Talk:Himalayan salt

WPFood assessment

Low importance C-class article, regional "health salts" with minimal impact on the global market.

This article needs attention in the following areas:

• Copy edit for spelling, punctuation and grammar.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 07:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Not rock salt?

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)

German article

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)

Please propose changes to the article (with translations from German Wikipedia, as well as links to the original sources) here before making large-scale changes. Badagnani (talk) 19:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Nepal or Pakistan?

Some sources[2] state that it is produced in Nepal. Badagnani (talk) 19:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

It is from the Salt Range in Pakistan. It is a completely normal salt without any therapeutic benefit. It is a cheat and you should not distribut this esoteric nonsense. 85.181.59.235 (talk) 20:07, 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)

Agreed. The Himalayan mountains span across a few different countries and the salt mines span that difference. There is a major mine in Pakistan and I've heard there is one in China and other neighboring countries... not all sources are going to be from Pakistan. Burleigh2 (talk) 16:43, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, in Germany we have "Himalayan salt" with origin of Poland but the most of the salt with this name comes from Pakistan. In the himalayan region they dont have salt at all. In Germany there are official warnings of ministries because of this salt. It is a cheat and has no positiv effects for the health.85.181.59.235 (talk) 20:31, 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)

Also agreed. There are companies that get a raw material from somewhere, then have it shipped to another country to process it so it can legally be listed as "product of __" or "made in __" for marketing. Granted, that's not a very good marketing practice to me, but it happens with some of the more sketchy companies... or those where the nearest processing plant is across the border just a few miles from where the raw material is procured. Burleigh2 (talk) 16:43, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

"Himalayan salt" is NEVER from the Himalaya Mountains. It can not be of from the Himalaya Mountains because they dont have any salt there at all! 85.181.59.235 (talk) 20:52, 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)

Sourced: Nepal has no salt deposits

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 [3]. Badagnani (talk) 20:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Sourced: Tibet is a producer of rock salt

It appears that your unsourced assertion was incorrect. Tibet has long produced rock salt, using it domestically as well as exporting it. See [4]. Badagnani (talk) 20:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Heavy metals

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)

No, the German Wikipedia article say, that it contains 10 elements (ministrial source) and if it would contain really 84 elements (as Peter Ferreira asserts) than it would contains elements like mercury, lead or cadmium. But it does not. It is a normal salt without any differences to other salts (just the price is much higher).85.181.59.235 (talk) 20:07, 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)

Sea salt contains about 15 elements, but all salts (equally "Himalayan salt") contains 97-98 sodium chloride und just a very small part of other elements. 85.181.59.235 (talk) 20:21, 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: [5]. Badagnani (talk) 20:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Section History

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)

You're right that "King of Salt" and meat preservation would need a reference. The same is done for marketers of the wolfberry, who claim that it was called "happy berry" in Chinese; no source has ever been found for that. Regarding the Himalayas, the article Himalayas does state that the system includes mountain ranges in other nearby countries, including Pakistan. Badagnani (talk) 20:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Is there any source for the possibility that rock salt mined in Poland has been sold as "Himalayan salt"? Badagnani (talk) 20:08, 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)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

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)

Tagging for neutrality...

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)

Pink color

Which elements does the pink color come from? Badagnani (talk) 18:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Iron(III) oxide. --85.181.52.220 (talk) 19:16, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Possible Health issue

• Natural Health News: Himalayan Salt FAD May Be a Health Risk

gioto (talk) 09:22, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Where is the "non-existent Himalaya Institute of Biophysical Research" referenced in the book?

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)

I just looked at the page that is cited in this article (which is just a page bashing the product) and the reference that they use to cite that the facility doesn't exist is to a non-existent page. In other words, there is no citing for their statement and I can find no mention of this facility in the book. Until I can find some proof that the book references this institute, I'm removing that clip from the article... if it's in the book and someone can point where so it can be verified, we can put that part back in. Burleigh2 (talk) 18:31, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I think that the passage about the book is dispensable. If the book show a different analysis of the chemical composition of Himalayan salts and don´t reference any source, it is unusable for this article.--85.181.47.227 (talk) 07:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry reverted back, should have read here first!!gioto (talk) 08:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the user 85. (not sure what to call someone identified with a number, sorry), but the book does have a lot of in depth info about Himalayan Crystal Salt and deserves to be mentioned as a resource at least. Burleigh2 (talk) 15:20, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Page 129 of the book (English edition) states "The Institute of Biophysical Research has implemented an extensive study under the guidance of Peter Ferreira". Greenman (talk) 10:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I just grabbed my copy of the book (English version, ISBN 978-3-9523390-0-8)... page 129 talks about the vibration frequencies of various things in the human body. There is no mention of the Institute at all. It looks like you have a different version of the book.Burleigh2 (talk) 14:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Picture of Peter Ferreira (Mr. Ferreira is the director of the Institute for Biophysical Research) This Institute is mentioned here [6] as being in Germany and the following [7] makes for an interesting read. gioto (talk) 10:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

[snip edit: nevermind about the name... it's a different Institute than the Vegas one, but the rest of my statement is still a valid point] ...a web search turned up nothing. Why would they have to have a website? There are some companies that have no phone systems (or no listing in the phone book) because they wouldn't take incoming calls or only work through regular mail or E-mail. It doesn't mean they don't exist necessarily... I'm going to do further research on this. Burleigh2 (talk) 14:03, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

An Institute of Biophysical Research does not exist in Germany and Peter Druf (pseudonym: Ferreira) is not a scientist but a fraudster wanted by the police. You can read this all in the german article. 85.181.55.91 (talk) 12:02, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

other language references in English article?

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)

Of course you can reference a page with a different language. --85.181.47.227 (talk) 07:41, 10 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)

Can we just remove mention of the book?

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)

Biographies of Living Persons? How would that come into play with the book? Also, it is quite extensive in original and verifiable research... there is a reference section in the back of the book that is a few pages long of various books and sources that it came from. Why would it not be a reliable source? The bulk of the book is about the history of how salt has been used and lists dozens of uses for the salt (without saying it'll "cure everything that ails you") regardless of whether people think it works for certain ailments. I've read through it and the only claims it makes are general health claims (washing out the eyes or nasal cavity, helping to moisturize where the rinse is used, etc... all of which has been used for a long time and is recommended by various doctors in many cases). Personally, I think it's a good reference just for the uses of the salt and the history if nothing else. Burleigh2 (talk) 19:22, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

BLP applies to any page of Wikipedia.

Are the two sources reliable? --Ronz (talk) 20:34, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I know the concepts and ideas of BLP would apply to every page, but this is about salt, not a biography about a person, which is why I was questioning what you meant on that. By having the mention of the book where I put it earlier (with the uses of the salt), I think it avoids the issue because the book is more about how to use the salt and the history of it. Burleigh2 (talk) 20:41, 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)

You're referring to this [8] edit. I agree. The article is about Himalayan salt. Mentioning the book in passing that way comes across as a promotion for the book, rather than an expansion of the article. Does that make sense? --Ronz (talk) 21:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, after looking over it, I can see how it may look like that. Best to leave it out. Burleigh2 (talk) 22:37, 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)

Concerning "dubiously promoted": Stiftung Warentest calls the promotion of Himalayan salt "irreführend" (misleading) and "vorgetäuscht" (faked).[9] --85.181.15.247 (talk) 01:24, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Peter Druf

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)

My concerns exactly. --Ronz (talk) 20:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm new enough here where I'm not sure how an issue like the book would get resolved (to leave it out or leave some mention in)... is there a vote, or are comments made and someone makes a decision based on the majority? Burleigh2 (talk) 21:08, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:DR gives a list of ways to go about resolving disputes. Because there's a BLP issue, the information probably should be removed immediately. I'll go ahead with that. --Ronz (talk) 21:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, good to know. Thanks for guiding me along on this. Until now, I've been the one entering new info into controversial topics. LOL! Burleigh2 (talk) 22:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)