Regulating salt? Give me a break
According to a Canadian news story, the US American Medical Association along with the Center for Science in the Public Interest ("CSPI"), a nanny-state "science" organization used a public hearing today to call on the FDA to regulate salt. (Background information on the hearing itself is available HERE.)
http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2007/11/29/salt-regulations.html
According to a CSPI article, "The American Medical Association says that 150,000 lives could be saved in the U.S. annually if salt in processed foods and restaurant foods were cut in half."
And according to the Canadian article, "Kevin Willis, a bio-chemist with the Canadian Stroke Network, says about 30 Canadians die every day as a result of too much salt."
CSPI is the same group that is trying to ban non-diet soda for kids, to force restaurant chains to put "nutrition information" on their menus, and to get cities or states to ban trans-fats...and who knows what else?
In any case, does anyone really believe that lowering the salt content of food would save over 400 lives a day in the USA? It's just ridiculous. The last thing we need is letting these busy-bodies regulate salt. The proper response to these nanny-staters is to tell them to mind their own damn business and go eat boring salt-free food if they like but let us enjoy our lives while we can.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Rossputin on 11/30/07 at 02:55:22 am . Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. |
Yours truly
-
Following Obama's Economic Policies
Facebook NetworkedBlogs
XML Feeds
11/30/07 @ 11:12:59 am
Come on Rossputin! Give your readers a break. Are you trying to bait the medical profession?
If not, attend one of their Heart Rehab programs or talk to a heart surgeon and find out what it is about salt that can kill.
Those with heart disease are told not to consume more than 2400 mg of salt (1/2 teaspoon) a day. This includes all the sodium listed in processed foods. Something about fluid retention around the heart stops it. Good advice for those who want to see their grandchildren through college.
Like sugar a little bit may be okay but our food industry, wanting to maximize profits, doesn't use 'a little bit'. Salt is great for preserving only dead meat, not live.
BC
11/30/07 @ 11:19:34 am
Bryan,
I didn't say that people should eat salt until they explode. I said the last thing we need is government regulation of salt.
Indeed, you make my point by unintended implication that maybe sugar regulations are next.
If those with heart disease are told not to consume some amount, do we really need government to enforce that?
Then what, some commissar knocks on my door to make sure I'm exercising enough or having only 2 glasses of wine instead of three?
Where is personal responsibility?
11/30/07 @ 12:03:54 pm
What do you expect?
Massachusetts is trying to equate spanking to child abuse and a school in Ohio pulled a play based on an Agatha Christie book because of the title that the book migh have been published under.
Nanny and her friend (politically-correct man) are out of control.t
11/30/07 @ 09:46:00 pm
Thanks 'Ross'. Good answer.
I agree we don't need a Nanny government.
This nation has come a long way in protecting the environment through educational programs at almost every level of communication.
However, it still has a long way to go in convincing and educating people as to why and how they should carefully choose what they consume in order to stay physically and mentally healthy.
The old adage is true, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Only in this case, it is a pound of education is worth a ton of medical cure.
BC
12/01/07 @ 06:41:50 am
RGK,
I nearly spit out my (surely salt-laden) cereal when reading your response about '...people eating salt till they explode..'. Thanks for the laugh. I also totally agree with you on the need for economic sanctions/withholding of aid to countries where barbaric punishments happen, such as this teddy bear thing in Sudan. Hope you're well, how about this market!!??
Peace,
Sat
12/02/07 @ 07:28:14 pm
If CSPI is right, there's a certain social darwinism that will negate the need for gov't intervention. If CSPI's wrong, there's no need for gov't intervention in the first place. Gov't errs when it seeks to protect its citizens from themselves.