If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Don't eat salt! No, go ahead and eat salt! Oh, nevermind...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/03/op...pagewanted=all This is what happens when researchers use "biological plausibility" rather than The Scientific Method. -- Dogman "I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Don't eat salt! No, go ahead and eat salt! Oh, nevermind...
On Jun 5, 3:22*pm, Dogman wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/03/op...y-think-we-kno... This is what happens when researchers use "biological plausibility" rather than The Scientific Method. -- Dogman "I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman I think in certain instances Mr. Taubes might be just as guilty of only looking at what he wants to look at and ignoring what is right in front of him. Case in point: "Instead, the organizations advocating salt restriction today — the U.S.D.A., the Institute of Medicine, the C.D.C. and the N.I.H. — all essentially rely on the results from a 30-day trial of salt, the 2001 DASH-Sodium study. It suggested that eating significantly less salt would modestly lower blood pressure; it said nothing about whether this would reduce hypertension, prevent heart disease or lengthen life. " From the DASH study: "The DASH diet was associated with a significantly lower systolic blood pressure at each sodium level; and the difference was greater with high sodium levels than with low ones. As compared with the control diet with a high sodium level, the DASH diet with a low sodium level led to a mean systolic blood pressure that was 7.1 mm Hg lower in participants without hypertension, and 11.5 mm Hg lower in participants with hypertension." Now it would seem to me that if the study shows that you can lower blood pressure by 12 points in people with hypertension, then you have in fact demonstrated that in can reduce hypertension. Clearly it shows that the extent of hypertension has been reduced in those patients as a group. And if you have a person who is say 145 systolic and they drop just 6 points to 139, they are no longer hypertensive. Not saying what all the evidence from all the studies really says. Just that in this case Taubes appears to have adopted the tactics of those he rails against. He's also wrong on the length of the study. They were on the salt comparison diets for 8 weeks, not 30 days. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Don't eat salt! No, go ahead and eat salt! Oh, nevermind...
On Wed, 6 Jun 2012 05:39:55 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: [...] Now it would seem to me that if the study shows that you can lower blood pressure by 12 points in people with hypertension, then you have in fact demonstrated that in can reduce hypertension. Of course it can. In certain people (people with severe hypertension, for example). But for the vast majority of us, there's no reason to restrict salt intake. In fact, it can actually cause problems for those who do, as recent studies have shown. Not saying what all the evidence from all the studies really says. Just that in this case Taubes appears to have adopted the tactics of those he rails against. He's essentially saying that for some of us, reducing sodium intake might be prudent, but for the vast majority of us, it makes little difference, and can actually cause problems - as recent studies have shown. That seems pretty straightforward and transparent to me. And very unlike the "tactics he rails against." -- Dogman "I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Don't eat salt! No, go ahead and eat salt! Oh, nevermind...
Dogman wrote:
" wrote: Now it would seem to me that if the study shows that you can lower blood pressure by 12 points in people with hypertension, then you have in fact demonstrated that in can reduce hypertension. Of course it can. In certain people (people with severe hypertension, for example). But for the vast majority of us, there's no reason to restrict salt intake. In fact, it can actually cause problems for those who do, as recent studies have shown. Dr Atkins at one point said that the single most predictable result of low carbing was reduced blood pressure. To me that means it happens even more often than weight loss. It's also why I suggest to newbies that they not worry about salt - Salt avoidance is a part of low fat plans that is not needed on low carb plans. Newbies tend to bring it with them not understanding where it came from in the first place. He's essentially saying that for some of us, reducing sodium intake might be prudent, but for the vast majority of us, it makes little difference, and can actually cause problems - as recent studies have shown. Some people end up salt intolerant as they age. These people will have benefitted from prior avoidance of excess salt. How to tell if you are likely to become salt intolerant when you hit 60? Family history, wild guess. There is very little down side to avoiding excess salt. In the western diet we get far more salt than we need. But this mostly argues against salting your food without tasting it first and against eating fries at fast food places. Not the same level as carefully orchestrated salt avoidance. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Don't eat salt! No, go ahead and eat salt! Oh, nevermind...
On Wed, 6 Jun 2012 18:06:07 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
wrote: Dogman wrote: " wrote: Now it would seem to me that if the study shows that you can lower blood pressure by 12 points in people with hypertension, then you have in fact demonstrated that in can reduce hypertension. Of course it can. In certain people (people with severe hypertension, for example). But for the vast majority of us, there's no reason to restrict salt intake. In fact, it can actually cause problems for those who do, as recent studies have shown. Dr Atkins at one point said that the single most predictable result of low carbing was reduced blood pressure. To me that means it happens even more often than weight loss. It's also why I suggest to newbies that they not worry about salt - Salt avoidance is a part of low fat plans that is not needed on low carb plans. Newbies tend to bring it with them not understanding where it came from in the first place. Exactly. He's essentially saying that for some of us, reducing sodium intake might be prudent, but for the vast majority of us, it makes little difference, and can actually cause problems - as recent studies have shown. Some people end up salt intolerant as they age. These people will have benefitted from prior avoidance of excess salt. How to tell if you are likely to become salt intolerant when you hit 60? Family history, wild guess. I've gone in the other direction, but not by much, as I've aged (but then I used to weigh far more than I do today). When I wrestled and played football in college (many moons ago), I'd eat salt tablets by the handful. I have to make sure it doesn't go too low. "Low" being defined as 90/60 (any or both numbers). I usually have a BP of 110-115/62-65. I can't imagine how feinting, or getting dizzy when standing up too quickly, would ever be a good thing. There is very little down side to avoiding excess salt. In the western diet we get far more salt than we need. But this mostly argues against salting your food without tasting it first and against eating fries at fast food places. Not the same level as carefully orchestrated salt avoidance. Avoiding processed, refined and fast foods make it pretty hard to consume too much sodium, IMO. -- Dogman "I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Don't eat salt! No, go ahead and eat salt! Oh, nevermind...
On Jun 6, 11:43*am, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2012 05:39:55 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: [...] Now it would seem to me that if the study shows that you can lower blood pressure by 12 points in people with hypertension, then you have in fact demonstrated that in can reduce hypertension. Of course it can. In certain people (people with severe hypertension, for example). But for the vast majority of us, there's no reason to restrict salt intake. Once again, that's not what Taubes said when he referenced the specific study to try to make his case. In his own words: "It suggested that eating significantly less salt would modestly lower blood pressure; it said nothing about whether this would reduce hypertension, prevent heart disease or lengthen life. " The study did show a substantial reduction in blood pressure for those restricitng salt intake. That says to me that it does reduce hypertension. He's essentially saying that for some of us, reducing sodium intake might be prudent, but for the vast majority of us, it makes little difference, and can actually cause problems - as recent studies have shown. That seems pretty straightforward and transparent to me. And very unlike the "tactics he rails against." You're trying to lead the whole thing off into another direction. I'm not talking about Taubes opinions or advice in general. I'm just pointing out that his statement regarding the one study he uses to support his case is at the least very misleading and at worse, a lie. And for me it would lead me to begin to question how fair and objective he really is. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Don't eat salt! No, go ahead and eat salt! Oh, nevermind...
On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 08:55:25 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: [...] "It suggested that eating significantly less salt would modestly lower blood pressure; it said nothing about whether this would reduce hypertension, prevent heart disease or lengthen life. " The study did show a substantial reduction in blood pressure for those restricitng salt intake. That says to me that it does reduce hypertension. Semantics. I think Taubes is pointing out that the *study* itself didn't mention it. He's essentially saying that for some of us, reducing sodium intake might be prudent, but for the vast majority of us, it makes little difference, and can actually cause problems - as recent studies have shown. That seems pretty straightforward and transparent to me. And very unlike the "tactics he rails against." You're trying to lead the whole thing off into another direction. No, that's what YOU are trying to do. I'm letting Taubes words, and the results of the various studies he cites, speak for themselves. And for me it would lead me to begin to question how fair and objective he really is. Since he references both sides of the issue, that seems pretty fair and objective to me. YMMV. -- Dogman "I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Don't eat salt! No, go ahead and eat salt! Oh, nevermind...
On Jun 7, 12:16*pm, Dogman wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 08:55:25 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: [...] "It suggested that eating significantly less salt would modestly lower blood pressure; it said nothing about whether this would reduce hypertension, prevent heart disease or lengthen life. " The study did show a substantial reduction in blood pressure for those restricitng salt intake. * That says to me that it does reduce hypertension. Semantics. I think Taubes is pointing out that the *study* itself didn't mention it. I don't see it as semantics. He leaves the reader with the impression that the study showed no effect on hypertension. Exactly the opposite is true. He's essentially saying that for some of us, reducing sodium intake might be prudent, but for the vast majority of us, it makes little difference, and can actually cause problems - as recent studies have shown. That seems pretty straightforward and transparent to me. And very unlike the "tactics he rails against." You're trying to lead the whole thing off into another direction. No, that's what YOU are trying to do. I'm letting Taubes words, and the results of the various studies he cites, speak for themselves. The problem is he misreported what the study said. That;s my point. And for me it would lead me to begin to question how fair and objective he really is. Since he references both sides of the issue, that seems pretty fair and objective to me. .. The point is he's not fairly referencing both sides of the issue when he points out a study and says it did not say anything about reducing hypertension. The study actually showed that it lowered blood pressure 12 points in those with hypertension compared to a higher salt diet. And that is indeed misleading or a lie. I try to apply reasonable logic. And when someone cites a study and misreports what it says, then I start to question their objectivity. I don't want to have to go look up every study to see if they're telling the truth or not. In this case I did and it turns out, Taubes is fibbing. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Don't eat salt! No, go ahead and eat salt! Oh, nevermind...
On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 15:04:14 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: [...] The study did show a substantial reduction in blood pressure for those restricitng salt intake. * That says to me that it does reduce hypertension. Semantics. I think Taubes is pointing out that the *study* itself didn't mention it. I don't see it as semantics. That's because you're a doofus. He's essentially saying that for some of us, reducing sodium intake might be prudent, but for the vast majority of us, it makes little difference, and can actually cause problems - as recent studies have shown. That seems pretty straightforward and transparent to me. And very unlike the "tactics he rails against." You're trying to lead the whole thing off into another direction. No, that's what YOU are trying to do. I'm letting Taubes words, and the results of the various studies he cites, speak for themselves. The problem is he misreported what the study said. That;s my point. No, he didn't. If anyone "misreported" anything, the study itself did. People are free to make up their own minds about that. -- Dogman "I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Salt or Salt Subsitute? | Atkins Dude | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 7 | June 29th, 2005 06:51 PM |
What's in my salt? | Berna Bleeker | General Discussion | 8 | March 24th, 2005 04:38 PM |
Salt | Carol Frilegh | General Discussion | 1 | February 25th, 2005 05:11 PM |
SALT | KennyS | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 4 | May 18th, 2004 11:46 PM |
Salt or Lite Salt | Judy | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 3 | January 24th, 2004 03:33 AM |