• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

FDA To Legally Restrict Salt In Food

Status
Not open for further replies.

daw840

Member
The Food and Drug Administration is planning an unprecedented effort to gradually reduce the salt consumed each day by Americans, saying that less sodium in everything from soup to nuts would prevent thousands of deaths from hypertension and heart disease. The initiative, to be launched this year, would eventually lead to the first legal limits on the amount of salt allowed in food products.

The government intends to work with the food industry and health experts to reduce sodium gradually over a period of years to adjust the American palate to a less salty diet, according to FDA sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the initiative had not been formally announced.

Officials have not determined the salt limits. In a complicated undertaking, the FDA would analyze the salt in spaghetti sauces, breads and thousands of other products that make up the $600 billion food and beverage market, sources said. Working with food manufacturers, the government would set limits for salt in these categories, designed to gradually ratchet down sodium consumption. The changes would be calibrated so that consumers barely notice the modification.

The legal limits would be open to public comment, but administration officials do not think they need additional authority from Congress.

"This is a 10-year program," 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 FDA, which regulates most processed foods, would be joined in the effort by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees meat and poultry.

Currently, manufacturers can use as much salt as they like in products because under federal standards, it falls into the category deemed "generally recognized as safe." Foodmakers are merely required to report the amount on nutrition labels.

But for the past 30 years, health officials have grown increasingly alarmed as salt intake has increased with the explosion in processed foods and restaurant meals. Most adults consume about twice the government's daily recommended limit, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Until now, the government has pushed the food industry to voluntarily reduce salt and tried to educate consumers about the dangers of excessive sodium. But in a study to be released Wednesday, an expert panel convened by the Institute of Medicine concludes that those measures have failed. The panel will recommend that the government take action, according to sources familiar with the findings.


Although the specifics of the government's plans have not been made public, the food industry has been bracing for a federal initiative.

"We're working on it voluntarily already," said Melissa Musiker, senior manager of science policy, nutrition and health at the Grocery Manufacturers Association. In recent months, Conagra, Pepsico, Kraft Foods, General Mills, Sara Lee and others have announced that they would reduce sodium in many of their products. Pepsico has developed a new shape for sodium chloride crystals that the company hopes will allow it to reduce salt by 25 percent in its Lay's Classic potato chips.

Morton Satin, director for technical and regulatory affairs at the Salt Institute, which represents salt producers, said regulation "would be a disaster for the public." He said that the science regarding sodium is unclear and that consumption does not necessarily lead to health problems.

"If you consume a lot of salt, you also get rid of a lot of salt -- it doesn't mean it's an excess," he said. "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."


Michael Jacobson of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which first petitioned the FDA to regulate sodium in 1978, said voluntary efforts by industry are laudable, "but they could change their minds tomorrow. . . . Limiting sodium might be the single most important thing the FDA can to do to promote health."

In January, New York City launched a campaign against salt, urging food manufacturers and chain restaurants to voluntarily reduce sodium by 25 percent in their products nationwide over the next five years. Baltimore, Boston, Los Angeles, Chicago and the District are among a list of cities supporting the New York initiative.

A recent study by researchers at Columbia and Stanford universities and the University of California at San Francisco found that cutting salt intake by 3 grams a day could prevent tens of thousands of heart attacks, strokes and cases of heart disease.

Most salt eaten by Americans -- 77 percent -- comes from processed foods, making it difficult for consumers to limit salt to healthy levels, experts say.

"We can't just rely on the individual to do something," said Cheryl Anderson, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health who served on the Institute of Medicine committee. "Food manufacturers have to reduce the amount of sodium in foods."

Reducing salt across the food supply will be a massive and technically challenging project. Although many artificial sweeteners have been discovered, there is no salt substitute.

Humans have an innate taste for salt, which is needed for some basic biological functions. But beyond flavor, salt is also used as a preservative to inhibit microbial growth; it gives texture and structure to certain foods; and it helps leaven and brown baked goods.

Gary K. Beauchamp, a psychobiologist and director of the Monell Chemical Senses Center in Philadelphia, said salt also provides another, less understood quality. "It gives something that food people refer to as 'mouthfeel,' " said Beauchamp, who also served on the Institutes of Medicine committee. "For some soups, for instance, it's not just the salty taste -- sodium makes the soup feel thicker."

Policymakers will have to decide whether to exempt inherently salty foods, such as pickles, while mandating changes in other products to reduce the overall sodium levels in the food supply.


Above all, government officials and food industry executives say, a product with reduced salt must still taste good, or it will flop in the marketplace, as evidenced by several low-sodium products that had abysmal sales.

"Historically, consumers have found low-sodium products haven't been of the quality that's expected," said Todd Abraham, senior vice president of research and nutrition for Kraft Foods. "We're all trying to maintain the delicious quality of the product but one that consumers recognize as healthier."


Source

Ugh, this kind of thing bothers me on some level. Really? We have to legally restrict salt content now?
 

Doytch

Member
Eh, for some things this really is necessary. Sodium amounts in a children's meal (at a restaurant) that are equivalent to the amount an adult should have in a day? That kind of stuff is ridiculous and you can't even see the nutritional info most of the time.
 

Keylime

ÏÎ¯Î»Ï á¼Î¾ÎµÏÎγλοÏÏον καί ÏεÏδολÏγον οá½Îº εἰÏÏν
It feels like the more and more complex things get, the less and less we can rely on governing bodies to make informed decisions.

Not sure where this all goes, but it doesn't give me too much comfort to think that the people in charge of making the big decisions don't necessarily have all the best information or people to base the decision on.
 

daw840

Member
Doytch said:
Eh, for some things this really is necessary. Sodium amounts in a children's meal (at a restaurant) that are equivalent to the amount an adult should have in a day? That kind of stuff is ridiculous and you can't even see the nutritional info most of the time.

Right, but it should be the responsibility of the individual (or parent in the kid's case) to make sure they are eating healthy. Not the government.
 

Jex

Member
They took our SALT!

daw840 said:
Right, but it should be the responsibility of the individual (or parent in the kid's case) to make sure they are eating healthy. Not the government.

No. People fail at this horrendously.

I guess that would be fine, if they weren't being supported by a healthcare system that is funded by tax payers. But as they are, and as making people eat healthier put less strain on that system, I'm all for government restrictions.
 

eznark

Banned
Like I always say. Rationing and government control of food production, distribution and preparation are the only way to ensure we can all pass the President's Fitness Challenge and shake Arnold's hand.

ObamaOats all day and all night make the body feel right!
 

Barrett2

Member
While public health certainly is a legitimate area for regulation, I would rather see Congress stop subsidizing corn syrup. That alone would lead to less fatties.

eznark said:
ObamaOats all day and all night make the body feel right!


Im' pretty sure you can buy some Quaker Oat Meal at a Tea Party rally with a very crude, poorly-spelled, printed "ObamaOats" label on the front; most likely with a watermelon or hammer & sickle graphic thrown in the mix.
 

Doytch

Member
daw840 said:
Right, but it should be the responsibility of the individual (or parent in the kid's case) to make sure they are eating healthy. Not the government.
Yes it should, but they need to be given the information to make an informed choice. I would kill for legislation that forces restaurants to have nutritional info right on the menus, and I think that is a much more elegant and smart solution than this. TBH, I have zero remorse for those who buy processed shit loaded with bad fats and salt and die at 35. The only thing that pisses me off about that is when they waste my money (I live in Canada) taking up hospital beds because they didn't give a shit.
 

numble

Member
daw840 said:
LOLWUT?!? Really? You want the government to start telling you what you can and cannot eat?
You can still buy salt. They will not take it away.

...but maybe they will. Start stocking up!
 

daw840

Member
Doytch said:
Yes it should, but they need to be given the information to make an informed choice. I would kill for legislation that forces restaurants to have nutritional info right on the menus, and I think that is a much more elegant and smart solution than this. TBH, I have zero remorse for those who buy processed shit loaded with bad fats and salt and die at 35. The only thing that pisses me off about that is when they waste my money (I live in Canada) taking up hospital beds because they didn't give a shit.

Agreed.
 
lawblob said:
While public health certainly is a legitimate area for regulation, I would rather see Congress stop subsidizing corn syrup. That alone would lead to less fatties.

No fucking kidding.
 

eznark

Banned
lawblob said:
While public health certainly is a legitimate area for regulation, I would rather see Congress stop subsidizing corn syrup. That alone would lead to less fatties.
I don't care about the reasoning but I love the action.

And Jex is right. Publicly subsidized health care will be one of the arguments for curbing a whole lot of consumer choices.
 

daw840

Member
numble said:
You can still buy salt. They will not take it away.

...but maybe they will. Start stocking up!

I don't think they will just take it away, or ration it, but you never know. My problem is this kind of legislation in general is just more and more hand holding by the government.
 

Gaborn

Member
Insanity. At some point people have to make their own decisions on what they eat. It's not the government's place to do so. And then to EXEMPT some salty foods like pickles? Why? Because there's some sort of massive pickle lobby? this smacks of a political decision both to BAN or place onerous burdens on some businesses to change their business models and to PROTECT other favored businesses for no particularly good reason.
 
now for the salt content in soft drinks

why the fuck do sweet softdrinks contain so much fucken salt??

I will tell you why... to make you even more thirsty and drink more!!!!

regulate that shit please
 

Futureman

Member
Doytch said:
I would kill for legislation that forces restaurants to have nutritional info right on the menus

I doubt this would really have any real world result. Many people don't eat out that often and when they do, it's a treat and they don't care if the foods are high in fat, salt, calories, etc.

Isn't there some better way to do this then to outright ban a certain amount of sodium in food? Wouldn't it be better to have some system to reward people who make healthy decisions?
 

bionic77

Member
lawblob said:
While public health certainly is a legitimate area for regulation, I would rather see Congress stop subsidizing corn syrup. That alone would lead to less fatties.




Im' pretty sure you can buy some Quaker Oat Meal at a Tea Party rally with a very crude, poorly-spelled, printed "ObamaOats" label on the front; most likely with a watermelon or hammer & sickle graphic thrown in the mix.
I agree 100% on cutting back on corn syrup. Instead of paying off farmers to grow excess quantities of corn I am sure we can pay them to grow some stuff that will be more healthy to everyone.

And why are people against the idea of the government's regulating our food? You can still add more salt if you want to, but obviously we as a country can't be expected to eat healthy ourselves alone. And I would rather trust the FDA to look after our health than food corporations.
 

eznark

Banned
gutter_trash said:
now for the salt content in soft drinks

why the fuck do sweet softdrinks contain so much fucken salt??

I will tell you why... to make you even more thirsty and drink more!!!!

regulate that shit please
regulate it yourself and stop drinking soda you fucking child.

Im' pretty sure you can buy some Quaker Oat Meal at a Tea Party rally with a very crude, poorly-spelled, printed "ObamaOats" label on the front; most likely with a watermelon or hammer & sickle graphic thrown in the mix.

Really? Damn I thought I just came up with clever product and jingle.
 

Jex

Member
In the end, if you are truly informed about your choices you can go out and kill yourself in a thousand differen't ways.

However, there are lots of parentswho raise their kids on KFC and other shit. The kids don't have an informed choice in the matter, they're parents are just lazy and go for the easiest food around. Lots of people in poorly off-backgrounds eat like this, and once that becomes your routine you stay with it for a large part of your life.

This is bad for these kids as they grow up because not only is it unhealthy, but they will be mocked for their weight. This is troubling in a number of ways, especially as it's something thats less likely to happen to middle class kids. I mean, I see fast-food joints in poor areas all the time and those people are growing up eating that kind of meal, and then they carry on eating it in later life. It's an unpleasent cycle with negative consequences both for the people who eat poorly, and the healthcare system that has to look after them because they eat shit.
 
gutter_trash said:
now for the salt content in soft drinks

why the fuck do sweet softdrinks contain so much fucken salt??

I will tell you why... to make you even more thirsty and drink more!!!!

regulate that shit please

I keep hearing this repeated on GAF and every single time I do I get confused. Almost every soda or diet soda I've seen is right around 50mg or less sodium content per serving, which is right around 1-2% or your daily ammount. That's not catastrophic.

V8 on the other hand, is a salty beverage. And a shitty one.
 

robochimp

Member
daw840 said:
Right, but it should be the responsibility of the individual (or parent in the kid's case) to make sure they are eating healthy. Not the government.


You're ignoring that in reality processed food exists. That is how people eat
 

JBuccCP

Member
What i would favor is for happy meals and kid's cuisine's and whatever else is aimed at kids to have much stricter guidelines. I really don't care what some 40 year old fatass shoves in his piehole, but a 10 year old has no real choice other than to eat what he's given.
 

turnbuckle

Member
TheLastCandle said:
I keep hearing this repeated on GAF and every single time I do I get confused. Almost every soda or diet soda I've seen is right around 50mg or less sodium content per serving, which is right around 1-2% or your daily ammount. That's not catastrphic.

V8 on the other hand, is a salty beverage. And a shitty one.

You're out of your goddamned mind.
 

daw840

Member
LOL, I knew here on GAF some people would actually support this. Completely insane.

Step one towards Gattaca.
 

Doytch

Member
Futureman said:
I doubt this would really have any real world result. Many people don't eat out that often and when they do, it's a treat and they don't care if the foods are high in fat, salt, calories, etc.

Isn't there some better way to do this then to outright ban a certain amount of sodium in food? Wouldn't it be better to have some system to reward people who make healthy decisions?
Well everyone kept telling me in the other thread that people really do care about eating healthy but it's just so difficult to find out what's good and bad for them.

Honestly, I really want it because it'd be nice for me to know. If other people don't give a damn about the 3000mg of sodium in their fettucine alfredo then fuck 'em.
What i would favor is for happy meals and kid's cuisine's and whatever else is aimed at kids to have much stricter guidelines. I really don't care what some 40 year old fatass shoves in his piehole, but a 10 year old has no real choice other than to eat what he's given.
Yup, this. I find it absolutely disgusting and reprehensibly negligent of the restaurant.
 
Doytch said:
Yes it should, but they need to be given the information to make an informed choice. I would kill for legislation that forces restaurants to have nutritional info right on the menus, and I think that is a much more elegant and smart solution than this. TBH, I have zero remorse for those who buy processed shit loaded with bad fats and salt and die at 35. The only thing that pisses me off about that is when they waste my money (I live in Canada) taking up hospital beds because they didn't give a shit.

Too late.
 

Ceres

Banned
daw840 said:
LOLWUT?!? Really? You want the government to start telling you what you can and cannot eat?

They already do. You're just okay with them limiting the number of bugs that can be found in the food to pass inspection and not with limiting the amount of salt added.
 

harSon

Banned
daw840 said:
LOL, I knew here on GAF some people would actually support this. Completely insane.

Step one towards Gattaca.

That's a pretty shitty comparison.

If you wanted to compare something to Gattaca, that currently exists, a better comparison would probably be the basis of our education being standardized testing.
 

daw840

Member
Ceres said:
They already do. You're just okay with them limiting the number of bugs that can be found in the food to pass inspection and not with limiting the amount of salt added.

Ok......except that's a cleanliness issue, not an ingredient issue. I don't recall ever seeing roaches listed in the ingredients on the back of the box.
 

Barrett2

Member
eznark said:
Really? Damn I thought I just came up with clever product and jingle.

*begin fast-tempo banjo music*

If you love yer' freedom, and hate the communism, buy ObamaOats to show em' how you feelin'

Made with whole grain oats, like Uncle Sam knows how to grow em, sure beats Pelosi's San Francisco death panel potions!
 
TheLastCandle said:
I keep hearing this repeated on GAF and every single time I do I get confused. Almost every soda or diet soda I've seen is right around 50mg or less sodium content per serving, which is right around 1-2% or your daily ammount. That's not catastrphic.

V8 on the other hand, is a salty beverage. And a shitty one.
Well, the salt in sodas is there to hide the 40 mg of fructose-based sugar, both together aren't exactly great for you. There's a couple of really good lectures on Youtube about why that sucks, and here's one.

It's all about moderation though really. If you drink 2L a day of it, it's probably not going to be good for you. :p
 

Yaweee

Member
I was in mostly in favor of the new labeling restrictions to be on the front of the box in same way, but actually restricting how much salt can be in a product? That's freaking absurd.
 
I know what I am eating, and I choose to eat what I do. So does everyone else. I guess the argument could be made for children's food, but that's the only one I can think of (but really it's the parents responsibility to choose what to feed their kid, not the guvmint.)
 

turnbuckle

Member
Doytch said:
Well everyone kept telling me in the other thread that people really do care about eating healthy but it's just so difficult to find out what's good and bad for them.

Honestly, I really want it because it'd be nice for me to know. If other people don't give a damn about the 3000mg of sodium in their fettucine alfredo then fuck 'em.

Yup, this. I find it absolutely disgusting and reprehensibly negligent of the restaurant.

Doesn't one of the parts of the health care bill require restaurants with over a certain # of locations to include nutrition info on their menu pretty soon? I was reading that one of the side effects of a similar law that passed in New York caused restaurants to start using healthier and/or lower calorie ingredients because once people were seeing the high caloric value of the food would be less likely to purchase it.
 

harSon

Banned
daw840 said:
Ok......except that's a cleanliness issue, not an ingredient issue. I don't recall ever seeing roaches listed in the ingredients on the back of the box.

The insects are significantly healthier and more nutritional than the shit they're falling into :)
 

Gaborn

Member
Seriously now: What do supporters of this think of the favoritism suggested towards the pickle industry? Should pickles be exempt from this simply because they're "naturally salty"? If the contention is excessive salt is a BAD thing, and if they're concerned that we're consuming too much salt.... why make the exemption for pickles? Just "because"? Or is there, you know, some SCIENTIFIC reason that salt from pickles is somehow less bad?

Just to add a little color to that question, dill pickles contain 1428 mg of sodium for a 3.5 ounce portion. sweet pickles are only 712 mg for a 3.5 ounce portion.

On the other hand, McDonald's SUPER SIZED french fries are only 390mg. Burger King's are significant's higher than McDonald's but even their "king size" fries have less salt than dill pickles.
 
On one hand I don't like the idea of the government meddling with something like this. They're bound to screw it up. On the other hand the amount of salt in some foods is absurd. I can't even find tortilla chips that don't taste like they've been doused in salt.

And as was already mentioned if the government is going to regulate something like this it needs to be corn syrup.
 

tokkun

Member
A recent study by researchers at Columbia and Stanford universities and the University of California at San Francisco found that cutting salt intake by 3 grams a day could prevent tens of thousands of heart attacks, strokes and cases of heart disease.

Reducing 3 grams from what amount? 3 grams is already more than the recommended daily allowance of sodium. Lazy reporting, Washington Post.
 

ianp622

Member
Jexhius said:
In the end, if you are truly informed about your choices you can go out and kill yourself in a thousand differen't ways.

However, there are lots of parentswho raise their kids on KFC and other shit. The kids don't have an informed choice in the matter, they're parents are just lazy and go for the easiest food around. Lots of people in poorly off-backgrounds eat like this, and once that becomes your routine you stay with it for a large part of your life.

This is bad for these kids as they grow up because not only is it unhealthy, but they will be mocked for their weight. This is troubling in a number of ways, especially as it's something thats less likely to happen to middle class kids. I mean, I see fast-food joints in poor areas all the time and those people are growing up eating that kind of meal, and then they carry on eating it in later life. It's an unpleasent cycle with negative consequences both for the people who eat poorly, and the healthcare system that has to look after them because they eat shit.

This. Also, I don't think many people here realize how much salt there is in everything we eat. Especially if you eat prepared food, it's really astounding how much salt you can hide away in food. A lot of times, there just really isn't anything you can do about it.

Plus, excess salt consumption can lead to heart disease and kidney stones. How can this not be a good thing? If you want to add your own salt, keep a salt shaker with you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom