Despite Evidence That Salt Is Good For You, Politicians Want To Regulate Your Salt Intake

Remember, folks, fat is the new smoking.

Suppose you wanted to test the effects of halving the amount of salt in people’s diets. If you were an academic researcher, you’d have to persuade your institutional review board that you had considered the risks and obtained informed consent from the participants.
You might, for instance, take note of a recent clinical trial in which heart patients put on a restricted-sodium diet fared worse than those on a normal diet. In light of new research suggesting that eating salt improves mood and combats depression, you might be alert for psychological effects of the new diet. You might worry that people would react to less-salty food by eating more of it, a trend you could monitor by comparing them with a control group.
But if you are the mayor of New York, no such constraints apply. You can simply announce, as Michael Bloomberg did, that the city is starting a “nationwide initiative” to pressure the food industry and restaurant chains to cut salt intake by half over the next decade. Why bother with consent forms when you can automatically enroll everyone in the experiment?

Personally, I reject the premise that the government has any business managing the public’s health to begin with. If a given citizen wants to be a fat slob, shouldn’t he or she be free to do that? Is this not still a free country? And to the extent that our individual health choices impact the overall health insurance/health care industry, isn’t that a reason to make the individual more responsible for his/her own health care instead of an excuse for the government to step in and start telling us what to eat?
Six years ago I was writing, in opposition to smoking bans, that when the big government nanny staters were done going after the smokers they’d turn and go after other things. Like salt. I was right.
When the government is dictating our diets to us, we can thank the smoking ban proponents for setting a precedence whereby the government can dictate the way we live our lives to us for the sake of our own health.

Tags: , , , ,


«
»
  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    That would be like trying to regulate Ted Kennedy's alcohol intake! HA!!!

  • http://www.indymedia.org/en/index.shtml Angry Vertebrate

    Sounds like someone is getting a little defensive of his poor-quality diet.

    Of course too little salt causes problems, any athlete knows that, but so does too much. If the market won't provide enough quality food, then it is up to democratic institutions to force them to.

  • Halyn

    That's why we have a free market. That *is* the democratic institution to implement change in the market.

  • http://www.trifter.com/USA-&-Canada/South-Dakota/Fargo-North-Dakota-10-Cool Juhls @ 10 Cool Plac

    Interesante. It's good to encourage healthier diets, but balance is key! Table salt does have iodine added to it, so a little bit in the diet is good. Avoid excess of anything, I think.

  • http://magyartruth.blogspot.com/ Chief RZ

    Anyone care to guess what the average daily intake of salt should be?

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Sounds like someone is getting a little defensive of his poor-quality diet.

    Sounds like my diet is none of your business, statist.

  • 2keyboards

    The whole reason there's iodine in salt is because there were epidemics of hypothyroidism around the country. So, if you limit salt intake too much, but aren't eating anything high in iodine (sea food, soy), then you run the risk of your thyroid not working properly, and causing other health problems; like depression, slow heartbeat, slow metabolism (hello obesity!) for starters.

  • http://suitepotato.blogspot.com/ sayanything-4808

    Chief, the recommendation by the USDA is 2400mg for sodium. However, salt lost to urination,defecation, and perspiration must be replaced. Biking and hiking, I go through quite a lot. I can do 3600 easy for intake and still end the day low. Proper fluid flow is also important. So, if you sit around hardly taking in liquids, and eat a lot of salty foods, you're going to build up a lot quicker than otherwise.

    Basically, they want to address a lack of proper chemical flow-through due to lack of exercise by decrease of the chemical intake. Like telling people to cut fat out of their diets instead of putting them to use by getting their body chemistry moving and burning. As if they're giving up on encouraging the nation to move around.

    Encouraging… an alien concept to the political class.

  • Anthony

    If the market won't provide enough quality food, then it is up to democratic institutions to force them to.

    And when the market provides something liberals don't like legislate it out of existence. Smoking, trans-fat, sugar, salt, talk radio, bonuses, cars that people actually buy, energy consumption, private health care, etc. Screw freedom man only the government has the knowledge to tell you how to live.

    How about we kick the government out of our lives, and make our own choices. If I want salt I'll eat salt. And I will pay whatever consequences exist.

    I've stopped eating french fries cause the new cooking oil makes them taste terrible.

  • robert108

    If the market won't provide enough quality food, then it is up to democratic institutions to force them to.

    With free people making free choices, the market "provides" what the free people choose to bring to it. When govt, through taxation and regulation, prevents free people from making free choices, then markets cease to work properly. Without that interference, things work just fine. The real economy is people, not the govt.

  • http://Array 2Hotel9

    Without salt you die. That simple.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development