![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The "Himalayan salt" comes from Pakistan and has nothing to do with the Himalaya. It is an esoteric fantasy name. See the German article [1]. 85.181.59.235 ( talk) 19:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
The German Wikipedia article states that Himalayan salt contains heavy metals, such as mercury, lead, and cadmium. This analysis does show all three of these. Badagnani ( talk) 19:52, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Sea salt (and all salt other than refined salt) also contains all those elements, including the heavy metals, though often in parts per million or parts per billion. Badagnani ( talk) 20:11, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
That's absolutely incorrect. I study sea salt and can assure you that all unrefined salts produced from evaporated seawater contain detectable amounts of up to 100 or more trace elements. Badagnani ( talk) 20:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Another example: [2]. Badagnani ( talk) 20:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Low importance C-class article, regional "health salts" with minimal impact on the global market.
This article needs attention in the following areas:
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 07:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
This article talk page was automatically added with {{ WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot ( talk) 15:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
This article is a confusing combination of original research, or possibly fringe theories ("This is why pure sodium chloride causes problems for one's health which are not proven for the use of Himalayan salt"), commercialism, and even, apparently vandalism. ("Tommy is the original founder of Himilayan salt.') Piano non troppo ( talk) 07:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Which elements does the pink color come from? Badagnani ( talk) 18:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
products.mercola.com/himalayan-salt/ unreliable fringe source? This page] says it's produced in Nepal. But it also says it's not a form of rock salt. If it's not a form of rock salt, what is it, and why doesn't the page say what it is, if not a form of rock salt? Badagnani ( talk) 17:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
If it is rock salt, mined from the earth (rather than made by evaporating seawater), this should be stated in the article. Badagnani ( talk) 07:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
It's not Rocksalt (as in the stuff that is put on the roads), but it is salt from the mountains (as opposed to table salt that is chemically created or sea salt), so some companies might market it as rock salt or rock-based salt. Personally, I don't like the term because it confuses too many people... I think it should be left out to minimize confusion. Burleigh2 ( talk) 16:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
First of all I want to thank for assistance because my English is lousy and so I cannot write parts of the article myself. The article is much better now. Only the section "History" is IMHO still wrong. This salt is (generally) from Pakistan, so it cannot be formed in the foot of the Himalayan Mountains. There are no evidence that this salt was deemed as the “King of salt” and that it has ability to preserve meat at a longer duration than other salt. This are assertions of the sellers without attest. Because of that I would propose to erase the whole selection "Historie". -- 85.181.13.56 ( talk) 19:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
The working idea of how the salt veins got there is that packets of the ancient oceans around that area were caught in the tectonic plates as they rose up into the mountain range, the salt water (with all of its minerals) dried into the veins of salt, and that's how they came to be. Does that help clear up the confusion of how there is salt in the mountain? Burleigh2 ( talk) 16:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I am a little new to editing on Wiki, but I didn't think you could reference a page with a different language as a citation in an article. Two of the citations I have looked at were in German and I don't know enough German to be able to verify if the pages actually contain information cited or if they are even on the same topic. Can anyone clarify this for me? Burleigh2 ( talk) 19:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, then I have a stupid question... If people don't speak/read that language, how can they verify it's accuracy or proof? Do the rest of us just have to rely on those who speak the language to translate accurately? Burleigh2 ( talk) 14:07, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
How about we just remove mention of the book and its authors completely? I'm concerned about WP:NPOV, WP:BLP, and WP:OR issues with what little we have. I doubt that either reference is a WP:RS. -- Ronz ( talk) 18:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I was just looking through the history on the page. Someone took off my edit of mentioning the book with the uses saying it was advertising... how is that advertising when listing the book as it is now (talking about the different analysis of the salt) isn't? I'm not sure if I'm confused or if whoever changed it is. If a consensus can't be reached, it would probably be best to just remove the mention altogether and not put it back in. Burleigh2 ( talk) 20:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I disagree that the mention of the book should be removed altogether. I accept that the claim that Peter Ferreira is Peter Druf needs a reliable source, and should go. However, Himalayan salt is basically a brand of salt, and the book is specifically related to and promotes this salt. So the claim in the book that the chemical composition is different should stay, with the correct context. It's the equivalent of Coke claiming Coke Light is good for you. Whether the Coke marketing pamphlet is factually reliable or not is not the point, rather it's reliable in the context of being related to the product and having made the claim. I'd value more research into the disputes about Druf and the Institute if someone can follow the trail in German. I personally can't find any mention online of this Institute, which would be very unusual if it did exist. Basically, the article, to be comprehensive, needs to make mention of the controversy around this salt. The differing views are basically that the salt is either fantastically healthy, or is being excessively and perhaps dubiously promoted. Greenman ( talk) 00:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
@Ronz: I´m German and my English is not so good. In Germany there had been many reports in Newspapers and TV abaut the "Himalayan salt" and this reports were all criticizing that this product is a deception. It is a completely normal table salt, mined far away from the himalaya in an industrial salt mine, without any special effect for the health. Also several offices of consumer protection (such as Bavarian State Office for Health and Food Safety or Consumer Center Baden-Württemberg) were warning against the promotion off this salt. It seems that there are no reports like this in English language. The only I now is this page that User:Gioto linked [5]. But this page is not a suitable source. If you want I can provide some German sources and I can translate those for you. But my English is not good enough to edit the article. Here is a machine translation by Google of the German Wikipedia article [6]. But it is a very bad translation. -- 85.181.48.156 ( talk) 21:30, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Since someone reverted to the previous version with the statement about Peter Druf, is there any proof that it is a pseudonym for Peter Ferreira? The link given looks like the German version of Wikipedia (with editing options, so it could easily be changed by anyone) and I for one can't read German to verify what it says... I thought all citations had to be from reliable sources, not one that could be changed by anyone. Isn't this like citing another Wikipedia page? Without proof, that would be defamation and shouldn't be in the article. Burleigh2 ( talk) 20:48, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Can anyone provide a better website that will translate larger scripts? The link that supposedly proves the link between Druf and Ferriera is too long for the translators I'm using to cover it (including BabelFish), so I can't verify any proof of what they're saying (if it's suspect or if it's validated facts). Does anyone have a translation website we can use that doesn't have a limitation of words or characters? Burleigh2 ( talk) 16:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I have this book and I can't find reference to this lab that supposedly doesn't exist. When I looked on Yahoo, there are several other websites that seem to use exactly the script that's used in this article, but none lend a reference to the original source. Can anyone point to a page number or a section I can verify in? Burleigh2 ( talk) 16:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
This brings up a good point that I hadn't really thought about until someone took it off... should Dead Sea Salt be under a "related topic"? What about Sea Salt and Celtic Salt? I mean, they are all related as far as being types of salts and they are related... Why not have all of those types as "See Also"? Burleigh2 ( talk) 23:45, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Some sourcesproducts.mercola.com/himalayan-salt/ unreliable fringe source? state that it is produced in Nepal. Badagnani ( talk) 19:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Number one, the source states that the individual procured it from Pakistan. Number two, it is possible that what is sold as "Himalayan salt" may have more than one point of origin. Pink salt is also produced in the U.S. state of Utah and falsification may of course occur. Badagnani ( talk) 20:12, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
If specific companies selling "Himalayan salt" can be shown, with valid sources, to be fraudulently passing off salt that is not from the Himalaya Mountains as "Himalayan salt," this information should be added to the article, with sources. Are there sources showing that the Himalaya Mountains (and/or foothills) do not possess any deposits of rock salt? Badagnani ( talk) 20:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
You were asked "Are there sources showing that the Himalaya Mountains (and/or foothills) do not possess any deposits of rock salt?" You did not answer this. Badagnani ( talk) 20:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
It appears as if Mercola is deceiving the public when stating that his salt comes from Nepal (unless he means that it is produced elsewhere and simply resold, and purchased by him, in Nepal. See [10]. Badagnani ( talk) 20:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Please see http://ngs.org.np/web/about-us/238-kpkaphle which states that Nepal does have salt mines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.252.219.160 ( talk) 03:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Also see http://www.nepalitimes.com.np/issue/384/Nation/14430 which talks extensively about native salt in Nepal, which is does not have iodine. It is the reason that the Nepalese import salt from India.
Also see the film, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himalaya_(film) which is a realistic drama, depicting the story of how Nepalese natives take their salt crystals down the mountain, once a year for trade.
These are consistent with Mercola's claim of how difficult it was to get the Nepalese salt. products.mercola.com/himalayan-salt/ unreliable fringe source? (search for "Nepal"). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.252.219.160 ( talk) 06:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
It appears that your unsourced assertion was incorrect. Tibet has long produced rock salt, using it domestically as well as exporting it. See [11]. Badagnani ( talk) 20:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Several websites suggest that these salt lamps can help alleviate symptoms of allergies and asthma due to some sort of ion neutralization. The only scholarly article I found on the subject is here [12], but I was surprised Wikipedia didn't have anything to say on the subject. For something purportedly known for centuries, as several of these sites, including the linked scholarly article, assert, there should be some mention of said benefits. Circ ( talk) 04:27, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Link pops open a pdf titled Exposure to illuminated salt lamp increases 5-HT metabolism: A serotonergic perspective to its beneficial effects, written by Hajra Naz* and Darakhshan J Haleem at the Neurochemistry and Biochemical Neuropharmacology Research Unit, Department of Biochemistry, University of Karachi, Karachi, Pakistan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Circ ( talk • contribs) 04:32, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
FYI, I'm merging the Himalayan Salt Lamp page into this one per the discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Salt_lamp#Type_and_color If anyone knows how to merge them within the editing system in Wiki (aside from copy/paste like I'm doing), please feel free to do that instead... until then, I'm merging it in the only way I know how because it's such a short snippet. Burleigh2 ( talk) 15:29, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Would it improve the article to add information about Ionization if a reliable source can be found? Also at what heat is necessary for Ionization to occur. DavidR2010 ( talk) 17:50, 9 November 2010 (UTC)DavidR2010
I removed some more unsourced information about negative ions and their purported health benefits, and added a citation to a web site that aims to debunk this myth.
Jpp42 (
talk)
04:15, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
The salt is mined from Punjab and dont know why it is named Himalayan_salt. Himalaya is 300 kilometers away from its mines in Punjab. It is requested to use the name from where it is mined. Punjabi salt is appropriate and the present heading should be replaced with the Punjabi salt name.-- Khalid Mahmood ( talk) 10:15, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
The first sentence's use of the word *marketing* before *term* is misleading.
The person who undid my removal of the word said this: "It's mined in the Punjab, so Himalaya can only accurately be described as a marketing term."
This conclusion is wrong for three reasons:
1. When a term refers to a thing from one region but is named for another nearby, it is a logical fallacy (appeal to probability; also, a fallacy of exclusive premises) to conclude that the sole reason for this has to be that it was created by advertisers. (a) The term *could* have been created by advertisers, but that does not mean it *was*; (b) The term refers to the Himalayas, and the salt is mined in the Salt Region, but it does not follow without proof that, because the term seems inaccurate, the discrepancy *must have been created by advertisers*.
2. " http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/438805/Pakistan": "The Himalayas . . . form the northern rampart of the subcontinent, and their western ranges occupy the entire northern end of Pakistan." People draw false distinctions between Pakistan and the Himalayas and the use of *marketing* feeds this idea, particularly since the article stresses that the salt "is mined in Pakistan" to discount the idea it is mined in the Himalayas.
3. Since the only term by which this specifically sourced pink salt is known is *Himalayan salt*, the notion that it is solely a marketing term is therefore false. *Marketing* suggests that the *only* sources which use the term are advertisements and discussions about advertising.
If a contributor can show etymologically that term was originally created by advertisers, then they should add a section to the entry which shows this. A contributor could say that the area is referred to as the "Salt Range" and is next to the Himalayas and add the *theory* that the term was created by advertisers, but to do so legitimately, they'd have to quote a legitimate source.
If the facts presented suggest the possibility that marketing *might* be the source of the term, then the reader is free to draw their own conclusion and no pejorative is needed.
That's why the word *marketing* should be deleted from the first sentence.
However, the following article (which is too anecdotal to use as a source) makes mention of what might be the first use of the term by a marketer, and if the idea is substantiated, a section of the article could suggest there is reason to consider it: http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2008/01/salt-may-be-health-scam.html
This is the book by Peter Ferreira which is alluded to in the article as being full of false claims. It was published in 2003; the article claims Ferreira began selling and lecturing about Himalayan salt in "the '90s": http://www.amazon.com/Water-Salt-Essence-Healing-Nature/dp/B001DVZMW6
Sepium Gronagh ( talk) 20:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
PRACTICAL information seems conspicuously missing. How is it different from the usual table salt we buy from the grocer and use? Is it healthy? Unhealthy? And WHY? If a recipe calls for it, is it just a pompous, pretentious recipe, or is there some taste difference or advantage? Then we read it's "contaminated" by other chemicals, leaving the reader hanging as to whether this is a significant factor in making a dietary decision. Others' talking points infer (it seems) that this salt is little different from the usual (save for the possibly fluoride contaminated); whatever the case, an evaluation of health benefits or risks—and how it differs from ordinary, usual types of table salt—should be addressed. 73.8.106.145 ( talk) 19:23, 22 April 2015 (UTC)ChicagoLarry~commonswiki
"Hippocrates is said to have recognized the therapeutic benefits of salt mines...Health benefits have been attributed to the caves' unique microclimate, which is rich in natural salt microns and ions...In the 1980s, the Russians began to build halochambers lined with halite, which mimicked the microclimate of salt caves. With increased scientific attention, such chambers became certified as medical devices in Russia, and are said to have been adapted for use by the Russian space agency in microclimate optimization devices used by cosmonauts."
— Sala Horowitz, http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/act.2010.16302
@ Zefr, AlphaAce, Sbmeirow, and Jytdog: What do you think about this edit? Is it supported by source? It seems trivial to me. Orientls ( talk) 09:34, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Also, I notice the use of this source. It appears to mainly be a primary source. For example, a news story about the FDA warning would be a secondary source. So would not using a primary source be a violation of Wikipedia:MEDRS? VR talk 01:39, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
The article provides the impression that the salt is normally sold as quack medicineIf that's the case, it probably should be corrected.
in fact people buy it because they like the appearance and chefs recommend itSources? This sounds like just an evolution in how it's marketed. We need to take care not simply become another mouthpiece for their marketing, which has been a major problem with this article. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:21, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
What kind of sources do you expect on the subject of cooking with salt?But that's my point. We expect SOAP and NOTNEWS. When we have an FDA statement to use, I think we should be using it. -- Ronz ( talk) 02:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Zefr, sorry if I was not clear. It is not an issue of reliability but of weight. They are different policies. TFD ( talk) 17:20, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Before I post to NPOVN, I would like to note that the 2013 letter from the FDA does not say that the claims by Hearts of Light are false, but that they had not been approved and their products were adulterated. [13] TFD ( talk) 23:41, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
The previous version of the article conflates consumption of Himalayan salt with its usage in "salt lamps". Specifically it said:
there is no scientific evidence that it is healthier than common table salt; such claims are considered pseudoscience.
This is misleading because two of the sources cited are about the claim that Himalayan salt lamps have medical benefits - not about the claim that Himalayan salt is healthier than table salt. Its misleading to clump these claims together.
Secondly, the sources go into a depth comparison of Himalayan salt and table salt. That was mysteriously removed here even though it uses the very same sources as before. If those sources are unreliable than remove them too.
Thirdly, this isn't a purely scientific discussion. Himalayan salt does have cultural/aesthetic value. So do Himalayan salt lamps. Its not clear why an NPOV statement like "many find such lamps aesthetically pleasing" was removed. Its not a scientific statement. VR talk 01:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
your attempts to separate the various aspects of health claims (regarding what uses) seem too convoluted to get into in the lede
not contain details not found in the body
unless you can find a very elegant way to incorporate itSure we can phrase it differently, but, again that seems like a stylistic concern. Again, correct me if I'm wrong.
If you want to move this forward, don't just restore, or you will just be reverted again.I honestly don't see how blindly reverting everything some adds is helpful. If there's certain things you don't think should be in the lede, sure remove them. Or move them around. Or rephrase them. VR talk 19:57, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Is this source appropriate for adding material on the use of Himalayan Salt as cookware? Its lists as its author "Williams - Sonoma Test Kitchen", and the Williams-Sonoma company does seem to have experience in the field of cookware. Please note, I'm not asking if this is source is appropriate for making health claims - I know its not. VR talk 20:40, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
There is no policy or guideline that requires sources to be independent. However, in this case the publishers are independent of the topic. Wikipedia articles are only supposed to reflect information available in reliable sources, not to provide a higher truth based on our own assessments. I doubt there are many cookbooks written by people who do not own or work in restaurants or sell cooking supplies. Even Jamie Oliver has a cooking line. TFD ( talk) 00:48, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Google Himalayan+"salt plate" and use the news filter and there is a plethora of articles about Himalayan salt plates. [20] See for example "Hot or cold, salt block cooking adds flair to dishes" which I chose at random. Granted, it's not the MIT Journal of Culinary Science or the London School of Home Economics. TFD ( talk) 00:59, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
There is no policy or guideline that requires sources to be independent. WP:NOT, which is the concern here, as well as WP:OR. -- Ronz ( talk) 03:45, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
There are no articles that say people make false medical claims.The Time piece is titled: "Does Pink Himalayan Salt Have Any Health Benefits?", describes various claims that are made and answers that for all of them evidence is either negative or absent altogether. The Atlantic article explains the apparent route through which the false health claims associated with Himalayan salt likely arose out of a reverse-engineering of the 'naturalness' indicative from the of the color, before likewise dismissing the claims. These are mainstream popular-media sources, rather than specialized niche-cooking ones, and of all of the aspects of Himalayan salt they could have addressed, the one thing they both talk about in detail is health claims. (The Atlantic article also has one person specifically addressing what they see as it's best quality as a food additive: "it's good at being pink.") Do you not see that if mainstream popular media sources think false health claims are worth mentioning, maybe we should too?
VR, is there any specific edit you wish to make based on these two sources? TFD ( talk) 16:32, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Is this an industry hit piece on....salt? I think were at Peak Wikipedia when even an article on something as boring as salt comes off as scornful and preachy.
It has been mentioned 4 times (in 4 of 6 paragraphs) that it has no proven health benefits and the word pseudoscience is used twice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.59.96.194 ( talk) 09:40, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
There is a very weak link in this article based on an estimation that Himalayan rock salt contains 2% 98% Sodium Chloride, which aligns more with purified commercial table salt. Some other web sites say 86% Sodium Chloride, yet I haven't been able to find any reliable sources for either figure. Maybe some other editors will be able to find some more accurate and reliable sources?
Probrooks ( talk) 14:32, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
The following thoroughly non- NPOV citation and quote has been relocated here. An appropriately scientifically neutral one needs to be added in its place:
The neutrality of both author and his quote thoroughly fail Wikipedia's threshold.
Schwarcz has disqualified himself as a neutral scientific commentator by resorting to
invective and
ad hominum attack, accusing those he criticizes of having inadequately developed or damaged brains. That simply does not fly here. A responsibly neutral and appropriately scientific quote needs to take its place.
Wikiuser100 (
talk)
12:31, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
The quote:
References
As is often the case with nutritional controversies, pseudoscience slithers into the picture. In this case it is in the form of "natural" alternatives to table salt with insinuations of health benefits. Himalayan salt, which is composed of large grains of rock salt mined in Pakistan, is touted as a healthier version because it contains traces of potassium, silicon, phosphorus, vanadium, and iron. The amounts are enough to color the crystals, giving them a more "natural" appearance, but are nutritionally irrelevant. Some promoters make claims that are laughable. Himalayan salt, they say, contains stored sunlight, will remove phlegm from the lungs, clear sinus congestion, prevent varicose veins, stabilize irregular heartbeats, regulate blood pressure, and balance excess acidity in brain cells. One would have to have a deficiency in brain cells to believe such hokum. It doesn't even rise to the level of taking it with a grain of salt.
Apparently it is also sold at Walmart (I have never been to one of there stores) and has become a staple in the specialty salts section of many stores. They even sell it in my local discount store. According to an article in Business Insider, "The artisan salt market is booming though. Global salt consumption is forecast to be worth $14.1 billion by 2020. For the consumer, pink Himalayan salt is marketed as tasting more luxurious and flavorful." You can buy garlic pills on Amazon that promise health benefits, although there is no scientific basis. That doesn't mean that people are buying garlic for medical reasons. Do you have any evidence that the alternative health industry is the main driver of pink salt sales? I notice that the article for Himalayan black salt is less strident. TFD ( talk) 16:35, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The "Himalayan salt" comes from Pakistan and has nothing to do with the Himalaya. It is an esoteric fantasy name. See the German article [1]. 85.181.59.235 ( talk) 19:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
The German Wikipedia article states that Himalayan salt contains heavy metals, such as mercury, lead, and cadmium. This analysis does show all three of these. Badagnani ( talk) 19:52, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Sea salt (and all salt other than refined salt) also contains all those elements, including the heavy metals, though often in parts per million or parts per billion. Badagnani ( talk) 20:11, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
That's absolutely incorrect. I study sea salt and can assure you that all unrefined salts produced from evaporated seawater contain detectable amounts of up to 100 or more trace elements. Badagnani ( talk) 20:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Another example: [2]. Badagnani ( talk) 20:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Low importance C-class article, regional "health salts" with minimal impact on the global market.
This article needs attention in the following areas:
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 07:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
This article talk page was automatically added with {{ WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot ( talk) 15:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
This article is a confusing combination of original research, or possibly fringe theories ("This is why pure sodium chloride causes problems for one's health which are not proven for the use of Himalayan salt"), commercialism, and even, apparently vandalism. ("Tommy is the original founder of Himilayan salt.') Piano non troppo ( talk) 07:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Which elements does the pink color come from? Badagnani ( talk) 18:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
products.mercola.com/himalayan-salt/ unreliable fringe source? This page] says it's produced in Nepal. But it also says it's not a form of rock salt. If it's not a form of rock salt, what is it, and why doesn't the page say what it is, if not a form of rock salt? Badagnani ( talk) 17:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
If it is rock salt, mined from the earth (rather than made by evaporating seawater), this should be stated in the article. Badagnani ( talk) 07:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
It's not Rocksalt (as in the stuff that is put on the roads), but it is salt from the mountains (as opposed to table salt that is chemically created or sea salt), so some companies might market it as rock salt or rock-based salt. Personally, I don't like the term because it confuses too many people... I think it should be left out to minimize confusion. Burleigh2 ( talk) 16:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
First of all I want to thank for assistance because my English is lousy and so I cannot write parts of the article myself. The article is much better now. Only the section "History" is IMHO still wrong. This salt is (generally) from Pakistan, so it cannot be formed in the foot of the Himalayan Mountains. There are no evidence that this salt was deemed as the “King of salt” and that it has ability to preserve meat at a longer duration than other salt. This are assertions of the sellers without attest. Because of that I would propose to erase the whole selection "Historie". -- 85.181.13.56 ( talk) 19:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
The working idea of how the salt veins got there is that packets of the ancient oceans around that area were caught in the tectonic plates as they rose up into the mountain range, the salt water (with all of its minerals) dried into the veins of salt, and that's how they came to be. Does that help clear up the confusion of how there is salt in the mountain? Burleigh2 ( talk) 16:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I am a little new to editing on Wiki, but I didn't think you could reference a page with a different language as a citation in an article. Two of the citations I have looked at were in German and I don't know enough German to be able to verify if the pages actually contain information cited or if they are even on the same topic. Can anyone clarify this for me? Burleigh2 ( talk) 19:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, then I have a stupid question... If people don't speak/read that language, how can they verify it's accuracy or proof? Do the rest of us just have to rely on those who speak the language to translate accurately? Burleigh2 ( talk) 14:07, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
How about we just remove mention of the book and its authors completely? I'm concerned about WP:NPOV, WP:BLP, and WP:OR issues with what little we have. I doubt that either reference is a WP:RS. -- Ronz ( talk) 18:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I was just looking through the history on the page. Someone took off my edit of mentioning the book with the uses saying it was advertising... how is that advertising when listing the book as it is now (talking about the different analysis of the salt) isn't? I'm not sure if I'm confused or if whoever changed it is. If a consensus can't be reached, it would probably be best to just remove the mention altogether and not put it back in. Burleigh2 ( talk) 20:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I disagree that the mention of the book should be removed altogether. I accept that the claim that Peter Ferreira is Peter Druf needs a reliable source, and should go. However, Himalayan salt is basically a brand of salt, and the book is specifically related to and promotes this salt. So the claim in the book that the chemical composition is different should stay, with the correct context. It's the equivalent of Coke claiming Coke Light is good for you. Whether the Coke marketing pamphlet is factually reliable or not is not the point, rather it's reliable in the context of being related to the product and having made the claim. I'd value more research into the disputes about Druf and the Institute if someone can follow the trail in German. I personally can't find any mention online of this Institute, which would be very unusual if it did exist. Basically, the article, to be comprehensive, needs to make mention of the controversy around this salt. The differing views are basically that the salt is either fantastically healthy, or is being excessively and perhaps dubiously promoted. Greenman ( talk) 00:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
@Ronz: I´m German and my English is not so good. In Germany there had been many reports in Newspapers and TV abaut the "Himalayan salt" and this reports were all criticizing that this product is a deception. It is a completely normal table salt, mined far away from the himalaya in an industrial salt mine, without any special effect for the health. Also several offices of consumer protection (such as Bavarian State Office for Health and Food Safety or Consumer Center Baden-Württemberg) were warning against the promotion off this salt. It seems that there are no reports like this in English language. The only I now is this page that User:Gioto linked [5]. But this page is not a suitable source. If you want I can provide some German sources and I can translate those for you. But my English is not good enough to edit the article. Here is a machine translation by Google of the German Wikipedia article [6]. But it is a very bad translation. -- 85.181.48.156 ( talk) 21:30, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Since someone reverted to the previous version with the statement about Peter Druf, is there any proof that it is a pseudonym for Peter Ferreira? The link given looks like the German version of Wikipedia (with editing options, so it could easily be changed by anyone) and I for one can't read German to verify what it says... I thought all citations had to be from reliable sources, not one that could be changed by anyone. Isn't this like citing another Wikipedia page? Without proof, that would be defamation and shouldn't be in the article. Burleigh2 ( talk) 20:48, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Can anyone provide a better website that will translate larger scripts? The link that supposedly proves the link between Druf and Ferriera is too long for the translators I'm using to cover it (including BabelFish), so I can't verify any proof of what they're saying (if it's suspect or if it's validated facts). Does anyone have a translation website we can use that doesn't have a limitation of words or characters? Burleigh2 ( talk) 16:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I have this book and I can't find reference to this lab that supposedly doesn't exist. When I looked on Yahoo, there are several other websites that seem to use exactly the script that's used in this article, but none lend a reference to the original source. Can anyone point to a page number or a section I can verify in? Burleigh2 ( talk) 16:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
This brings up a good point that I hadn't really thought about until someone took it off... should Dead Sea Salt be under a "related topic"? What about Sea Salt and Celtic Salt? I mean, they are all related as far as being types of salts and they are related... Why not have all of those types as "See Also"? Burleigh2 ( talk) 23:45, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Some sourcesproducts.mercola.com/himalayan-salt/ unreliable fringe source? state that it is produced in Nepal. Badagnani ( talk) 19:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Number one, the source states that the individual procured it from Pakistan. Number two, it is possible that what is sold as "Himalayan salt" may have more than one point of origin. Pink salt is also produced in the U.S. state of Utah and falsification may of course occur. Badagnani ( talk) 20:12, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
If specific companies selling "Himalayan salt" can be shown, with valid sources, to be fraudulently passing off salt that is not from the Himalaya Mountains as "Himalayan salt," this information should be added to the article, with sources. Are there sources showing that the Himalaya Mountains (and/or foothills) do not possess any deposits of rock salt? Badagnani ( talk) 20:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
You were asked "Are there sources showing that the Himalaya Mountains (and/or foothills) do not possess any deposits of rock salt?" You did not answer this. Badagnani ( talk) 20:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
It appears as if Mercola is deceiving the public when stating that his salt comes from Nepal (unless he means that it is produced elsewhere and simply resold, and purchased by him, in Nepal. See [10]. Badagnani ( talk) 20:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Please see http://ngs.org.np/web/about-us/238-kpkaphle which states that Nepal does have salt mines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.252.219.160 ( talk) 03:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Also see http://www.nepalitimes.com.np/issue/384/Nation/14430 which talks extensively about native salt in Nepal, which is does not have iodine. It is the reason that the Nepalese import salt from India.
Also see the film, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himalaya_(film) which is a realistic drama, depicting the story of how Nepalese natives take their salt crystals down the mountain, once a year for trade.
These are consistent with Mercola's claim of how difficult it was to get the Nepalese salt. products.mercola.com/himalayan-salt/ unreliable fringe source? (search for "Nepal"). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.252.219.160 ( talk) 06:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
It appears that your unsourced assertion was incorrect. Tibet has long produced rock salt, using it domestically as well as exporting it. See [11]. Badagnani ( talk) 20:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Several websites suggest that these salt lamps can help alleviate symptoms of allergies and asthma due to some sort of ion neutralization. The only scholarly article I found on the subject is here [12], but I was surprised Wikipedia didn't have anything to say on the subject. For something purportedly known for centuries, as several of these sites, including the linked scholarly article, assert, there should be some mention of said benefits. Circ ( talk) 04:27, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Link pops open a pdf titled Exposure to illuminated salt lamp increases 5-HT metabolism: A serotonergic perspective to its beneficial effects, written by Hajra Naz* and Darakhshan J Haleem at the Neurochemistry and Biochemical Neuropharmacology Research Unit, Department of Biochemistry, University of Karachi, Karachi, Pakistan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Circ ( talk • contribs) 04:32, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
FYI, I'm merging the Himalayan Salt Lamp page into this one per the discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Salt_lamp#Type_and_color If anyone knows how to merge them within the editing system in Wiki (aside from copy/paste like I'm doing), please feel free to do that instead... until then, I'm merging it in the only way I know how because it's such a short snippet. Burleigh2 ( talk) 15:29, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Would it improve the article to add information about Ionization if a reliable source can be found? Also at what heat is necessary for Ionization to occur. DavidR2010 ( talk) 17:50, 9 November 2010 (UTC)DavidR2010
I removed some more unsourced information about negative ions and their purported health benefits, and added a citation to a web site that aims to debunk this myth.
Jpp42 (
talk)
04:15, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
The salt is mined from Punjab and dont know why it is named Himalayan_salt. Himalaya is 300 kilometers away from its mines in Punjab. It is requested to use the name from where it is mined. Punjabi salt is appropriate and the present heading should be replaced with the Punjabi salt name.-- Khalid Mahmood ( talk) 10:15, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
The first sentence's use of the word *marketing* before *term* is misleading.
The person who undid my removal of the word said this: "It's mined in the Punjab, so Himalaya can only accurately be described as a marketing term."
This conclusion is wrong for three reasons:
1. When a term refers to a thing from one region but is named for another nearby, it is a logical fallacy (appeal to probability; also, a fallacy of exclusive premises) to conclude that the sole reason for this has to be that it was created by advertisers. (a) The term *could* have been created by advertisers, but that does not mean it *was*; (b) The term refers to the Himalayas, and the salt is mined in the Salt Region, but it does not follow without proof that, because the term seems inaccurate, the discrepancy *must have been created by advertisers*.
2. " http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/438805/Pakistan": "The Himalayas . . . form the northern rampart of the subcontinent, and their western ranges occupy the entire northern end of Pakistan." People draw false distinctions between Pakistan and the Himalayas and the use of *marketing* feeds this idea, particularly since the article stresses that the salt "is mined in Pakistan" to discount the idea it is mined in the Himalayas.
3. Since the only term by which this specifically sourced pink salt is known is *Himalayan salt*, the notion that it is solely a marketing term is therefore false. *Marketing* suggests that the *only* sources which use the term are advertisements and discussions about advertising.
If a contributor can show etymologically that term was originally created by advertisers, then they should add a section to the entry which shows this. A contributor could say that the area is referred to as the "Salt Range" and is next to the Himalayas and add the *theory* that the term was created by advertisers, but to do so legitimately, they'd have to quote a legitimate source.
If the facts presented suggest the possibility that marketing *might* be the source of the term, then the reader is free to draw their own conclusion and no pejorative is needed.
That's why the word *marketing* should be deleted from the first sentence.
However, the following article (which is too anecdotal to use as a source) makes mention of what might be the first use of the term by a marketer, and if the idea is substantiated, a section of the article could suggest there is reason to consider it: http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2008/01/salt-may-be-health-scam.html
This is the book by Peter Ferreira which is alluded to in the article as being full of false claims. It was published in 2003; the article claims Ferreira began selling and lecturing about Himalayan salt in "the '90s": http://www.amazon.com/Water-Salt-Essence-Healing-Nature/dp/B001DVZMW6
Sepium Gronagh ( talk) 20:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
PRACTICAL information seems conspicuously missing. How is it different from the usual table salt we buy from the grocer and use? Is it healthy? Unhealthy? And WHY? If a recipe calls for it, is it just a pompous, pretentious recipe, or is there some taste difference or advantage? Then we read it's "contaminated" by other chemicals, leaving the reader hanging as to whether this is a significant factor in making a dietary decision. Others' talking points infer (it seems) that this salt is little different from the usual (save for the possibly fluoride contaminated); whatever the case, an evaluation of health benefits or risks—and how it differs from ordinary, usual types of table salt—should be addressed. 73.8.106.145 ( talk) 19:23, 22 April 2015 (UTC)ChicagoLarry~commonswiki
"Hippocrates is said to have recognized the therapeutic benefits of salt mines...Health benefits have been attributed to the caves' unique microclimate, which is rich in natural salt microns and ions...In the 1980s, the Russians began to build halochambers lined with halite, which mimicked the microclimate of salt caves. With increased scientific attention, such chambers became certified as medical devices in Russia, and are said to have been adapted for use by the Russian space agency in microclimate optimization devices used by cosmonauts."
— Sala Horowitz, http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/act.2010.16302
@ Zefr, AlphaAce, Sbmeirow, and Jytdog: What do you think about this edit? Is it supported by source? It seems trivial to me. Orientls ( talk) 09:34, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Also, I notice the use of this source. It appears to mainly be a primary source. For example, a news story about the FDA warning would be a secondary source. So would not using a primary source be a violation of Wikipedia:MEDRS? VR talk 01:39, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
The article provides the impression that the salt is normally sold as quack medicineIf that's the case, it probably should be corrected.
in fact people buy it because they like the appearance and chefs recommend itSources? This sounds like just an evolution in how it's marketed. We need to take care not simply become another mouthpiece for their marketing, which has been a major problem with this article. -- Ronz ( talk) 17:21, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
What kind of sources do you expect on the subject of cooking with salt?But that's my point. We expect SOAP and NOTNEWS. When we have an FDA statement to use, I think we should be using it. -- Ronz ( talk) 02:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Zefr, sorry if I was not clear. It is not an issue of reliability but of weight. They are different policies. TFD ( talk) 17:20, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Before I post to NPOVN, I would like to note that the 2013 letter from the FDA does not say that the claims by Hearts of Light are false, but that they had not been approved and their products were adulterated. [13] TFD ( talk) 23:41, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
The previous version of the article conflates consumption of Himalayan salt with its usage in "salt lamps". Specifically it said:
there is no scientific evidence that it is healthier than common table salt; such claims are considered pseudoscience.
This is misleading because two of the sources cited are about the claim that Himalayan salt lamps have medical benefits - not about the claim that Himalayan salt is healthier than table salt. Its misleading to clump these claims together.
Secondly, the sources go into a depth comparison of Himalayan salt and table salt. That was mysteriously removed here even though it uses the very same sources as before. If those sources are unreliable than remove them too.
Thirdly, this isn't a purely scientific discussion. Himalayan salt does have cultural/aesthetic value. So do Himalayan salt lamps. Its not clear why an NPOV statement like "many find such lamps aesthetically pleasing" was removed. Its not a scientific statement. VR talk 01:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
your attempts to separate the various aspects of health claims (regarding what uses) seem too convoluted to get into in the lede
not contain details not found in the body
unless you can find a very elegant way to incorporate itSure we can phrase it differently, but, again that seems like a stylistic concern. Again, correct me if I'm wrong.
If you want to move this forward, don't just restore, or you will just be reverted again.I honestly don't see how blindly reverting everything some adds is helpful. If there's certain things you don't think should be in the lede, sure remove them. Or move them around. Or rephrase them. VR talk 19:57, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Is this source appropriate for adding material on the use of Himalayan Salt as cookware? Its lists as its author "Williams - Sonoma Test Kitchen", and the Williams-Sonoma company does seem to have experience in the field of cookware. Please note, I'm not asking if this is source is appropriate for making health claims - I know its not. VR talk 20:40, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
There is no policy or guideline that requires sources to be independent. However, in this case the publishers are independent of the topic. Wikipedia articles are only supposed to reflect information available in reliable sources, not to provide a higher truth based on our own assessments. I doubt there are many cookbooks written by people who do not own or work in restaurants or sell cooking supplies. Even Jamie Oliver has a cooking line. TFD ( talk) 00:48, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Google Himalayan+"salt plate" and use the news filter and there is a plethora of articles about Himalayan salt plates. [20] See for example "Hot or cold, salt block cooking adds flair to dishes" which I chose at random. Granted, it's not the MIT Journal of Culinary Science or the London School of Home Economics. TFD ( talk) 00:59, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
There is no policy or guideline that requires sources to be independent. WP:NOT, which is the concern here, as well as WP:OR. -- Ronz ( talk) 03:45, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
There are no articles that say people make false medical claims.The Time piece is titled: "Does Pink Himalayan Salt Have Any Health Benefits?", describes various claims that are made and answers that for all of them evidence is either negative or absent altogether. The Atlantic article explains the apparent route through which the false health claims associated with Himalayan salt likely arose out of a reverse-engineering of the 'naturalness' indicative from the of the color, before likewise dismissing the claims. These are mainstream popular-media sources, rather than specialized niche-cooking ones, and of all of the aspects of Himalayan salt they could have addressed, the one thing they both talk about in detail is health claims. (The Atlantic article also has one person specifically addressing what they see as it's best quality as a food additive: "it's good at being pink.") Do you not see that if mainstream popular media sources think false health claims are worth mentioning, maybe we should too?
VR, is there any specific edit you wish to make based on these two sources? TFD ( talk) 16:32, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Is this an industry hit piece on....salt? I think were at Peak Wikipedia when even an article on something as boring as salt comes off as scornful and preachy.
It has been mentioned 4 times (in 4 of 6 paragraphs) that it has no proven health benefits and the word pseudoscience is used twice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.59.96.194 ( talk) 09:40, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
There is a very weak link in this article based on an estimation that Himalayan rock salt contains 2% 98% Sodium Chloride, which aligns more with purified commercial table salt. Some other web sites say 86% Sodium Chloride, yet I haven't been able to find any reliable sources for either figure. Maybe some other editors will be able to find some more accurate and reliable sources?
Probrooks ( talk) 14:32, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
The following thoroughly non- NPOV citation and quote has been relocated here. An appropriately scientifically neutral one needs to be added in its place:
The neutrality of both author and his quote thoroughly fail Wikipedia's threshold.
Schwarcz has disqualified himself as a neutral scientific commentator by resorting to
invective and
ad hominum attack, accusing those he criticizes of having inadequately developed or damaged brains. That simply does not fly here. A responsibly neutral and appropriately scientific quote needs to take its place.
Wikiuser100 (
talk)
12:31, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
The quote:
References
As is often the case with nutritional controversies, pseudoscience slithers into the picture. In this case it is in the form of "natural" alternatives to table salt with insinuations of health benefits. Himalayan salt, which is composed of large grains of rock salt mined in Pakistan, is touted as a healthier version because it contains traces of potassium, silicon, phosphorus, vanadium, and iron. The amounts are enough to color the crystals, giving them a more "natural" appearance, but are nutritionally irrelevant. Some promoters make claims that are laughable. Himalayan salt, they say, contains stored sunlight, will remove phlegm from the lungs, clear sinus congestion, prevent varicose veins, stabilize irregular heartbeats, regulate blood pressure, and balance excess acidity in brain cells. One would have to have a deficiency in brain cells to believe such hokum. It doesn't even rise to the level of taking it with a grain of salt.
Apparently it is also sold at Walmart (I have never been to one of there stores) and has become a staple in the specialty salts section of many stores. They even sell it in my local discount store. According to an article in Business Insider, "The artisan salt market is booming though. Global salt consumption is forecast to be worth $14.1 billion by 2020. For the consumer, pink Himalayan salt is marketed as tasting more luxurious and flavorful." You can buy garlic pills on Amazon that promise health benefits, although there is no scientific basis. That doesn't mean that people are buying garlic for medical reasons. Do you have any evidence that the alternative health industry is the main driver of pink salt sales? I notice that the article for Himalayan black salt is less strident. TFD ( talk) 16:35, 10 June 2020 (UTC)