Comparison of Himilayan/Redmonds

I have & use both..

This is from the back of the Redmonds package, the trace mineral analysis. I won't include percentages, only elements...

sodium chloride
calcium
potassium
sulfur
magnesium
iron
phosphorous
iodine
manganese
copper
zinc

*Real salt also contains numerous other trace minerals in minute quantities.

Now this is from the book, "Water&Salt", that I purchased along with the Himilayan...

On page 141 of the book, there is a certificate of analysis of the original himilayan crystal salt...performed by the Institute of Biophysical Research, Las Vegas, 2001

"Originally, the intention was to include all the elements up to order #90 into the chemical & Physical analysis of the crystal salt from October 12, 2000, the order # of the elements was increased to 94 in the frequency spectrum test. All natural stable & unstable isotopes were considered. However, artificial and unstable isoypoes were not considered for cosideration."

Then there is a listing of all 94 elements, including all of the above, a lot of things I've never heard of...tantalum, wolfram, samarium, etc...

This was obviously an exhaustive test, and the purveyors of this salt had a financial consideration. I'm wondering, though, is this type of test the standard? I'm guessing that these two salts are similar in make-up.

Both Redmonds & Himilayan come from mines...The Himilayan, though, in crystal form, is hand mined to preserve it's "inherent frequency spectrum".

So maybe the difference is in the structure?