Talk:Salt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Version 0.7
This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] Initial Comments

Unrefined sea salt that is obtained from the seawater, has 84 chemical elements and is much healthier than refined salt.

What is the reference for that fact? Thue | talk 12:21, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've NPOV-flagged the article, as there seems to be a strong pro-sea-salt, anti-table-salt bias in this article (notice the comments about aluminium: what about the aluminum in sea salt?). -- Anon.

entire coast of the Atlantic was deserted and the whole Europe was thrown into a Dark Age' '. Where is the evidence for this? What *is* the Atlantic coast of Europe - the west coasts of Ireland and Portugal?

Feel free to edit the article in any way you see fit. --Eleassar777 13:18, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Removed from the article for fact-checking:

According to the historian Henri Pirenne (Economic and Social History of Medieval Europe), during the High Middle Ages, the entire coast of the Atlantic was deserted and the whole Europe was thrown into a Dark Age of human under-development. It is supposed to be caused mainly by the lack of salt in the human diet, because all salt flats along the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean sea were flooded. The salt famine lasted almost 500 years, and many people died from dehydration and madness. Henri Pirenne claimed that the lack of salt went so far that human flesh was sold on the open-air markets and many people were so crazed that, to replenish their salt, drank blood from the neck artery of the person they had just slain. The rulers of the Medieval Europe grabbed the oportunity and exacted enormous salt taxes.

If true, this would be an astonishing and important part of European history. However, I went to school long after Pirenne's death, and there was nothing in my history books even remotely resembling this; nor have I read anything similar since until now, although I am quite familiar with less dramatic phenomena like salt roads and salt taxes. Was this really Pirenne's view? Does anyone else hold this view? Is there any evidence for this? -- The Anome 13:27, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Looking this up on the Web finds several cites from apparently dubious sources. Still searching for a proper cite. On the other hand, salt famine does seem to be a real concept -- just not this one, apparently. -- The Anome 13:32, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Can someone give more detail as to how the structure of salt changes when it is heated, and what the effects of this are? --User: 199.46.198.231, 21 Mar 2005

[edit] popcorn salt

Anyone know what tricalcium phosphate is for? I found this on the ingredients list for Morton's "popcorn salt." Not sure why anyone would need a separate salt for popcorn. --Tokek 04:34, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

  • Tricalcium phosphate is a strongly hygroscopic chemical that—by absorbing water—helps prevent the salt from caking or forming chunks. At low concentrations it's quite harmless; it's a big part of what bones and teeth are made of, actually. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 00:12, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)


      • Popcorn Salt is extremely fine, perhaps because this makes it stick to the popcorn. (I prefer it at all times to regular, coarser salt, because it seems to taste saltier.) Also, it comes in flavored varieties, such as cheese, garlic, etc. More precise info found here: http://www.amazon.com/Wabash-Valley-Farms-Popcorn-Salt/dp/B00017LF24 (See Product Description paragraph.)69.253.25.5 16:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)KHT


Cayman Sea Salt seems to be an ad: A google date range search (somewhat broken feature) produces only ~250 results before from jan 2000 to jan 2005. There seems to be nothing inherently notable about the salt other than the production technique, which should already be covered.

Also: I'd like to see an article about salt, superstition, and religion. Maybe even a sentence about how ants and certain other insects won't cross a line of salt.

[edit] NPOV and cleanup

I've tried to clean up most of the article. I think I've removed most of the pro-sea salt slant while still retaining balance; I welcome further comments. There was some duplication in the article, which I've removed. The history section still needs massaging, however. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 02:22, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Unusual Issues

1. Toxicity of edible salt -- What is a dangerous amount of salt to ingest at one time? Is this too strange of a question? I read in Rotten by J.Rotten that 3 big spoons of salt is dangerous. I can't find my copy of the book at this time.

2. In Japan and Korea it can be difficult to find table salt per se. It is very humid for half the year. It is very easy to find soy sauce, however. Salt can typically only be found in the form of soy sauce, in other words. This is more or less hearsay, however; I can't really imagine myself researching this. I suppose a native Asian could sort this question out rather quickly. And, does it belong in this article? I would vote yes.

McDogm 28 Apr 2005 0257 est usa

To answer the first question, the MSDS for sodium chloride shows an oral LDLO of 1000 mg/kg in humans. In other words, the lowest reported lethal dose of salt is 1 gram of salt per kilogram of body weight. For a 70 kg human (about 150 lbs), that's 70 grams of salt...about two or three table spoons taken all at once. On the other hand, that's very much a lower limit. Most people would just find that highly unpleasant, but not fatal. In animal tests, the oral LD50 (the dose required to kill 50% of exposed animals) is up around 3 or 4 grams per kilogram: half a pound of salt. It would be rather difficult to ingest that much salt at once; you'd probably vomit most of it right back up. --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 12:10, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Given that Japan is surrounded by ocean and Korea nearly so, I would say salt is not rare. Korea makes it own salt via evaporation but 80% of it now comes from China. I assume similarly for Japan. 65.32.175.202 14:29, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Incorrect part?

I think the part about 'anti-caking agents' must be incorrect: usually salt is more hygroscopic than the anti-caking agent which has limited ability to absorb water anyway. Usually, the mode of action is that of a crystal habit modifier: after absorption AND evaporation of water, salt grains recrystallize forming lumps. The crystal habit modifier - like its name suggests - modifies the crystallization so that no lumps will form.

I have added a bit to the above section along those lines (re. sodium hexacyanoferrate) so it can be supported by a citation, I couldn't find one to support the existing anti-caking bit but have left it in it's "citation needed" state. (I am not an expert on salt, I'm just trying to fill in some of the missing cites.) Samatarou 11:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Another thing I've amended is the "only 7% used for food", however I'm not very happy with the result as the two references I found differ by a wide margin, and I'm ont convinced they're talking about the same thing. Similarly it's not clear whether the original author of this section, when talking about "refined salt" meant "food grade" or extracted salt production generally. I have assumed the latter, because AFAICT food grade salt is only normally used for food so the "low percentage" must surely be in relation to all extracted salt not just food grade. However more expert input is needed here. Samatarou 11:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What about the taste?

This article need something about taste and cooking.

[edit] How Vital is Salt in the Diet?

This statement in the article should explain what the deleterious effects of lack of salt are: ". . . The deleterious health effects of the exclusive use of rock salt are similar to the effects of the total lack of salt in one's diet. . . ." Sodium--organically bonded in food molecules, in contrast to inorganic sodium atoms in salt--is available from meat and vegetables in a proper diet.

There is a lack of info on health effects. What info there is is largely from salt manufacturers, and I've made these sources clearer. They may well be right, but more info and more independent sources are needed. Perhaps we should flag the article:
Academics line up to defend salt, from the salt lobby, would be one starting point, though having a handful of academics on side doesn't mean the argument is correct. --Singkong2005 12:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
There is indisputable evidence that salt is required (see Sodium-Potassium Pump for an example of how crucial sodium is to cellular metabolic processes. In large quantities, especially if the person has a history of high blood pressure, sodium can aggravate that condition; it should be consumed in lower quantities as advised by a medical professional. However, no reputable medical doctor would say that salt could be safely eliminated from the diet. Nimur 04:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Density question

What is the density of table salt (in grams per cubic centimeter)?

It's roughly equal to that of pure sodium chloride. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:18, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merge from History of Edible Salt in the US

Wouldn't that make more sense as a section in this article? Avi 19:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd say no, that article is too specific to be of any major use. Rather an article on history on edible salt that would deal with human use of salt throughout history would be useful (So, the section should be split up and expanded into an article of its own). Would that article be incorporated into the section, we'd end up with a {{globalize}} tag. An article on salt in history in its broadest sense though is another matter. Scoo 21:07, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I think: rename History of salt in the United States to History of salt (Trade in there somewhere ??) and merge the history sections of this and Sodium Chloride, Salt into it. i.e. make a History of Salt article from all the pieces? Wizzy 17:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
I came across this again - OK to do this ? Wizzy 20:48, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

OK - finished. Wizzy 14:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Health effects (& how much is too much?)

The Health effects section is filling out a little, which is good. It would be good to address the quantity of what is a healthy amount of salt in the diet. Obviously there would be different viewpoints to describe. --Singkong2005 03:45, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


I feel there should be a section of the difference between salt and sodium as discussed in this article: Cooking Light - Sodium I feel people use the two words interchangabley, but should not because salt is only 40% sodium. Calimatthew 18:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


Also the medical condition of hypernatremia is mentioned but not hyponatremia. I don't fell expert enough to mess with health/medicine stuff but I feel strongly that this should be included. ----69.228.96.138 18:10, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The study by Nancy Cook is authoratative but examination of the BMJ ref shows the sample, although large, was entirely made up of subjects who were at risk of cardiovascular problems ("high-normals"). Given that the controversy re. low salt tends to hinge on benefits to normal v. "at risk" people, I felt this aspect of the study should be mentioned to ensure the article remains neutral. Samatarou 13:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rocks?

The article says one of the few rocks humans eat. This may be a weird question, but what are the other rocks? Astrophil 18:14, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Chalk (in antacids), perhaps. -- Avi 19:30, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
I was just about to post the same question:-). If the only other "rocks" that we eat are chalk in antacids then it would probally be fair to add a "very" i.e. "Edible salt ... one of the very few rocks humans eat". Also its not clear to me that we "eat" antacids, they are not food, rather we take them, they are medisain.--JK the unwise 10:55, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
A promo on Food TV mentioned salt as the only rock humans eat FWIW Wubb 03:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Any objection to changing the lead to "...the only rock that humans eat"?--JK the unwise 17:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps too categorical - see Pica (disorder). —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

How about "...the only rock that is commonly eaten by humans"?--JK the unwise 09:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:56, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Ice qualifies as a mineral. It probably doesn't qualify as a food, but it is eaten.

[edit] Move proposal

I propose a move of this article from Edible salt to Table salt because "table salt" is much more popular. See Google Fight between "edible salt" vs. "table salt". If nobody objects in a week, then I'll tag Table salt for speedy deletion (CSD G6) and move Edible salt there once the admin deletes it. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 02:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Since Table salt is a sub-section that would seem to imply that the article covers edible salts other then table salt.--JK the unwise 09:34, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
The two are not exact synonyms, so a Google fight is irrelevant. Salt used in preservation, curing, or food packing is arguably not 'table salt'. I think the current article title is better. Michael Z. 2006-03-15 17:24 Z
Support - no they're not exact synonyms, but table salt can be treated as a subsection, and it keeps it simpler. --Singkong2005 15:05, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Object - as per JK the unwise and Michael 16:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent edits

Wow, looks good! I did accidentally lose/miss a couple of references and I am glad they have been reinstated. There's one spot I'm a bit confused about, though: [1] I think, now that the article is more balanced, it currently makes a case for the idea that some people need to decrease their salt intake, some need to increase it, and some need not mess with it. Right? This statement sounds to me like it's saying that no one needs to decrease their salt intake. And plus, as an encyclopedia I'm not sure we should be giving direct health advice anyway. ;)

Also, I am wondering if we need all three pictures at the top. Isn't the salt shaker enough? (We also have the single serving package farther down.)

It's been a while since I've edited much (as evidenced by my screwing up the references -- thanks again), so I'm going to be a little less bold than usual and wait a couple of days for comments before doing anything again. If no one says anything, I will change these two things. Jacqui 19:23, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jacqui.
  • "…some need to increase it…" It's highly unlikely that a typical person in an advanced economy needs to increase intake as you get enough through diet and the body can cope well with any fluctuations. Continual salt deficiency might be a problem in Africa perhaps. Possible new topic?
  • What's the exact sentence that's worrying you?
  • Wikipedia ahouldn't give health advice because Wikipedia is highly unreliable, particularly on health issues where some contributors have an axe to grind or a commercial interest in a particular viewpoint. The most Wikipedia can do is point people to sources that are reliable.
  • Don't have strong views about the photos: they might appeal to children who use WikipediaNunquam Dormio 12:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Some clarifications:
This is the sentence I was a bit concerned about (please see the above link to see where it occurs): "Salt substitutes are unnecessary though some people might find them helpful." For some people, aren't they necessary? And even if not, doesn't this count as health advice?
BTW, you're talking to a "typical person in an advanced economy" who needed to increase her salt intake. Well, I guess we need to discuss what "typical" is. Is a person with a medical condition, however mild, considered "untypical" somehow? Most people have one medical condition or another, right? Well, some of them have to do with a lack of salt. This is mentioned in the article :) Jacqui 16:23, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I did a lot of editing today. However, while all of the reference numbers work, I think there's something up with the numbering, but unfortunately I can't figure out how to fix it! Jacqui 16:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

The named reference needs to precede those that refer to it. So < ref name=yogi >reference details< /ref > first and < ref name=yogi/ > afterwards Nunquam Dormio 17:29, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi - did some editing, added a photo of a chinese salt well brine boiler. BTW - I noticed in the "Unrefined Salts" there are other types of edible unrefined salts missing such as pickling salts (which aren't sea salts) that didn't seem to be included. Phreakster 1998 19:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] why?

Which are the characteristics of salt? and how it affect the body? (not the consecuences, I already understand that, i mean why the body can't absorb all the salt)

how salt affects in the absorbtion of water?

[edit] Iodide or iodate?

Can anybody in US look at the ingredents list and stat which salt is used for iodising? In germany iodate is used.--Stone 13:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Citation Needed?


Someone really went overboard on citation needed... Do you really need a citation that soy sauce has high salt content? ... lol ... It's the third major ingredient next to water and soy. lol. Makes that section silly.... Oogles 23:08, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, somebody really went nuts on this article. We do NOT need a citation to say that salt is commonly put on food! I'm about to go through and remove the more ridiculous ones. Phasmatisnox 01:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The edibility of salt isn't necessarily relevant. I think its an extraneous addition that was added because Salt was taken. I have moved the Salt page to Salts (chemistry). This page is now free to use Salt, in my opinion.Yeago 16:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree. It looks like sodium chloride covers that particular substance more generally, while edible salt does indeed cover the human consumption aspects. Perhaps it should be titled salt (condiment) or something to reflect that. I'm also not convinced that salts (chemistry) is the right place for that article. The naming conventions advise us to use singular nouns. I could see a case for moving sodium chloride to "salt", but I don't think that's what you're proposing. --Stemonitis 16:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Hmm... looking into it, its rather strange that the Salt (chemistry) article contains a blurb about the history and appearance of salt. That doesn't seem to make any sense. I see a merge tag and hopefully something will happen with that. As for moving Sodium chloride to salt, I see so much overlap between Sodium chloride and Edible salt that I think either way is an improvement. Comparing the two it seems like a good proposal for merge. Sure, let's move sodium chloride.
As for it being singular, that's fine. Someone in the talk page their suggested it. Moreover, the whole article is written in the 'salts' tense. Doesn't matter to me =)Yeago 17:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Support move/merge taking sodium chloride to salt and merging in any useful stuff dfrom edible salt (which strikes me as a really lame name anyway). Mangoe 18:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The page "Edible salt" has been moved to "Salt" as the result of a related move request. The discussion can be found at Talk:Salt (chemistry). Dekimasuよ! 02:43, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History of edible salt

Isn't the history of edible salt much the same as the history of sodium chloride? Does it make sense to have a blurb about the history of salt in an article that focuses on its dietary uses? Unless of course that history illustrated the diet in history, which it does not. Propose removing history section and putting link to History of salt in the "see also".Yeago 18:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV violation

This has got to go:

According to a finding from a reputed group practicing 'Nature Cure', salt can be linked to most of the diseases in humans. According to its founder Dr. Raju [30] "The salt that we add to taste is roughly from 4000 mg to 25000 mg. Means we are consuming salt many times than required to satisfy the tongue. We do get the natural sodium more than enough through our natural food like fruits, vegetables, milk etc every day, causing no deficiency."

It seems like there have been a lot of editing on this article, so I will not just remove it outright, but I would suggest that one of the regular editors either completely rework that paragraph or remove it. If I do it, I assume it will just be reversed, and I won't return to keep it off the page. This paragraph has poor language, attributes reputability to some unnamed "nature cure" group and seems to state that salt is as good as the root of all bodily evil. This paragraph seems to be pushing some strange fringe salt ideology, and it does not belong on Wikipedia.

128.101.10.146 17:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Job done. Nunquam Dormio 17:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 12 June 2007

As of 11 June 2007 there was a bias in the article where it stated that salt consumption increases the risk of health problems. That was not enough because it did not specify which types of salt and in which proportions. Salt imbalance is what causes those health problems and salt balance is what prevents them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mcampbell422 (talkcontribs).

Many of the changes introduced here make no sense and are completely unfounded (or at least uncited by WP:RS for some non-obvious ideas)...what's a "unilateral" form of a salt, who cares whether what you shake on your food is the same cationic ratio as the human body, etc. This appears to be related to User:Mcampbell422's massively (at this time anyway) WP:OR additions to the page about salinity control. DMacks 05:31, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

A unilateral form of salt is one that is not sufficiently balanced with another form of salt such that a physiological stress upon an organism occurs. Who cares? Everyone cares - or at least their bodies do. Their bodies not only control the overall content of salt in the blood and/or body, they control its balance of different types of salts. When the proportion of different types of salt is less than optimal, stress is placed upon their bodies. If you have information that any of this information is wrong, then by all means delete what I write. If you don't have that information, then don't delete anything. Let's certainly keep the literal definition of salt scientitic. Remember: unless you can prove that: there is original research, there is no neutral point of view, or the information is not verifiable, then don't do anything. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.195.17.240 (talk)

Sorry, but WP:RS instructs that it is up to the editor who adds info to supply reliable sources for it, not for others who question that info to cite disproof of it. DMacks 18:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Table salt & sodium chloride

The claim that table salt is 99% NaCl is currently supported by published assays of two brands of salt. These references seem inadequate to support the claim. I have no idea if all the "alternative salt" quackery that used to be on here has any basis, but I'd like to know if table salt is defined as mostly NaCl, or just typically winds up being mostly NaCl. Maybe other brands of table salt aren't the same...? Eleland 00:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Whatever government branch handles food safety in your jurisdiction will also have set standards for what can be called 'salt' or 'table salt'. This link – while not from a particularly authoritative site – suggests that in the United States the FDA standard is a minimum of 97.5% sodium chloride. (I don't have time to find the actual regulation.) As noted there, the actual purity of salt sold is usually much higher; 99% is definitely not unreasonable. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, upon some research, it looks like the Food Chemical Codex standard is probably something like 97.5% with the vast majority of the 2.5% being water. However, I can't actually find a good source for this, just a lot of industry sources that imply it if I put one and one together (aka [[WP:OR#SYN]). Maybe somebody who has access to a university e-library system, or the like, could pull up the relevant standard and add it as a citation? Eleland 15:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Salt melts at 800°C. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.44.236.78 (talk) 17:14, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


Query: on a box of table salt (Windsor, Canada), sugar is listed as an ingredient.

A stove top test (v. a salt w/o sugar) quickly shows that there is a very small amount of sugar in Windsor salt.

Any idea why?

(I've written to Windsor, no reply to date...)

[edit] Salt is a mineral commonly eaten by humans composed primarily of sodium chloride

Lot's wife? Hardly a mass market then. :) Captain Pedant 08:20, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Daily intake of salt

I read in John Wiseman's SAS Handbook that 10mg of salt intake is usual per adult/per day. Also, I think that salt intake in Japan is way higher (as they use allot of soy sauce, ...) Perhaps something to look into.

81.246.178.53 (talk) 12:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Way out. A typical adult needs 4g salt / day. See the article. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 12:35, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Please check on it anyways. I thought that the critics against Macrobiotics were that it featured way too much salt (thus higher than 4g-6g). Also, Japanese people/cuisine uses not only salty ingredients (soy sauce, seaweed, miso, ...) yet they also tend to eat less (which is better), yet which also causes blood pressure to drop. It is thus imperative that they take in much more salt.

As this blood pressure is a very important item to include in the article, I suggest you look into it.

Thanks in advance. KVDP (talk) 08:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Found reference to my claim. It appears that the Japanese eat 12 grams of salt/day. It is mentioned in the book "The Okinawa program" by Willcox, Willcox and Suzuki (page 72). Further reference available from "Okinawa Centenarian Study database; U.S. dietary data from the U.S. cohort of the Seven Countries Study from Keys,A.1980 Seven Countries: A Commonwealth Fund Book. Boston:Harvard University Press.

Note that the Okinawans eat 7 grams/day (Okinawans are said to have "the healthiest diet in the world"; atleast according to the book.

Include in the article, I did quite some trouble by now looking into it myself. KVDP (talk) 15:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] use on roads

where would i go to find out about salt harvesting AND how much of it is used on american roads? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.102.204.88 (talk) 14:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

rock salt SeanCollins (talk) 05:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Typographical mistake

In the history section, second paragraph, third sentence: Pliny was wrongly spelled "Pliney". His name, in English, takes no E.

Fixed. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 11:05, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Uses other than dietary

This article practically begs for additional content regarding the thousands of other, non-dietary uses of salt. Unfocused 01:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] potatos and salt

some forms of potatos come from the salt company, this is rather funny, i just thought that you should know *chortal* —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.228.241 (talk) 13:30, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Health and potassium/natrium balance

Nowhere in the article it is found that the balance between potassium and natrium too must be maintained (this can be out of balance due to incorrect eating) See this site, this website and finally this site Include in article. thanks, 81.246.187.104 (talk) 17:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)