Salt is good for you

[Aerozord]

The article about a low salt diet does not help you is abit old but it also makes mention that it could be possibly detrimental to your health. Well they did that study and the results indicate that it is indeed unhealthy to cut down on your salt.

The good news is the study found what your average person ingests (95% of people) is the amount you should be consuming. In other words just keep doing what you are doing. This is more to keep people from harming their health (and eating less tasty foods) because of an old cultural myth.

[Flarecobra]

Does not mean one should not keep an eye on taking in too much salt as well. Balance is everything after all, and everyone has different requirements.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

A person's physical health can be a very specialized thing. Sure, some common sense aspects do have blanket applications (burn more calories than you take in to maintain weight, ect.), but otherwise figuring out what is healthy for you and your occupation is something you need to figure out or decide on for yourself.

[Aerozord]

Originally Posted by Shyria Dracnoir

A person's physical health can be a very specialized thing. Sure, some common sense aspects do have blanket applications (burn more calories than you take in to maintain weight, ect.), but otherwise figuring out what is healthy for you and your occupation is something you need to figure out or decide on for yourself.

I'm sorry this is legitimately confusing me. How exactly can you "decide for yourself"? I dont think the 'you know yourself best' mentality works when talking about the long term affects of adding or removing a grams worth of a single mineral on the cardiovascular system. Especially considering even if you had great record keeping and your own personal MRI your lack of a control subject would render your findings inconclusive.

[BitVyper]

I'm just gonna switch to the super ketogenic dietary replacement fluid because I think people who write Harry Potter fanfiction while protecting the world from Skynet with psuedoscience are the most qualified health experts in the business.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Originally Posted by Aerozord

I'm sorry this is legitimately confusing me. How exactly can you "decide for yourself"? I dont think the 'you know yourself best' mentality works when talking about the long term affects of adding or removing a grams worth of a single mineral on the cardiovascular system. Especially considering even if you had great record keeping and your own personal MRI your lack of a control subject would render your findings inconclusive.

You can definitely decide for yourself better than wide sweeping generalizations can.

[Aerozord]

Originally Posted by K-Resh

You can definitely decide for yourself better than wide sweeping generalizations can.

So you believe you know better than a panel of experienced medical experts carefully studying complex biological ailments of the course of months with data collected over years if not decades despite lacking any empirical data?

Than I am curious, so you think medical research is a waste of time then? Should we ignore other wide sweeping generalizations like tobacco increasing the risk of cancer or high sugar diets leading to diabetes?

[Grandmaster_Skweeb]

Basically, it depends on the individual. Both too much and too little is detrimental to one's health. While this study is nice, it's best to take it with a grain of salt on account of one's lifestyle and if one is advised by their doctor, dietitian, whatever.

What I'm wondering is if science can figure out what led you to that wildly irrational and confrontational outburst, Aero.

[Krylo]

Originally Posted by Grandmaster_Skweeb

Basically, it depends on the individual. Both too much and too little is detrimental to one's health. While this study is nice, it's best to take it with a grain of salt on account of one's lifestyle and if one is advised by their doctor, dietitian, whatever.

[shiney]

Stealing that gif, it's necessary.