I could certainly walk through my degrees and where they came from, but i suspect that's not really where your question lies. I understand you *want* to believe that something's that effectively almost pure NaCl with a few minor minerals in it will be a healthful panacea - however it's very well understood that in order to get that little bit of minerals, you end up getting a lot of salt - which is also similarly understood to be a direct driver of hypertension. See The Lancet, Harvard medical student review, or any one of the 10,000 other reputable sources that have published as much. I could also review a list of the peer reviewed journals i've published in, and the clinical trials that have been conducted. My work has, over the years, helped shape current FDA (for the US) policy and similar agencies in other countries all over the world. You are correct that i'm not employed by 'the big boys club' of the FDA. Lecithin does absolutely nothing to 'balance the acid and alkali' in chocolate. It's function is purely as an ampiphillic emulsifier.
If you are marketing a food product as a medicinal food, or as appropriate for a demographic that has serious health issues - it comes with a responsibility to do so in a fashion that is consistent with current medical understanding. Marketing salt (and lets be honest here - Himalayan salt IS salt) as heart healthy because it has a few minor minerals (and again - lets be honest - they are VERY minor - the average NaCl composition of this salt is 95%..). It's irresponsible. Likely illegal (you ARE familiar with the US labeling requirements related to sodium content and heart health, correct?)
I've been at this a very long time. It's been my observation that there's a group of folks who desperately want to believe in non-traditional approaches (raw food, high salt, low carb, whatever), and often outright discredit mainstream science, while quoting the non-traditional sources or personal experiences that have not been peer reviewed, published, or even replicated. There almost always is no reputable science that has been replicated backing any of it up. What i find interesting is when those folks comes to an established board asking for information, and when they do not receive the answer they like, proceed to disparage and attempt to discredit the one who attempted to help them, because the answer did not lie within the constraints of their pre-existing personal belief system.
I will not engage in an extended discussion on this past this post.