Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If you want access to members only forums on HSO, you will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member. ?

Picture of the baby back ribs i smoked on the Weber today


Recommended Posts

On 6/8/2016 at 7:22 AM, leech~~ said:

I know right! I keep telling my wife that I can eat all the cheese I want because they have zero carb's! :D

She says, honey it's the fat, cholesterol & sodium that will kill you!

She's such a buzz kill! :(

index.png

Tell here to check later research.   Ingested Cholesterol has little effect, sodium too.   Fat instead of carbs is looking good as well.  

CardioBrief: Salt Restriction only Beneficial in HTN?

Study suggests broad restrictions are unneeded, but debate continues

 
  • by Larry Husten
    CardioBrief

 

A large new analysis offers more evidence that broad salt restriction doesn't benefit most people and may even harm some people. The study did find that salt restriction may be beneficial to the minority of people with high blood pressure who also consume high levels of salt.

Though by no means a definitive study, the paper published online in The Lancet adds to growing concerns that population-wide efforts to restrict salt may be misguided. However, the American Heart Association said "the public should not be confused by the flawed study" and said it stands by its support for low-salt diets.

Average sodium consumption in the U.S. is 3,400 mg per day. The American Heart Association recommends that sodium levels be no higher than 1,500 mg per day, while some other organizations recommend sodium levels below 2,300 mg.

The new analysis combines data from more than 133,000 hypertensive and normotensive people who participated in four large prospective studies. Salt consumption was estimated by measuring sodium from a urine sample.

For both hypertensive and normotensive people, levels of salt consumption below 3,000 mg per day were associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and death. However, at the highest levels of salt consumption (more than 7,000 mg per day) there was an increased risk in the people with hypertension but no increased risk in people without hypertension.

"While our data highlights the importance of reducing high salt intake in people with hypertension, it does not support reducing salt intake to low levels," said the lead author of the study, Andrew Mente, PhD, of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, in a McMaster press release. "Our findings are important because they show that lowering sodium is best targeted at those with hypertension who also consume high sodium diets."

The authors recommended that population-wide efforts to lower salt consumption should only be undertaken in areas like central Asia or China where the average sodium intake is very high.

The Debate Goes On

Speaking on behalf of the American Heart Association, Elliott Antman, MD, of Brigham & Women's Hospital in Boston, said he strongly disagreed with the methods of the study along with its conclusions:

"It is disappointing to see that a flawed methodological approach to the important question of the relationship between sodium intake and cardiovascular events is perpetuated in this latest publication. Use of spot urine specimens obtained first in the morning are not a good surrogate for the gold standard, which is serial 24-hour urine measurements. Thus, from the very start there is an unreliable estimation of the 24-hour urinary sodium at baseline -- that is, at entry into the studies that are pooled in this report.

"Furthermore, it is unrealistic to expect that a measurement of urinary sodium at entry into the studies that are pooled can provide a reliable estimate of the sodium intake during the course of follow-up of the studies. Thus, we cannot have confidence in the relationships between sodium and outcomes that are reported in this paper. We cannot use the information in this paper to guide public policy. The AHA maintains its previous statements of the concerns about the approach taken in such analyses and continues to recommend less than 1,500 mg of sodium per day for all sources."

Andrew Mente and another study author, Martin O'Donnell, MD, offered the following response to Antman:

 

"In developing public policy, large population studies are required to describe the relationship between sodium (salt) intake and health outcomes in the general population. While repeated 24-hour urine collections may be the reference standard for measuring sodium intake in individuals or small groups, they are completely impractical and arguably unnecessary for large population studies. Use of a fasting morning urine to estimate sodium intake in populations has been shown to provide reliable estimates (compared to 24-hour urines), and accepted by leading medical journals (Lancet, NEJM, JAMA) and the WHO as a practical approach to measuring intake in populations. The generalizability of studies using fasting urines is superior to 24-hour urine collection, as the latter is associated with high rates of non-completion. Use of a single measurement of a risk factor in populations is common in medical research. Major advances in our understanding of the importance of blood pressure, diabetes and cholesterol have been based on single measurements of these risk factors in large epidemiologic studies (e.g. Framingham, INTERHEART) -- consider the consequences of ignoring those studies!

"A recommendation for low sodium intake (<1.5g/day) in the entire population should be based on definitive proof of benefit, rather than merely attempting to disprove studies that contradict. We are unaware of any studies demonstrating that sodium intake of <1.5g/day is significantly associated with lowest cardiovascular rates in the general population (compared to moderate), but are aware of numerous studies (including those using 24-hour urine collections) that report a higher risk in those with low sodium intake.

"Meta-analyses of these previous studies report moderate sodium intake to be associated with lowest cardiovascular risk, even when studies using 'spot' urine measurements are excluded. The current recommendation for low sodium intake is based on an assumed cardiovascular benefit, inferred from small blood pressure trials. Current evidence, from international studies conducted over the past 6 years, suggest that those assumptions may be flawed, and guidelines need to be updated to reflect contemporary evidence."

15 hours ago, Big Dave2 said:

I'm not saying Velveeta doesn't have it's place and is good for some things but I still wouldn't call it cheese.

It isn't cheese.  It is pasteurized process cheese food or something like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, delcecchi said:

 

It isn't cheese.  It is pasteurized process cheese food or something like that. 

Fortified, thickened, flavored, and colored by-product of cow juice. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Big Dave2 said:

You must be in the McDonald's union if you can't afford some cheese........:)

why do you think we're pushing for $15 an hour!!!!!!!!;):D:P

not to worry though my wife introduced me to the other cheese groups so I get my share of the pepper jacks chedder etc!!!!!!!!!!:lol:

Edited by smurfy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now ↓↓↓ or ask your question and then register. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • Sounds pretty sweet, alright. I will check them out, thanks.
    • If you really want to treat your wife (and yourself) with a remote operated trolling motor, the Minn Kota Ulterra is about easy as it gets.  Auto stow and deploy is pretty awesome.  You just have to turn the motor on when you go out and that the last time you have to touch it.   24V 80lb.  60 inch shaft is probably the right length for your boat.  They ain’t cheap - about $3k - but neither one of you would have to leave your seat to use it all day.
    • Wanderer, thanks for your reply. I do intend for it to be 24 volt, with a thrust of 70-80. Spot lock is a must (my wife is looking forward to not being the anchor person any more).  With my old boat we did quite a lot of pulling shad raps and hot n tots, using the trolling motor. Unlikely that we will fish in whitecaps, did plenty of that when I was younger. I also need a wireless remote, not going back to a foot pedal. We do a fair amount of bobber fishing. I don't think I will bother with a depth finder on the trolling motor. I am leaning toward moving my Garmin depth finder from my old boat to the new one, just because I am so used to it and it works well for me. I am 70 years old and kinda set in my ways...
    • Dang, new content and now answers.   First, congrats on the new boat!   My recommendation is to get the most thrust you can in 24V, assuming a boat that size isn’t running 36V.  80 might be tops?  I’m partial to MinnKota.     How do you plan to use the trolling motor is an important question too.     All weather or just nice weather?   Casting a lot or bait dragging?   Bobber or panfish fishing?   Spot lock?  Networked with depth finders?  What brand of depth finders?
    • We have bought a new boat, which we will be picking up this spring. It is an Alumacraft Competitor 165 sport with a 90 horse Yamaha motor. I will be buying and installing a trolling motor,  wondering if I can get some recommendations on what pound thrust I will want for this boat?  Also, I will be selling my old boat, is there a good way to determine the value on an older boat ( mid-80's with a 75 horse 2-stroke  Mariner motor)  I will appreciate any help with these questions.
    • Sketti...  not out of a jar either!
    • Lol yeah I watched that
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.