Are you SOS free?

[JeffN]

I am grateful for this post...

Jeff’s reminder that being SOS-free isn’t necessary

Thanks.

It may be a good time to review this thread on "Nutrition Elitism, Perfectionism & Neuroticism."

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=42240

In Health
Jeff

[viv]

I too think that this idea of no salt can be dangerous for some people, especially if you live in a warmer climate. The reason vegemite is so popular in Australia is because it's nearly all salt, and the Aussies go so far as to take salt tablets.

I remember years ago I was on vacation in Las Vegas with some friends and in the evening I felt very unwell and I had no idea what was wrong with me. I remember walking into a pharmacy and the pharmacist took one look at me and told me I needed salt tablets. Shortly thereafter I made a miraculous recovery. I have been wary of this no salt idea ever since.

[Skip]

In his 2008 newsletter, Dr. McDougall states:

"A basic diet of starches, vegetables, and fruits (the McDougall Diet) with no added sodium provides less than 500 mg of sodium daily. Adding a half-teaspoon of salt to the surface of your McDougall dishes daily adds about 1100 mg of sodium—making the total daily intake 1600 mg. The “low-sodium diet” fed to a hospitalized patient, following a massive heart attack, under the expert guidance of doctors and dietitians, contains 2000 mg of sodium. Now you understand why I am comfortable putting the saltshaker on the dining tables at our programs."

I checked the cronometer and it says that the rda for sodium is minimum 500 and max 2300 mg per day. So if you follow the McDougall plan and attempt to be SOS free, you may not be getting the rda of sodium which may lead to problems......this is what I glean from this discussion. I wonder how the people who are SOS free feel about this?

[JeffN]

In his 2008 newsletter, Dr. McDougall states:

"A basic diet of starches, vegetables, and fruits (the McDougall Diet) with no added sodium provides less than 500 mg of sodium daily. Adding a half-teaspoon of salt to the surface of your McDougall dishes daily adds about 1100 mg of sodium—making the total daily intake 1600 mg. The “low-sodium diet” fed to a hospitalized patient, following a massive heart attack, under the expert guidance of doctors and dietitians, contains 2000 mg of sodium. Now you understand why I am comfortable putting the saltshaker on the dining tables at our programs."

I checked the cronometer and it says that the rda for sodium is minimum 500 and max 2300 mg per day. So if you follow the McDougall plan and attempt to be SOS free, you may not be getting the rda of sodium which may lead to problems......this is what I glean from this discussion. I wonder how the people who are SOS free feel about this?

A WFPB diet provides about 250-500 depending on the restrictiveness and/or variety. Based on my analysis of the McDougall diet, I say around 350-500 and it would have to be fairly limited and/or restrictive to get down to 200-250 or less.

There is no RDA/DRI for sodium but there is a recommended safe minimum of 500 mg/day though the bare minimum need is estimated to be about 115 or so buy that is under ideal conditions with "maximal adaption and without active sweating" and not recommend as a goal to aim for

"Thus, a minimum average requirement for adults can be estimated under conditions of maximal adaptation and without active sweating as no more than 5 mEq/day, which corresponds to 115 mg of sodium or approximately 300 mg of sodium chloride per day. "

Recommended Dietary Allowances 10th Edition
Subcommittee on the Tenth Edition of the RDAs Food and Nutrition Board Commission on Life Sciences
National Research Council
ISBN: 0-309-53606-5, 302 pages, 6 x 9, (1989
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/1349.html
P 253

The 1500 is the Adequate intake which is actually 1200-1500 depending on age and health. "The Adequate Intake (AI) is set instead of an RDA if sufficient scientific evidence is not available to calculate an EAR. The AI is based on observed or experimentally determined estimates of nutrient intake by a group (or groups) of healthy people." The AHA, ACC, NHLB, etc all use the 1500 too.

https://www.nap.edu/read/10925/chapter/8#270

"The AI for sodium is set for young adults at 1.5 g (65 mmol)/day (3.8 g of sodium chloride) to ensure that the overall diet provides an adequate intake of other important nutrients and to cover sodium sweat losses in unacclimatized individuals who are exposed to high temperatures or who become physically active as recommended in other dietary reference intakes (DRI) reports. This AI does not apply to individuals who lose large volumes of sodium in sweat, such as competitive athletes and workers exposed to extreme heat stress (e.g., foundry workers and fire fighters). The AI for sodium for older adults and the elderly is somewhat less, based on lower energy intakes, and is set at 1.3 g (55 mmol)/day for men and women 50 through 70 years of age, and at 1.2 g (50 mmol)/day for those 71 years of age and older. "

The 2300 is the Tolerable Upper Limits. This is defined as "The highest level of nutrient intake that is likely to pose no risk of adverse health effects for almost all individuals in the general population. As intake increases above the UL, the risk of adverse effects increases."

https://www.nap.edu/read/10925/chapter/8#271

"The adverse effects of higher levels of sodium intake on blood pressure provide the scientific rationale for setting the Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL). Because the relationship between sodium intake and blood pressure is progressive and continuous without an apparent threshold, it is difficult to precisely set a UL, especially because other environmental factors (weight, exercise, potassium intake, dietary pattern, and alcohol intake) and genetic factors also affect blood pressure. For adults, a UL of 2.3 g (100 mmol)/day is set. In dose-response trials, this level was commonly the next level above the AI that was tested. It should be noted that the UL is not a recommended intake and, as with other ULs, there is no benefit to consuming levels above the AI."

So, if you follow the program as recommended, including a variety of foods from the recommended food groups, you should be close to 300-500. If you add in a 1/2 tsp of salt, you are adding in about 1100 which puts you at 1450-1650.

These are the numbers my guidelines are based on. They are the same guidelines used by Dr's Mcdougall, Klaper, Lederman, Esselstyn, E2, WFM, Pritikin, etc.

This is not recommending the unbridled use of salt, nor is it saying you must hit the 1500-2300 range but showing that most people can easily add "up to" a .25 to .5 tsp and not worry. If you are adding it at the table to the top of the food, even just 200 mg (the amount in one of the small .5 gram salt packets) can taste like quite a bit. So, using 1-3 of those packets a day is a simple way of measuring it and staying around 700-1000.

Here are comments from a recent discussion on this very issue from my colleague Jay Kenny, PhD, who in my mind, knows more about this topic then anyone, and has written several CEU programs on it.

"The vast majority of people can probably get by just fine on 200 to 500mg sodium/day although this level would be dangerous for those taking diuretics, some other drugs and some medical problems including those with seriously impaired renal function. I think shooting for 500 to 1000mg sodium daily is likely a safe and effective target for most people to avoid elevated BP/HTN who want to control their BP without drugs. If one were to eat a diet composed largely of whole fruits, nuts, whole grains, and beans with no added salt or other foods with appreciable amounts of sodium then sodium deficiency is plausible [NOTE: JSN - Depending on the variety and restrictiveness] as these foods have so little sodium intake could fall below 200mg/day which may be insufficient for some people.

People whose adrenals that cannot make enough aldosterone who are not being treated with aldosterone certainly would not want to be on a low-salt diet as their ability to retain salt is severely compromised. They can become hyponatremic even on a normal American diet sometimes. A lot of vomiting might trigger low chloride levels in someone who cannot keep any food down. People with cystic fibrosis lose a lot more sodium in their sweat and cannot adapt as normal people so might have problems on a very low-salt intake. But as long as one has normal adrenal function and normal renal function and are not taking drugs like diuretics worrying about sodium deficiency is a waste of time. Walter Kempner used to put people with malignant HTN on a diet of rice and fruit and sugar which must have less than 200mg of sodium but not for long. He would add some chicken or fish and vegetables and these had sufficient sodium to prevent deficiency. Clearly people can consume zero sodium on a fast for a week or more."

Most of this is covered in the Salt thread. If you follow my guidelines you will be able to add some salt, end up around 500-1100 and not risk your health from too little or too much.

As we say at the program, "the food is your medicine and as Julie Andrews sang, 'just a (very little) spoonful of sugar (and/or salt) helps the medicine go down' "

In Health
Jeff

[JeffN]

Here is an example of a typical day based on my SNAP meals, that has about 600 mg sodium for about 2000 calories, without adding any salt.

viewtopic.php?t=10519

Here is another typical day that came in at 140 mg sodium for about 2000 calories, without adding any salt.

Breakfast
1 cup fresh blueberries
1 medium orange
2 cups Oatmeal

Lunch and Dinner
3 large baked potatoes
1.5 cups black beans
1 cup cooked zucchini
.5 cup cooked chopped onions
1 cup cooked chopped peppers
1 cup cooked okra
2 cups cooked mushrooms

Snack
1 medium apple

Nutrient Analysis
Energy: 1986 kcal
Sodium 142.3 mg

So, as you can see, it is possible to not only get below the 500, but even below the 200, without any added salt.

I come up with the 350-500 as an average based on eating a variety of foods following my guidelines, but someone following a more repetitive, more limited/restrictive diet, could possibly come in under the 500 & even under the 200 on a regular basis.

In Health
Jeff

[Lyndzie]

It may be a good time to review this thread on "Nutrition Elitism, Perfectionism & Neuroticism."

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=42240

In Health
Jeff

Great thread! I just so happened to stop in a Walmart today because I want to make a bean soup, and they have the largest selection of dried beans I've found anywhere, and the prices can't be beat. Glamorous? No, but that bean soup is gonna be delish.

[Poison Ivy]

Don't you get a certain amount of oil from the plant foods you eat? It is just not refined.

Olive oil is a liquid fat obtained from olives. Corn oil from corn?

What if you just eat green and black olives on your salads? Aren't you getting some oil, just not refined?

[Willijan]

I agree with Viv that we don't want to make this look harder for new converts, but I think this is an interesting and worthwhile question. I think new converts should use the advice Dr. McDougall gives in his books, and allow added salt and sugar if desired. After awhile they can decide if they want to go SOS free, or if they're fine as is.
I remember when I read Jeff Novick on the subject of salt, he mentioned the max sodium amount he recommended (1/2 tsp.), but he also said none is best, according to my memory.
I have been struggling with both giving up sodium or even getting it down to 1/2 tsp. reliably, and also with whether I thought it was a high priority, given the other non-dietary health struggles I have right now. So it is very interesting to find out what others here are doing.
I have absolutely no trouble giving up oil. Salt and sugar, I want, but most of the time I eat very little sugar. I really want salt on certain foods, mainly low-starch veggies.

[patty]

Don't you get a certain amount of oil from the plant foods you eat? It is just not refined.

Olive oil is a liquid fat obtained from olives. Corn oil from corn?

What if you just eat green and black olives on your salads? Aren't you getting some oil, just not refined?

Jeff Novick's _Calorie Density_ spotlights we get not only get enough fat and oil is from the plant but we subconsciously eat the same amount of WEIGHT of food daily. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CdwWliv7Hg This is important as Dr. McDougall shares in "The Starch Solution" plants survive all seasons starch based. Dr. McDougall's MS online video shares the fat/oil goes directly to the cell, wraps itself around the cell, creating a stick substance where it no longer repels the other cells creating a sludge in the blood vessel breaking the cell's brain barrier. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WHn6DFZmwk In "Whole" Dr. Campbell shares it has to be from the bottom up. Once the dots are connected we become more of the sum of all the parts as the subconscious and conscious mind are synchronized in thinking, to applying, to Being.

Aloha, patty

[verde]

In addition, you don't have to chew it as much and chewing impacts satiety, the less chewing, the less satiety.

In Health
Jeff

Really? I'm surprised because I find that if I eat a cup of blended veggie soup prior to having my full meal, I eat less and feel more satiated! What gives?

Thanks!

[JeffN]

In addition, you don't have to chew it as much and chewing impacts satiety, the less chewing, the less satiety.

In Health
Jeff

Really? I'm surprised because I find that if I eat a cup of blended veggie soup prior to having my full meal, I eat less and feel more satiated!

Correct.

Filling up on soup or salad first is one of the principles to decrease calorie density and increase satiety of the overall meal.

However, when 2 foods that are equal in calories are compare with 1 being blended vs 1 being unblended (Apple vs apple sauce, veggies vs blended veggies, nuts vs nut butter, etc), the unblended is more satiating.

This topic (calorie density, satiety, chewing, disrupted fiber, etc) is well covered in several threads in my forum.

In health
Jeff

[roundcoconut]

I wanted to comment really quickly on the (well-intentioned?) desire to make a plant-based style of eating seem approachable and not intimidating:

In the end, when someone tells you that fixing their diabetes is easy (or undoing years of weight gain, or whatever), then their expectations will not be very accurate — about whether this requires three hours from them over the next six months, or whether they should commit themselves to a lot of vigilance over the next six months.

I just wonder why we hold back?? Giving accurate information is what helps people to callibrate their expectations, and decide whether to give it a go. As a beginner to any undertaking, I would rather hear, “It’s an ongoing effort, but it’s worth it”. I would rather hear, “The benefits you get from doing this, FAR outweighs the drawbacks.”

If I were learning pottery, I would far rather be told that my instructor put in 300 hours of focused practice, before she had anything worth firing and glazing. And maybe I’m going to be a prodigy, but if my experience is anything like hers, then maybe I too will need 300 hours of focused practice before I’m doing it well and making it look easy.

As to this stye of eating, it’s NOT terribly easy, whether you are allowing yourself a few teaspoons of sugar (or salt) a day, or not. I am not convinced that it makes things noticeably easier by using the allowed amounts of sugar/salt! In the end, the real challenges are about all the situations and the mindsets in which one can easily lie to oneself and backslide.

It’s gonna be kinda hard at times, whichever approach you take. If you start from a baseline of trying to limit yourself to 1/2 tsp of salt a day, you will still be tempted to go batty on some food gifted to your by a neighbor. if you start from a baseline of not using processed sugars, you are not necessarily “protected” when someone passes around some heavily-sweetened brownies at a potluck. The challenges remain, no matter which ideology seems right to you intellectually.

It seems to me that that’s where the rubber meets the road, right?

[graciezoe]

I try to be sos free and have been mostly sugar and oil free since 2014. Salt is something I use at holiday time.

[verde]

In addition, you don't have to chew it as much and chewing impacts satiety, the less chewing, the less satiety.

In Health
Jeff

Really? I'm surprised because I find that if I eat a cup of blended veggie soup prior to having my full meal, I eat less and feel more satiated!

Correct.

Filling up on soup or salad first is one of the principles to decrease calorie density and increase satiety of the overall meal.

However, when 2 foods that are equal in calories are compare with 1 being blended vs 1 being unblended (Apple vs apple sauce, veggies vs blended veggies, nuts vs nut butter, etc), the unblended is more satiating.

This topic (calorie density, satiety, chewing, disrupted fiber, etc) is well covered in several threads in my forum.

In health
Jeff

Thank you Jeff! As always, clarifying answer! Got it!

[pundit999]

I started 5.5 years ago and have reversed my heart disease, deriving other benefits at the same time.

I don't consume any oil and or added sugar. At times, the soy milk I use for tea has some sugar in it.

I use less salt than before, but I still consume it.

I find that not adding salt in cooking but sprinkling on top allows me to eat less salt. But wife does not like it, so I have made a compromise.

I hope to use increasingly less salt as time goes on.