Key result
This letter critiques previous analyses on dietary sodium restriction, arguing that assessing 24-hour urinary sodium after 5 days of restriction is inappropriate for guiding subsequent intake.
This letter critiques a meta-analysis on dietary sodium and blood pressure, specifically challenging the interpretation of a cited study regarding the harms of salt restriction.
To the Editor. —The meta-analysis by Midgley et al1shows a slightly smaller decrease in blood pressure than that in previous analyses, which probably is due to different selection criteria. The authors also try to suggest that salt restriction is harmful and, in particular, cite a study by Alderman and colleagues.2Clearly, they have not read the article in detail or the correspondence that followed.3In this study, salt intake was assessed only after all subjects had been carefully instructed on how to restrict their salt intake to stimulate the renin-angiotensin system so that a renin/sodium profile could be derived. It has been consistently pointed out that it is only possible to distinguish low, normal, and high renin subgroups if patients are on a low sodium intake. Moreover, it is inappropriate to use this 24-hour urinary sodium after 5 days of sodium restriction as a guide to the patient's subsequent
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Graham A. MacGregor (1996) conducted a letter in Blood pressure. Dietary sodium restriction was evaluated. This letter critiques previous analyses on dietary sodium restriction, arguing that assessing 24-hour urinary sodium after 5 days of restriction is inappropriate for guiding subsequent intake.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: