May, 11 2009, 09:00am EDT
'Heart Attack Entrees With Side Orders of Stroke'
Overly Salty Restaurant Meals Present Long-Term Health Risks for All, and Immediate Danger for Some
WASHINGTON
Unsafe levels of sodium chloride, or salt, in chain restaurant meals
increase one's chance of developing hypertension, heart attacks,
strokes, and kidney disease according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The nonprofit food safety and nutrition watchdog group today is exposing chain restaurant meals with dangerously high levels of sodium and is renewing its call on industry and government to lower sodium levels in foods.
Photo Credit: CSPI Ahoy,
matey! Red Lobster's Admiral's feast, with creamy lobster topped mashed
potato, Caesar salad with dressing, just one of the complimentary
Cheddar Bay Biscuits, and a lemonade: At 7,106 mg of sodium, it is one
of the saltiest restaurant meals in America.
People
with high blood pressure, African Americans, and people middle-aged and
older-70 percent of the population-should consume no more than 1,500
milligrams (mg) of sodium daily, according to the government's dietary
advice. Others should consume no more than 2,300 mg of sodium per day.
Yet it is almost impossible to get restaurant meals with reasonably
safe levels of sodium. A lifetime of eating much more than the
recommended amounts of sodium presents an increased risk of disease in
the long term. But for some, particularly the elderly, consuming 4,000
mg or more of sodium in a single meal can present an immediate risk of
heart failure or other serious problems.
CSPI
researchers examined 17 chains and found that 85 out of 102 meals had
more than a day's worth of sodium, and some had more than four days'
worth, including these:
- Red Lobster Admirals' Feast with Caesar Salad,
Creamy Lobster Topped Mashed Potato, Cheddar Bay Biscuit, and a
Lemonade: 7,106 mg
- Chili's Buffalo Chicken Fajitas (with tortillas and condiments) and a Dr Pepper: 6,916 mg
- Chili's Honey-Chipotle Ribs with Mashed Potatoes with Gravy, Seasonal Vegetables, and a Dr Pepper: 6,440 mg
- Olive Garden Tour of Italy (lasagna) with a Breadstick, Garden Fresh Salad with House Dressing, and a Coca-Cola: 6,176 mg
- Olive Garden Chicken Parmigiana with a Breadstick, Garden Fresh Salad with House Dressing, and Raspberry Leonade: 5,735 mg
"Who
knows how many Americans have been pushed prematurely into their graves
thanks to sodium levels like those found in Olive Garden, Chili's, and
Red Lobster?" asked CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "These
chains are sabotaging the food supply. They should cut back and give
consumers the freedom to decide for themselves how much salt they
want."
"More than 70 percent of older Americans have
hypertension and are especially vulnerable," said Dr. Mel Daly, a
geriatrician who is Medical Director of the Subacute Unit at Greater
Baltimore Medical Center and an associate professor of medicine at
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. "Many elderly eat
frequently at these restaurants because of convenience and cost. But
the high sodium levels in many of these meals can lead to a spike in
blood pressure and even precipitate heart failure in some individuals."
Children eating at chain restaurants don't fare much
better than their parents or grandparents. According to the Institute
of Medicine, children aged 4-8 should consume no more than 1,200 mg of
sodium per day. These meals that have one or two days' worth of sodium:
- Red Lobster Chicken Fingers, Biscuit, Fries, Raspberry Lemonade: 2,430 mg
- Chili's Country Fried Chicken Crispers with Rice and 1% milk: 2,385 mg
- KFC Popcorn Chicken with Macaroni and Cheese, Teddy Grahams, and 2% milk: 2,005 mg
- Jack in the Box Chicken Strips Grilled, Buffalo Sauce, Fries, and 1 % milk: 1,980 mg
- Olive Garden Chicken Fingers, Fries, and Raspberry Lemonade: 1,835 mg
"Parents
already have enough to worry about with the increasing incidence of
obesity and diabetes among children. The restaurant industry should not
add to these problems by raising kids' blood pressure as well," said
Dr. Stephen Havas, an adjunct professor of preventive medicine at
Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and a former vice
president for science, quality, and public health of the American
Medical Association. He noted that a 2006 meta-analysis of randomized
controlled trials in children found that reducing children's salt
intake lowered their blood pressure, and that if lower blood pressure
were maintained into adulthood, it would reduce the incidence of
cardiovascular disease.
Since 1978, CSPI has been urging the Food and Drug Administration to press for lower salt levels in processed and restaurant foods. In 2005 the group sued the FDA
and then petitioned the agency to regulate salt as a food additive,
subject to reasonable limits in a given category of food. (Currently,
the FDA considers salt to be "generally recognized as safe" and does
not put any limits on its use.) Havas and other hypertension experts
have estimated that reducing sodium levels in restaurant and packaged
foods by half could prevent at least 150,000 premature deaths per year
in the United States.
CSPI hopes that new leadership in the Obama
administration will look to sodium reduction and other prevention
measures as means of making health care reform affordable. Since the
Bush administration did nothing to encourage sodium reduction, some
city public health departments, particularly New York City's, have
begun to press the food and restaurant industries to cut the sodium in
their products. Requiring chain restaurants to disclose sodium on menus
would help consumers regulate their salt intake and would likely nudge
the industry to provide more low-sodium choices, according to CSPI.
"Americans spend north of $15 billion to treat high blood
pressure, and many billions more on expensive heart procedures, yet the
government spends peanuts improving Americans' diets," said Jacobson.
"Getting the food and restaurant industry to use less salt would be one
way the Obama Administration could help prevent chronic disease and
make health coverage more affordable."
Tomorrow, before the Senate Finance Committee, Jacobson
will testify that reducing sodium consumption by just 25 percent over
the next 10 years could save the government $9 billion a year in direct
medical costs.
Since 1971, the Center for Science in the Public Interest has been a strong advocate for nutrition and health, food safety, alcohol policy, and sound science.
LATEST NEWS
Warren Says Trump Will 'Try to Ban Abortion Nationwide' If He Regains Power
"Donald Trump is proud that he overturned Roe v. Wade, he's proud he ripped away a fundamental freedom from millions of women," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
Mar 18, 2024
Sen. Elizabeth Warren warned Sunday that Donald Trump will aggressively pursue a national abortion ban if elected to another term after the former president and presumptive 2024 GOP nominee boasted about the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade—a move that opened the floodgates for draconian attacks on reproductive rights across the country.
Trump nominated three of the five Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn Roe in 2022, and he stacked lower federal courts with far-right extremists.
In a Fox News interview that aired Sunday, Trump said the justices "did something that from a lot of standpoints is extremely good" and repeated commonplace right-wing lies that Democrats support infanticide—claims that are frequently used to justify further rollbacks of reproductive freedoms. Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case brought by right-wing groups that could dramatically weaken access to medication abortion.
The former president said he will be deciding "pretty soon" on a specific abortion policy for his 2024 campaign for the White House. The New York Timesreported last month that Trump has told advisers and allies that he "likes the idea of a 16-week national abortion ban with three exceptions, in cases of rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother."
Asked during the Fox News interview whether he thinks a 16-week abortion ban would be "politically acceptable," Trump responded, "We're gonna find out."
Trump's campaign previously dismissed the Times reporting as "fake news."
Trump on if a national 16 week abortion ban would be politically acceptable: "We're gonna find out."
He then lies about Democrats supporting the murder of born babies. pic.twitter.com/B5e41m9ftm
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 17, 2024
Warren (D-Mass.) said in response that "Donald Trump is proud that he overturned Roe v. Wade, he's proud he ripped away a fundamental freedom from millions of women, and if he regains power, he will go even further and try to ban abortion nationwide."
"By overturning Roe, Trump put judges and politicians in the driver's seat of women and their families' most personal healthcare decisions," said Warren. "He opened the door to even more extreme restrictions on our freedoms: criminalizing doctors, passing bans with no exceptions, and restricting access to IVF—and he brags about it."
"Trump said we're going to find out if the country will accept his plans for a national abortion ban, and he's right," the senator added. "He's going to find out this November when the majority of Americans who support reproductive freedom turn out to send President Biden and Vice President Harris back to the White House and remind Donald Trump that we will not go back—not now, not ever."
"As Project 2025 makes clear, opponents will not stop until abortion is banned and out of reach in all 50 states."
Right-wing groups, including the coalition known as Project 2025, have been working for months on a range of proposals that would further curtail reproductive freedoms at the federal level and undercut people's ability to receive basic medical care.
"In emerging plans that involve everything from the EPA to the Federal Trade Commission to the Postal Service, nearly 100 anti-abortion and conservative groups are mapping out ways the next president can use the sprawling federal bureaucracy to curb abortion access," Politicoreported last month. "Many of the policies they advocate are ones Trump implemented in his first term and President Joe Biden rescinded—rules that would have a far greater impact in a post-Roe landscape. Other items on the wish list are new, ranging from efforts to undo state and federal programs promoting access to abortion to a de facto national ban. But all have one thing in common: They don't require congressional approval."
Project 2025, a coalition of dozens of right-wing groups—including Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America and other anti-abortion organizations—is "drafting executive orders to roll back Biden-era policies that have expanded abortion access, such as making abortions available in some circumstances at VA hospitals," and "collecting resumes from conservative activists interested in becoming political appointees or career civil servants and training them to use overlooked levers of agency power to curb abortion access," according to Politico.
"Donald Trump is to blame for the ongoing abortion access crisis," Planned Parenthood Votes said in a statement earlier this month. "Because of his first-term actions, 21 states—and counting—now ban some or all abortion; and one in three women are blocked from access in their home states. As Project 2025 makes clear, opponents will not stop until abortion is banned and out of reach in all 50 states."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Russia's Putin Secures Another Term
The controversial leader won a record number of votes for a post-Soviet candidate even as opponents organized a protest at noon on the election's third and last day.
Mar 17, 2024
Despite protests on Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin won reelection with more votes than any candidate since the fall of the Soviet Union.
Exit poll the Public Opinion Foundation (POF) put the final tally after three days of voting at 87.8%, the Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM) at 87%, and Russia's Central Election Commission (CEC) at 87.3%. Putin will now serve another six-year term, meaning he will have been at the helm of the Russian state for longer than any leader since Catherine the Great, surpassing Josef Stalin.
The election comes less than a month after the second anniversary of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and is likely to lead to more tensions between the Russian and U.S. governments.
"It gives me some hope to see how many people are not happy with the dictatorship, the war, with what's happening in Russia."
"For a U.S. administration that hoped Putin's Ukraine adventure would be wrapped up by now with a decisive setback to Moscow's interests, the election is a reminder that Putin expects that there will be many more rounds in the geopolitical boxing ring," Nikolas Gvosdev, director of the National Security Program at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, told the Russia Matters project.
With most of Putin's prominent opponents either dead, imprisoned, or in exile, the elections results were considered a foregone conclusion by both friends and foes of his administration.
A Putin spokesperson said in 2023 that the election was "not really democracy" but instead "costly bureaucracy," according to CNN. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the White House National Security Council said the election was "obviously not free nor fair."
However, Russian opponents of Putin did find a way to demonstrate their position with a protest called "Noon Against Putin." The protest was called for by St. Petersburg politician Maxim Reznik, according to The Guardian. Participants were instructed to head to a polling place at noon and cast a paper ballot for one of the candidates running against Putin, or to write-in another candidate or spoil their ballot.
Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny had endorsed the protest before his death last month in a Russian prison, leading the Independent Novaya Gazeta newspaper to dub it "Navalny's political testament."
The action drew crowds to polling places both in Russian cities like Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Yekaterinburg and at Russian embassies around the world.
"This is the first time in my life I have ever seen a queue for elections," one woman waiting in line in Moscow told
CNN. Russian journalists reported that the lines at some stations within the country reached the thousands, according to Reuters.
Navalny's widow, Yulia Navalnaya, who had also endorsed the protest, voted at the embassy in Berlin, while several protesters gathered outside the embassy in London.
"I expected there to be a lot of people, but not this many," London-based participant Maria Dorofeyeva told The Guardian, adding, "It gives me some hope to see how many people are not happy with the dictatorship, the war, with what's happening in Russia. And we want to stop it."
Ruslan Shaveddinov of Navalny's Anti-Corruption Foundation told Reuters:
"We showed ourselves, all of Russia and the whole world that Putin is not Russia (and) that Putin has seized power in Russia."
"Our victory is that we, the people, defeated fear, we defeated solitude—many people saw they were not alone," Shaveddinov said
Keep ReadingShow Less
Van Hollen Says Netanyahu Spreading 'Flat Out Lies' About UNRWA
The Maryland senator defended the organization on CBS and said there was no evidence that it was a "proxy for Hamas."
Mar 17, 2024
U.S. Senator for Maryland Chris Van Hollen continued his defense of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East and its work in Gaza in an appearance on CBS News' "Face the Nation" on Sunday.
"The claim that Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu and others are making that somehow UNRWA is a proxy for Hamas are just flat out lies, that's a flat out lie," he told journalist Margaret Brennan.
The U.S. was one of many Western countries that paused funding for UNRWA after the agency announced in January that it had fired 12 staffers over Israeli allegations that they had been involved in Hamas' October 7 attack on Israel. However, some countries including Canada, Sweden, the European Union, and Australia have since restored funding. A report has also emerged that Israel tortured UNRWA staffers into falsely confessing to involvement in the Hamas attack.
"Netanyahu has wanted to get rid of UNRWA because he had seen them as a means to continue the hopes of the Palestinian people for a homeland of their own."
Van Hollen's remarks on Sunday come days after he argued for the restoration of UNRWA funds on the floor of the U.S. Senate and criticized Republican legislators who wanted to permanently end funds for the organization that supports some 6 million Palestinian refugees in countries across the Middle East, including around 2 million in Gaza.
During his speech, he pointed out that the Netanyahu government had not shared the underlying evidence that UNRWA staffers participated in October 7 with either UNRWA itself or the U.S. government. He also urged his colleagues to read a classified Director of National Intelligence report on Netanyahu's claims of UNRWA complicity with Hamas.
On "Face the Nation," Van Hollen said that the person in charge of operations on the ground in UNRWA was a 20-year U.S. Army veteran.
"You can be sure he is not in cahoots with Hamas," the senator told Brennan.
He also repeated claims that Netanyahu has wanted to eliminate UNRWA entirely since at least 2017.
"Netanyahu has wanted to get rid of UNRWA because he had seen them as a means to continue the hopes of the Palestinian people for a homeland of their own," Van Hollen said, adding that the right-wing Israeli leader's "primary objective" was preventing the formation of a Palestinian state.
However, the dismantling of UNRWA would be especially catastrophic amid Israel's ongoing bombardment and invasion of Gaza, which has killed more than 31,000 people and put the survivors at risk of famine. No other organization has the infrastructure in place to distribute the necessary aid.
"If you cut off funding for UNRWA in Gaza entirely, it means more people will starve, more people won't get the medial assistance they need, and so it would be a huge mistake," Van Hollen said.
He also said that only 14 of the agency's 13,000-strong staff in Gaza had been accused of participating in the October 7 attack.
"We should investigate it, we should hold all those people accountable, but for goodness' sake, let's not hold 2 million innocent Palestinian civilians who are dying of starvation... accountable for the bad acts of 14 people."
Van Hollen also repeated his call for President Joe Biden to condition the sale of offensive military weapons to Israel on the country obeying international law and allowing aid into Gaza. While Israel sent the U.S. a letter saying it was in compliance with the law, "the day it was signed, clearly the Netanyahu government is not in compliance, because we see that they're continuing to restrict humanitarian assistance," he told Brennan.
Also on "Face the Nation" Sunday, United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) Chief Executive Catherine Russell described the impact that a lack of aid was having on the children of Gaza.
"We know now that children are dying of malnutrition in Gaza," she told Brennan.
Russell said that not enough aid was reaching those who needed it, calling both air drops and sea deliveries "a drop in the bucket."
She also called for greater transparency into what was actually happening in Gaza and the difficulties of delivering aid.
"The world should be able to see what's happening and make their own judgments about what's going on," Russell said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular