Lindsey Davies, new president of the UK Faculty of Public Health, is calling for urgent action to reduce salt and transfat content in food

See Denis Campbell's article in the Guardian. It's good that Lindsey Davies is speaking so unambiguously. "The food industry should be about producing food, and food is a basic requirement of a healthy, productive life and wellbeing. Adding things to food that reduce health and wellbeing, such as transfats or too much salt, strikes me as profoundly irresponsible," is clear. The powers that be should have been saying this long ago. The dangers of high sodium intake have long been known but not acted upon.

Both Labour and Tory administrations allowed the food companies free rein to ladle more and more salt into their products, thus damaging irrevocably the health of innocent salt-sensitive purchasers. Let's look at what successive governments with their successive Department of Health personnel have done about recommendations made in regard to salt, high consumption of which is the cause of a huge proportion of the ill-health and disability of the nation:

The Department of Health's Committee on Medical Aspects of Food and Nutrition Policy (COMA) was disbanded in March 2000.

The following information was taken on July 11th 2006 from http://www.actiononsalt.org.uk/recommendations.htm but since then appears to have been removed from the internet. I find it surprising that such interesting information has been removed. It's a good job I copied and pasted it when I did. The website itself http://www.actiononsalt.org.uk/ is still on the internet.

Recommendations made about salt

"COMA

1 Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease 1994 This COMA report considered the evidence for a causal relationship between the consumption of sodium and both the level of blood pressure and the rise in blood pressure with age. A statement in the report said it recommended: "A reduction in the average intake of common salt (sodium chloride) by the adult population from the current level of about 9g/day to about 6g/day. There needs to be a gradual reduction in the amount of sodium from salt added to processed food and food manufacturers, caterers, and individuals should explore and grasp the opportunity for reducing the sodium content of foods and meals." The Chief Medical Officer at that time, accepted all the recommendations in this COMA report except for the recommendation to reduce salt. The reason for this is not clear but is believed to be pressure from industry. Department of Health (1994), "Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease", HMSO, London.

2 Dietary Reference Values 1991 This COMA report considered that: "Current sodium intakes are needlessly high and we caution against any trend towards increased intakes". It set its recommended intake for salt, as with all the other recommended intakes for nutrients, on the basis of the balance of risks and benefits, which might practically be expected to occur. The RNI for a particular population group is defined as the amount of the nutrient that is enough or more than enough for about 97% of the people in this group. The Reference Nutrient Intake (RNI) for sodium for adults was set at 1600 mg/day. This is equivalent to approximately 4g of salt, if all the sodium was present in the diet as sodium chloride. This is considerably less than the present intake of 9-12g. Department of Health (1991), "Dietary Reference values for food, energy and nutrients for the United Kingdom", HMSO, London."

I wonder why The Chief Medical Officer in the early '90s apparently did nothing to implement the recommendation of a maximum of 4g of salt a day, and apparently gave greater consideration to the desires of the food industry than to the health of the nation, and I wonder how many deaths and how much terrible suffering he was, therefore, personally responsible for? And I wonder why his successors in the post were so tardy in taking effective steps to give warnings about salt consumption? - Political considerations? - What though, could be more important in this matter than the health of the members of public - the electorate - the tax-payers, in fact?

I consider the failure to put pressure on food manufacturers and caterers to reduce the sodium content of foods and meals until recent times to be a dereliction of duty of successive political administrations and health departments. - I remember buying McCance and Widdowson's 'Composition of Foods' in the late '90s, at considerable cost, in order to discover how much sodium there was in food. There was no way consumers could get this information from the pack. - The people of this country have been very ill-served in this matter.

See sodium in food.

Obesity and the Salt Connection.

Groups vulnerable to salt.

Experts now say the recommended daily maximum salt intake of 6g is too high and should be lowered.

BBC News reports that experts now say the recommended daily maximum salt intake of 6g is too high and should be lowered.

Professor Graham MacGregor, said: "All the evidence now points that the target should be set lower. Getting it below 6g would give more benefit."

He said the 6g figure, set by the government's expert advisers back in 1994, had been "plucked out of the air" because the evidence at the time was not that good.

"We knew it was important to cut salt intake and we wanted a target that the food industry would accept."

Well not to put too fine a point on it, Professor MacGregor is being somewhat misleading in what he says! - Although the 6g figure was advised in 1994, for many years from 1994 on, the food industry ladled more and more and more and more salt into their highly salted convenience foods and ready meals and salty snacks and the government didn't start advising people to cut down on salt till round about 2003/4. (And if memory serves me correctly, the first advice given was max 7g a day for men and 5g a day for women. Years later it was changed to 6g a day.)

Recommendations made about salt

COMA

1 Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease 1994 This COMA report considered the evidence for a causal relationship between the consumption of sodium and both the level of blood pressure and the rise in blood pressure with age. A statement in the report said it recommended: "A reduction in the average intake of common salt (sodium chloride) by the adult population from the current level of about 9g/day to about 6g/day. There needs to be a gradual reduction in the amount of sodium from salt added to processed food and food manufacturers, caterers, and individuals should explore and grasp the opportunity for reducing the sodium content of foods and meals." The Chief Medical Officer at that time, accepted all the recommendations in this COMA report except for the recommendation to reduce salt. The reason for this is not clear but is believed to be pressure from industry. Department of Health (1994), "Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease", HMSO, London.

2 Dietary Reference Values 1991 This COMA report considered that: "Current sodium intakes are needlessly high and we caution against any trend towards increased intakes". It set its recommended intake for salt, as with all the other recommended intakes for nutrients, on the basis of the balance of risks and benefits, which might practically be expected to occur. The RNI for a particular population group is defined as the amount of the nutrient that is enough or more than enough for about 97% of the people in this group. The Reference Nutrient Intake (RNI) for sodium for adults was set at 1600 mg/day. This is equivalent to approximately 4g of salt, if all the sodium was present in the diet as sodium chloride. This is considerably less than the present intake of 9-12g. Department of Health (1991), "Dietary Reference values for food, energy and nutrients for the United Kingdom", HMSO, London

I wonder why The Chief Medical Officer (Kenneth Calman, I believe) in the early '90s apparently did nothing to implement the recommendation of a maximum of 4g of salt a day, and apparently gave greater consideration to the desires of the food industry than to the health of the nation, and I wonder how many deaths and how much terrible suffering he was, therefore, personally responsible for? And I wonder why his successors in the post were so tardy in taking effective steps to give warnings about salt consumption? - Political considerations? - What though, could be more important in this matter than the health of the members of public - the electorate - the tax-payers, in fact?

I consider the failure until recent times to put pressure on food manufacturers and caterers to reduce the sodium content of foods and meals to be a dereliction of duty of successive political administrations and health departments. - I remember buying McCance and Widdowson's 'Composition of Foods' in the late '90s, at considerable cost, in order to discover how much sodium there was in food. There was no way consumers could get this information from the pack. - The people of this country have been very ill-served in this matter.

See my webpage about the Politics of Salt for fuller coverage of the issue.

And it is more than time for Professor MacGregor to tell the truth about salt sensitivity, especially that caused by the reckless over-prescribing of pharmaceutical drugs that cause weakened blood vessels, massive fluid retention and consequent morbid obesity. - I wrote to him about this OVER TEN YEARS AGO and yet he is still not telling the truth about obesity and the salt connection.

Salt consumption in Britain is falling but still 50 per cent higher than advised, claims Food Standards Agency.

Salt consumption falling but still 50 per cent higher than advised

Extract:

"Salt consumption in Britain has dropped but is still on average 50 per cent higher than the recommended amount, new research claims. Tests on 1,287 adults showed their average salt intake was 9g per day compared to 9.5g when tests were done in 2001.

But consumption is still higher than the Government's national target of 6g per day, the Food Standards Agency said.

The urinary sodium tests carried out in 2005-06 showed men consumed an average 10.2g of salt per day compared to 11g in 2001.

Women's average intake was less at 7.6g per day - down from 8.1g in 2005/06.

The results follow a Food Standards Agency campaign encouraging people to cut their salt intake. The campaign warns that 75 per cent of salt eaten in Britain is found in processed food."

It is scandalous that successive governments and their negligent Departments of Health delayed until 2003 warning British citizens that salt intake could be too high and could cause serious illness and early death. AND THEY ARE STILL NOT TELLING PEOPLE THAT TO LOSE EXCESS WEIGHT THEY NEED TO REDUCE SALT/SODIUM INTAKE AND NOT REDUCE CALORIES, BECAUSE OBESITY IS CAUSED BY FLUID RETENTION, NOT BY EATING TOO MANY CALORIES. - I certainly do not believe that all the expensive government advisors are so ill-informed that they do not know this to be the case. I believe that the reason we are being constantly exhorted to eat less salt is in the pious hope that obesity will thereby be reduced - but will be attributed to an increase in exercise, about which we are also being constantly exhorted. 'Experts'on eating problems have a big eating problem of their own; they do not relish having to eat their own words. - They are hoping to get away with it - get away with not being forced to admit that their calorie and overeating claims of the past are not only needless and ineffective, but are also counter-productive - more likely to cause weight gain than weight loss in obese people, because eating insufficient calories causes increased water retention in the blood stream. And of course the ones who know the truth are hoping desperately to hide the truth so that they do not get sued by the thousands and thousands of innocent people who have been greatly harmed by the misinformation the 'experts' have been giving for many years. - If the truth were to be told - that to lose excess weight the calorie myth must be abandoned and the obese person needs to cut down seriously on salt/sodium intake - then obese people could concentrate on eating less sodium instead of wasting any more of their lives on the dangerous course of eating fewer calories than the body needs. - And they would rapidly and safely lose weight - without hunger, without drugs, without strenuous exercise and without fail.

1 Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease 1994 This COMA report considered the evidence for a causal relationship between the consumption of sodium and both the level of blood pressure and the rise in blood pressure with age. A statement in the report said it recommended: "A reduction in the average intake of common salt (sodium chloride) by the adult population from the current level of about 9g/day to about 6g/day. There needs to be a gradual reduction in the amount of sodium from salt added to processed food and food manufacturers, caterers, and individuals should explore and grasp the opportunity for reducing the sodium content of foods and meals." The Chief Medical Officer at that time, accepted all the recommendations in this COMA report except for the recommendation to reduce salt. The reason for this is not clear but is believed to be pressure from industry. Department of Health (1994), "Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease", HMSO, London.

2 Dietary Reference Values 1991 This COMA report considered that: "Current sodium intakes are needlessly high and we caution against any trend towards increased intakes". It set its recommended intake for salt, as with all the other recommended intakes for nutrients, on the basis of the balance of risks and benefits, which might practically be expected to occur. The RNI for a particular population group is defined as the amount of the nutrient that is enough or more than enough for about 97% of the people in this group. The Reference Nutrient Intake (RNI) for sodium for adults was set at 1600 mg/day. This is equivalent to approximately 4g of salt, if all the sodium was present in the diet as sodium chloride. This is considerably less than the present intake of 9-12g. Department of Health (1991), "Dietary Reference values for food, energy and nutrients for the United Kingdom", HMSO, London

I wonder why The Chief Medical Officer in the early '90s apparently did nothing to implement the recommendation of a maximum of 4g of salt a day, and apparently gave greater consideration to the desires of the food industry than to the health of the nation, and I wonder how many deaths and how much terrible suffering he was, therefore, personally responsible for? And I wonder why his successors in the post were so tardy in taking effective steps to give warnings about salt consumption? - Political considerations? - What though, could be more important in this matter than the health of the members of public - the electorate - the tax-payers, in fact?

I consider the failure to put pressure on food manufacturers and caterers to reduce the sodium content of foods and meals until recent times to be a dereliction of duty of successive political administrations and health departments. - I remember buying McCance and Widdowson's 'Composition of Foods' in the late '90s, at considerable cost, in order to discover how much sodium there was in food. There was no way consumers could get this information from the pack.

Here's a serious suggestion for the government: - put a punitive tax on table salt.

For fuller discussion on the political considerations that have caused the obesity epidemic you need to read the whole of page http://www.wildeaboutsteroids.co.uk/story.html

Lose weight by eating less salt! Go on! - Try it! - You will feel so much better! See my website http://www.wildeaboutsteroids.co.uk/ (The site does not sell anything and has no banners or sponsors or adverts - just helpful information.)

Past recommendations made about daily salt intake

The Department of Health's Committee on Medical Aspects of Food and Nutrition Policy (COMA) was disbanded in March 2000.

The following information was taken on July 11th 2006 from
http://www.actiononsalt.org.uk/recommendations.htm

Recommendations made about salt

COMA

1 Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease 1994
This COMA report considered the evidence for a causal relationship between the consumption of sodium and both the level of blood pressure and the rise in blood pressure with age. A statement in the report said it recommended:
"A reduction in the average intake of common salt (sodium chloride) by the adult population from the current level of about 9g/day to about 6g/day.
There needs to be a gradual reduction in the amount of sodium from salt added to processed food and food manufacturers, caterers, and individuals should explore and grasp the opportunity for reducing the sodium content of foods and meals."
The Chief Medical Officer at that time, accepted all the recommendations in this COMA report except for the recommendation to reduce salt. The reason for this is not clear but is believed to be pressure from industry.
Department of Health (1994), "Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease", HMSO, London.

(Note by Willow: - The Chief Medical Officer at that time appears to have been Kenneth Calman. - I wonder why he gave greater consideration to the desires of industry than to the health of the nation, and I wonder how many deaths and how much terrible suffering he was, therefore, personally responsible for? In 1996 he became a Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath. I myself would not have awarded him an honour like this, in view of his failure to accept that recommendation about salt. - Would you? - I consider the failure at that time to put pressure on food manufacturers and caterers to reduce the sodium content of foods and meals to be a dereliction of his duty in that job.)

2 Dietary Reference Values 1991
This COMA report considered that:
"Current sodium intakes are needlessly high and we caution against any trend towards increased intakes".
It set its recommended intake for salt, as with all the other recommended intakes for nutrients, on the basis of the balance of risks and benefits, which might practically be expected to occur. The RNI for a particular population group is defined as the amount of the nutrient that is enough or more than enough for about 97% of the people in this group.
The Reference Nutrient Intake (RNI) for sodium for adults was set at 1600 mg/day. This is equivalent to approximately 4g of salt, if all the sodium was present in the diet as sodium chloride. This is considerably less than the present intake of 9-12g.
Department of Health (1991), "Dietary Reference values for food, energy and nutrients for the United Kingdom", HMSO, London.

Comment from Willow:

The official/s who KNEW all those years ago that high intake of salt causes many serious and disabling illnesses and early deaths, and had the power all those years ago to take measures to ensure lower levels of salt in processed foods and to get information about sodium/salt levels in food onto the packaging of food, and to inform the general population about the harm high salt intake was causing to many people, and decided to do none of this - were they fit to hold their high office? - And was there no-one in the vast Department of Health or in Parliament who took an interest in these matters or checked on whether the public was being well served by its highly paid officials? - What use are professional qualifications when such indefensible decisions are made?