New York State says No Salt for you

[rooftop1000]

Just caught this one on facebook and thought it worthy of derision or discussion

http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=A10129&Summary=Y&Text=Y

A10129 Summary:

BILL NO A10129

SAME AS No same as

SPONSOR Ortiz (MS)

COSPNSR Markey

MLTSPNSR Perry

Add S399-bbb, Gen Bus L

Prohibits the use of salt by restaurants in the preparation of food by

restaurants.

tracey

Edited March 10, 2010 by rooftop1000 (log)

[Porthos]

Incredible stupidity.

[Sethro]

Whoever is pushing this bill deserves to be drowned in salt. The end.

[djyee100]

Big Brother seems to have moved into the kitchen. Before the state assembly & senate pass this bill, every supporter of this bill should eat no food with salt for a month, & see how they like it.

"No owner or operator of a restaurant in this state shall use salt in any form in the preparation of any food for consumption by customers of such restaurant..." Goodbye, MacDonald's, Taco Bell, & other fast food chains. Goodbye to any restaurant that uses canned or frozen foods that have salt in them. Goodbye to any restaurant that uses salted artisanal foods like homemade pickles or pancetta. Even Chez Panisse couldn't survive these restrictions.

"Whenever the court shall determine that a violation of this section has occurred, the court may impose a civil penalty of not more than one thousand dollars for each violation. Each use of salt in violation of this section shall constitute a separate violation." A restaurant can be fined up to $1000 for sprinkling some salt into a pot of soup. Sprinkle some salt into a second pot of soup, & that's $2000.

The Attorney General's office is directed by this bill to bring these salt scofflaws to justice. Given their workload prosecuting serious criminals, I bet the AG's office just loves this bill.

Legislation starts moving because interested parties (read: lobbyists) approach legislators with a proposal for a bill. More often than not, the legislators will put forward a bill because it has been suggested by a group towards whom they feel favorably inclined (read: campaign contributors). My question is: who in the world would want a bill like this, & why? And how did they get some legislators to go along?

Personally, I doubt if this bill as written will go anywhere. But I've been wrong before. In the 1990s the California legislature passed a law forbidding the use of raw eggs in restaurant food. The law was aimed at sloppy restaurants. But it also affected the restaurants that use these ingredients responsibly. The law received many complaints (no more homemade mayonnaise or Caesar salad dressing at some top restaurants), and it was amended quickly to allow raw or undercooked eggs with the consent of the customers.

[IndyRob]

I've done some googling on this and didn't discover much coverage from the mainstream media - although wikipedians appear to have been quick to add this ignominious distinction to the pages of each sponsor.

I guess that leaves me with two questions:

1) Is there anyone who fears that this could actually be passed? I mean, any state legislator could, for instance, propose a bill banning squirrels from the state. It wouldn't necessarily mean that change is coming.

2) WTF are Brooklyn voters thinking? And will they think differently next time they're at the ballot box?

[Moopheus]

No salt at all? That is pretty stupid--it clearly shows complete ignorance of the restaurant business, cooking, and basic physiology. Sure, a lot of places--fast food places in particular--really overdo it on the salt, but this is not the way to address that. I could see maybe a rule to provide some information for people on salt-restricted diets. But what are they going to do--arrest every chef in the state?

[Pielle]

Wow, this is by far the stupidest thing I have read in a long time.

I would like to know were they would draw the line for "Salt in any form". Just about EVERY food item, from broccoli to beef, naturally contains a significant amount of sodium (you know, because it is actually required for life).

So either it is only refined salts that are banned, in which case I will gladly use my "sea water concentrate" or they just banned restaurants from serving food.

Brilliant...

[rooftop1000]

This made a 7 second mention on the Channel 2 News at Noon...with a straight face yet

t

[Special K]

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/03/11/2010-03-11_assault_on_salt_an_insult_chefs.html

[Dave the Cook]

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/03/11/2010-03-11_assault_on_salt_an_insult_chefs.html

It's too bad the paper doesn't do more than superficial reporting on the issues. They don't investigate the statement Ortiz makes:

He claims billions of dollars and thousands of lives would be saved if salt was taken off the menu altogether.

Worse, they perpetuate a chunk of -- at best -- misleading information by saying:

There's little argument that too much salt causes high blood pressure, which can lead to heart attacks . . .

In truth, there's a fair amount of skepticism regarding this linkage. Even the staid Mayo Clinic hedges:

Some people are more sensitive to the effects of sodium than are others. People who are sodium sensitive retain sodium more easily, leading to excess fluid retention and increased blood pressure. If you're in that group, extra sodium in your diet increases your chance of developing high blood pressure, a condition that can lead to cardiovascular and kidney diseases.

. . . .

If you are older than 50, are black or have a health condition such as high blood pressure, chronic kidney disease or diabetes, you may be more sensitive to the blood pressure raising effects of sodium.

. . . .

You may or may not be particularly sensitive to the effects of sodium. And because there's no way to know who might develop high blood pressure as a result of a high-sodium diet . . .

Emphasis mine -- just look at all those qualifiers. Of course, they go on to recommend a low-sodium diet anyway . . .

[JAZ]

Here's a much better look at the matter from the Albany Times Union:

If passed, the deeply misguided measure, introduced by Felix Ortiz, D-Brooklyn, would result in fines of up to $1,000 for each addition of salt by restaurant staff, whether before, during or after cooking. Customers would have the option of adding salt when food is served.

In a phone conversation Wednesday, Ortiz admitted that he did not research salt's role in food chemistry or his bill's ramifications for the restaurant industry. He said he was prompted to introduce the bill because his father used salt excessively for many years, developed high blood pressure and had a heart attack.

Regardless of its intent, and accepting its sponsor's claim that it is part of his campaign to improve the public's health, the bill exhibits profound ignorance not only of matters of taste -- literally -- but also of the chemistry of cooking.

And my favorite bit:

Ortiz also said he expects to continue to eat ham, cheese and bread in restaurants, all of which contain salt.

[Holly Moore]

Sugar is at risk too, both in NYC and PHL, leaving the possibility of a life long diet of bitter and sour.

Don't think savory is possible without salt.

[emmalish]

Great article JAZ, thanks for the link.

[djyee100]

And my favorite bit:

Ortiz also said he expects to continue to eat ham, cheese and bread in restaurants, all of which contain salt.

Is he planning to bring his own ham and cheese sandwich into a restaurant, and ask them to give him a plate? If his bill passes, plates may be the only thing a restaurant will be able to serve.

From the NY Times, an article about the uncertain nature of salt research:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/23/science/23tier.html

[Porthos]

The statement near the end of the article that a proper clinical trial would be too time consuming and expensive should frighten anyone who truly believes in the scientific method. What are they really afraid of finding out? That their cherished beliefs could be wrong?

FWIW, I'm 5'7" and have weighed between 200 and 250 pounds for the last decade (closer to 200 right now) and my bp is 115 over 65 typically and I salt EVERYTHING.

[John DePaula]

Of course, on some other forums, the tired lament, 'Nanny State!, Nanny State!' is heralded once again along with the poor comparison to the smoking ban in public places; however, the comparison is inapt:

• Smoking affects all. If I eat salted food, it only affects me.
  
• Smoking is NEVER necessary to good health; Salt, in moderation, is.

I feel perfectly competent to make my own decisions about what I eat.

The bill is silly and should be discarded; and shame on them for wasting our time.

[Sethro]

I have low blood pressure and when my sodium level depletes I get faint and see spots. Bummer for me!

[divalasvegas]

Update: New York State Assemblyman Felix Ortiz has now issued a clarification of his proposed legislation to ban the use of the salt in all restaurants in New York State.

He now says that restaurants/chefs would be "allowed" to use salt as additives and that salt would be recognized as necessary in certain recipes.

Two questions:

1) Exactly what does he see as the difference between adding salt and using salt as an additive?

2) What kind of multi-million dollar state government bureaucracy would need to be formed to police which recipes require salt as a necessary inclusion, er, additive?