Is Himalayan “non-gmo” pink salt radioactive?

Now this is rich. If there was any doubt as to why we think the anti-gmo crowd is head shakingly stupid, here is a classic example. A company called Himalania is selling Himalayan Pink Salt as a non-gmo certified product. That’s right, non-gmo salt.  Kudos to Shea Gunther for his column, Facepalm of the week: Non-GMO salt!?  for bringing it to our attention.


The twittersphere was all giggly at this nonsense and mad scientist Kevin Folta weighed in on his Illumination blog,

Here’s how we know that science is dead in the anti-GMO movement.  The Non-GMO Project and their crack scientific team has verified, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that salt is not a transgenic plant.

It would be hilarious if it wasn’t so sad and so true. On their website, Himalania touts the salt as being mineral rich, containing such helpful minerals as magnesium, potassium, copper and iron. They go on to say the salt is pure and hasn’t been “exposed to any modern chemicals, toxins or radiation sources.”

Sounds great? Well, what else does it contain? A visit to the site has a chemical breakdown of all  the natural elements in this purest of pure salts. Among those are fluoride, arsenic, lead, plutonium, uranium, and polonium.

Huh. Some of those things sound kind of radioactive, especially that polonium one. Wasn’t that what assassins used to kill this guy, Viktor Yushchenko?


Or maybe he wasn’t assassinated but was eating Himalayan Pink Salt?

And it has fluoride? Isn’t there some hippie movement to tale fluoride out of our water supplies?

I noticed the list included lead, which has been shown to affect IQ. Maybe all these natural folks consuming pink salt may have had their IQ compromised by the lead in the salt?

No, of course not. These trace amounts aren’t harmful to humans. As they say, the dose makes the poison. Imagine if any of the elements were in gmo foods?  The frightened anti-gmo villagers would be jumping and hollering and pointing… “Look! Look! Poisons!”

Oh and this is choice. The company wrote in the comment section on Gunther’s piece,

… we are demonstrating our support for this meaningful cause, and advocating that we do care about our consumer’s health concerns. Not all consumers are as educated on this topic, and for some it is primordial and comforting to have the NON GMO Verified seal on the products they intend to purchase.

Allow me to translate. “Our customers are idiots.” How in God’s name is placing a non-gmo label on a product that can’t be gmo be educating people?

“…we do care about our consumer’s health concerns.”

Really? Then how about a label that warns people who are 51 years of age or older, are African American, have high blood pressure, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease to limit their salt intake? (source CDC.)

Ah, here it is, “We are committed to clean labeling and standing behind the Himalania brand, as being a part of the NON-GMO Verified eco-system is more than just adding a 1” x 1.5” logo on our products – It is a state of mind…”

A state of mind? There you have it. Their stance is not based on science, but a state of mind. 

But maybe we should err on the side of caution. After all, the FDA has been bought off by big business, so those safe levels may be all wrong and could very well be harmful. That’s why Himalayan Pink Salt should be not only labeled non-gmo, it should have another label, prominently displayed on the  front of the package saying. “This product may be radioactive.” 


7 thoughts on “Is Himalayan “non-gmo” pink salt radioactive?

  1. Someone gave us some of this salt. I won’t eat it. I don’t avoid many foods, but as a scientist, this stuff is highly suspicious. Why should salt be pink? Why should I want salt from some exotic source?

    I’m sad that consumers buy this sort of crap.

    • All food has some radio active ingredients. Look it up but don’t stop eating and drinking. Pink salt is about 98 per cent sodium so that leaves about 82 minerals sharing the other 2 per cent.
      Sadly we can’t live on pink salt alone.

  2. Greetings, unfortunately, you’ve compounded scientific illiteracy with more scientific illiteracy. The chemical study that you cited (and I cited here: ) shows that the concentrations of fluoride, arsenic, lead, plutonium, uranium, and polonium are all less than a given value, presumable the method-detection limit of the analytic procedure. It does not mean that these elements are present.

    • I think you might have missed my attempt at humor. My attempted point was that that even if all those elements were present, the fact they are were at such low levels it didn’t matter. “These trace amounts aren’t harmful to humans. As they say, the dose makes the poison. Imagine if any of the elements were in gmo foods? The frightened anti-gmo villagers would be jumping and hollering and pointing… “Look! Look! Poisons!”

      It was a jab at the anti-gmo, natural folks who would have freaked if gmos contained any one of those things.”

      But actually thanks, for responding.

  3. Please google the product. I find it semi-amusing that the label for this particular brand in your picture varies from the label actually for sale online. Perhaps you’ve encountered a bit of photoshopping. The article from whilst your image originates ( is the only place I have been able to locate this particular label – with the “gray strip” descending from the top. Even their other products contain the notable “cork strip” descending on the label. Can you give a reasonable explanation for this?

  4. GMO(?) most table salt contains DEXTROSE

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s