From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: Calcium/Magnesium
Date: 17 Dec 92 04:08:26 GMT
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA

In article <silver.724547658@sfu.ca> silver@fraser.sfu.ca (Craig Silver) writes:
>This is a message I sent to the man who wanted more information
>(cpr4k@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (Christian P. Roberts)).  If you'd like
>me to go into it more, let me know and I'll tell you what I know.

You mean you'll repeat some very fringe theories of Jim Moon, eminent
crackpot, SFU.

>I don't know much about the different forms of calcium but I can tell
>you about "vitamin D".  I put it in quotes because it's not really a
>vitamin in the true sense of the word.  Being a vitamin means that it
>is an essential nutrient, meaning that our bodies cannot make it and
>we have to therefore consume it.  This is not true of "vitamin D"
>because our bodies *do* make it when we are exposed to sunshine (no,
>we don't get "vitamin D" from sunshine directly).  What it *is* is a
>potent steroidal hormone and its other name is calciferol.  Its name
>comes from its function: to absorb calcium.

In temperate climates, vitamin D is not synthesized at all during the
winter months, and sun exposure at other times depends a lot on society
and culture.  Widespread supplementation has just about ended rickets.

>So you might ask why not take some "vitamin D" pills to absorb more
>calcium?  The answer is a big NO.  The reason is that when this
>hormone is consumed it goes into the chylomicron and into lymphatic
>circulation (just like how the body handles consumed fats).  The
>problem with this is that it *doesn't* go to the liver and kidneys to
>get converted into the proper form of the hormone (the proper form BTW
>is 1.25-dihydroxycholecalciferol).  In it's improper form, it actually
>sends calcium to the soft tissues, like the arteries, instead of the
>bones.  So North America's problem is actually not that we don't have
>enough calcium in our bodies, but that the calcium is distributed to
>the wrong body parts.

This is highly questionable.  In non-toxic doses, calciferol is
metabolised quite normally and does in fact get converted by the
kidney into an active form.  Calcification is only a concern in
toxic overdoses.

>Fare skinned infants are at the greatest risk of the ill effects of
>consuming "vitamin D" and many died in Britain because their milk 
>was fortified with it.  It is a disease and is now called Pathological
>Calcification.  This why Britain doesn't fortify their dairy
>anymore.  You guys in the states have a choice between fortified milk
>and nonfortified.  We in Canada don't, unfortunately.

All commercially sold milk in the US is fortified with vitamin D
at 400IU/quart.

>On the other hand, those who are at risk of not getting enough
>"vitamin D" are dark skinned infants living in northern parts of the
>world.  Some don't get enough sun so they *can* be given a small
>amount of the hormone to prevent rickets (the disease one gets when
>one doesn't have enough "vitamin D"). 

It's certainly not just dark skinned infants, though the children of
immigrants who have moved to northern climates are particularly susceptible
to deficiency syndromes.  However, rickets was endemic in the industrial
regions of Britain among whites before dietary supplementation was introduced.

>The truth of the matter is that the only way to get "vitamin D" to do
>the right things in our bodies is to make it from sunshine and the
>amount of sunshine we need to do this is a mere 1 hour 3 times a week
>on the cheeks.  Can we OD on it from sunshine?  No.

Supplemented food or sunshine, it makes no difference.

>So in making sure you get enough calcium, I would strongly suggest
>buying dairy products that are not fortified with "vitamin D" (that
>is, if you buy them) and watch your calcium:magnesium ratio (2:1).

Nonsense.  I would hope this person would continue to drink dairy
products which are fortified with vitamin D to obtain her calcium.
It is not necessary to look for additional supplements of the vitamin.

>Sorry I couldn't help with the forms of calcium.

Right--after all this, all you could offer is a misleading harangue
on vitamin D, when that wasn't even her question.  God--does this
Moon guy brainwash everyone into sounding exactly the same, and to
repeat themselves at regular intervals?  It's ridiculous.

And this fixation on calcium/magnesium ratios is really anal retentive.
People should try to eat a balanced diet, and if a woman thinks she
isn't taking enough, some kind of supplement, such as calcium carbonate
or calcium lactate or gluconate is not a bad idea.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition