So that was one of the intermediate pieces of the puzzle we were trying to put together, and we got fairly consistent results. And there are a couple of possible explanations for that. One is purely methodologic, it's a lot easier to measure sero magnesium precisely with a blood test than it is to measure dietary magnesium intake over a period of a year or so, using even the most detailed questionnaires. So we think there's a lot more measurement error when we assess dietary magnesium. Fresh fruits and vegetables are high in magnesium.
Some nuts are particularly high, green vegetables especially, soy beans and whole grains.
I think one implication of the study is that we hope it spurs our scientific colleagues to look into this further. The quick answer is No, those data don't exist yet. But one of the possible explanations for this disparity in results between serum magnesium and dietary magnesium is that there are other determinants of serum magnesium of the body's internal set point that tend to override small differences that occur casually in dietary magnesium when it's not being intentionally manipulated. And it opens the door to the notion that well if one could overwhelm the internal set point by taking supplements, or by eating a diet that is specifically designed to be very high in magnesium, that might very well do the trick. In fact with regards to diabetes and glucose tolerance there are short term studies done on individuals who are hospitalised for a period of a week or two, that demonstrate very consistently that intravenous infusions of magnesiums or very high magnesium diets taken over a short run will improve the body's sensitivity to insulin and do provide a basis for that hypothesis, but the question of whether long term supplementation would be of benefit is an interesting and important one in an area where we're currently trying to mount randomised control trials to prove or disprove it.