Thursday, March 4, 2010

Killer Salt has been Given More than a Fair Shake

Food Giant Knew It was Using Weak Research to Confuse the Public

People who should know better are warning of the coming war on salt. They are deriding efforts to curb our consumption of this vital but wildly overused mineral.

The source of their “war” propaganda was a recent paper in the New England Journal of Medicine. The authors estimated that cutting daily salt intake by 3 grams (less than a teaspoon), would dramatically improve health in the United States, including a huge impact on stroke and heart disease deaths. http://bit.ly/4sh1xu Indeed, if we could curb our salt habit, experts say we would prevent about half a million strokes, another 500,000 heart attacks, and save some $32.1 billion in medical costs over the lifetime of adults ages 40 to 85. http://bit.ly/ausqjY

So, what’s the confusion? In a word: marketing.

Earlier in my career, a bright Oregon scientist claimed to have discovered that a lack of calcium and not an excess of sodium was linked to hypertension. I know this because I covered the story for many of the consumer and physician publications I worked for at the time.

Shortly thereafter, another scientist who had an insider’s point of view let me know I had been duped. (Me and a thousand other reporters.) Turned out I was talking with a researcher whose office had funded the study, much to his dismay. The doctor who did the calcium research had turned to one of the largest manufacturers of salty snack foods for investigational support (money). In an interoffice memo, the corporate director of research and development questioned the investigator’s “weak” results, but recommended funding his work.

Why? He stated that the data would confuse the public and “release the pressure on sodium for the time being.” Moreover, he noted that the controversy over salt would return, but the study would provide a break from the nonstop negative press being given to high-sodium-content foods. The memo even went so far as to suggest that since the researcher’s scientific credentials were weak the company should provide him “with scientific assistance to enhance his credibility and promote visibility.” (Note: his emphasis, not mine.)

The memo also suggested releasing the data during a time when most leading heart doctors in the U.S. would be out of the country attending an international cardiology meeting. The memo noted that this would give the calcium story several days of media attention before any medical authority could get caught up with the news and caution against the findings of the calcium study.

I am not naming the researcher since I doubt he was privy to the in-house intrigue that was the determining factor behind his funding. But I offer this as a cautionary tale. We saw this once before with the tobacco industry doing everything in its power to support really bad science that very effectively confused the public. Clearly, some within the food industry were taking notes.

No comments:

Post a Comment