|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|||
|
That lovin' spoonful
|
In the 1960s, Lewis Dahl of Brookhaven National Laboratory studied a rat that got hypertension with a high-salt diet. Dahl persuaded many scientists that high sodium caused hypertension, but critics later noted that, if scaled to human size, the rats would have been eating the equivalent of 500 grams of salt a day. That's beyond the famous potato-chip diet we're thinking pure road salt! And the rats were missing some of their kidney mass, so they were abnormally slow to get rid of extra sodium. But for a public eager for dietary advice, and a medical profession becoming more and more eager to dispense it, the sodium results were compelling enough. In 1979, the U.S. Surgeon General's report was the first blanket recommendation to reduce dietary salt. How convincing was the evidence at that point? Pretty flimsy, charges David McCarron, a persistent critic of the salt hypothesis from Oregon Health Sciences University. In 1979, he writes, the only "information that was supported by valid scientific data regarding the role of salt in blood pressure control was:
McCarron says that because this data supported the expected relationship between sodium and hypertension, the recommendation was made despite the lack of answers to "a vast number of issues that bear far more heavily on the relevance and rationality of national dietary recommendations," including:
In other words, the argument was inconclusive. What did the largest salt study find?
|
||||||
![]() |
|||||||
There are 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 pages in this feature. Bibliography | Credits | Feedback | Search |
|||||||