great, but what about the risks associated with stressing RAAS pathway in a healthy individual? new evidence is coming out that suggests that a blanket >2g/day recommendation isnt a good idea, it should be tailored to your blood pressure and existing treatment

Not sure what you’re referring to exactly. Sodium has been established as a general risk factor for high bp which is why there’s an rda. Your article shows it’s beneficial as do the authoritative agencies. The American Heart Association recommends even less than that at 1500 as the ideal for most adults.

This post was edited by dark-soul on Nov 18 2017 10:50pm

do some reading of new stuff then

The current guidelines are that sodium is a risk factor for increased blood pressure. You even added support for that in this thread.

The thing with blood pressure is that there are a lot of factors that impact it. Things like sodium intake, smoking, etc are modifiable risk factors which the person can actively work on to reduce which is why they’re always talked about.

so hard to find sustainable lines of intake

i find that sodium intake can result in decreased metabolism possibly due to decreased blood flow. i find that it facilitates fat staying on your body longer
kind of like diet coke. they both seem to facilitate the other foods that you eat lingering around longer in your fatty tissues

Oh one doctor says something that just wants to be publicized and sell his/her shit because they aren't making enough to make the mortgage on their mansion makes it a scientifically just and peer-reviewed case study.

I actually think the relationship is muddy. If you look back at old research (pretty much what current MDs are recommending), you'll find all the correlations in the world. But if you look beyond the research, there's a lot of money and focus that wanted to create a feeling of proof. It's no different than what we're seeing with the stuff on carbs & arteries clogging, except the research on carbs is newer and I think it's better. Essentially, if you ingest a bunch of sticky food and you get to a point where you're not using it, you're setting yourself up for all kinds of health problems--clogged arteries among them. tbh you don't need a degree or research in front of you to see why that makes perfect sense.

You're quite right that HDL/LDL aren't great indicators, but they still work for the general population just because the same people who are eating too much sugar are eating too much fat. Go figure, and either one of these things can kill you. I'm not completely anti-high-cal diet but I am saying that most people don't produce enough waste, don't exercise enough, and eat too much crapola. And that's why most people look 50 when they're 35.

I'm 39, and when I play basketball at the gym and guys freak out when I tell them I'm 39. To date, nobody has ever believed me on first being given my age. Here's the problem: I look 39. Most folks guess I'm anywhere from 23 to 30. And no wonder, because most people who are 39 look like they're in their late 40s. And I can attribute looking younger to exercising and eating well. I don't think most people actually think about the relationship between diet (and esp. nutrition) and health and I get annoyed when I see folks trying to say it all comes down to this or that one thing which causes people to de-condition and die early. If it comes down to one umbrella of causes, it's that people make poor decisions and they permit others to make decisions for them. It's a cultural phenomenon but people have the ability to be counter-culture and actually make a chance in the world.

I've been arguing about the importance of micronutrition and what we believe (and how we behave) because they are closer to the root of what's wrong than worrying about caloric intake. If you have the right beliefs and behaviours, you won't get fat in the first place.

???

Wb