Himalayan Sea Salt! GMO Free! With Extra Plutonium!

-

Yesterday I wrote about a website I found HERE and could not believe my eyes.  It was a picture of Himalayan Sea Salt, VERIFIED GMO-Free!   I wrote a little something about this and its insanity. 

 I decided to follow up on this curious stuff.  Himalayan Sea Salt.  GMO-Free. Going forward, when I mention "salt" we're talking table salt. Table salt is one simple molecule, a sodium and a chloride locked together in ionic bliss.  In our typical table salt they add a pinch of goiter-busting iodine and calcium silicate to prevent caking. Other than that, pretty simple stuff. 

 I know I'm risking being called a shill for big salt, but here goes...

 So I go online and the first thing that pops up is Mercola's website- he loves not good old sodium chloride, but Himalayan Salt, over 250,000,000 years old, so it claims. 
 Dr. Mercola must have slept through chemistry class. Click on this to read the words of a true anti-scholar.  Plus, people that refer to themselves as "Dr. _______" all the time drive me nuts.  
First, the "Purest Salt on Earth".  What a great claim.  The purest salt on earth is the reagent grade sodium chloride on my lab shelf.  Mercola claims that table salt has nothing in common with natural salt, and that "heat alters the natural chemical structure of (table) salt".  

Altering sodium chloride's natural chemical structure is pretty difficult to do.  Aside from dropping it in water and dissociating it into ions, the stuff together, dry and happy, is simply sodium chloride.   

 Turns out that Himalayan Sea Salt (which if it actually comes from the Himalayas is about as far as you can get from the sea) is loaded with all kinds of fun elements.  Over at Salt News (no kidding) they did a spectral analysis of Himalayan Sea Salt.  No GMOs, but plenty of things that would get spark an activist frenzy if they were present in Monsanto corn.  The laundry list of evil elements present is long, and there are detectable levels of lead, arsenic, plutonium, radium, uranium,  and the list goes on and on.  They also refer to "tungsten" as "wolfram", which explains the "W".  The list is shown after the end of this posting.

 The analysis says 97.5% good ol' sodium chloride, at least as I can back calculate from these numbers. Keep in mind Mercola's note above, "Today's common table salt has nothing in common with natural salt", which is exactly true, if you ignore the fact that they are both 97.5% sodium chloride. Plus, using "common" twice in his sentence is confusing. He needs a better proofreader, but they'd probably correct his loony science too. 

 Now I know damn well that the vanishingly small amounts of these elements are probably present in many food items.  No argument there.  They are there at levels that are undeniably physiologically irrelevant. 

 The point is, if such chemical analysis was done on corn you'd read about how GM corn contains lead, arsenic, plutonium and uranium. It would be posted on every anti-GM website and it would be the obvious link between GM and disease.  Correlations are the mainstay of anti-GM "evidence". 

 The ironic part is that 1 in 10 deaths in the USA are blamed on salt, 2.3 million deaths a year worldwide. That's exactly 2.3 million more than GMOs, as transgenic plants have killed 0.0.  Salt consumption is linked clearly to high blood pressure and is a contributing factor in stroke and cardiovascular disease.

 Ultimately, that ear of corn is not nearly the poison that the big pink rocks of Himalayan salt are. 

 However, they do taste delicious together when used in prescribed amounts.



Here are the data from Salt News.  No other source is provided, so take them with a grain of salt. 














Popular posts from this blog

Film Review: The Need to Grow

-
Image
The recurring ads on Facebook pulled at me to watch The Need to Grow , a documentary film about food and farming.  As someone connected with these areas professionally and personally, I thought it would be worth a watch.  Here is a review. First the good things.  The film is nicely shot and well written.  The majority of the work builds on themes such as nutritious diets healthy soils, and efficient energy. Those are the central underlying values of the film, and ones that I wholly endorse.  However, where the film falls apart is in its approaches to achieve those end points.  Two of the "experts" recruited for the film are none other than Jeffrey Smith and Vandana Shiva, two people with little training in science or farming (and no, Vandana Shiva is not a physicist as the film claims).  The narrator is actress Rosario Dawson, who early in the film makes the proclamation, "Agriculture is the most destructive human activity on the planet." It is...
Read more

Food Babe Visits My University

-
Image
It was 6:30 pm in the lab and I was just thinking about the last things I'd need to get done before I could go home.  Typical night.  Usually I'm riding home about 7 pm, but an email popped up asking me if I was going to go watch the Food Babe.  A click on a link would take me to the note on a UF Dean for Students Good Food Revolution Events website.  Vani Hari would be spreading her corrupt message of bogus science and abject food terrorism here at the University of Florida. Oh joy. There's something that dies inside when you are a faculty member that works hard to teach about food, farming and science, and your own university brings in a crackpot to unravel all of the information you have brought to students. She might have started from honest roots.  Her story says she was duped by an organic yogurt stand (join the club) into buying taro toppings that were filled with artificial, non-organic colors.  She realized that she could use social m...
Read more

Shame on Pediatrics. Rejecting Scientist's Comments

-
 A lot has been said about the journal Pediatrics December 2023 Clinical Report on "Using GMOs on Children". The poor scholarship and citation bias are alarming, and the bias against safe technology is clear.  When I wrote to editor-in-chief Dr. Lewis First, he indicated that I was invited to submit a response to the article that would be posted below the article on its website. I submitted my response, and it was not published on the site. My guess is that it illuminated the bankruptcies of the article in a manner that ran counter to the authors', editor's and journal's narrative.  So I'll publish my comment here.  Dear Pediatrics Readership,  The article by Abrams et al. represents a stunning example of how misinformation spreads- even through a credible conduit. Pediatrics is a respected journal, so when a paper implies a technology is dangerous, physicians and the general public take note. That’s good. But if the message runs counter to the scientific con...
Read more