However for physiological needs it may be noted that
> The blood serum in our bodies is suprisingly similar
> in
> composition to "sea salt" which perhaps points to
> what
> might be considered really healthy. [A strange
> kettle
> of fish?]

For a wonderful exposition on this phenomenon
(isotonicity is what is being referred to, not
necessarily nutrition nor composition) read the tome,
"From Fish to Philosopher." It is also of interest to
note that there are certain mammals and birds which
require sea water NOT fresh water to live! It all has
to do with the evolution of the kidney! (Oh! Gull,
albatross, cetacean.)

--- + + <commonsalt@...> wrote:
> You are correct - the difference is very discernable
> however when salt was in short supply [and the
> Gabelle
> was a recent example] neither the monopolists nor
> their siblings and
> public 'payed' any attention.
> Like many marketing needs, purity was thought to
> have been an advantage.

During the revolution in America from 1861 to 1865 the
American army made damn certain they destroyed as many
of the salt producing and storage sites of the rebels
as possible. Since this was a critical ingredient in
preservation of foodstuffs, widespread hunger and
debilitation were incurred by them. The insurgents
resorted to extracting salt from camp fires and other,
less pleasant, forms of recycling!

The major problem was the amount of energy required to
produce a unit amount of salt. The higher the
saturation of salines (salt springs) the better. The
purer the lick or dome or cave, the better.
Coastlines seductively only need the sun to affect
concentration but there are many elements (rain,
hurricane, fog) which reduce this efficiency. The
resultant "sea-salt" is not necessarily fit for
consumption (birds fly and brine shrimp digest...)


Purity is important when
> considering the huge
> quantities needed by industry, though 30% is still
> m/f from solar
> evaporation processing.

A large amount also from saline deposits mining such
as Salzburg and salt mounds such as Avery Island.
Actually, as the "sea" becomes increasingly polluted
and ever so more toxic, purification of the salt is
most likely to be favored, even by the new age folk,
as beneficial . It would be nice to couple
desalination and salt production in one!


>
> Iodide has been traditionally added to salt m/f only
> because salt
> in the quantities required for human consumption is
> ideal
> as a useful vehicle to induce mass intake of Iodide
> particularly
> to poorer countries. [It has active influence on
> the thyroid gland
> and little to do with the physiological need for
> salt]


Iodine, indeed, is required for adequate thyroid
function and therefore many life processes. The
iodine, in the form iodide, is added because salt is
sodium chloride and large amounts of iodide follow
when large amounts of chloride are excreted (remember
your periodic table?) So it was felt (and I assume
proven) that ingestion of large amounts of sodium
chloride would lead to the elimination of iodine from
the potato chip eater. It is notable that iodization
was first established in have nations not among the
have nots!

Large amounts of iodine occur in green tea and sea
weed, which are only recently comestibles in this
nation! Oh, and sea salt!
=jack=
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: thetasig2002
> To: commonsalt@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 7:05 AM
> Subject: Table Salt vs. Sea Salt
>
>
> My apologies if this question has already been
> answered. I could not
> find a reference in the archive.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/