Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

discovermagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 180 posts

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

#121

Post by jaggederest »

MawKKe wrote: post #61
blueflow wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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

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?

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

#122

Post by anal_reactor »

kazinator wrote: post #47

> 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.

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

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

#123

Post by amelius »

kazinator wrote: post #47

> 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.

So, what is wrong with the statement?

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

#124

Post by pkaye »

ufo wrote: post #83
FriedPickles wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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

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.

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

#125

Post by dchristian »

bilsbie wrote: post #120

Isn’t there a lot of iodine in dairy?

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).

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

#126

Post by PKop »

shortrounddev2 wrote: post #102
PKop wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no point, why risk it, for what benefit? Just brush your teeth and apply topical fluoride periodically. It's not hard. Is it for you? Even a tiny negative impact on IQ is a dumb thing to accept in service to some nonsense rationale for your teeth. Accepting this tradeoff is an IQ test itself. I'm with Europe on this one.

I believe that you've selected a single study based on your existing biases and are basing your entire opinion off of it, rather than having done an honest amount of research into the nuances of the issue

It's a recent meta analysis and isn't the only one shaping my view, but this issue has been raised for a long time. I'm asking you directly: why would you make this tradeoff? Makes no sense. Do you just accept it because that's the way things are, you're told it's good? I don't get it.

Why would you preference a dubious need for your teeth easily mitigated by just taking care of them, over potential harm to your kids (plus societies kids) brains?

I believe that's a dumb tradeoff.

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

#127

Post by ufo »

Spooky23 wrote: post #106
ufo wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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.

Notably, a lot of non-table salt in the US is not iodized. So the amount of iodine someone gets depends on how much of their food is industrialized, vs home cooked.

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

#128

Post by ufo »

_yb2s wrote: post #99
ufo wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely not!! A single drop of Lugol's iodine has dozens of times the deily recommended amount of iodine, and such levels have been documented to cause harm to the thyroid. Including inducing hypothyroidism. To quote the American Thyroid Association ( https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4267409/ ) > We recommend against the use of dietary supplements, nutraceuticals, or other over-the-counter products either…

It’s not widely used in mainstream medicine, but carefully tuned pharmacologic doses of iodine can successfully treat hypothyroidism for some people- such as the person you are replying to. It’s an “alternative medicine” thing but the biological mechanism and effect are real and understood. It should not be confused with regular dietary needs for someone that isn’t intentionally trying out a non mainstream medical in…

The most common kinds of hypothyroidism are due to the thyroid being damaged. Adding iodine can't help, but there are several known ways it can be harmful.

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

#129

Post by 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....

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

#130

Post by jrootabega »

amelius wrote: post #123
kazinator wrote: post #47

> 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.

So, what is wrong with the statement?

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.

Post reply on HN