FDA Joins Salt-Ban Bandwagon

Now that Bloomberg's salt-reduction initiative is rolling, the FDA will soon introduce a salt attack of their own. Though it hasn't been formally announced, the Washington Post reports that the FDA is planning a 10-year initiative that would eventually lead to a legal limit on the amount of salt allowed in processed food. One source said, "This is not rolling off a log. We're talking about a comprehensive phase-down of a widely used ingredient. We're talking about embedded tastes in a whole generation of people."

The program would require the FDA to analyze thousands of products and then work with the manufacturers to reduce the salt input slowly enough so consumers didn't taste the difference. Currently, manufacturers are allowed to use as much salt as they want because it's "generally recognized as safe" under federal standards. Well, that was before studies showed that most Americans consume twice the daily recommended amount of salt a day. (Just one Katz's pastrami sandwich!) Recent studies have shown that cutting salt intake by three grams a day could prevent hundreds of heart attacks and strokes. Cheryl Anderson, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said "We can't just rely on the individual to do something." Surely not. They would probably just pull a Sliwa.

Many food manufacturers are already jumping on board. Sara Lee, Kraft Foods and General Mills have all announced they will reduce sodium, and Lay's even developed a new sodium chloride crystal shape that will somehow make their potato chips 25% less salty. However, others say salt is necessary for flavor and texture. "For some soups, for instance, it's not just the salty taste—sodium makes the soup feel thicker," says director of the Monell Chemical Senses Center Gary K. Beauchamp.

And Morton Satin, the coincidentally named director for technical and regulatory affairs Salt Institute, just wants to make sure the FDA is smart with his favorite seasoning. "I want to make sure they're basing this on everything that is in the scientific literature, so we don't end up being guinea pigs because someone thinks they're doing something good."

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Jaya Saxena in News on April 20, 2010 5:40 PM

Comments [rss]

saltisgoodforyou

nivek, you are completly oblivious to what is going on around you, if you were intellegent enough to realize what kind of an arguement u are starting i would not have to say the things that i am saying. but more than likely you are a liberal marxist bum sitting in your moms mobile home, collecting a welfare check to complain that the wealthy CAPITALIST workers arent taking care of u enough!!!!! look man you said that it was the healthcare industries problem, did we not pass a 900 billion dollar bill 3 weeks ago????????

Wish

I can understand wanting to cut junk out of processed foods, but for some of these items salt is used as a preservative instead of industry produced preservatives. I, for one, would rather deal with salt than a chemical I can't pronounce and of which I am unclear of possible side effects. Salt, I know how to handle/limit. polymethylwhosawhatsits is another thing entirely

Mordicai

Don't worry, you are supposed to research all this & make up your own mind. Otherwise you are a communist. Also you are supposed to figure out what an efficient safety package for your car is. What, you want a Nanny State deciding who can dump toxins into the water? Free market, you socialist scumbag! & if you can't put out your own house fire, well heck, that is just Darwinism, chump!

Politburo

Issues like that are exactly why this will be a 10-year process, working with manufacturers.

It is not some kind of top-down declaration from on high that some commenters above seem to think this is.

inoyourider

Fuck this shit.

Banning cigarettes is one thing.

This is WAY too much government intrusion into my privacy.

Fuck anyone that supports this.

Mordicai

I've been saying the same thing! First they want to limit the lead in my paint, then the lead in my food, then the mercury in my food, then the rat shit in my food! BIG GOVERNMENT IS OUT TO...STOP PEOPLE FROM POISONING ME! FASCISM!!!!!

Guest

Go overboard with sarcasm much? There's a HUGE difference between salt, which our bodies need, and lead & mercury, which are toxins.

Bottomless Chips

Before you dismiss it, it's worth at least a couple minutes of your time:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3535456672331412636#

Mordicai

The myth of the rational public is not an adequate reason to allow boom/bust systems to flourish. Or to allow people to make self-destructive choices. Heck, cigarettes are the perfect example-- all they DO is kill you, & have an addictive chemical in them to make you crave them. Rational actors is a lie, because human beings are real animals, not logical constructs.

Bottomless Chips

Do you believe in the marijuana legalization?

Do you believe in prohibition?

nivek

You clearly don't understand where, why, or how our healthcare costs are ballooning. Why must people like you be so stupid and not be able to connect the dots?

You consume too much salt, you get hypertension. You consume too many empty calories and don't exercise, you get hypertension, diabetes, heart failure, and not to mention fatter. You consume processed foods, and you don't get the nutrients your body needs because they've all been destroyed in the preservation process.

nivek

The reality here is that junk and not food is now making up many of our diets -- the only way it seems these days to make points and get things in the heads of thickheaded people is to yell at them, or gross them out.

Bottomless Chips

No, nivel.

The way you get people to understand is by letting them bear the responsibility of their actions. i.e. no federally taxpayer subsidized health care.

The nannying of the government does nothing other than create massive deficits and corruption.

hashedz

If people are too stupid to care for their own health and well being is it really the job of Gov't to look out for them? I think not. If they insist on eating junk for every meal then that makes them a Darwin Award Candidate and rightly so.

BTW Salt is a dietary mineral, not a poison.

Politburo

Dietary minerals and poisons are not mutually exclusive.

For example, you need tiny amounts of selenium to live, but you wouldn't want more than a trace amount.

The same goes for just about any substance. Even too much water can kill you.

"Is it really the job of the government to look out for them?" When the government subsidizes the negative consequences, yes, it is.

Bottomless Chips

"Is it really the job of the government to look out for them?" When the government subsidizes the negative consequences, yes, it is.

And you wonder why some people are saying they don't like the direction the country is going in?

Nanny state...it's sad.

The government can't look out for 300,000,000+. People need to take responsibility for themselves.

Not to mention the federal government is mired in inefficiencies and cost overruns, thus who will look out for the bad choices they make that we subsidize?

When you want the government to nanny, Politburo, they better lead by example. Here's to firing any unhealthy government employee, right?