Skip to content(if available)orjump to list(if available)

Adding iodine to salt played a role in cognitive improvements: research (2013)

davidgay

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v45/n23/jonah-goodman/a-nati... is a pretty good article describing how a Swiss doctor showed experimentally that adding iodine was a cure for goitre and the associated mental handicaps (Switzerland is highly deficient in iodine in many areas, because glaciers in the last ice age removed most top soil).

kazinator

> something our bodies can’t synthesize

Iodine is an element! As such, it cannot be produced by a chemical reaction and so isn't synthesized in any living organism.

It's produced in supernova explosions, by the rapid neutron capture process.

anal_reactor

I'd argue that it's not completely unreasonable to claim that stars are living organisms in some sense of this expression

mjcohen

Then you might enjoy "Star Maker" by Olaf Stapeldon. It is available on Amazon.

djtango

After studying atmospheric Chemistry I found it hard to not feel like our planet was alive in some sense of the word but "alive" has a very precise meaning and Earth doesn't fit the definition. Presumably because it doesn't reproduce

amelius

So, what is wrong with the statement?

kazinator

If "wrong" means "false", then nothing!

While the statement is not false, it has a kind of type error. Iodine is not in a category that can or cannot be synthesized in organisms (or any chemical reactions). We only talk about molecules in this category: e.g. Vitamin C can be synthesized in some organisms, but not others.

The following is also not a false statement: household waste isn't handled by the JVM garbage collector. However, at least we know it was written in jest. To nitpick that one would be to betray not getting the computer science dad joke.

null

[deleted]

jrootabega

At best, it doesn't say anything useful. You can say the same thing about carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, etc.

At worst, it implies that, like essential amino acids, it CAN be synthesized by some living organism.

JohnKemeny

And hamburgers (which the body cannot synthesize).

gopalv

Burger King continued to use iodized salt consistently, while McDonalds, Wendys etc have switched to flakier salts for their fries which cuts total sodium overall by being flatter instead of grainy, but without any iodine added to it.

The downward trend in fast food began in the 70s, once sodium was seen as bad, so more salty tasting thin crystals were preferred.

[1] - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20634172/ (on researchgate)

erikpukinskis

I also prefer cooking with the flakier stuff because I can grab a pinch of it and sprinkle it in a controlled way.

I try to use iodized salt when it’s convenient: when salting pasta water, in baking, etc… but I wonder if my family is getting enough.

dkarl

When my wife's doctor recommended more iodine in her diet, I was surprised how hard it was to find iodized flaky salt. I only found one brand I could order, and it was extremely expensive and didn't have a great texture for cooking with. I keep iodized table salt around and sometimes use it for salting soup, stock, or pasta water, but 99% of the time I reach for plain old Morton kosher salt.

connicpu

It might just be easier and cheaper to take iodine supplements. Humans need about 150mcg/day, just make sure not to overdose on it. Vitamin companies love selling you huge doses you don't need, but if you know what dosage you're looking for you can usually find appropriate ones.

hansvm

Flaky salt is easy to make. You can adjust the texture as desired. I usually start with a bucket of sea water, but iodized salt works too.

ThrustVectoring

Saltier tasting salt is likely counterproductive, IMO. People aren't born knowing how much salt taste corresponds to how much salt consumption, so that gets tuned by persistent salt deficits causing upregulation of salty food desire. In other words, homeostatic feedback causes salt consumption to stay about the same by increased consumption of salty-tasting processed food.

tasty_freeze

While I was growing up, my family put so much salt on everything, even before tasting it. About once a month during the summer months my folks would surprise us by picking up pizza (with 8 growing kids, it was a lot of pizza). The top would be flopped open on the boxes, and then mom would start shaking the salt, and shaking, and shaking, and wouldn't stop until you could see a layer. We were all so used it that non-salty pizza was drab, just as you state.

I finally kicked the habit when I went to college. There were no salt shakers out on the tables. After the first semester I went home and nearly choked on the level of salt on the food.

kijiki

> In other words, homeostatic feedback causes salt consumption to stay about the same by increased consumption of salty-tasting processed food.

I'd imagine that McDonalds/Wendys/etc don't view that as a bad thing...

FriedPickles

Hmm, why don't they make iodized flaky salt?

gopalv

> why don't they make iodized flaky salt?

They'll figure out a way eventually, but it is definitely harder.

It is always easy to grow something uniform as a pure crystal, without fault lines on them causing crumbling.

As a kid who spent a lot of time with chemistry, it used to fascinate me that you can crystallize out a clean salt crystal out of a mix of potassium permanganate and salt, the salt grain will grow pretty much pure salt on it without a hint of purple (also burned my nose skin off collecting chlorine from the exercise, talk to your local chemistry teacher and find out why).

I never succeeded in making a colored salt transparent crystal.

ufo

I think it's a United States thing. There are other countries where all salt meant for human consumption must be iodized.

pkaye

US has adequate intake while Norway, Germany and Finland have iodine deficiency.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8240726/

> The iodine intake is also inadequate in several countries with strong health systems and otherwise successful public health programs (Norway, Germany and Finland). In Norway, iodized salt is not widely implemented and the allowed level of fortification is only 5 ppm, below the recommended minimum level of 15 ppm. Fish and seafood were assumed to provide adequate iodine intake in the population, but their iodine content is not high enough unless consumed every day, and their consumption is declining. In Germany, a major challenge is the low use of iodized salt in the production of processed foods, which contributes to most dietary salt. Finland had an effective salt iodization program for decades, but decreased consumption of iodized salt and milk resulted in lower iodine intakes. Actions to strengthen the coverage of iodized salt were recently recommended by the Finnish National Nutrition Council.

Spooky23

Almost all table salt is. Flake or kosher salt has become fashionable for various reasons.

You’ll not see any change for awhile, as the same clowns who are against fluoridation and vaccination also want to enjoy the freedom of a life without iodine.

ak217

> downward trend ... sodium was seen as bad

Excess sodium intake is associated with cardiovascular disease and heart failure. Salt is also an opportunistic carrier for iodine supplementation. So to call it good or bad, you'd need to either come up with an epidemiological study of the two diseases relative to each other, or maybe propose an alternative carrier for the iodine supplementation.

nradov

The issue with sodium intake is not the quantity but rather the osmolality.

https://peterattiamd.com/rickjohnson/

ak217

Sure. That makes sense physiologically, if you think about membrane potential and hormonal control and kidney capacity. Just like with glucose, it's the spikes that cause the damage. But it's a lot easier to explain to a non-professional that eating overly salty food is bad for them (which is what the advice reduces to in practice) than try to explain osmolality to them.

simondotau

> Excess sodium intake is associated with cardiovascular disease and heart failure.

The evidence for this is poor, and there is some evidence to the contrary.[0] Right now it is difficult to assert that there's anything more than a correlation, possibly because many popular high salt food choices could be bad for reasons other than sodium (e.g. fast food staples). In recent decades, widespread success of anti-salt messaging means that lower salt intake is now highly correlated with eating a healthy diet.

There's no first-order harm in a low salt diet, but there may be some second-order concerns. For example, when food manufacturers are pushed to reduce salt, their arsenal for achieving hyperpalatability becomes narrowed to objectively worse things like sugar and refined seed oils.

--

[0] "The field of heart failure has evolved [...] There is now substantial randomized trial data to indicate that dietary sodium restriction does not provide the reduction in clinical events with accepted heterogeneity in the clinical trial results." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38215917/ (2024)

ak217

That study is focused on how much to restrict sodium intake in patients who have already experienced heart failure to avoid further clinical events (more heart attacks). The evidence for excess sodium intake causing cardiovascular problems (by way of either high blood pressure or tissue damage from sodium spikes) remains pretty robust. See for example https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8470268/.

I think the closest thing to what you're saying that has been found is that very low sodium levels in the diet also lead to problems (the body is starved of electrolytes).

thatcat

i wonder why when you can simply add potassium salt to make it taste saltier without sodium

cbracketdash

A significant source of declining iodine levels in humans can also be traced to increased bromide found in food and medications. Most notably potassium iodate was used as a bread conditioner until the 1950s when it was substituted for potassium bromate. [0]

Excess bromide levels displace the iodide stored in the thyroid and is a contributing factor to the described increase of groiter. Bromide also has the added drawback of increased cancer risk and has now been banned in California [1] [2].

[0] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3916868/

[1] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml...

[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20131203041405/http://www.oehha....

MichaelNolan

Further reading from Gwern - https://gwern.net/iodine

jrootabega

> Iodine is a critical micronutrient in the human diet — that is, something our bodies can’t synthesize

For this I am thankful. If your body DOES start synthesizing iodine, you and those around you probably don't have much longer left to live.

blueflow

Explanation: Iodine is a molecular element, it consists out of only one type of atom. Atoms being synthesized implies some nuclear reaction or decay going on, both would cause radiation.

iugtmkbdfil834

Thank you. For the life of me I could not figure out why that is true.

MawKKe

I mean, it's possible that at some point evolution produced such nuclear reactored individual, but who got "naturally selected" rather quickly for obvious reasons

jaggederest

If you read some of the Dune supplementary materials, the sandworms are biological nuclear reactors. It's kinda handwavey but it's a cool concept - how do you keep a creature the size of a freight train moving constantly in a very thick medium... how about harvesting fissionables?

tzs

See the Isaac Asimov story "Pâté de Foie Gras" from the September 1956 issue of Astounding Science Fiction, available here [1] on the Internet Archive.

[1] https://archive.org/details/sim_astounding-science-fiction_1...

frabert

I long for the day when my liver can also act as a particle accelerator

xattt

The kidneys? A pair of calutrons.

burnished

Uhm, yes, is this where the line for the beta test starts?

altairprime

smiles in katalepsis

cubefox

Yeah, from Wikipedia:

> An essential nutrient is a nutrient required for normal physiological function that cannot be synthesized in the body (...) The nutrients considered essential for humans comprise nine amino acids, two fatty acids, thirteen vitamins, fifteen minerals and choline.

While some of these can be synthesized by other animals, this is not the case of minerals like iodine. I believe only organic compounds can be synthesized by animals.

SAI_Peregrinus

Our bodies can synthesize several inorganic compounds, and other organisms can synthesize even more. There are biological sources of $H_{2}O$, $NH_{4}^{+}$, $NO$, $HCO_{3}^{−}$, $HPO_{4}^{2−}$, and (traditionally considered inorganic despite having carbon) $CO_{2}$. Iodine is an element, not a compound, and can only be synthesized through nuclear processes, not chemical ones.

gilleain

I feel your use of TeX (or whatever that notation is precisely ...) is far too clear.

Possibly use InChI instead, so instead of "$HPO_{4}^{2−}$", use "InChI=1S/H3O4P/c1-5(2,3)4/h(H3,1,2,3,4)/p-2". Or, more concisely, just use the key, which is "NBIIXXVUZAFLBC-UHFFFAOYSA-L". :)

(from : https://www.ebi.ac.uk/chebi/searchId.do?chebiId=43474)

lgeorget

The definition I remember from my chemistry class is that organic compounds are those having at least one C-H bond.

morjom

What is this kind of notation from/based on? e.g $H_{2}O$

freehorse

Minerals (as the term is used in nutrition, not in mining) are chemical elements, not "compounds". They are part of the constituents that can be synthesised into compounds. Usually our bodies obtain them in some form of organic or inorganic salts, which are compounds, so we obtain them as parts of compounds. To synthesise compounds that contain iodine, you need iodine in some form. As we are not talking about nuclear reactions through which elements are synthesised through other elements, there is no way humans, animals or plants synthesise any minerals like iodine, we all obtain them from some source. The original sentence is weird, because it talks as if iodine can be synthesised somehow chemically but just our bodies are unable to.

mr_toad

Does respiration count as synthesis?

hilux

Iodine is also found in seafood and dairy and eggs, which may have been less common in the American diet a century ago, especially among the poor, but are widespread today. Americans no longer need iodized salt. (Not sure about vegans.)

cogman10

It's definitely in seafood. Dairy and eggs depend on what the cows and chickens have been fed. In regions with low soil iodine content, you can expect the eggs and milk to also be low in iodine.

Vegetables and grains also have a significant amount of iodine in that sort of soil (it's where the cows and chickens get it).

6SixTy

Vegans should already be extremely watchful of their nutrition, as there's for example B12 in a lot of animal products, where a B12 deficiency means you are getting nerve damage.

hiroshi3110

In Japan, iodized salt is banned as a food additive. because we can take it from see weeds like kombu.

ycombinatrix

Why would that be a reason to ban iodized salt?

slongfield

Too much iodine can lead to thyroid problems, and this has been a problem in some subgroups in Japan: https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/107/6/e2634/6516999

xiande04

Even without iodized salt, Japan is one of the highest consumers of iodine worldwide. [1]

But I agree. Even though iodized salt is pointless in Japan, so is the law banning it (assuming OP is correct, and it is in fact banned).

[1]: https://anaturalhealingcenter.com/documents/Thorne/articles/...

numpad0

IIUC it's not specifically banned by name in a law, more like not on the whitelist for food additives. Industrialized foodstuffs manufacturing in late 20th century Japan was wild, and additives are managed on approvals basis than bans as the result.

taeric

This has me curious on how I would know if my family needs more iodine? We have largely been on kosher salt for a long long time. It is just more pleasant to use while cooking.

I could, I think, just switch a lot of what we do back to iodized salt? Feels pointless if not needed, though.

29athrowaway

You likely eat other kosher products that do not use "kosher salt".

Using "kosher salt" is not always a requirement for a product to be kosher. Technically all salt is kosher if it is produced under kosher supervision, even if it's not "kosher salt".

(And some salt labeled as "kosher salt" can also be not actually kosher!)

"Kosher salt" should be rather called "koshering salt", which is the salt you would use for koshering meat.

And like most people, you likely eat more salt than strictly needed because there's salt in everything. So consuming more salt should be of least concern.

taeric

Oh, I should have been clear there, I don't do kosher because it is "kosher." I just like the larger flakes and it is easier to cook with from familiarity. I'm assuming with time I could get used to iodized again, but not at all clear if I need to.

And we have actually been doing quite well with not eating out too often. Literally less than 5 times all month. Such that I am not at all worried that we are getting too much salt.

Though, that starts getting at the general question. How often should I get blood work for nutritional analysis? Because.... I don't know that I've ever done that.

29athrowaway

I see. Most sea salt also has no iodine if that's a concern.

CactusBlue

In Korea, people often have seaweed soup. Seaweed is very high in iodine, so most people in South Korea doesn't use iodized salt.

yongjik

Seaweed, man. Buy a bag of dried kombu, plop a piece when you're making soup or broth: it goes well with most flavors, and will give you all the iodine you need.

Disclaimer: not meant to be medical advice, obviously.

bilsbie

Isn’t there a lot of iodine in dairy?

dchristian

That depends on if it's in the grass that the cows eat. They first researched iodine in cows because there isn't much iodine in the grass around the great lakes. This area was known as the "goiter belt".

Adding iodine to the cow's food made them healthier and that's how they estimated the dose for humans (mcg / kg).