Salt skirmishes.

Abstract

Dietary salt intake continues to occupy believers and nonbelievers alike. Fortunately a large quantity of excellent data have accrued in the last decade, so that the quality of the ammunition has undoubtedly improved. The numbers of clinical intervention trails has practically doubled and several meta-analyses are available. Interestingly, the results from the advocates for strict salt restriction and those from authors with more liberal views are fairly consistent; namely, salt reduction would decrease blood pressure in normotensive persons slightly, and in the hypertensive patients by about 5 mm Hg. Recently, almost an entire issue of a prestigious medical journal was devoted to salt and hypertension-related issues. The editors made their point of view clear by interspersing various articles with commentaries of their own. One of the topics was related to the 'right' of authors to restrict access to data accured through public funding with the argument that only they have the wisdom to analyze and interpret the data properly. This was the case with intersalt. Through litigation, some of the Intersalt data were made available to persons associated with the salt industry. Their interpretation and the counter-editorial make for interesting reading. A public-interest group termed Consensus Action on Salt and Hypertension has been founded, to admonish the living to eat less salt. I recommend shortening the advice to: 'eat less'.