Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.


Sugar - not salt - bigger threat to blood pressure

F.I.S.T.

Iron Killer
Jacked Immortal
EG Freak
Mutated
Board Donator
Fully Loaded
EG Cash
82,365
Sugar - Not Salt - Bigger Threat To Blood Pressure
Posted on:
Tuesday, April 10th 2018 at 9:45 am
Written By:
GreenMedInfo Research Group


Salt has gotten a bad rap when it comes to blood pressure. Sugar is the real culprit.

For over a hundred years medical researchers have promoted the theory that salt consumption is a primary driver of high blood pressure and leads to cardiovascular deaths.

Some have even called salt "the single deadliest ingredient in your pantry." And most conventional doctors still insist that cutting salt in the diet lowers blood pressure and saves lives.

But compelling research published in the BMJ journal OpenHeart points to sugars, particularly fructose, as a bigger threat when it comes to blood pressure and heart disease.http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/sugar-not-salt-bigger-threat-blood-pressure#_edn1

The authors of this study from Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute in Kansas City, and Montefiore Medical Center in New York, call the benefits of cutting sodium "debatable." And in fact, the link between salt and heart disease is shaky.

Restricting salt actually reduces blood pressure very little on average. And in a 2011 meta-analysis the respected Cochrane Collaboration found that moderate reductions in salt don't reduce the likelihood of dying or developing cardiovascular disease.

In fact, cutting salt may increase your risk of fatal heart disease, especially if it is 'real salt' a healthy source.

In this study, the authors pointed out that most dietary salt comes from processed foods. That also happens to be the biggest source of added sugars.

Drawing on evidence from basic science, population studies and clinical trials, the authors found that sugar had a greater effect on blood pressure. And they found that fructose played a major role in the development of hypertension. Our own GreenMedInfo database on fructose toxicity contains dozens of studies indicating it may harm the cardiovascular system.

About 300 years ago the average person ate a few pounds of sugar a year. But thanks to the development of processed foods and especially high fructose corn syrup in sodas, that average has shot up to somewhere between 77 and 152 pounds per year. That's about 24 to 47 teaspoons a day and about 83 grams of fructose.

And today about 13% of Americans consume at least 25% of their total calories as added sugars.

That level of sugar in the diet is deadly. The researchers found that eating 25% of your calories in sugar can triple the risk of dying from cardiovascular disease compared to people who eat less than 10% of their calories as sugar.

And yet the Institute of Medicine guidelines still bless a diet consisting of 25% added sugars.

When that sugar is fructose it raises blood pressure significantly. Consuming more than 74 grams of fructose per day results in a 77% increased risk of blood pressure above 160/100 mm Hg.

The researchers emphasize that processed foods are the problem. But naturally-occurring sugars found in fruit and vegetables are not harmful.

So when it comes to blood pressure and heart disease, avoiding processed foods is the first step to lowering your risk. When choosing sweeteners use moderate amounts of natural sweeteners like honey, and maple syrup.

And instead of worrying about a low salt diet, replace your white table salt with a good Celtic sea salt or Himalayan pink sea salt.

Click here to learn more about the health benefits of unrefined sea salt.

References

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/sugar-not-salt-bigger-threat-blood-pressure#_ednref1 James J. DiNicolantonio and Sean C Lucan, "The wrong white crystals: not salt but sugar as aetiological in hypertension and cardiometabolic disease." Open Heart 2014;1: doi:10.1136/openhrt-2014-000167

View attachment 22372
The GMI Research Group (GMIRG) is dedicated to investigating the most important health and environmental issues of the day. Special emphasis will be placed on environmental health. Our focused and deep research will explore the many ways in which the present condition of the human body directly reflects the true state of the ambient environment.

 

Well which parts of the article do you wish to dispute? It doesnt matter which platform information is reported on.It matters the content of that information.But if you have conflicting data,please post it up.There is never only one side to any studies so im always looking to read up on as many studies as possible.
 
idk, i didn't read it lol
 
it's an interesting theory, and not necessarily wrong, but the abstract doesn't put forth any evidence that proves the theory that i can see.
 
it's an interesting theory, and not necessarily wrong, but the abstract doesn't put forth any evidence that proves the theory that i can see.

Again,please post up some contradictory research or data to back up your opinion.
 
i'm of the opinion that excess salt or sugar is bad
 
i'm of the opinion that excess salt or sugar is bad

Excess anything is bad my friend.The point of this thread is too many have demonized salt when sugar has been proven to be an even greater risk.
 
i agree. i wish there were more studies. nutrition data can often be confusing and contradictory depending on who pays for the research, how well the study was conducted, etc.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

  • Article Article
This is confusing addiction with dependance, which typically go hand in hand.. however one does not see things or confulse sinply because they...
Replies
1
Views
212
We all know sugar is bad for your gut, but it’s not doing your brain any favors either. Information recently published in the Journal of Cerebral...
Replies
0
Views
196
  • thread_type.tlg_group thread_type.tlg_group
I actually trained arms for 4 months with bfr bands on to see what it was about. While I did grow about 1-1/2 inches to my arm/forearm I had nerve...
Replies
1
Views
43

Latest threads

Back
Top