Salt. No matter the size or the color, from a pure chemist point of view, most of it is comprised of a harmonic (ionic) bond between sodium and chlorine. Break the bond and one ends up being highly explosive (sodium) while the other ends up being highly toxic (chloride).
Salt had a momentous effect on history. It enabled the transition from hunter-gatherer to a settled lifestyle and was already mentioned as a tool for the preservation of food in Ancient Chinese texts more than 2000 years ago. The Egyptians even used it for mummification.
Salt was also used as a major economic commodity. It was used by the Chinese government as a source of revenue, later to be used by the Roman empire as a monthly wage for Roman soldiers. The Libyans even traded salt for an equal amount of gold.
Wars were fought, civilizations were formed and massive trade infrastructures were created where some highway roads nowadays could be dated back to the time where these roads were used for trading resources like salt.
Yet here we are, the 21st century, where we’re arguing if sugar is addictive or not. While nobody would argue that salt is addictive. Even though sodium chloride is the sixth most abundant element on Earth, in the world of health and nutrition, you’d at least expect us to know a thing or two, especially with such a magnificent history. And perhaps that’s how it appears on face value. .
So what is it that we’ve got all wrong about salt? Is salt truly a healthy natural substance providing two essential minerals, or is it a dietary blood pressure-raising demon that vaporizes all the water and makes it surface in places you’d never want it to be in the first place?
There is only one way to find out. To the research.