Kickas.org Forums Ankylosing Spondylitis General Discussion #1 AS Web Support Group medication alert

Hi Cindy: Interesting information. Thanks for the heads up. I have been cutting back my Calcium, just out of intuition for a few weeks now.

Shari

Sounds like a bunch of hogwash to me. If anything, the drug companies are going to want people to take more calcium so that it can aid in clogging up their arteries and then they can sell more statins. I'll wait for the study. Those who are informed about nutrition know that calcium needs other nutrients to help it get to our bones (and not aid in calcifying our arteries). This guy is an alarmist.

Antacids are poor sources of calcium. I think they are calcium carbonate. Eggshell. Oyster shell. Chalk maybe. It is a poorly absorbed source of calcium.

and very harsh on the stomach as well, if one has gastritis issues, like i do.

citracal (calcium citrate) is much better tolerated and i get the impression, better absorbed as well.

ironically, antacids in the form of calcium carbonate, actually made my gastritis worse, when i first tried them. the exact opposite of what they were supposed to be doing.

Jay, this is not "hog wash", sorry my need to give a heads up seems to have up set you. My Rheumy is not an alarmist but a very conciencious, carring doc that always goes the extra mile for his patients. When he gives me new information I feel confident in sharing new reports to the group.

Cindy

Interesting you can discern my disposition via a forum reply. I'm not upset.

No reference (article, study, etc.). It is hogwash in my book. Your rheumy may be the nicest guy walking this planet, but that doesn't preclude him from being an alarmist. Perhaps he is referring to the myriad (it seems) pieces of legislation jeopardizing our ability to buy supplements, but that isn't quite the same as some near conspiracy by big pharma regarding calcium.

All I can add is there are three elements involved in the contraction of heart muscles. Sodium, Potassium and Calcium. These are taken in the body as a mineral, vitamin and food. They are in a chemical compound when taken in. The body extracts the elements. With the heart, these elements are responsible for the action potential of the heart (as well as other tissue such as muscle if you want to look further).

This interaction between these atoms, on a cellular level, causes the heart to contract. These elements are responsible for the electrical current, which causes your heart to beat. There are therapeutic ranges to stay in and monitor for all these elements. Too much can be as bad for your body as too little. This is your basic electrolyte blood work, these three elements.

I have seen treatment for elevated elements, as well as too little. Therapeutic range for them all is optimal.

Magnesium is hard for the cells to "take in" due to its structure. You might want to research maximizing Mg with a receptor (I am not sure which one). Most free flows through the blood stream. Just like Vit D is the receptor for Calcium on certain cells.

When it comes to elements or minerals. Balance is crucial. I would have to say that I am not surprised by the new look at Calcium. It's one of the three atoms responsible for the heart beating.

When talking about supplements. They are the new huge money making pharmacological industry now. Not disclosed as medication. Our bodies are designed to absorb all essential elements through nutrition except Vit D, which is created naturally through sunlight exposure. Certain period of time per day. I can't remember.

It's been a while since I've studied the action potential of the heart. All I can say is that I am going by memory

Shel

cindy and jay,

i encourage you to read this short webmd article that i linked above and am linking again:

http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/news/20110419/calcium-supplements-may-increase-heart-risk

i think the truth may rest somewhere in the middle.

amongst the various things that are discussed is this paragraph:

"The researchers suspect that the sudden change in blood calcium levels when starting a supplement is responsible for the increased risk, meaning that women who already had calcium in their blood due to personal supplement use may have been immune to this abrupt spike."

as with many other things, i think the jury is still out. and as discussed in the article, rarely is it "one size fits all".