Calcium Supplements May Increase Risk Of Heart Attacks

Who paid for the study? Did they also study calcium taken with Vitamin D? Is there a relationship between the funders of the study and manufacturers of Bisphosphonates or other medications associated with osteoporosis?
When important studies are discussed in public media, the source of funding should always be disclosed.
Sheila

Read the news article that this opinion was posted about:
Calcium Supplements May Increase Risk Of Heart Attacks

| previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

Calcium supplementation

posted by J Higgins on 30 July 2010 at 9:20 am

What kind of calcium? That can also make a difference! Is it citrate or oyster shell, or some other calcium composition? What manufacturer(s) of calcium?
Did the study participants have any other underlying conditions? Were those people at risk for heart attacks anyway?
And, yes, who funded the study? What might their motivation be?
Also, I hate headlines like this because it actually should read: 'Study finds that certain calcium supplements without co-administered vitamin D may cause heart attacks.' The Vitamin D information is buried near the end of the article. Some people may read the headline and stop taking calcium without realizing that they may only need to take Vitamin D along with it!

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

This does not surprise me

posted by Erica Peirson on 30 July 2010 at 9:30 am

The previous comments about funding and the need for more information are very valid. However, even as a Naturopathic physician, I've always believed that calcium supplementation was over-rated. The process of swallowing a calcium pill does not guarantee that the calcium will end up in your bones. Your body needs to have the right environment and other vitamin cofactors present for this to happen. For example, if one's system is too acidic from drinking carbonated beverages, not eating enough vegetables or eating too much protein, the body buffers that acidity by pulling calcium from the bones and out into the urine. Many studies have shown that as urine pH decreases (acidic) the amount of calcium in the urine increases. Vitamin D is not the only cofactor needed for the proper absorption of calcium. Vitamin K2 (from vegetables and healthy gut flora), magnesium, manganese and boron are also needed to mobilize calcium from the blood stream to bones. Basically, eat more greens. It's never as simple as taking one pill or supplement. See a licensed Naturopath if you want a comprehensive treatment plan for optimal bone health.

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

Calcium should be taken with magnesium

posted by Adam McLaurin on 31 July 2010 at 5:46 am

A while back I read an article called 'Calcium Supplement: The Best Form Of Calcium To Take For Bone Health' from a website called 'The Healthier Life'.

This article was very helpful describing the various forms of calcium and which are best, but one thing that it said that's very interesting is that calcium taken alone may stick to the arterial walls rather than be laid down in bone. They say that calcium and magnesium in nature are always found together, and therefore should be taken together.

If this is true, it would explain the outcome of this study. It'd probably be a worthwhile followup for them to see a) what kind of calcium people were taking, and b) were they taking it with magnesium

Anyway, I'd post a link to the article I referred to, but I'm not sure of the policy here, so you can go find it yourself if you're interested!

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

Disturbing findings - calcium, what about vitamin D

posted by J Saleh on 01 Aug 2010 at 6:43 am

I treat Osteoporosis on a daily basis. Calcium supplements are cornerstone of our treatment, but I always prescribe them with Vitamin D. If the patient however has sufficient vit D3 levels I would prescribe only calcium on it its own. And here is my concern according to this study.
I believe we should not advise our patients against calcium supplements and should wait to gather more solid findings.
A new study should compare the same brand of calcium supplement without vitamin d to another study group who take calcium with vitamin D.

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

calcium supplements

posted by Stan Echols on 03 Aug 2010 at 12:40 pm

Sometimes I feel like I just woke up in a Woody Allen movie. I can now add calcium to my list of recommendations/precautions from various experts. Already on the list is dark chocolet, red wine, coffee, tuna, and vitamins a, c and e. I'm happy to make appropriate lifestyle and diet changes to improve my health. But it's a bit unnerving to be told a short time later that I may be killing myself, substituting one problem for another, or simply wasting money. I think I'll go have a slice of cheesecake.

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

Increased bone density

posted by Ron Horgan on 04 Aug 2010 at 8:20 pm

I have submitted a post detailing a 22% increase in the neck of the femur and a 32% increase in the lower lumbar vertibrae.
This result for my wife was due to a combination of vibration, suppliments including calcium and a brief treatment with bisphophonate.
Full details were provided and I am rather disappointed that you have not published this information.
If it was due to some technical requirement please advise me by e mail so that I may redraft it accordingly.
Best Wishes Ron Horgan

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

Which? Calcium with or without Vitamin D?

posted by Carolyn Partain on 04 Aug 2010 at 9:56 pm

I could not understand the sentence in the last paragraph, "In an accompanying editorial, John Cleland...wrote that as a general rule, people with osteoporosis should only receive calcium supplements, either alone or with vitamin D, if they are also undergoing effective treatment for osteoporosis." OK, which is more advisable, calcium supplements"alone" or "with vitamin D" for the treatment of osteoporosis? Please rephrase for my senior-aged comprehension.

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

Expert Calls Calcium Study Absurd

posted by Michael Mooney on 05 Aug 2010 at 8:24 am

Several rebuttals to this poorly constructed biased study are available. Try this one to start: http://www.michaelmooney.net/CalcuimStudyAbsurd.html
then read: http://www.npicenter.com/anm/templates/newsATemp.aspx?articleid=28263&zoneid=2

Statements about one type of calcium being superior or causing problems is basically nonsense. See: http://www.michaelmooney.net/CalCarbSuperior.htm. Yes, calcium does better when partnered with the 11 or so other nutrients that build bone, but studies are clear, calcium builds bone density used alone. See the study by Storm on page 8: http://www.supernutritionusa.com/images/pdfs/CalciumCarbonate.pdf#zoom=100.

Michael Mooney

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

Increased Bone Density

posted by Ron horgan on 09 Aug 2010 at 1:08 am

I have three points to make about this article.
1 My understanding is that calcium deposition in arteries is onto preexisting plaque deposits of cholesterol. I doubt that calcium would be deposited into healthy arteries.
2 Increasing calcium supply is necessary to increase bone density. My 72 y/o wife was diagnosed with severe osteopenia verging on osteoporosis.
As seemed to be irreversible we tried several treatments at once.
These were Actonel(a bisphosphonate) 35 mg per week, increased milk and green vegetable consumption, Vibration treatment with the Power Plate device,and calcium suppliment Nutralife Calcium Complete.Vitamin E ,C fish and krill oil was also taken. After 6 months the Actonel was reduced to 35 mg per fortnight and discontinued after 9 months because of concern about Osteonecrosis of the Jaw as a possible side effect.
Over 18 months her bone density was increased as reported above to levels typical of a woman in her 20's.
None of the therapies used have been individually reported to have such a large increase,and it seems that they have worked in synergy.
3 Meta analysis has both strengths and weaknesses.
While it can reveal universal trends which are true for most people, it can also obliterate particular results where unrecognised variability is important.
For example if some individuals are helped and others hindered by a particular treatment, the average result may appear to be zero, whereas strong individual effects may be found.
In this instance the meta analysis may dissuade people from taking calcium suppliments and worsen their bone density. Other posts have made similar points.
My basis for making these comments is a personal heart attack, my wife's diagnosis, my background as a research chemist and the amazing wealth of information on the internet.
I hope that this information is useful for people with osteoporosis.
Best Wishes Ron Horgan

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

Calcium Tablets and Heart Disease

posted by jeffrey dach md on 10 Aug 2010 at 5:28 am

Great article on calcium and heart disease! Taking calcium tablets alone for osteoporosis may increase coronary artery calcification and heart disease risk, and should be re-evaluated. Other interventions and nutrients such as vitamin D, magnesium, vitamin K, pH balance etc may be more useful. Also, the type of calcium used may be significant, organic (citrate) to be preferred over the elemental (carbonate).

As you pointed out, Calcium Score is a test that shows the amount of calcification in the coronary arteries, and is strongly correlated with heart disease risk. How does one prevent and reduce heart disease? I recommend the William Davis Track Your Plaque Program.

For more see:

http://www.drdach.com/Track_Your_Plaque.html


jeffrey dach md

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |

WHY and How

posted by Brian Cremer on 04 Oct 2010 at 3:39 am

In addition to the questions raised by other contributors I would like to know why supplementing calcium is harmful. What is it that results in these findings? Is it deposited in the arteries? What effect does vitamin D have that it should reduce the risks? The report seems to make unqualified claims.

previous page | post followup | alert a moderator |