Salt Institute challenges Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (Press Release)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE  
Contact: Dick Hanneman
April 30, 2009  
Phone: 703-549-4648
dick@saltinstitute.org

Salt Institute challenges Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee on lack of science and transparency 

Alexandria, VA—The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Agriculture continues to retreat from public engagement and transparency as it forms guidelines on population-wide salt reduction based on substandard evidence and science, according to the Salt Institute.  

"We had hoped that this Administration would provide transparency, public engagement and solid science as it makes decisions that affect millions of Americans. Unfortunately, the Committee's meeting this week was held as a webinar, excluding public engagement, and was filled with expert opinion as opposed to evidence-based findings," said Salt Institute President Dick Hanneman.

Previous Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committees made recommendations that were confidently portrayed as evidence-based, yet a short time later were forced to be withdrawn when the published science, as well as the impact of the recommendations, proved the Guidelines to be wrong. Evidence is accumulating about salt much as it did about fat. The Salt Institute proposes that the Committee will need to step back from its historically restrictive guidance on salt just as scientific advance has already required it to do on guidelines for fat. 

"The reputation of the 2010 DGAC is hurt when such a substandard level of evidence is further compounded by the refusal to recognize or even consider new evidence," stated Morton Satin, Technical Director of the Salt Institute. "While no one doubts that a certain proportion of our population may experience modest blood pressure declines from salt reduction, it has by no means been scientifically established that a population-wide reduction will benefit health outcomes. Indeed, the literature abounds with references alluding to possible harm for some."

Satin said his chief concern is the potential harm from unintended consequences, including introduction of salt replacements—"an arsenal of synthetic chemical products that have never been tested for their interactions and toxicities at the projected levels."  

According to Satin, it is little different than replacing hard animal fats with trans fats or cane sugar with the several industrial chemicals we call sugar replacers today. "Sooner or later, a fuller understanding of their toxicities will be revealed, but no one will be around to take responsibility for the ill-conceived strategy that prompted them," said Satin. 

For years, the Salt Institute has been asking HHS for a large scale randomized controlled trial to determine the impact of salt on health outcomes of Americans. "If this process and the resultant guidelines are to serve the citizens of America, the preponderance of quality evidence must be the basis upon which the conclusions are arrived," stated Satin.