think the best thing for the health of this country would be a steady and purposeful elimination of Federal bureaucrats from our daily lives!

My dad was on a salt-free diet because of Congestive Heart Failure. I got used to cooking without salt, and to be honest, I never really missed it.

I like salt on things like french fries (which is already so good for you anyway, lol), but most pre-made foods, take out and even restaurant foods (many of which are just frozen micro-in-the-bag type foods that are reheated in the kitchen), are loaded with it.
When you think you are eating healthy, (name brand bla-bla slim meals, soup, etc.), the sodium content is enormous, but then so are all the other additives of which we have no clue what they are or what they're for.

Next they'll be checking our blood for compliance.

Next on the chopping block - no more posting to forums... Everyone knows that boneheads on the vine will raise your blood-pressure faster than sodium ever will.

A word of caution on the salt issue: Too little salt in ones diet will lead to fainting spells, cognitive disorders, and physical illness.

All too true. I am not on a low salt diet and drink liquids as appropriate for my activity level but in the summer I have to drink sports drinks, take salt suppliments, and eat extra salt on my food to prevent getting sick.

Where does it say in any of these articles about salt, fats, sugars or any other food additives that you CAN"T add more to your food? Nowhere. It only suggests that more people should be conscious of how much is consumed. If you choose to ignore these recommendations you are free to do so.

It is also suggested that you avoid sticking your tongue into a light socket. But if you feel you must, please go ahead.

instructing about half the population to reduce daily sodium intake to 1,500 milligrams, or about a half a teaspoon of salt, a day.

That's more salt than I use in a month. I don't even OWN a salt shaker. If it's absolutely necessary for my tax $$ to be used to "educate" and "instruct" people that salt has bad effects on the body and you should stop, something needs to be done about the lax teaching by the teachers unions.

We already KNOW about salt intake, cigarette smoking, drinking while pregnant, and a million other things. Obviously this organization needs to be trimmed down as it has nothing better to do than be Bossy Captain Obvious.

Once the gov't forces manufacturers to reduce salt in foods that people already KNOW is salty (potato chips, etc), people are just going to start adding their own salt and end up with more than they had before. Your mouth knows when something needs more salt, pepper, sugar, etc. The hand doesn't usually know when to stop when you feel it needs "more" though.

Wow, it's 2011 and people still think that salt is EVIL? If you have two healthy kidneys and don't have a genetic predisposition toward sodium-related hypertension, you can eat all the salt you want as long as you drink plenty of water.

Maybe instead of imposing sodium reduction, they should encourage people to drink more water.

Sad but true, the only way we will get Americans to reduce their levels of salt and other things we consume too much of is by completely regulating how much of those things is in the foods we buy. But what will this country become if the government tells McDonald's they are now required to put no more than X mg of salt in their meals. If they also regulate the amount of red meat too and other things, you will quickly find yourself at Taco bell where their filler doesn't actually have meat in it anyway. Only difference will be that it will be a salt free Taco Bell instead.

There's red "meat" served at Taco Bell & McDonalds?

You can pry my salt out of my cold dead hands! Lay off! btw...is this a discussion about guns or salt?

I'm too busy memorizing the passwords required to access my various internet accounts to worry about counting the milligrams of sodium in my diet...

Shugga-Shugga "Maybe we should come up with a better substitute for salt."

They already did, but people don't use it - it tastes different.

The new rules are just common sense, but we're too spoiled by having processed foods readily available.

Also, if people started living longer, Social Security would run out of funds even faster - Eat, drink and be merry.

To the entire article. Oh Bite Me.

I'm so sick of this nanny state. I eat what I want and do what I want. I'm no spring chicken and I still have perfect blood pressure and cholesterol. When I have a problem, I'll change something. Until then Big Brother needs to shut the hell up. AND if I choose to change nothing if a problem does occur then Big Brother needs to shut the hell up TWICE!

Let people live (and die) their own lives you sanctimonous, know-it-all, duller than dishwater, useless TWITS!

shugga

that's the point! there is too much sugar and salt in everything! if you want it, add it - but let the rest of us at least have a choice!

Anindividual-- you do have a choice, you can cook at home from scratch. If we restricted the salt in processed food they will just come up some other kind of preservative that will be worse on the body than salt. Everyone needs salt in there system to stay healthy.

I would like to know who is behind the Food Pyramid, Who decides what is best for everyone to eat and how much money is paid by Fruit and Vegetable and Fish processors.

I'm sure you would rather be poisoned slowly than have the option of adding more salt if you wanted it... If you took a few moments to actually understand the implications of sodium on our nation's health you may understand.

Personnally I don't want the government adding sodium and high fructose corn syrup to everything which has cost our country dearly in their health as far as cardio vascular disease and childhood obesity.

The government isn't trying to make you stop eating salt, they just don't want to make people eat it who don't want to eat it. Big difference. You can add as much salt & sugar as you want but don't ask the rest of us to pay your doctor bills !

(faxes a salt shaker to reality) ^5

I don't want the government adding sodium and high fructose corn syrup to everything

The government isn't adding anything to your food. Not that you know about anyway.

You can add as much salt & sugar as you want but don't ask the rest of us to pay your doctor bills !

Same goes for you all riding motor cycles and taking the stairs instead of the elevator. You fall and hurt yourself don't come asking any of the rest of us for help.

So on a related topic, does anyone actually pay attention to these "Food Rules" anyway? Seems like a big waste of tax dollars that we don't have to me.

reality-1087596, (love the name) If the government didn't warn you about tainted food that was killing people, you'd complain about it not doing its job. If the government didn't warn you about the dangers of asbestos or approaching storms, or get after manufacturers for selling unsafe products, you'd also complain. Americans are not brain dead because they lack information relative to making good choices and living safe and healthy lives. They are brain dead if they choose to equate any and all information that comes from our government regarding health and safety with "control" that must be ridiculed and resisted.

Since most of us do not raise or grow our own food, and since we have no control over what food manufacturers put into our food, I am glad the government does. Since we have no control over making food manufacturers label the ingredients in our food, I am glad our government does. And since most of us are not doctors or scientists who have the savvy to know what certain foods will do to us, I am glad that our government steps in in this regard. Yes, thank God we have the government looking out for us.

Many past world civilizations DID have government "interference" in food and health matters, and to their benefit. This isn't a new thing. 300 + years ago, German doctors equated flies with disease and officials made lids on beer steins used in public houses mandatory. If the ancient Romans had had access to scientific knowledge, they wouldn't have used lead pipes for their drinking water. Other diseases have been eradicated because interfering governments decreed that chamber pots could no longer be dumped out windows. How you must long for the good old days.

I'm glad we have nutritional scientists, who aren't trying to sell me snacks, try to lay out what kinds of foods are necessary for healthy living.

And for thousands of years the average life span was about 30 years. The gubment (pronounced in a familiar way for you) is trying to educate you as to some factors that could prolong your life and decrease your costs to our health system. Take some responsibility for your actions and cut the salt!

Well, the US government has issued dietary guidelines for decades....the food vendors certainly aren't going to do it. Would you rather be ignorant of the consequences of you food choices?

ITWV,

Have you ever heard of hyponatremia
Hyponatremia is a metabolic condition in which there is not enough sodium (salt) in the body fluids outside the cells. Study it.

For over half a century now I have listened to the goverment on health issues. They flip flop on what is good and not good for you. Within 10 years you will here the goverment telling you that you need more salt intake, which will conflict todays report. I have concluded Political Correctness means: What is correct this morning may not be what is correct this afternoon. Live by political correctness and I can about guarantee you an early death by being stressed out all the time, for stress is one of the top killers.

Reality, you're about to fall for the Great Liberal Conspiracy (tm)! The Liberals say that being healthy is good, so folks like you will say, "I'm not gonna listen to that Lib'ral Big Gummint claptrap! Pass the salt, fat, and bacon!"

Pretty soon, you keel over with a heart attack because of your diet, and thus, the Liberals have won!

Hate to break the news to you, we are mortal. This means one day we will die. hard fact of being Human. My mother was a nutrition expert for over 40 yrs of her life, put vitamins and health above everything. She died at 68 of lung cancer and never smoked, or allowed smoke around her. After her death I concluded it is best to just live your life to the fullest you can. My Granfather loved salty foods, lived to 98, was almost 99 when he passed.

No I do not spend my life worrying about winning, or loosing to the liberals, it may be a priority for you, but is not a priority for me. As far as my diet. Been married 21 years and my wife watch's my diet. I just say "Yes Mam".

However my diet now is much more healthier then before I was married and lived on college junk food. Heart Attack? I have known of young athletes in great shape who have had them.

You are so right, how in the heck have we made it this far????? I would like the government to shut up and mind their business not ours and spend OUR tax dollars on something important like closing the borders or what is happening in Egypt or building our armies back up or funding NASA again or paying back the money they stole from Social Security or building up our roads and bridges or........... But, stay out of our lives!

ltwv: Salt intake is not a factor. There is really only one thing causing the weight gain for the majority of the overweight kids...video games.
When you take part in no real physical activities like running, playing outdoors or simply working around the house you'll gain weight ...look at all the coach potatoes

They are brain dead if they choose to equate any and all information that comes from our government regarding health and safety with "control" that must be ridiculed and resisted.

No, the 'brain dead ones" are all those who blindly accept everything our government says as gospel. The biggest lie ever told is "Hi, I'm from the government and I am here to help."

I LOVE government GUIDELINES - it's just a little nudge toward REGULATIONS...get used to it folks, the US of A is now rushing toward a complete nanny-state. Like regular lightbulbs, I am now going to start hoarding salt!

Agreed. And one thing the government isn't telling us about salt is that we DO need table salt with iodine! Sheesh, they cut out the iodine from most salt and now we have a great increase in thyroid disease and other such maladies. Research it yourself and don't rely on the government!

Reality, I have to agree with you on the diet stuff. I have an uncle who was an athlete all his life, did wrestling, ate healthy and ran a YMCA his either life, and when he was in his fifties, he had to have bypass surgery because his aorta was 99 percent blocked. The doctor told him it was hereditary and that the only reason he hadn't died was because he was in such good health.

ltwv

I'm sure you would rather be poisoned slowly than have the option of adding more salt if you wanted it...

Salt is not poison. As a matter of fact, your body needs some of it. For me to lower my intake by half a teaspoon a day, they're going to have to start sucking blood out of my body and filtering it out til I die. One of those disposable salt shakers used to sit in my cabinet for so long it hardened from moisture so I quit buying it.

The obvious solution is to cut government by half.
This article makes it obvious that we have too many people working for the government , with nothing to do.
Save the money, fire half of that department, see if any one notices.

Save SS by passing out salt and cigarettes. If more people were to die within 5 years of their retirement, SS would probably be in a better finacial state.

This is sorta "tongue in cheek", but I do not care for the Federal government going beyond the powers given to it in the Constitution, nor do I cherish the thought of paying for others medical bills and I do not believe that people should work from 18 to 65 and then live off SS payments for another 15 - 20 years.

I don't have the answers, but realize that a better system must be found before the country in completely bankrupt.

and since we have no control over what food manufacturers put into our food,

I have to disagree with this- while you may not have control over what manufactures put into a particular product, you absolutely have control over what products you put into your body. Read labels, select processed food that meets with your nutritional objectives. Better yet, don't buy the pre-packaged stuff to begin with, hit the produce aisle and the meat counter and know EXACTLY what you put in your food. Stop buying crap and suddenly affording quality becomes a whole lot easier. Cook from scratch instead of relying on pre-packaged meals and things get even better. The problem is more laziness than anything else. And all the guidelines in the world won't solve that root cause.

when Michelle Obama get her rear end down by half then I may cut my salt usage in half.

Allen

You have a very bizarre and, it seems, a very unscientific approach to your own nutritional needs. You gage your salt intake based on the size of someone else's rear end.

I don't understand the anti-government comments. No one is preventing salt lovers from having salt. I would like to have free choice to eat less salt, but it's very hard to remove the salt that is already in the food. Is it a Constitutional right not to have to salt your own food?

Who's trying to tell you what to eat? Nobody is taking your choices from you.

Loosen up that tin foil hat there sparky.

Nobody is telling you what you can and cannot eat! These are suggestions and guidelines. Our sodium intake has increased significantly in the past couple of decades, and eating such large amounts of sodium is NOT healthy.

For what it's worth, I don't think this is "wasted" money, either. We pay a massive amount of money in this country as a consequence of the high obesity rate. If you think you're health insurance rate isn't being affected by services required by obese folks, then I have something to tell you... Similarly, there are significant health expenses as a result of hypertension as well, as those costs do get passed on to healthy people as well (either through health insurance rates or through public services like Medicare, Medicaid, and similar services).

Don't complain and ask for help, when your fat ass is dying from all the wrong choices you made then.

generally thats the first step, next step is to tax it and then tells schools that can't use salt. Then you get a city or state like NYC or California that decides to implement this and then its banned. Just let us know whats in the food, it can make suggestions but by the looks of the amount this is getting rediculous if you exercise there is no way that is enough salt.

And then they add fluoride to the water to stop people from wanting to reproduce. The John Birch Society ride again! Tin foil hats for everyone!!!!

Nobody is telling you what you can and cannot eat!

Um, I hate to break it to ya, but you're wrong there. You should really pay attention to the laws that have been passing in the last 4 years. Trans-fat bans were just the inch the gov't needed to take a mile. Yeah, it's bad for you, but most of us aren't so stupid that we need the gov't to clean out the toybox so we don't choke on the toys.

Ok guys #1 these "suggestions will end up in Federal Regulations for restaurants and food producers. #2 I believe my point was clear that I recognized the obesity crisis. #3 I said I weighed 150 Lbs so I doubt that I have a fat ass

Hey vwterry you are an idiot, don't care much for John Birch society. But, pay attention whats going on. NYC bans transfats, SF bans McDonalds toys(or city/county near there), those are just a couple examples of what goes on. You can put your head in the sand if you want. Yeah, Transfats aren't good for you but just let us know and leave us alone.

These food guidelines have been around for years. It's not some government conspiracy to tell you what you can and can't eat. And yes, they have changed over the years as science has improved just like many other things. Since we all pay for those that are unhealthy, whether in the form of higher insurance premiums, medical costs and/or taxes, it seems like a worthwhile invesment to issue guidelines. I do believe it's the government's role to require the food manufacturers to provide us the information we need on the product labels so we can make our own choice whether or not we want to put the stuff in our bodies. The food industry's main concern is sales, not our health. And for every story out there about some guy who lived to be 98 who ate bacon every day, there is an opposite story. My father, who will be 70 this year, takes 19 prescriptions, and has taken that many for years! And a great deal of what he has is hereditary, but can be prevented or mitigated with proper diet and exercise. Yes, I'm going to die, but I really don't want to have a heart attack (he had one at age 44) and I don't want to spend my golden years in and out of the hospital. I also would rather spend my money on shoes, not on 19 prescriptions. So, I have made some serious modifications to my diet with my physician's help. I appreciate the guidelines as they are one of the many tools I use in making my own food choices.

TheGriff,

But you can add all of those things if you want to. That is the point. They are still being manufactured and sold in this country. It's your choice.

As private citizens you can eat anything you want, there are people that chew glass and they aren't denied that right by the government. It's your choice.

Until things like food additives are banned feel free to purchase, eat or rub them all over your body. The government may recommend that you don't but will not, and have not, stopped you.

That's your choice. Isn't that what you all want?

Eat a pasty! Kids love em too!

Pasties made with real beef and fresh vegetables, without all the sodium and preservatives. A true meal in itself.

I hope to see more convenient food vendors and fast food establishments take this heed and add less sodium to their products

How about exercising a consumers choice and simply eat somewhere else?

Str8shott

I agree with you and I think that more healthy choices are available. It is a challenge, however. Do you also find it curious that foods with less salt tend to cost more than foods that contain your entire daily minimum requirement in one serving?

Nibor

We do eat somewhere else and, increasingly, restaurants are noticing and changing their menus. You may have to salt your own food soon. What a hardship for you!

bingo. it's all about the money.

So true bloggit. The same with the tobacco industry. We have all the resources if you can afford them or have issurance, to combat diseases after you get them. It`s about time we as a nation address preventive medicines or healthy living. And expose those who profit and lobby congress to allow their products to remain legal to purchase although there are tons of evidence that its not only toxic but are hazardous to human life.

It's all about the $$? Who's forcing the consumers to buy these goods? I'm pretty sure $$ is all about the demand.

Talk to conservative legislators lets cut off all funding to government for the next two years, that will give us a chance to get caught up.
Another plus would be 10 million libbies would die of frustration..

They're not taking your salt away from you! They are wanting less put in by the processor so you can put on your own layer of white on every time you eat. My husband did that, after a stint in the hospital where he died several times and ended up with several tubes and broken ribs(helped keep him here until the zapper worked, finally) he has put the shaker down some. Not entirely, some people learn slowly. That's all the government is doing, TRYING to help you save your worthless hide!!! Too many are talking so radical about this, don't be dumb.

Live the California diet and become 90 years old but no medical care after 70(Obama care). You should know by now that everyone dies no matter what you do. Do you think that the last 10 to 15 years of life is quality living? Go look in the Elder care centers. You are not immortal and there is nothing you can do about it.

Did you read the article? Or are you just being reactionary?

They never said to STOP eating salt. They just said eat LESS salt. There is a point where to much salt is BAD for you, and according to the study, most foods in a typical diet put you over that limit.

MelonHead

The dose is the important issue here. A little salt is necessary .... a lot of salt is unhealthy. Cholesterol is also necessary ..... a lot of cholesterol is unhealthy. Aspirin is a valuable medicine .... a lot of aspirin ...... well you get the picture.

Acidrain and Don97524: they don't get it, doubt if they EVER will. If you say government, the ears shut and the mouth opens, out comes fear and paranoia!! You guys said it, moderation.

Right you are Carol. No one is taking away salt shakers or even suggesting that that be done. Apparently it is a major hardship for some people to salt their own food. Maybe they need someone to cut their meat as well.

don, you sound like a broken record. As long as you're accommodated than obviously no one else could possibly be inconvenienced. Please, find something else to say. This is already the 4th time I've read this exact same post from you.

Ann

Since I have not posted the exact post four times you are obviously wrong.

don, then you have a problem with your memory. Post after post after post about it being a hardship for people to salt their own food. Over and over and over and... get the drift. We get it, you don't like salt. One post could have said it all.

So, Ann, do you have any ideas or contributions to offer or is it just complaints and criticism of others? I took a look at several of your recent comments and found nothing of substance ..... only insults and disagreements without offering any alternative. So why bother?

I agree that I had a few (not four) similar (not identical) remarks in my blog conversation with a couple of different people. If you want to keep a tally of the similarity of my various remarks, that is your business. I hope you find it all enlightening and entertaining.

I believe I stated "back off" quite plainly to the nanny state and I'll add a "mind your own business" for good measure. There, perfectly stated ONCE in a concise statement. It's hardly an issue that needs exhaustive repetition and grandstanding.

FYI, Ann. In spite of your very logical, intelligent and persuasive arguments I STILL believe that it not a hardship to have to salt one's own food. And there is little in the world that is more tiresome than comments from you and your fellow "libertarians" railing about "nanny states", naziism, socialism, communism and the like every time the government is mentioned in a news article.

You don't know much about politics do you Don! That is not a libertarian that is a member of the Tea Party. I only use terms like Nazi, Fascist, Socialist or Communist in the proper form - such as referring to Nazi Germany during the Hitler regime, or Communism when referring to the former Soviet Union. I am a moderate. I am pro-choice, voted for Obama (because Palin is a flat-out loon and I had no better option) and pro-environment. I am also a fierce believer in states rights and that our personal freedoms are being destroyed day after day by the federal government that wants to govern our every action, from what we eat, to what we can watch, to how we are permitted to raise our children.

You missed the entire point of the problem the majority have with this story (and I'm not surprised because you seem to miss a lot of obvious points). Every time the government comes out with a "guideline" today, tomorrow it becomes a law. I think only an idiot would ride a motorcycle without a helmet or ride in a car without a seatbelt but it is my strongest belief that we allow people to be idiots. And as far as food control, that should be dictated by what the public wants. The vast majority of Americans know excessive amounts of salt are bad for you, if they cared that much they wouldn't buy foods or eat in restaurants that used excessive amounts... That's obviously not what is happening. The salitiest snacks are the most popular.

Let the people govern themselves in all private matters and the federal government needs to back off - is ALL anyone is protesting. All you're protesting is your right to whine that everyone should carry a salt shaker because you're (I don't know????, what????) allergic to salt? And while I don't have a single problem with your making the statement, I found it extremely annoying that you kept making the same statement over and over - and that was ALL my post was about. - Another obvious point you seem to have missed.

Ann

I merely disagree with the "slippery slope" premise that guidelines become restrictions. Such thinking leads, for example, to widespread possession of hand guns and assault weapons by people who should not have such weapons. The NRA has convinced its membership and a large portion of the rest of the population that if they take away some guns they will soon take away all guns. Such rhetoric has invaded the political discourse to such an extent that large numbers of people have, in my opinion, become far too reactionary - considering all government bad.

I am not pleased with everything the government does .... not even close. But I do understand that in a democracy I do not always get my own way. I do believe, however, that government at its best is the way that people get together to accomplish those things that are difficult or impossible to do alone. The comments on this blog make it clear to me that there are many people who consider the government their enemy no matter what the issue.

Consider your argument over salt. You believe that today's guideline is tomorrow's mandate. That is unlikely, but even if low salt levels in foods were the "law of the land," who is harmed? If we are talking about restaurant food, salt is available on the table. If we are talking about fast food, small packets of salt are available for customers. If we are talking about groceries, the food will be taken home where customers who like salt have a salt shaker.

Conversely, a large portion of the population is, or should be, on a salt-restricted diet because of hypertension or other health concern. Your apparent response is too bad ..... shop or eat in places that offer low salt food. I STILL do not think its a hardship to salt one's own food and I believe that they should do so in the interest of the general health of the population. Saltiness of food is an acquired taste and many of our food choices have the unfortunate result of causing people, including children, to crave unhealthy food choices.

The salt argument has been going on for more than a generation. The number of lower salt choices in prepared foods has increased because of consumer demand. This is a benefit of information which is, after all, what the article we are discussing is about. Scientific medical information is produced by the government, people respond by requesting (or demanding) healthy choices. A market is created. Restaurants and food companies produce and advertise their healthy choices. One even uses the brand name "Healthy Choice." It's capitalism at its best, don't you agree.

Sometimes the government does issue mandates, but in general those mandates regulate severe and acute health issues ...... limits on bacteria, rat feces and hair, etc., etc. In my opinion the government has not over-reached and I do not, as you obviously do, believe that they will over-reach.

I continue to be bored by the automatic and usually irrational rants about "nanny states" and I believe that in many (not all) cases it is merely shorthand for anti-government rhetoric. In my personal experience, the people I know that engage in the nanny state, slippery slope, all government is bad dialogue are the people who automatically vote against school funding measures because "I don't have kids in school" and always vote for the candidate who promises lower taxes. My view is that some level of taxes is necessary and it takes hard word to find the right and fair level.

ps .... I am sorry that you took offense to my similar statements to a couple of different people. Please realize that some people view a blog as a conversation and a response is often intended for one person. You exaggerate when you accuse me of the making the exact same comment four times ..... and I also think that you overreacted. Chill.

For one, they dont process all flour products for consumers, and second, there's this magical thing called exercise. Both of which are void in the US...

We also eat a lot of corn in the US. It's in MANY of the foods we buy.

Tyranusex - Asian cultures have a high incidence of hypertension due to the high salt consumption in their diets. The Ministry of Health and Welfare in Japan published the following results from a study of circulatory disorders in Japan.

More than 33 million adults were estimated to have hypertension, which reached 45% of the adult population in Japan. Prevalence of hypertension increases as population ages in both men and women (Table 1). More than half of middle-aged men and almost three-fourths of elderly men had hypertension

Besides hypertension, there are several other major diseases for which the Japanese are at greater risk than Westerners.

Good and valid point - was going to post pretty much the same comment.

So you have to picture things - like ever seen a fat native Japanese person - ever seen a thin naturalised (American/Japanese person). Think it's called it's all about FAT. A typical Japanese diet consists of large amounts of fish and salt - guess the food part would essentially be protein with some Omega based fats. Comparatively our diet consists of enormous quantities of highly processed foods containing fat and carbs (carbs of course being converted to fat because we don't exercise). The salt intake is likely higher per capita simply because of the processing (salt is necessary for this). This move to reduce salt intake doesn't address the real issue - that is, we are by and large fat and obese (you don't get that way by eating salt) you get that way by sitting on your duff, couch potatoing and eating like pigs. Convenience food is too convenient, we've lost the ability or inclination to cook fresh produce and we rely on fast and processed foods for our staples. What we really need is initiatives to get the kids (our futures) to put down their video games and to encourage adults of all ages to excercise more.

What did the article say - 60% of Americans are overweight or obese - let's deal with that first and the salt later - let's live like the Japanese - soy sauce is so nice.

Lets see... Remembered from my exchange student days in Tokyo- I ate very little processed food- my host mother went to the market every 1-2 days (and rode her bike to do so) to buy fresh food to prepare for meals. Breakfast was the most likely to contain processed food in the way of instant soup or some form of sausage product, but also always included vegetables and other fresh items (honestly- ate the strangest breakfasts- hot dogs, broccoli, toast and cabbage soup was a particular "favorite"). Also, not a day passed without some major walking or bike riding. Probably a mile to and from the train station and at least that far from the train station to campus and back. And a lot of walking in between sight seeing and the likes. FAR lower alcohol consumption, especially for women. Ate a lot more rice than bread (even though it was white rice, it was still much less processed than any bread product ever will be). Ate a lot more fish than red meat or chicken. So all totaled, I think it adds up more to lifestyle choices than anything else. The closer to it's natural state the better when it comes to anything you eat. The more you cook from scratch than buy in a box, the better. The more you move, the better. All simple, logical steps, but they require more effort than most Americans are willing to put forth (myself included in some instances)

Suzy - the article is about reducing the consumptionof sodium, not processed foods. It's not the fresh produce or general lack of processed foods that cause Asians to have a high incidence of hypertension, it the excess salt found in items such as soy sauce and salted fish.

Thank you, Zach! The ignorance of most of the posters on this topic and many others is both overwhelming and alarming. No one is trying to keep those of you who are happy sitting on your couch watching football with a six-pack on one side and a jumbo bag of chips on the other from having your fun, so stop complaining. However, there are those of us who want to be informed. If you actually make an effort to eat a more nutritionally balanced diet and reduce excess salt, you will eventually find that you have no desire whatsoever for junk food.

This study is a waste of our money. There have been countless studies done for at least the last 40 years saying much the same thing with some recomending the government ban the addition of any salt to processed foods.

Zach, just like "global Warming"? I read the e-mails !

The Raven

Feel free to eat whatever you want. This is a free country and nothing in this article changed that.

We can always count on the anti-government crowd to comment about how bad the government is. Thanks for your very informative contribution.

When you live in the DRC, then you can complain; until then shut up!

You are right about the iodine. When you leave off salt, take iodine. You need it for thyroid.

yeah but kinda silly really. the iodine is only in the salt b/c it's put there. that's not really a reason to say salt is good.

dam tired of this - how about sharing your references for the "facts" that you present with the rest of us. It's dangreous to report unsupported statements as "fact" on a public forum just because you think that they are facts. There is always some fool out there who might believe you.

The title of this article includes the statement, "New food rules lower sodium limits." You are confusing low salt and low sodium. Table salt is sodium chloride. Low salt foods are made by reducing the amount of salt added, in which case the food contains less salt, just like the label says, but not necessarily more potassium. Compare the amount of salt, sodium and potassium in regular canned soup and reduced salt canned soup. Low salt foods are not the same as reduced sodium foods, which are made with salt substitutes that may include potassium chloride rather than sodium chloride.

Lowering salt and increasing water in your diet will not "wash the vitamins and minerals out of your system much faster". That is an absurd statement with no basis in fact.

"If you crave salt, your body is telling you that you need more" is also a myth. If you crave a slice of chocolate cake, is your body telling you that you need more sugar and trans-fats?

camil - If one reduces salt consumption, there is no need to take iodine supplements. Iodine is naturally present in other foods, such as milk, seafood, vegetables and cereals. Even if you stop adding salt to your food, you still consume iodine from other sources that aren't necessarily apparent. For example, most multi-vitamins contain iodine. You should only take iodine supplements if you are instructed to do so by your doctor.

You are right. I was told by my doctor. My remark was misleading, I guess. Sorry bout that.

If iodine is already present in foods why is it added to salt?

For those who are uneducated, once again, salt does not naturally have significant if any level of iodine in it, it is added in production of it. It has been proven that those who live near oceans do not need nearly as much iodized salt because it is naturally in the salty ocean air. This is why they recommended at one point in nutrition that it was better if you are using salt to use iodized salt because it has the extra iodine added for dietary purposes. Otherwise, I disagree completely with the "fact" of low salt or sodium food all tasting the like crap. I have had kidney disease and limit very much how much sodium I ingest. I eat and prepare extremely flavorful meals with next to no sodium added to them and have had plenty of people say they didn't miss it or would never have really known the diffierence. It's all about knowing the foods, what complements it, and what seasonings to use in place of the sodium, it really isn't that difficult and it's much healthier to do.

ROFLMAO! Excellent!

When is the sequal coming out?

Nice literary reference, George, but there is no mandate in the article, no Big Brother, no conspiracy. It is nice to see, however, that at least a few of the tin hat crowd have a sense of humor.

GREAT. But wasted here...

Amazingly entertaining. You should write a book! lol

I did take notice of this though:

"conservatives to leave the law intact. “A living Constitution is extremely flexible,” said the Court’s eldest member, Elena Kagan III. “ Europe has had laws like this one for years. We should learn from their example,” she added."

It caught my eye because our Pharmacology teacher told us today, about a man and his father that took a trip to France. The father became sick while there, with a disease that would have only taken a treatment of a certain, very cheap, antibiotic to clear up. However, the man was just over 65 years of age, which made him ineligible for treatment under the French socialist health plan.
The son offered to pay for the antibiotic, of which he knew would cure the disease, because he was himself, a doctor. They were denied and had to fly home to get the antibiotic. The father was fine.
Obamacare, anyone?

Sorry Conway T that is just internet fake news. Not a true story. You might want to look in to the French health care system before you post.

So...what does this have to do with reducing sodium in our diets?

LMAO George!!!

Those who don't "get it" have not been paying attention...but they'll accuse you of wearing a tinfoil hat and all the while, they've been wearing blinders!

ABCzyx,

To answer your question: Today's Government "Recommendations" are tomorrows Government "Mandates", in case you haven't been studying history or read the entire 2000+ pages of the HCRA. It specifically established Government "Standards of Care" boards made up of Government accountants and other "bean counters" that will determine what type of care is given and to whom in order to meet governmental "cost control" targets for all Government Health-care programs. Once we are all in the "Public Option" plan, the Government will "Mandate" what you can and can't eat to stay covered, and since they will be the "only game in town", you won't have a choice.

Hanover,

I happen to know of similar case personally, because I'm related to the person it happened to. There was also the case of the women with the Urinary tract infection that nearly died while in an English hospital. Seams they put her in bed next to a highly contagious person on the 100 patient ward and she caught whatever it was. Only reason she lived is that she just walked out of English hospital after 2 weeks and "illegally" flew back to US and got proper treatment.

A favorite exercise of those on the right is to predict the future. With usually inaccurate results. Why not wait until they actually mandate these sort of things before you condemn them?

I was reading a few of the posts above and had to return to the top of the page to assure myself that this was a story about government recommendations for average Americans to consider lowering their daily intake of salt. As to health care in England, we are not in England folks, no matter what they do to treat their people.

htdjpf - you obviously are so concerned about government control that you didn't take the time to fully read and comprehend the article. It's a real stretch of the imagination to assume that a study that resulted in guidelines for reducing sodium in our diets is the precursor to the government telling us what we can eat. Maybe you should loosen that aluminum foil helmet that you are wearing.

Very good, George. A great literary piece. Love the pseudonym. As for those of you who "don't get it", I can only hope you read the last few lines of George's post. Too bad we cannot learn from history. It seems we cannot learn from RECENT history. Remember a study saying trans-fats were not good for you? Mr. Bloomberg saw the "study" and decided to ban trans-fats from New York City restaurants, and take-aways (fast food joints). I'll keep wearing my tin foil hat a little longer, if you please. That is until I die of a malady caused by tin foil.

How about we eliminate MSG and flavor "enhancers" they are potentialy much more harmful than salt or sugar.

Eliminate corn syrup. Replace it with sugar, like we used to use. Yes, we need to reduce sugar consumption, but corn syrup is even worse for us than sugar.

ABCzyx,

BU!!sh!t. New studies have shown that High Fructose Corn Syrup is processed no different than "Sugar". Your body processes it all the same. HFCS is about 66% Fructose sugar and 33% Sucrose sugar. Standard table "Sugar" is about 50% Fructose and 50% Sucrose. HFCS can be made from CORN, grown in the US, while "Sugar" comes from Sugar Cane plantations in third world countries that use the equivalent of "Slave Labor" in production.

So your little, Liberal, bleeding-heart, shouldn't want us to use Sugar since it is a "Blood crop". It was the "Social Justice" police like you that caused companies to switch from "evil" sugar to HFCS twenty or thirty years ago. SO, either you have "selective memory" or you are one of those ignorant, YOUNG, "I know everything", activists/Democrats, that still lives off mom and dad, and believe you have the "RIGHT" to tell other people how to live, because YOU "know what's good for them".

Woah man. He was just making a statement. No need to put him down like that. You get all that information from that website about HFCS?

htdjpf - you should do a little research. First, the fructose content of high fructose corn syrup can be controlled by the manufacturing process. HFCS can contain as much as 90% fructose depending on the manufacturer. It is fructose that has been associated with increased incidence of metabolic syndrome, which includes risk factors such as high blood pressure, abdominal fat, high blood triglyceride levels, high uric acid levels, insulin resistance and a state of chronic inflammation. In addition, pilot studies have indicated that HFCS contains trace amounts of mercury which probably originates from the sodium hydroxide and hydrochloric acid required to produce HFCS.

Sugar produced from sugar cane or sugar beets is a disaccharide derived from glucose and fructose. The key here is that each molecule of sucrose contains one unit of glucose and one unit of fructose. In other words, there is a one to one ratio of the two in table sugar whereas HFCS contains fructose in greater ratio to glucose. After all, it is called high fructose corn syrup for a reason. Therefore, although excess sugar is not good for anyone, sugar is preferable to HFCS because it contains a lower percentage of fructose and does not have the mercury content of HFCS.

"Sugar" comes from Sugar Cane plantations in third world countries that use the equivalent of "Slave Labor" in production.

Sugar cane and sugar beets can both be grown in the USA. Try checking out Florida (the largest producer of sugar cane in the USA), Louisiana, Hawaii and Texas, among others.

It was the "Social Justice" police like you that caused companies to switch from "evil" sugar to HFCS twenty or thirty years ago.

The reason that this country converted to HFCS has nothing to do with "Social Justice" police. Factors for the conversion include governmental production quotas of domestic sugar, subsidies of U.S. corn, and an import tariff on foreign sugar,all of which combined to raise the price of sucrose to levels above those of the rest of the world, making HFCS less costly for many sweetener applications. Pressure was put on the government to reduce the use of sugar and increase production of HFCS by corn grower lobbies and Corn Refiners Association. In other word, special interest groups won...business as usual in Washington. European nations have not converted to HFCS.

SO, either you have "selective memory" or you are one of those ignorant, YOUNG, "I know everything", activists/Democrats, that still lives off mom and dad, and believe you have the "RIGHT" to tell other people how to live, because YOU "know what's good for them".

Wrong again, htdjpf. I'm a 61-year-old female with are Ph.D. in chemistry. I haven't "lived off mom and dad since I was 18". While I don't know everything, I can assure you that I know more about biochemistry, physiology and chemistry than you will ever know, and based on what I know, I personally prefer table sugar as a sweetener over HFCS for the reasons listed above.

Well instead of creating a fair health care program they will force the American people to eat and be healthier. Never mind choice it no longer exists.

Actually, they might be trying to get people healthy so it won't cost so much when mandatory health insurance comes in.

GOOD!!! Hope they achieve both, and soon!!!

I'm afraid that cooking for yourself or very careful shopping are the only solutions.

I use a pepper herb mix myself to flavor my foods. It basically pepper with cheap herbs added to it, like sage, thyme, oregano, garlic, whatever I can find at the store. The no salt kind. I've used this for years and it works just fine. I figure I get enough salt in the rest of my diet.

The quality of food has declined for the pass few years thanks to self serving experts. Bread is almost inedible not to mention all the "special packaging" to promote health. They only thing promoted was an increase in profits! So you take out the salt, I will put it back in so that your slop is edible.

And how did your doctor find out ...... by reading the studies that were funded by the government. Your doctor, it may surprise you to know, did not discover this information on his or her own.

don, no. The government was not involved in such matters when I was told. It was busy with WWII.

imperious, no, you don't know me and thus did not detect my extreme sarcasm. I expect no efficiency at all from our government.

Now THAT is choice, good for you. Without-add your own, with-too bad for you-for all of us. Plain food gives us choices, doctored (added to) food doesn't. How's that for FREE choice, good enough????

1. Who cares what Asians think.

2. Guess they should stop putting all that soy sauce and MSG in their food.

dam tired

Don't judge Asian food by what is served in American restaurants. Completely different that was Asians in Asia eat, including the MSG content.

It is pretty bad, Once I bought a loaf of bread and I looked at the label. I saw that it had HFCS. That is pretty dumb to me..

Tanja

Where do you get your ideas? Based on your theory I guess lots of people "need" Big Macs, greasy fries, and pizza. You can justify eating an entire bag of Lay's potato chips (because you can't eat just one) because you would not crave those chips if you didn't "need" them. How foolish!

There is your mistake-- I always said if it is all natural it is good for you, if not don't eat it. whole milk, whole eggs, great beef, bacon, potato's , real butter (but I think that they are adding something to butter you buy in the store, it is softer and has little white spots in it when melted, My home made butter it hard under 70 degrees and when melted is smooth and velvety) .

We need to find out what everyone over 80 has been eating all there life>>

You know what? NO ONE IS TELLING YOU WHAT TO EAT! SO STFU!

These are guidelines for people who give a @!$%# about what they eat. You can continue being an ignorant fool and eat what you want.

Loosen up your tinfoil hat.

Why don't you take care of yourself and quit trying to control the lives of others? Your the same kind of person that will complain about overpopulation and then try to regulate safety. You better remove the aluminum from your own head before criticizing others.

SNAPPA

It's just information. Some of us like information. You can ignore it if you'd like. Personally, I wish the government would MANDATE lower sodium in foods. Those of us who want lower sodium would appreciate it because we are having a hard time figuring out how to get the unwanted salt out of a can of soup. You, on the other hand, can add your own salt if it doesn't suit you. I can guarantee that the government will allow you to buy all the salt you want at the grocery store. There will be no tax, it will always be cheap, and you can use as much as you want.

I tried Salt free Ketchup in the past and you know what, it tasted like crap. Sorry, some foods need something to give it a little bit of flavor. I love raw tomatoes but ketchup and tomato sause without some spices/salt reallly suck.

TheGriff

Here's a thought. If it isn't salty enough, add salt. It's easy. But those of us with different tastes have a lot of trouble removing unwanted salt.

Don,

I keep seeing people like you posting the "Don't cook with salt", "if it isn't salty enough then add some" mantra. Problem with that is: 1) Salt works better and requires less when added at time of cooking. Studies have repeatedly shown that people use over twice the total amount of salt "at the table" when none is used in preparation, than when it is used during preparation.

As an example: If you use a teaspoon of salt in the 6 quarts of water used to boil 2 pounds of standard "off the self" dried pasta, you don't need salt at table and most of that teaspoon of salt goes down the drain with the water. But if you don't use that salt during cooking, people with use up to 1/2 a teaspoon of salt "at the table" for EACH SERVING of that pasta.

Most "Canned" foods shouldn't require any "table salt" unless they were specifically "Salt Free" and unfortunately those taste like cardboard.

I'd like to have the concession on card board---sooner or later that's what we'll be eating.

htdjpf

I don't use salt during cooking and use very little salt at the table. My salt shaker is filled approximately once in two years. I don't put any salt in the pasta water, and add no salt to the pasta at the table. What other people add at the table concerns me not at all.

The taste for salt is acquired and the taste for less salt is also acquired. It took me about a month of a low salt diet before unsalted food was palatable .... now most canned soups and other prepared foods are unpleasantly salty.