The problem with salt in food doesn't stem from restaurant meals. It stems from packaged, cheap food that people eat on a daily basis.
I have no problem with regulation on these types of products, but the government needs to stay away from regulating freshly prepared food for salt content.
A lot of restaurant food is prepared with huge sodium quantities, sometimes three or times the daily limit with which many people are required to observe. It's often undisclosed, and it can be pretty dangerous, even deadly, for people with particular health conditions - some of whom are certainly unaware of the requirement, or even of the existence of the underlying health condition.
I have a huge problem with regulation on packaged food, to contrast with the previous comment. One can simply buy healthier versions of theses products if that is one's preference.
kreminitly- a Canadian study found that it cost $430 million a year to treat hypertension caused by excess sodium (and that's with a smaller, and healthier population).
This isn't just a personal health issue, it's a hugely expensive drain on the country's resources.
Obviously the Mayor doesn't have enough to do. I occasionally watch the Food channels. I have noticed how often the TV Chefs use a liberal amount of salt and take pains to explain the importance of the ingredient. One can't help but notice they are trying to send Nanny Bloomberg a message.
Do you think that there is an end to the list of foods that are bad for us?
Take my word for it - butter is next, destroying what is left of haute cuisine.
Some are allergic to shellfish, peanuts, etc? Ban all of them.
High calorie, low nutritional value? There go the desserts.
What do you do if you're, just an example, Tyson (who managed to avoid all Federal oversight during the Clinton years, located in Arkansas, just a coincidence)?
You plan a "No Kid Hungry in Arkansas" publicity scam, and mysteriously you get an exemption. Oh, wait - they're doing it now. Which Chicago gangsta will pop up in their Board of Directors or as a "consultant"?
It's not food.
It's control.
It's not for everyone - it's just for people who don't own Congress.
I would say respectfully that any comment on the purported dangers of salt is missing the point, adding that I don't believe restaurants have any obligation whatever to make every meal appropriate for an individual who might drop dead from a single salty meal, if such a person indeed exists.
If this goes through, then a salt shaker on the restaurant table will doubtless soon be illegal too, since if professional chefs can't be trusted to make these judgments without bureaucratic guidance, the rest of us yahoos obviously can't handle it either. And how about a monthly salt ration at the grocery store, just to make sure you behave yourself when you cook at home?
It should be obvious that this is a ridiculous notion -- that it is not being immediately shouted down as an absurdity is yet another illustration of how far down the wrong path we've gotten.
Soon, we'll need peacetime rationing coupons or food stamps from Uncle Sam the Dietitian to buy any food or drink, so we children of the State couldn't go off and do something rash.
Sodium in certain quantities is poisonous to a subset of people. Those people may or may not be aware of either the underlying health problem, or the issue that health problem may create with regard to with salt. Food regulation is nothing new, and if you're ok with the requirement for milk pasteurization, for health inspections of restaurants, and for other similar measures, then there's very little difference here.
RussellB wrote:
"kreminitly- a Canadian study found that it cost $430 million a year to treat hypertension caused by excess sodium (and that's with a smaller, and healthier population).
This isn't just a personal health issue, it's a hugely expensive drain on the country's resources."
***********************
Yes, you're right, I relent. This personal liberty nonsense is becoming to darn expensive. You should have heard me gasp when I read your 430 mil figure.
Actually, I jest. Re AemJeff, I'm not OK with regulation pasteurized milk. If you want it, look for it on the label; someone is sure to sell it to you. Leave the gov't hand off of it. Ditto for smoking in restaurants. Go seek out a smoke-free place. You're not owed a healthful dining experience. If you want to have lots of salt, let the insurance co. hit you with a surcharge. Leave me out of it. Your health is not my business. Put your seatbelt on. Or don't. You figure out how to pay for your mistake when you're in the hospital. Leave me out of it.
Indeed, AEMJeff, the "cost to society" argument can be used to justify virtually unlimited interference in personal decisions. Children born out of wedlock are far more expensive to society than any amount of unregulated salt consumption. Wanna regulate that?
Indeed, sex itself is enormously costly, with all its potential damage to emotional and physical well-being -- how much public health money goes to treating STDs alone? If cost is the criterion, maybe the salt cops should be lurking outside people's bedrooms instead.
The problem isn't salt served in freshly prepared restaurant food. The problem is processed food in general.
Processed food is BAD for you. High sodium content is necessary for processed packaged to "work". Processed food is therefore high in sodium.
But it doesn't follow that sodium is bad for you, or sodium added to fresh food preparations, at least. It is the processing, the preservatives, the unnatural "generally considered safe" additives, etc.
The struggle should be against processed food, and reducing peoples desire to eat it. On a governmental level, through more sensible food/ag policy, among other solutions, such as better school lunches. I wouldn't mind even seeing basic culinary skills taught in high school.
The problem with salt in food doesn't stem from restaurant meals. It stems from packaged, cheap food that people eat on a daily basis.
I have no problem with regulation on these types of products, but the government needs to stay away from regulating freshly prepared food for salt content.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseA lot of restaurant food is prepared with huge sodium quantities, sometimes three or times the daily limit with which many people are required to observe. It's often undisclosed, and it can be pretty dangerous, even deadly, for people with particular health conditions - some of whom are certainly unaware of the requirement, or even of the existence of the underlying health condition.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI have a huge problem with regulation on packaged food, to contrast with the previous comment. One can simply buy healthier versions of theses products if that is one's preference.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusekreminitly- a Canadian study found that it cost $430 million a year to treat hypertension caused by excess sodium (and that's with a smaller, and healthier population).
This isn't just a personal health issue, it's a hugely expensive drain on the country's resources.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseObviously the Mayor doesn't have enough to do. I occasionally watch the Food channels. I have noticed how often the TV Chefs use a liberal amount of salt and take pains to explain the importance of the ingredient. One can't help but notice they are trying to send Nanny Bloomberg a message.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDo you think that there is an end to the list of foods that are bad for us?
Take my word for it - butter is next, destroying what is left of haute cuisine.
Some are allergic to shellfish, peanuts, etc? Ban all of them.
High calorie, low nutritional value? There go the desserts.
What do you do if you're, just an example, Tyson (who managed to avoid all Federal oversight during the Clinton years, located in Arkansas, just a coincidence)?
You plan a "No Kid Hungry in Arkansas" publicity scam, and mysteriously you get an exemption. Oh, wait - they're doing it now. Which Chicago gangsta will pop up in their Board of Directors or as a "consultant"?
It's not food.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt's control.
It's not for everyone - it's just for people who don't own Congress.
I would say respectfully that any comment on the purported dangers of salt is missing the point, adding that I don't believe restaurants have any obligation whatever to make every meal appropriate for an individual who might drop dead from a single salty meal, if such a person indeed exists.
If this goes through, then a salt shaker on the restaurant table will doubtless soon be illegal too, since if professional chefs can't be trusted to make these judgments without bureaucratic guidance, the rest of us yahoos obviously can't handle it either. And how about a monthly salt ration at the grocery store, just to make sure you behave yourself when you cook at home?
It should be obvious that this is a ridiculous notion -- that it is not being immediately shouted down as an absurdity is yet another illustration of how far down the wrong path we've gotten.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSoon, we'll need peacetime rationing coupons or food stamps from Uncle Sam the Dietitian to buy any food or drink, so we children of the State couldn't go off and do something rash.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSodium in certain quantities is poisonous to a subset of people. Those people may or may not be aware of either the underlying health problem, or the issue that health problem may create with regard to with salt. Food regulation is nothing new, and if you're ok with the requirement for milk pasteurization, for health inspections of restaurants, and for other similar measures, then there's very little difference here.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRussellB wrote:
"kreminitly- a Canadian study found that it cost $430 million a year to treat hypertension caused by excess sodium (and that's with a smaller, and healthier population).
This isn't just a personal health issue, it's a hugely expensive drain on the country's resources."
***********************
Yes, you're right, I relent. This personal liberty nonsense is becoming to darn expensive. You should have heard me gasp when I read your 430 mil figure.
Actually, I jest. Re AemJeff, I'm not OK with regulation pasteurized milk. If you want it, look for it on the label; someone is sure to sell it to you. Leave the gov't hand off of it. Ditto for smoking in restaurants. Go seek out a smoke-free place. You're not owed a healthful dining experience. If you want to have lots of salt, let the insurance co. hit you with a surcharge. Leave me out of it. Your health is not my business. Put your seatbelt on. Or don't. You figure out how to pay for your mistake when you're in the hospital. Leave me out of it.
Push the government to the sidelines.
Stop ruining my country.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIndeed, AEMJeff, the "cost to society" argument can be used to justify virtually unlimited interference in personal decisions. Children born out of wedlock are far more expensive to society than any amount of unregulated salt consumption. Wanna regulate that?
Indeed, sex itself is enormously costly, with all its potential damage to emotional and physical well-being -- how much public health money goes to treating STDs alone? If cost is the criterion, maybe the salt cops should be lurking outside people's bedrooms instead.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe problem isn't salt served in freshly prepared restaurant food. The problem is processed food in general.
Processed food is BAD for you. High sodium content is necessary for processed packaged to "work". Processed food is therefore high in sodium.
But it doesn't follow that sodium is bad for you, or sodium added to fresh food preparations, at least. It is the processing, the preservatives, the unnatural "generally considered safe" additives, etc.
The struggle should be against processed food, and reducing peoples desire to eat it. On a governmental level, through more sensible food/ag policy, among other solutions, such as better school lunches. I wouldn't mind even seeing basic culinary skills taught in high school.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse