Sodium and Health: Old Myths and a Controversy Based on Denial

Purpose of Review

The scientific consensus on which global health organizations base public health policies is that high sodium intake increases blood pressure (BP) in a linear fashion contributing to cardiovascular disease (CVD). A moderate reduction in sodium intake to 2000 mg per day helps ensure that BP remains at a healthy level to reduce the burden of CVD.

Recent Findings

Yet, since as long ago as 1988, and more recently in eight articles published in the European Heart Journal in 2020 and 2021, some researchers have propagated a myth that reducing sodium does not consistently reduce CVD but rather that lower sodium might increase the risk of CVD. These claims are not well-founded and support some food and beverage industry’s vested interests in the use of excessive amounts of salt to preserve food, enhance taste, and increase thirst. Nevertheless, some researchers, often with funding from the food industry, continue to publish such claims without addressing the numerous objections. This article analyzes the eight articles as a case study, summarizes misleading claims, their objections, and it offers possible reasons for such claims.

Summary

Our study calls upon journal editors to ensure that unfounded claims about sodium intake be rigorously challenged by independent reviewers before publication; to avoid editorial writers who have been co-authors with the subject paper’s authors; to require statements of conflict of interest; and to ensure that their pages are used only by those who seek to advance knowledge by engaging in the scientific method and its collegial pursuit. The public interest in the prevention and treatment of disease requires no less.

The Future of Meat: Health Impact Assessment with Randomized Evidence

Massive animal farming for meat production poses major problems in terms of resource use, environmental impact, and biodiversity. Furthermore, excessive meat consumption has been associated with multiple deleterious health consequences. However, more and better-designed randomized trials are needed to increase the level of evidence on the health impacts of meat. Novel meat alternatives, such as plant- and cell-based meat, are much less impactful to the environment and might replace traditional animal meat in the future, but, despite promising early data, the health consequences of these novel products need further study. This manuscript focuses on the health impacts of meat over 3 main sections: 1) overview of the evidence highlighting the association of meat consumption with health; 2) novel alternatives to meat, including plant-based and cell-based alternatives; and 3) examine the rationale for randomized studies to evaluate the effects of the novel meat alternatives compared with the standard animal meat.