How Much Sodium Is In The Diet? Is The RDA For Sodium Too High?

[tara]

More on primates getting sodium:
http://www.livescience.com/4120-mystery-solved-gorillas-eat-rotting-wood.html

 

[Travis]

Tissue ratios are not necessarily a guide to what our intake needs are. If it were, vegan diets would be obviously suicidal, tissue ratios of vertebrates being mostly protein, fat, and relatively low carbohydrate.

Not quite a perfect analogy. Dietary fat and carbohydrates are constantly used for energy and in the process, the molecular structures change. Sodium and Potassium remain unchanged in the body.

Out of eleven subjects [table 4], the mean Na/K plasma ratio was 35/1 and the red blood cell Na/K ratio was 1/(7.7). I would expect that the lymphatic fluids carry the same ratio as plasma. Out of these subjects, there was surprisingly little variation in in the plasma sodium concentration [137.3-141.2], leading me to believe that this ratio is held constant by the kidneys. We do in fact see a large difference in the Na/K ratios of urine:

What seems to be the case is that large sodium concentrations increase blood pressure by attracting cellular water in a process similar to osmosis. The extra sodium is filtered by the kidneys and the urine concentration reflects the dietary intake. Any excess sodium is promptly removed at the expense of cellular water. This increases dehydration.

There is a certain amount of sodium required to maintain the cell potential.

Cremated bodies have K/Na ratio of (3.29):1. This is higher than the tissue concentrations because it includes plasma, lymph, and perhaps urine as well. This seems to be the homeostatic ratio. This is about 2.75 times the RDA in favor of potassium.

 

[tara]

Not quite a perfect analogy. Dietary fat and carbohydrates are constantly used for energy and in the process, the molecular structures change. Sodium and Potassium remain unchanged in the body.

Fair enough that it's not a perfect analogy because the fats and carbs are used as fuel. And I agree that that fats and carbs are modified by metabolism.
But it's also true that all the essential minerals are incorporated into various molecules in the body, so in a way they undergo change too. It's not just fuel and energy that needs to flow - we are always losing some minerals and need to take in more.

There are various debates about the optimum intake amounts of sodium as well as other minerals, and I'm sure there will continue to be more learnt about it. One of Peat's points is that if you keep sodium intake up, it tends to help keep some other hormones in a more favourable (less stress) range. I think he also mentions that if you have high amounts of the other alkaline minerals, you may need less of the sodium, etc. If this is the case then the total amounts of Na, K, Mg, Ca might be important, not just the ratios, and a low potassium intake might make a higher sodium intake useful as compensation. I believe the Gerson diet is also high in potassium and low in sodium. There may well be hazards from excess salt too (as you say, not the same as sodium).

My point is that you can't prove the optimal intakes of a mineral from the composition of tissues, because that depends on the processes - the flow - not just the structure.

 

[Travis]

You are right. Sodium exists in the lymph, so it can be lost in sweat in a greater relative amount to potassium. Here is the bible on sodium intake from the people who actually created the RDA: Sodium and Chloride

This is a huge compendium of knowledge and they seem to have a chapter on every nutrient. It appears that there is little harm at the current RDA, but most Americans consume 3x this which puts them in hypertension territory and hypertension is associated with heart attack and stroke.

They also found, as part of the INTERSALT study I believe, that the Yanomamo Indians of Brazil only consume 200mg of sodium per day. And it seems that you excrete exactly the amount you consume through the kidneys and skin regardless of your intake through a renin-dependent hormonal feedback system. The Yanomamo Indians seem healthy.

The obligate sodium losses through urine and sweat were found to be only 180mg/day for an inactive person. This would put the Yanomamo Indians of Brazil in salt balance at only 12% of the RDA. I am eating much more sodium than these folks naturally without added salt, though still under the RDA.

There are also many studies dealing with sweat losses:

As noted previously, Allsopp and coworkers (1998) documented that heat acclimated persons consuming 1.5 g (66 mmol)/day of sodium achieved sodium balance after 5 days while being exposed to 40°C (104°F) for 10 hours/day

Even people sweating buckets don't need more than the RDA.

I think the main problem is the salt-shaker. I don't know of anyone who actually quantifies how much salt they consume from a shaker. How many milligrams is 4 shakes?

 

[Blossom]

How many milligrams is 4 shakes?

According to cronometer it's 620 mg but I'm sure it could vary slightly depending on the particular salt shaker used.

 

[mayweatherking]

I have been eating everyday a 10oz pack of Deglet Noors, one entire mature coconut, one pound of kale, and one pineapple. I just added up the mineral contents as %RDA.

Calcium 93%
Iron 136%
Magnesium 134%
Phosphorus 96%
Potassium 180%
Sodium 12%
Zinc 56%
Copper 229%
Manganese 881%
Selenium 74%

The RDA for sodium is ridiculous. There is absolutely no way that you can get a sodium RDA without using salt or seaweed. This means that 99% of land-based animals (squirrels, deer, birds, raccoons, ect) cannot possible get as much sodium as the Nutrition Board is recommending.

I think there are politics involved in the salt RDA because it is ridiculous of you think about it.

The total amount of protein is 47 grams.
coconut[ one]=13.2g
Dates [10oz]=14g
Kale [pound]=15g
Pineapple [one]=4.8g

The total energy is 2884 Calories.
coconut=1405
Dates=790
Kale=227
Pineapple=462

Nothing wrong here IMO. A little zinc from pumpkin seeds might be appropriate.

Does anyone know if the cronometer does these calculations for you? I just signed up but I haven't received the validation E-mail yet. I am doing these calculations by hand and it is kinda tedious.

Maybe the salt is more involved from an evolutionary standpoint. I always found these excerpts absolutely fascinating. Can it prove that we evolved from being an ocean based species? Or maybe the salt "needed" is whatever is enough to keep prolactin truly lowered:

Since respiratory metabolism, governed by the thyroid hormone, is our main source of carbon dioxide, it's obvious that thyroid deficiency should impair our ability to regulate water and solutes, such as salt. An organism that illustrates this function of thyroid is the young salmon, when it leaves a freshwater river to begin its life in the ocean. As it converts its physiology to tolerate the salty environment, its thyroid hormone surges. When it's mature, and returns to the fresh water to spawn, its prolactin rises sharply. In experiments with rodents, it has been found that drinking a large amount of water increases their prolactin, but the same amount of water, with added salt, doesn't.

Water: swelling, tension, pain, fatigue, aging

For example, hormones in this family are, as far back in evolution as they have been studied, involved in the regulation of water and minerals. It is well established that increased water (hypotonicity) stimulates prolactin, and increased sodium inhibits its secretion. Growth hormone is also closely involved with the regulation of water and salts.

Since estrogen causes a slight tendency to retain water while losing sodium, producing hypotonic body fluids, and since hypotonicity is a sufficient stimulus to cause prolactin secretion, I have proposed that it is estrogen's effect on the body fluids which causes it to stimulate prolactin. In pregnancy, the fetus is exposed to fluids more hypotonic than can be accounted for by estrogen and prolactin alone; since GH lowers the salt concentration of fish when they enter the ocean from freshwater, it seems to be a candidate for this effect in pregnancy.

Growth itself is an intrinsic property of all cells, but the growth hormone does have its greatest influence on certain tissues, especially cartilage. Gigantism and acromegaly were what originally made people interested in looking for a growth hormone, and these are characterized by continued, exaggerated enlargement of bones and cartilage. In old age, cartilaginous structures such as the bones and ears keep enlarging. The fact that simply diluting the culture medium is sufficient to stimulate the growth of cartilage suggests that the growth hormone might be acting by its effects on water metabolism. In fish which enter fresh water from the ocean, pituitary hormones of this family help them to balance salts in this new environment, but in the process, they develop osteoporosis and skeletal deformity, of the sort that occur more gradually in other animals with aging.

Growth hormone: Hormone of Stress, Aging, and Death?

 

[Travis]

This is interesting. Prolactin causes a powerful influx of calcium into the cell in nanomolar concentrations; it does this, apparently, by stimulating phospholipase C on the cell membrane. This releases inositol phosphates, known for their ability to chelate calcium in inorganic chemical solutions. Biochemists explain this by looking for a 'inositol phosphate' receptor, which then stimulates a membrane 'pump' to control the calcium levels. I think this is absurd, especially considering that the other membrane 'pump' has been proven impossible to work as supposed. I think this can be understood simply based on the affinity of inositol phosphates for calcium.

In mammals, the mammary glands have the highest concentrations of prolactin receptors. This draws calcium into the cells, which is then incorporated into milk. Perhaps as a result of incomplete sexual differentiation, many—if not all—males also have prolactin receptors in the same location. This of course leads to manboobs in the event of high prolactin levels, often seen after ingesting gluten when gluten exorphin B5 increases prolactin through the δ-opioid receptor. Prolactin is under the control of dopamine, which acts to inhibit its release. You would expect higher concentrations in Parkinson's disease, and this is indeed found.

Fish don't produce milk, but prolactin could still be influencing intracellular calcium levels in those animals. The competing ion of calcium is magnesium, which is naturally chelated by adenosine triphosphate. The creation of AMP, or cAMP, frees the magnesium ion—perhaps why the formation of such is associated with calcium influx. As the competing ion, less intracellular magnesium would translate into more calcium; the converse is also true, and the opposite effect would occur extracellularly. Aldosterone regulates the sodium and potassium levels, so those are probably already under control.

Besides prolactin regulating calcium levels, we have the parathyroid hormone. The parathyroid gland has a specific calcium‐sensing receptor with two disulfide bridges, but nobody so far has precisely explained how it works. So does the parathyroid interact with prolactin to influence the calcium:magnesium ratio? . . . [searching] . . .

Isaac, Roland. "Effect of parathyroid hormone on plasma prolactin in man." The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (1978)​

'The i.v. infusion of parathyroid extract or the synthetic fragments of bovine or human parathyroid hormone produced a rapid and marked increase of plasma PRL in normal subjects. The stimulation of the release of endogenous parathyroid hormone by administration of disodium EDTA also resulted in a parallel increase of plasma PRL.' ―Isaac​

The molecule EDTA is a good lead and calcium chelator. Perhaps the parathyroid is sensing low calcium; then releasing parathyroid hormone; and this, in turn, raises prolactin.

'Parathyroid hormone did not act via plasma cAMP, as the plasma level reached by this nucleotide was too small to produce PRL release. The ingestion of L-dopa 2 h before parathyroid hormone infusion suppressed the PRL response, suggesting that dopamine and parathyroid hormone interact at a common site.' ―Isaac​

This is a bizarre statement. It is well‐known that dopamine actively suppresses prolactin directly at the pituitary.

'As it has been recently shown that PRL stimulates the renal synthesis of 1,25-dihydroxycholecalciferol, the present data suggest that the effect of parathyroid hormone on this synthesis may be due to the increase in plasma PRL.' ―Isaac​

So he has all the major players: the calcium chelator EDTA (but could just as well be inositol triphosphate), the dopamine precursor L‐DOPA, prolactin, parathyroid hormone, cyclic adenosine monophophate, and the most active vitamin D variety (calcitriol). These are the small molecules and peptide hormones known to regulate the calcium:magnesium ratio; these are the prototypical calcium biomolecules, and they interact with prolactin. The magnitude of the effect of parathyroid hormone was considerable, representing roughly a fivefold change in prolactin (Fig 1).

For these reasons, I would assume that the prolactin observed in the aquatic species mentioned above were responding to calcium—not sodium. The body has it's own suite of biomolecules for dealing with sodium: aldosterone, cortisol, and renin being the primary ones. I'm not sure how the calcium levels change from freshwater to saltwater, but I'm sure it would significant. I think it's fair to assume that saltwater would have higher calcium levels simply because it has more contact time. Freshwater—as in streams—was distilled rainwater not long ago and is constantly in flux with decaying leaves, sticks, and such that could act as an ion filter . . . [searching] . . .

Horibe, Yoshio. "Calcium in the South Pacific, and its correlation with carbonate alkalinity." Earth and Planetary Science Letters (1974)​

'The analysis of calcium in seawater has been a subject of study by many chemists, since Dittmar [1] found the calcium/chiorinity ratio was higher in deep water than in surface water, while the ratios of other major elements to chlorinity are constant within the experimental error throughout the world ocean. From the result of Carpenter's ion-exchange EDTA titration method [2], which checked well with the classical triple-oxalate procedure for most of the major oceans, Culkin [3] suggested calcium is a conservative element.' ―Horibe​

The concentrations are roughly ten millomole per kilogram, from the surface down to 5233 meters (Table 1).

Masironi, R. "Calcium content of river water, trace element concentrations in toenails, and blood pressure in village populations in New Guinea." Science of the Total Environment (1976)​

'Calcium concentration ranges from 1.2 to 15.9 mg/l. It is relatively higher (between 7 and 8 ppm Ca) near the source in the limestone mountains and it decreases downstream to as low as 1.2 ppm. As the rivers approach the Sepik river the calcium concentration increases again.' ―Masironi​

Taking 8 milligrams per litre as a fair average, and converting units, we have:

(8·mg/L)×(g/10³·mg)×(mol/40·g)×(10⁶·mg/kg) = 2(10²)·mol/kg = .2·mmol/kg = ¹⁄₅ millimole per kilogram​

This is 50× less than the ocean's concentration. This means a fish traveling from the South Pacific to a river in New Guinea would have to activate not only their renin–aldosterone system, but also their endogenous calcium‐equilibrating biohormones: the parathyroid, vitamin D, and prolactin.

 

[Amazoniac]

I recently started eating salt again but am not feeling better-off for doing so. All natural foods have a Na⁺∶K⁺ ratio ranging from around 1∶7 to 1∶11—even beef—and over 99% of land mammals eat at this ratio. Only humans eat enough sodium to actually invert this ratio (some inner-city inhabitants are actually found to consume more sodium than potassium!) Of course sodium is necessary, but not so much to crowd-out the intracellular potassium. I always start ranting when this topic comes-up because I find it ridiculous that many people frame salt as being necessary for humans despite those aforementioned land animals and a few isolated human cultures eating none; I like eating salt as much as everyone but not so much as believe that one.

Travisord, have you tried some sodium bicarbonate with orange juice* to rule out chloride?

The monovalent cations of sodium antagonize this protective action of calcium. Hence, the [therapeutic] diet should take this fact into consideration by feeding less sodium while giving more calcium.

 

[Amazoniac]

William F. Koch Research Site

a great deal of the burning pain of malignancies is caused by an excess of sodium chloride

 

[Travis]

Travisord, have you tried some sodium bicarbonate with orange juice* to rule out chloride?

But then we'd have the confounding carbon dioxide! I'm stuck with the natural ratios found in apples for the next day or two, as I had bought 18 pounds and this is all I have left (and half of a coconut).

You have to admit that there must exist a theoretically 'perfect' ratio, and also that it wouldn't be unreasonably to assume that this would more likely approximate the natural food ratio (1∶7) than the inner-city ratio (1∶1). I'd be hesitant to go lower than 1∶4, but do think that some deviation is perfectly safe.

 

[X3CyO]

Salt tastes so good tho.
But then again so does kale.

Maybe sodium is just a cheap cop out to get some minerals since most people in america dont eat a lot of greens. Arent sodium potassium magnesium calcium phosphorus all interchangeable to an extent?

 

[Travis]

Salt tastes so good tho.
But then again so does kale.

Maybe sodium is just a cheap cop out to get some minerals since most people in america dont eat a lot of greens. Arent sodium potassium magnesium calcium phosphorus all interchangeable to an extent?

The cell doesn't think they're interchangeable, and ATP really likes to complex with Mg²⁺ and not calcium. The fact that the K⁺–Na⁺ balance is under renin and mineralocorticoid homeostatic control implies that it's important The insides of our cells contain primarily K⁺, and Na⁺ exists more in the extracellular fluid. If a person eats from KFC near-exclusively for five or six years they are going to run out of intracelluar potassium, after which Na⁺ will ingress and cause disturbances. Based on My Theory of Differential K⁺–Na⁺ Partitioning (which accounts for this observation by the fact that K⁺ has a higher electrophoretic mobility and hence is attracted more towards the −180·mV mitochondrial membrane potential inside the cell than is sodium—no 'membrane pumps' or imaginary ATP energy required), I would predict that additional sodium consumption wouldn't be an issue as long as the cells are still saturated with intracellular potassium. I think it's also safe to say that only the ratio really matters, and a person could simply take a potassium supplement to balance any additional sodium they consume (assuming they accept the idea that something approaching a 1∶5 ratio would be ideal).

 

[X3CyO]

Time to buy some potassium chloride then.

 

[InChristAlone]

I have watched a lot of raw vegan YouTubers and it would appear that if they are involved in running that they do need to pay attention to sodium. One did a marathon and got hyponatremia. He now takes salt pills for runs. I think this is an area that is highly individual. I don't think there is a ratio that is the only perfect ratio for all humans. It's all context. I personally don't know how anyone can survive on watery fruits without sodium in cold climates.

 

[SOMO]

I use up to 2 TABLESPOONS of himalayan pink salt (a form of sea salt) daily with no ill effects.
I enjoy how salt tastes and have been hospitalized for low-sodium (dehydration) in the past.

No headaches or weird blood pressure issues either.

 

[Travis]

I use up to 2 TABLESPOONS of himalayan pink salt (a form of sea salt) daily with no ill effects.
I enjoy how salt tastes and have been hospitalized for low-sodium (dehydration) in the past.

No headaches or weird blood pressure issues either.

But do you know how much potassium you eat?

 

[Travis]

I have watched a lot of raw vegan YouTubers and it would appear that if they are involved in running that they do need to pay attention to sodium. One did a marathon and got hyponatremia. He now takes salt pills for runs. I think this is an area that is highly individual. I don't think there is a ratio that is the only perfect ratio for all humans. It's all context. I personally don't know how anyone can survive on watery fruits without sodium in cold climates.

But that's not to say this would ever really happen naturally. I think it's logical to assume that this happens on account of people drinking distilled or otherwise low mineral water, and drinking water having a 1∶5 ratio might work just the same (or even better). Of course we had originally evolved from the ocean so you can always argue that land-based ratios aren't quite natural, but I have sweated very profusely for hours in 90+ degree temperate while fully-active and had tolerated that better than all those around me; this had been done with very little salt, and even sometimes with no salt in the weeks proceeding. A marathon is 26 miles, and whether vegan or not you should probably drink minerals with your water. Just because having less sodium in the tissues can be seen as a liability for long distance running, using distilled water, doesn't necessarily mean that it's good to have high levels of sodium in the tissues in general. I can think of instances where weighing 350 pounds would increase survival over that of a person having average body weight.

But of course I still think that essentially any practical amount of Na⁺ is more-or-less harmless accompanied by sufficient potassium and water. Any condition attributed to 'excess sodium' can probably be equally understood as either a potassium or water deficiency.

 

[Amazoniac]

But then we'd have the confounding carbon dioxide! I'm stuck with the natural ratios found in apples for the next day or two, as I had bought 18 pounds and this is all I have left (and half of a coconut).

You have to admit that there must exist a theoretically 'perfect' ratio, and also that it wouldn't be unreasonably to assume that this would more likely approximate the natural food ratio (1∶7) than the inner-city ratio (1∶1). I'd be hesitant to go lower than 1∶4, but do think that some deviation is perfectly safe.

Perhaps this can be sorted out by:
- drinking the juice followed by sodium bicarbonate
- mixing them in a cup and waiting a while before drinking
..depending if the person wants the carbonic of the acids or not.

--
Cytoprotection by inhibition of chloride channels: The mechanism of action of glycine and strychnine - ScienceDirect

 

[SOMO]

But do you know how much potassium you eat?

I try to keep Sodium:Potassium at a 2:1 ratio.

Potassium Chloride (lite salt) on a baked potato simply does not taste as good as sodium salt on a baked potato. Potatoes are a good source of potassium and I eat them a few times a week.

I also eat very little fruit.

I’ll just say this: I’ve been hospitalized for low sodium at least 3 times. I’ve never been hospitalized for low potassium.

 

[Travis]

I try to keep Sodium:Potassium at a 2:1 ratio.

Potassium Chloride (lite salt) on a baked potato simply does not taste as good as sodium salt on a baked potato. Potatoes are a good source of potassium and I eat them a few times a week.

I also eat very little fruit.

I’ll just say this: I’ve been hospitalized for low sodium at least 3 times. I’ve never been hospitalized for low potassium.

You eat salt at a 2∶1 ratio to potassium, and yet you've been 'hospitalized for low sodium?' You're unbelievable.