Dangers of Calcium Supplements
Dangers of Calcium Supplements
40
Share
148

As I've said many times before, I'm not a big fan of calcium supplementation for most people, and I have repeatedly pointed out the dangers of too much calcium. Although a necessary nutrient, it doesn't perform as promised when taken in large amounts for bone health, and a number of studies now indicate that it may be problematic when it comes to heart health. In summary, there is an ever growing amount of research that shows that a high consumption of supplemental calcium leads to heart disease, arthritis, disabling PMS, and senility. And although high levels of dietary calcium may be exempt from the heart disease warning according to several new studies, it's still highly suspect when it comes to bone health.
The Evidence Against Calcium Has Been Building

It has been gospel for years in both the medical and alternative health communities that consumption of calcium-rich foods and calcium supplements can help prevent the loss of bone density and osteoporosis, especially in postmenopausal women. As a result, calcium supplements are widely recommended and used to combat estrogen- and age-related declines in bone mineral density. In fact, supplemental calcium has been added to all kinds of foods that you would think have nothing to do with calcium--ranging from orange juice to SpaghettiOs. No joke: SpaghettiOs has a Plus Calcium version.1 And although there have actually been a few studies over the years that seemed to indicate that supplemental calcium might actually reduce cardiovascular disease, the opposite now appears to be true. The evidence concerning the dangers of calcium supplements has been building for years--first slowly, but now accelerating.

Although researchers are not exactly sure how it does it, ever mounting data indicates that high calcium intake does indeed increase the risk of heart attacks and death. We can probably find a clue in the fact that calcification accelerates hardening of the arteries and the likelihood of death in patients with failing kidneys and that using calcium supplements accelerates it even more.2,3 It's not hard to extrapolate that evidence to see how increased vascular calcification as triggered by calcium supplementation, especially within coronary arteries, would be expected to increase the incidence of cardiovascular disease.

As already mentioned, there have been a number of studies over the years that have found that calcium supplementation is associated with upward trends in cardiovascular event rates, particularly in healthy postmenopausal women.4 But probably the first "major" crack in the calcium myth, at least in the medical community, was the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Heidelberg) study published in 2010.5 The specific objective of the study was to "prospectively evaluate the associations of dietary calcium intake and calcium supplementation with MI [myocardial infarction, i.e. heart attacks] and stroke risk and overall CVD [cardiovascular disease] mortality." As the study pointed out in its background statement, "It has been suggested that a higher calcium intake might favourably modify cardiovascular risk factors. However, findings of an ultimately decreased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) are limited. Instead, recent evidence warns that taking calcium supplements might increase myocardial infarction (MI) risk."  The specific objective of the study, then, was to "evaluate the associations of dietary calcium intake and calcium supplementation with MI and stroke risk and overall CVD mortality."

As the researchers explained, and as I mentioned earlier, previous epidemiological studies have consistently reported an inverse association between dietary calcium intake and the risk of hypertension, obesity, and type 2 diabetes. In other words, until the last few years, most studies   suggested that a reasonably higher intake of calcium might ultimately decrease the occurrence of cardiovascular events. The EPIC study, however, came to a more disturbing conclusion. It found that in comparison with non-users of any supplements, users of calcium supplements had a statistically significant increased risk of having a heart attack, which was more pronounced for calcium supplement only users. As stated in the study's conclusion, the researchers suggested that increasing calcium intake from diet likely did not confer significant cardiovascular benefits, while calcium supplements, likely raised the risk of having a heart attack.

That was strong stuff, and the ante was raised by two new studies published this year!

A Swedish cohort study established in the late 1980's set out to investigate the association between long term intake of dietary and supplemental calcium and death from all causes and cardiovascular disease. After following the 61,433 women for 19 years, the results of the study were published this February.6 Average total cumulative calcium intake (dietary plus supplemental) for the participants in the study ranged from 572 mg/day to 2137 mg/day. The study found that high intakes of calcium in women are indeed associated with higher death rates from all causes including cardiovascular disease…but not from stroke. Specifically, they found that among calcium tablet users with a dietary calcium intake above 1400 mg/day the hazard ratio for all cause mortality was 2.57 times the norm. To translate this into English, your risk of dying, if you're a woman, more than doubles if you take calcium supplements and have a high total calcium intake. That said, the researchers indicated that they believed that the study results suggest that supplements, rather than dietary calcium, are the problem. (As we will discuss later, this does not necessarily give a free pass to consuming high levels of dairy calcium.) Dr. Michaëlsson, the study's lead author, also noted that since a meta-analysis of randomized trials has shown that calcium supplementation actually increases the rate of hip fracture, "My present recommendation is to avoid calcium supplement use if you have a normal varied diet."

A second study, also published in February, but in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Internal Medicine, came to a similar conclusion, but with a twist.7 The premise of the study was that "scant evidence supports the notion that calcium supplements alone significantly decrease the risk for osteoporotic fracture, yet these supplements remain one of the most popular treatments taken by adults in the United States. In addition, there is increasing evidence that calcium may contribute to a higher risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD)." This study, then, used a large cohort of adults to examine how dietary calcium and calcium supplements affect the risk for CVD among women and men.

This study tracked 388,229 men and women aged 50 to 71 years who had participated in the National Institutes of Health--AARP Diet and Health Study. The twist? This study found that a high intake of supplemental calcium is associated with an excess risk of CVD death in men… but not in women. (Pretty much the mirror image of the Swedish study we just cited, but still a negative for calcium supplements.) Specifically, the study found that men who consumed 1000 mg or more of supplemental calcium per day had a significant 20% increased risk of cardiovascular disease death, a risk that was driven by a significant 19% increased risk of heart-disease death. For women, however, there was no association between calcium intake and the risk of death.

Now, to be sure, there have been a number of significant studies over the years that have pointed to the safety of calcium supplementation. For example, an early reading of the data from the Women's Health Initiative initially pointed to a lack of effect of calcium supplements on the risk for cardiovascular events.8 However, subsequent analysis of the same data did indeed find that calcium supplements significantly increased the risk for these events, particularly heart attacks.9 And in a meta-analysis, the use of calcium supplements VS placebo was associated with a modest increase in heart attacks.10 In the end, the evidence keeps pointing back to an increased risk.
Calcium and Bone Health

The JAMA, Internal Medicine study cited above, asked a key question that's worth taking a closer look at. It asked: what is the evidence in favor of supplement use in terms of bone health, particularly when it comes to calcium? It answered that question as follows:

    A meta-analysis of 29 studies found that calcium use alone was associated with a non-significant reduction in the risk for fracture.11 (However, the use of calcium with vitamin D reduced the risk for fracture by 12%. Vitamin D alone at doses of 800 IU or more daily also significantly reduced the risk for fracture.)
    In another meta-analysis, total calcium intake did not alter the risk for hip or total non-vertebral fracture.12 More disturbing was the finding that calcium supplementation was associated with a higher risk for hip fracture compared with placebo.

In other words, despite the strong "belief" shared by many medical doctors (not to mention, many in the alternative health community) that calcium supplements protect your bones, the actual evidence in support of that belief is thin at best. That makes concerns about calcium's apparent tendency to promote cardiovascular problems that much more disturbing. Now you're talking about significant risk in return for a vague and unsubstantiated promise of better bones. If this were the old West, we'd call it snake oil.
How Much Calcium Should We Take?

Calcium intake has been promoted for years because of its supposed benefit for bone health, particularly among the elderly. Current guidelines suggest that most adults should consume 1000-1200 mg of elemental calcium daily, with some physicians recommending 2000 mg a day for postmenopausal women. Theoretically, individuals who consume a "healthy" diet that is rich in dairy products and "calcium-fortified foods," should reach these thresholds. But in truth, this is mostly a myth, and most women take, or are prescribed, supplemental calcium.

As I've mentioned several times, although we live in a calcium obsessed society, I've never actually been that big a fan of calcium supplementation. Until recently, virtually every health expert in the world has told us to supplement with more and more calcium, to the point where it has become one of the hottest dietary supplements and food additives in the world. But the simple truth is: the vast majority of people get more than enough calcium in their diets. In fact, most people get too much. As I've outlined in previous newsletters, the average American consumes 600 lbs of dairy products a year. That's almost 2 lbs per day per person--keeping in mind that includes all those who eat no dairy at all. Theoretically, if the theories were true, that should be more than enough to protect most Americans from osteoporosis. But in fact, osteoporosis rates in the United States are among the highest in the world. Indeed, several years ago, researchers at Yale University analyzed 34 published studies from 16 different countries and found that the countries with the highest rates of osteoporosis (including the United States, Sweden, and Finland) were those in which people consumed the most meat, milk, and other animal-based foods.13 The study also showed that African-Americans, who consume, on average, more than 1000 mg of calcium per day, are nine times more likely to experience hip fractures than are South African blacks, whose daily calcium intake is only about 196 mg. On a nation-by-nation basis, people who consume the most calcium have the weakest bones and the highest rates of osteoporosis. Incidentally, the study was published in the journal called Calcified Tissue International…I kid you not.

The interesting thing is that this world-wide obsession with calcium is a relatively new phenomenon. It actually started in the 1950's under pressure from the American dairy industry. Before then, historically, people didn't consume much calcium -- and had very few problems with osteoporosis. What they did consume was magnesium -- almost five times as much as we consume today. Which brings up a key point: the health of our bones depends far more on co-factors such as magnesium, boron, vitamin K, and vitamin D than it does on calcium. High consumption of calcium--either dietary or supplemental--is simply counterproductive.
Conclusion - the Dangers of Calcium

As I keep saying, I'm not a big fan of calcium supplementation for most people -- either in pill form or as a component of high dairy intake. Although a necessary nutrient, it doesn't perform as promised when taken in large amounts for bone health…and as we now know, heart health. And now the dangers of too much calcium and the dangers of calcium supplements in particular are just too well documented to ignore. In summary, there is an abundance of research that shows that a high consumption of supplemental calcium leads to heart disease, arthritis, disabling PMS (or PMDD as the TV ads have renamed it), and senility. And as for a high dietary intake of calcium, it may not present the same heart health problems as supplemental calcium, but it's no better at protecting your bones--and, in fact, likely contributes to osteoporosis.

So what's going on?

As I mentioned a moment ago, it's only since the 1950's, and thanks to the dairy industry, that we consume high levels of calcium and that the Daily Value has been set so high (1000+ mg). In truth, until the 1950's, mankind evolved and lived quite healthily relying on plants as their primary source of calcium. And although they may have suffered from many diseases, one problem that most people, pre-calcium overload, did not have was weak bones. In fact, studies of fossilized human bone suggest that our ancient human ancestors usually had a greater peak bone mass than modern men and women living in industrialized societies today.14 Their loss of skeletal mass with age also appeared to be considerably slower than that of modern people living in Westernized societies.

Which brings us to the question of the day: if supplementing with calcium is detrimental to bone health and health in general, then what should we take?
Vitamin D

Earlier we referred to the meta analysis of 15 trials published in 2010 in the British Medical Journal that found that calcium supplements (without co-administered vitamin D) are associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction.15 That's a clue!

Quite simply, the body needs vitamin D to absorb calcium. Without enough vitamin D, one can't form enough of the hormone calcitriol (known as the "active vitamin D"). This in turn leads to insufficient calcium absorption from the diet. You want 1000 to 2000 IU of vitamin D3 daily. Unfortunately most people, including about forty percent of all children, are vitamin D deficient. This study is hardly unique. There are many similar studies that demonstrate the importance of vitamin D in terms of calcium utilization.16 Notably, the study cited above also identifies the importance of magnesium in terms of bone health.
Magnesium, a Better Natural Alternative

Without calcium, you cannot live, but without adequate amounts of magnesium to balance that calcium, you will find yourself falling victim to hardening of the arteries, arthritis, diabetes, and senility. Magnesium is the activating mineral for close to 400 different enzyme reactions in the body (that we know about)--more than any other mineral. Too little magnesium literally impacts your body negatively in hundreds of ways. And what makes the problem even worse is that magnesium is much harder for your body to absorb and utilize than calcium. This fact alone makes a joke of the standard 2:1 ratio of calcium to magnesium recommended by the medical establishment and found in most dietary supplements. Based on absorption, the ratio provided by most supplements is much closer to 6:1 or even 8:1 in favor of calcium--a very unhealthy ratio. And dairy at 10:1 calcium to magnesium is about the worst possible ratio imaginable.

In fact, the medical community has it bass akwards. Instead of consuming 2:1 calcium to magnesium, you should consume 2:1 magnesium to calcium…at the very least. That means that for most people no calcium supplementation is required at all. And because of the absorption issues associated with magnesium, supplementation of magnesium is advisable. However, the more dairy you consume, the more magnesium you must supplement with to balance it out.

The bottom line is that magnesium is the most important major mineral needed by your body, and unfortunately, the one that is most often depleted. As a side note, approximately 50% of all the magnesium in your body is found in your bones.17
Vitamin K

Vitamin K is crucial in that it regulates where calcium deposits in the body. It activates a group of amino acids called "Gla" (gamma-carboxyglutamic acid). The best known Gla protein is osteocalcin18 (Gla-OC). Vitamin K works by helping osteocalcin hold onto calcium, which is necessary for osteocalcin to be able to regulate where calcium goes in the body--ideally into the bones and teeth and away from the arteries. The bottom line is that vitamin K keeps calcium in your bones and teeth instead of allowing it to deposit in your soft tissues, causing a hard calcium build-up.

Note: there are two forms of vitamin K: K1 and K2. You want K2. Human studies show that vitamin K2 is up to ten times more bioavailable than K1.19 In addition, vitamin K2 remains biologically active in the body far longer than K1.
Boron

Boron is involved in processes that build and repair joints, giving it an important role in the prevention of arthritis. Boron also helps to prevent tooth decay, again because of its involvement in the metabolism of other essential minerals. Its ability to regulate calcium, magnesium, and phosphorus not only protects bones but also helps to keep teeth strong and healthy. Its primary action on calcium is probably indirect…by activating vitamin D and estrogen. Studies have shown that postmenopausal women who took 3 mg of boron a day decreased the amount of calcium lost in their urine and increased their estrogen levels.20
Essential fatty acids

Some studies suggest that EPA (Eicosapentaenoic acid, an omega-3 fatty acid) and GLA (gamma-linolenic acid, an omega-6 fatty acid) may help increase levels of calcium in the body and improve bone strength. In a study of women over 65 with osteoporosis, those who took fish oil EPA supplements and evening primrose oil GLA supplements had less bone loss over 3 years than those who took a placebo.21 Many of these women also experienced an increase in bone density.

The dosage required for evening primrose is between 1500--6000 mg. daily.
pH

If you have not already done so, I suggest you read the chapter in Lessons from the Miracle Doctors that talks about "cleansing your blood" to get a better understanding of how a high acid "forming" diet (meat, fish, poultry, eggs, dairy, cooked grains, some fruits, and refined sugars) leeches calcium from the body. But for now, the brief explanation is that when you consume a high acid "forming" diet, your body is forced to use calcium (from your bones or from your diet) to buffer the high acid potential so that your blood pH remains constant and you don't die. Incidentally, the problem with dairy, in addition to its 10:1 calcium to magnesium ratio, is that it actually takes more calcium to buffer its acid forming potential (from its high phosphorus content) then you actually receive from the dairy--thus the high incidence of osteoporosis in countries that consume a lot of dairy. Now, do not misunderstand. I am not saying that dairy is the biggest culprit in your diet. Actually, all of the other acid foods are worse -- particularly high-sugar soda pop. I just single dairy out because it's always identified as building strong bones, when the opposite is actually true.

Note well: we are talking about acid "forming" foods, not acidic foods. People get very confused about this. We're talking about foods that form acid salts in the body after being metabolized, not foods that are acidic when you eat them. Citrus fruits, for example, are highly acidic when you eat them, but are actually alkalinizing after they have been metabolized into the body. Many people ignorantly dismiss the concept of body pH because they do not understand the difference between these two concepts: acid forming VS acidic. So again, the foods we are concerned about are meat, fish, poultry, eggs, dairy, cooked grains, some fruits, and refined sugars. Most vegetables, on the other hand, are highly alkalinizing.

So what is one to do? Well first, you might want to rethink your diet to minimize the intake of high acid forming animal foods (to less than 3 ounces a day) and the elimination (or severe restriction) of refined grains and sugars. At that point, the amount of highly absorbable calcium that you get in your diet from foods such as romaine lettuce, broccoli, sesame seeds, and bok choy, for example, will be more than adequate to build strong bones.

And for those who do not wish to modify their diet? Calcium supplementation is required so that the calcium used to buffer the acids produced in your body comes from outside sources rather than your bones. Coral calcium is not especially absorbable by the body (despite claims to the contrary). It's pretty much just calcium carbonate, and there are better sources of calcium for building bones if you must supplement for that purpose. However, it is very effective at neutralizing excess acid and raising the pH of your soft tissue and fluids other than blood, so it is helpful at reducing the rate of bone loss. Just for fun, if you have some coral calcium in your house, pour a capsule into a can of sugared soda pop and watch what happens.
The Bottom Line

Unless you have a horrible diet, don't worry about consuming special amounts of calcium or supplementing with calcium. Concentrate instead on magnesium and the other co-factors required for calcium utilization. The trick is not how much calcium you consume; it's what happens to it after you consume it. Is your body taking it in? Is it being utilized? Is it going to the right places--such as your bones--instead of being deposited in your arteries and causing cardiovascular disease?

Potential Danger Of Calcium Supplements
August 2012

By William Faloon
William Faloon
William Faloon
As I approach 58 years of age, I am taking even more aggressive steps to slow my rate of aging, like reducing calorie intake and getting in a bit more physical activity. I recently shaved my moustache to modernize my appearance for some TV shows scheduled later this year.

One reason I find life so addicting is that virtually every week, new findings either confirm or contradict scientific positions Life Extension® has taken over the past 32 years.

A study published in May 2012 showed that calcium supplements may increase risk of cardiovascular disease. This study tracked almost 24,000 Europeans and suggested (in a subgroup analysis) that people taking only calcium supplements were about twice as likely to have a heart attack.1

We carefully examined this report and found multiple design flaws that clearly skewed the results. But for the purposes of this editorial, I am going to assume this finding is accurate and explain how to protect against deadly calcification processes.

Later in this piece, I'll reveal startling information as to who really makes the most popular dietary supplements in America.
Calcium Should Not Be Taken By Itself
Calcium Should Not Be Taken By Itself

Those involved in nutritional medicine have long known that people who supplement with calcium should also take adequate amounts of magnesium. The reason is that magnesium is a natural calcium channel blocker.2

Magnesium deficiency can induce elevation of intracellular calcium concentrations, and accelerate atherosclerosis.3 Calcium is a component of atherosclerotic plaque and when calcium salts build up in soft tissues it causes hardening, which is technically called calcification.

Exposure to excess amounts of calcium over time, without adequate magnesium sets the stage for endothelial dysfunction and formation of atherosclerotic plaque.3-7

We have published an overwhelming number of articles about the importance of magnesium. I'll never forget when the FDA raided us at gunpoint in 1987 and seized literature we published stating that nutrients like fish oil and magnesium prevent heart attack. They ridiculed the notion that nutrients had any effect on disease risk. That day the FDA had the upper hand and seized our property under the pretext that we were promoting "unapproved drugs" since the FDA did not recognize any health benefit to supplements like magnesium and fish oil.

We later sued in Federal Court and won everything back, along with a small check from the US Treasury that covered some of our legal costs.
Magnesium Deficiency Contributes To Vascular Disease
Magnesium Deficiency Contributes To Vascular Disease

If calcium supplements do increase heart attack and stroke risk, a lot has to do with magnesium deficiency. The US Department of Agriculture admits that 57% of the American public suffers inadequate magnesium intake.8 The reality is an even higher percentage of Americans are not getting optimal amounts of magnesium. Too bad the FDA forcibly suppressed the dissemination of information about magnesium, while another department of government (Department of Agriculture) warned of an epidemic magnesium deficit.

If a person takes high amounts of calcium without magnesium, they may very well be accelerating the occlusion of arteries in their heart and brain.3-7

Despite threats of incarceration, we and others have repeatedly advised people to supplement with lots of magnesium. We have fortified many of our supplements with extra magnesium, causing some members to call and ask why so much magnesium and so little calcium? Our answer is that most fail to get enough magnesium to protect against vascular disease, whereas more calcium can readily be obtained from dietary and supplement sources.

Assuming that excess calcium intake without regards to magnesium intake may increase heart attack and stroke risk, this may indeed validate what Life Extension® has long espoused about the critical need to balance calcium and magnesium.
Dangers Of Insufficient Calcium

Let's not forget that insufficient calcium intake will cause bone loss leading to osteoporosis and life-ending fractures.9

In fact, insufficient calcium itself accelerates atherosclerosis by causing excess removal of calcium from bone into the bloodstream where it calcifies arteries.10 For example, in validated models of atherosclerosis, calcium-deficient diets increase the rate of tissue calcification by 170% while calcium-supplemented diets reduce calcification by 62%.10

The take home message is to ensure sufficient ingestion of calcium and magnesium and as you'll read next—vitamin K2. Regrettably, the majority of aging women still take calcium supplements with no magnesium or vitamin K2, thus setting the stage for arterial calcification and subsequent heart attack and ischemic stroke.12-20
Vitamin K2 Keeps Calcium Out Of Arteries
Vitamin K2 Keeps Calcium Out Of Arteries

Calcium is so essential that if blood levels fall too low, you will die from an electrolyte imbalance that causes your heart to lose contractile rhythm needed to circulate blood.

Remember there are four chambers to your heart that have to precisely expand and contract or your heart will not beat in a stable manner. Electrolytes are minerals such as potassium, magnesium, and calcium that are needed to maintain the heart's electrical synchronicity.

Adequate calcium is so critical that your body has evolved mechanisms to saturate your blood with calcium if there is even a perception of calcium deficit. In the presence of low calcium, parathyroid hormone is secreted that often pulls too much calcium from bones.21 The downside to this as we age is our arterial walls can become infiltrated with calcium (i.e. calcification).

Fortunately, nature has developed a protective mechanism to keep excess calcium out of your arteries. For this important mechanism to function, vitamin K2 is required. The problem is that our diet provides little vitamin K2 and the result is that virtually all aged people suffer calcification of their brain, glands, heart valves, and arteries.

Published data about the ability of vitamin K2 to protect against cardiovascular disease is compelling. For instance, people with higher intake of vitamin K2 intake have a 57% reduction in risk of dying from cardiovascular disease.17 Those with blocked arteries and damaged heart valves show low vitamin K2 status.23-26 Women taking vitamin K2 have reductions in nonvertebral fractures as high as 81%.27

The reason vitamin K maintains bone density while simultaneously protecting against atherosclerosis is that it activates factors in bone to grab and retain calcium while functioning as a lock in the arterial wall to keep calcium out.15,28-32
EFFECTS OF HIGHER INGESTION OF VITAMIN K17
Reduction in All-Cause Mortality 	26%
Reduction in Severe Aortic Calcification 	52%
Reduction in Coronary Artery Disease 	57%

To explain this further, just imagine a set of calcium-regulating proteins in your arteries that determine whether calcium is allowed in or kept out. If these proteins are locked, they won't allow calcium to enter arterial cells. If the proteins are unlocked, calcium freely flows into cells and destroys them.

The key to turning on calcium-regulating proteins in the body is vitamin K2. If enough K2 is present, these proteins prevent calcium infiltration into soft tissues.33-37 (The name of this vitamin K-dependent calcium-blocking protein in arteries is matrix Gla protein).

Bones contain a protein called osteocalcin that functions like studs in a house. When activated by vitamin K2, osteocalcin grabs on to calcium and holds it in place.28,38-44 Without adequate K2, osteocalcin is not sufficiently activated, which results in calcium leaving bone and depositing into arteries.24,34,45-47

Life Extension first issued an urgent warning about the lethal risks of vitamin K deficit in 1999. I regret we did not discover this sooner as I know of members (including my own father) who perished from systemic calcification brought on by Vitamin K And Magnesium Remain Overlooked Nutrients

The ability of vitamin K2 to activate calcium-regulating proteins, and thus maintain bone density and inhibit calcification is undisputed, yet the majority of aging Americans do not supplement with vitamin K2. This is slowly changing as word spreads about the critical importance of this overlooked nutrient.

Regrettably, knowledge about the benefits of calcium in protecting against osteoporosis has been widespread for over 30 years, and the result is that aging women have been gobbling down large potencies of calcium supplements without concurrently taking magnesium and vitamin K2.

So it is not surprising for a study to show higher rates of heart attacks and stroke in those using calcium supplements without also taking magnesium and vitamin K. We at Life Extension warned of this risk long ago, yet few outside our membership paid attention. The tragic result may have been revealed in this recent study showing higher heart attack risk in calcium supplement users.
Drug Companies Sell Most Dietary Supplements

Health conscious people may be shocked to learn that the most popular dietary supplements are not made by people dedicated to keeping you alive.
Drug Companies Sell Most Dietary Supplements

Commercial supplement sales are dominated by Centrum® (made by a division of Pfizer) and One-A-Day® (made by a division of Bayer). These companies do not care about your health or longevity. This has been proven over and over as pharmaceutical companies face criminal charges for selling drugs they knew would kill human beings!

As we reported two years ago, Pfizer pled guilty (through a shell company) to a criminal charge that it fraudulently promoted the drug Bextra® in dangerously high doses to relieve acute surgical pain. Bextra®was never approved for this use.48 In an analysis presented at the American Heart Association, Bextra® was shown to more than double the risk of heart attack or stroke.49,50 Pfizer paid a record-breaking criminal settlement to the federal government of $1.195 billion for the fraudulent marketing of Bextra®.51,52 By using a subsidiary to plead guilty, Pfizer continues receiving lucrative Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement on its many other drugs.53

An article I wrote last year titled "FDA's Most Heinous Drug Approval" described how Bayer covered up the lethal side effects of a drug it made called Trasylol®.54 By delaying the withdrawal of Trasylol® from the market, Bayer caused the deaths of 1,000 human beings a month.55 Experts estimate that had Bayer not hidden findings about the dangers of Trasylol®, that 22,000 lives could have been spared.56

Would you trust dietary supplements sold by Pfizer, Bayer, or other pharmaceutical giants who financially benefit if you fall ill? Their track record shows a complete disregard of moral legitimacy. The scary part is that large corporations are increasingly dominating the dietary supplement marketplace by buying up name-brand vitamin companies.
Small Vitamin Companies Gobbled Up By Corporate Behemoths
Small Vitamin Companies Gobbled Up By Corporate Behemoths

As the public discovers the disease-preventing properties of nutrients, large corporations realize they have fallen behind the curve. A look at the primitive formulations of Centrum® and One-A-Day® provides a stark example of what happens when drug companies try to make effective dietary supplements.

A disturbing trend has been corporate giants buying out venerable supplement companies like the recent purchase of New Chapter by Proctor and Gamble57 (world's largest consumer products company) and Alacer (maker of Emergen-C® effervescent vitamin C) bought out by Pfizer (world's largest drug company).58

Proctor and Gamble who makes Tide laundry detergent and Pringles potato chips will soon be bringing you supplements under the New Chapter brand (a frequent advertiser in this magazine). There is no need to panic, since the founders of New Chapter will stay on for a while and it will be run for now as an independent subsidiary of Proctor and Gamble. That usually works until the corporate cost-cutters come in to find ways to earn more money from their acquisition.

Solgar59 was once a bedrock of nutritional credibility, but was purchased by NBTY (formerly known as Nature's Bounty), which then sold to private equity giant Carlyle Group in 2010 for $4 billion.60 (NBTY bought out a number of vitamin companies before selling itself to Carlyle Group—a conglomerate that invests in businesses as diverse as automotive, real estate, energy, and defense contracting).

GNC had its founding in 1935 as a small health food store in Pittsburgh.61,62 It grew to become the largest vitamin retail chain in the world. In 1999, Dutch company Royal Numico purchased GNC at a premium.63 In 2003, Numico sold GNC at a huge loss to private-equity firm Apollo Management.64 In 2007, Apollo sold GNC to an affiliate of the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan.65 In April 2011, GNC launched a successful initial public offering and became a publically traded corporation again.66

As you'll read next, large corporations lack the agility, expertise, and commitment to enable humans to stave off aging-related disease.
Pharmacy Chains Don't Care If You Live Or Die

Displayed prominently at the check-out counter when you walk in to most Walgreen's or CVS stores is a tall wall of tobacco products. These large pharmacy chains offer all kinds of packaged junk foods, toxic OTC drugs like acetaminophen, and of course any side-effect prone prescription drug your doctor may have been duped into prescribing.

We have previously written about the immorality of openly selling cigarettes since it provides nicotine addicts with an easy opportunity to continue or resume their lethal habit. An argument could be made to organize boycotts against pharmacy chains until they stop selling cigarettes. The sad fact is that the public has become far too apathetic for this kind of boycott to succeed in removing tobacco products from pharmacy shelves.

The typical consumer trusts the private label brands of pharmacy chains and even supermarkets, yet these corporate behemoths lack the scientific integrity to make state-of-the-art nutritional formulas.
Pharmacy Chains Don't Care If You Live Or Die

To give you a startling example of how poorly formulated products made by pharmacy giants are, look at a fiber product made by Walgreen's. It has an attractive-colored label, a healthy sounding name "Wal-Mucil 100% Natural Fiber" and a low price of just $10.99. There is even a health claim on the side panel stating that the fiber in this product may reduce risk of heart disease.

You may recall that the primary benefit of fiber taken before meals is to slow the absorption of carbohydrates into the bloodstream, or stated differently, to reduce dangerous after-meal blood glucose surges that cause heart attacks and strokes.

Now hold on to your seat as you find out what's really in Walgreen's fiber supplement. One of the top ingredients in this fiber product is table sugar (sucrose). Each serving provides 3 grams of sugars and only 3 grams of fiber.67 Those seeking to use Walgreen's fiber to prevent diabetes and vascular disease would inadvertently increase these risks by using—according to the label—a "Dietary Fiber Supplement."

Life Extension and other quality supplement companies have long made fiber products that do not contain sugar. Walgreen's may or may not have known about the dangers of excess sugar consumption. What we know is that sugar is a cheap filler ingredient and it made their product taste good. Walgreen's was either oblivious or didn't care that their fiber product would inflict serious health problems on someone who regularly used it.

I directly learned almost 20 years ago that these pharmacy giant's only concern is the financial bottom line—not their customer's health. As the first organization to launch melatonin, we were besieged by calls from pharmacy chains after prestigious mainstream doctors began endorsing it. Back in those days we were the only ones able to make virtually 100% pure melatonin. The best our competition at the time could do was 98% purity. Pharmacy chains who called us were only concerned with the cost and whether we had product liability insurance.

One of these companies I talked to complained we were slightly overpriced. I warned that the 2% impurities in our competitor's product might cause a health risk analogous to contaminated tryptophan (since the biosynthesizing processes were similar). I will never forget when a major pharmacy chain representative told me:

"We don't care about the quality of the ingredient. Our only concern is lowest price and whether you have product liability insurance to cover lawsuits that might be filed if your ingredient harms someone."

Life Extension® seldom carries product liability insurance (because of the confidence in our ingredients) and 100% melatonin cost more to make than 98% material, so we never benefited in a major way financially from an ingredient (melatonin) that we were the first to introduce.

Based on my direct interactions with pharmacy chains, they don't care if you live another day, while I will feel perpetually guilty for not identifying the disease-preventing properties of vitamin K before 1999.
Why We Are Different…
Why We Are Different…

Life Extension® has been, and continues to be structured as an entity that will fund biomedical research in perpetuity. We will not sell out to large corporate interests and our mission to indefinitely extend the healthy human life span will not alter.

How can we assure this? Each year, we fund a scholarship program that brings the most committed life extensionists under age 31 to South Florida. Through a meticulous screening process, we identify incredibly bright young people who are determined to vanquish aging, disease, and death. We enlighten these young life extensionists as to what we expect of them when it comes to their participation in fraternal organizations that will forever ensure that Life Extension® continues its unwavering scientific commitments.

Each year, we also support a long weekend meeting of some of the wealthiest and enlightened individuals on the planet who, like the under age 31 group, are also personally determined to vanquish aging, disease, and death. These individuals have the option of joining perpetual oversight organizations that will forever ensure that Life Extension® continues its biomedical research initiatives.

These arrangements to fund lifesaving research are irrevocable and permanent. Professional trustees are in place to guarantee that these provisions are not changed. So you will not hear that Life Extension has sold out to Pfizer, Bayer, Proctor and Gamble or any other company whose sole purpose is to make money.

No one in history has done what we have to safeguard a benevolent mission. As a member of the Life Extension Foundation®, you help support a historic undertaking to overcome the absurdly short life spans that currently afflict the human race.

For longer life,lack of vitamin K2.
 Breast Cancer and Heart Attacks: A Deadly Side Effect of Calcium Supplements?
January 30, 2012 | 434,444 views
| Available in EspañolDisponible en Español

    4.9K

By Dr. Mercola

    Calcium is one of the most popular dietary supplements on the market, largely because of the widely circulated mantra that mega-doses of this mineral are essential for building and maintaining healthy bones.

    As a result, many people believe that taking a calcium supplement is a simple way to prevent bone fractures associated with osteoporosis.

    What they have not been told is that while you can force increased bone mineral density with calcium supplements, you cannot be sure that this will result in greater bone strength. 

Be Careful In Interpreting Bone Tests Results

    Bone density, while an excellent measurement of compressive strength, does not reveal tensile strength, i.e. whether or not your bone will resist breaking from being pulled or stretched, as commonly occurs in a fall or similar trauma.

    Moreover, "osteoporosis," as presently defined by bone scans (DXA scan) using the T-score, inappropriately defines "normal bone density" according to the standard of a 25-year old, young adult.

    In other words, if you are 40, 50, or even 100, the T-score-based system says your bones are not normal, or even diseased if they are not as dense as they were when you were a young adult.

    If in fact they used the age-appropriate Z-score, most cases of "osteopenia," and many cases of "osteoporosis," would suddenly disappear because they were inappropriately classified from the start. 

Do Calcium Supplements Predispose You to Breast Cancer?

    Ultimately, the "calcium is good for your bones" mantra is yet another example of a good theory gone wrong, and represents how broadly deluded the mainstream medical community is about bone health and the nature of osteoporosis, and its highly fabricated twin condition "osteopenia." 

    There are actually a number of studies indicating that mass market calcium supplements increase your risk for cardiovascular incidents and other problems, while offering little benefit to your bones. Only because something can increase your bone density: eating what amounts to chalk or pulverized bone meal, or worse, chemicals like the drugs Fosamax and Evista, does not mean this will translate into improved health for your bones, or any of your other organ systems.

    Indeed, before jumping off the lemming-like cliff of conventional medical wisdom, consider there is a solid body of research indicating that higher bone density may actually increase the risk of malignant breast cancer by 300% or more! Considering that close to 1 in 4 women will be diagnosed with cancer in their lives, with breast cancer top on the list, isn't the neurotic fixation on increasing bone density with calcium supplements misplaced, especially when it may increase the overall risk of dying from cancer and, as we will see, cardiovascular disease (the #1 killer), as well?

Calcium Can be Beneficial or Deadly Depending on Where it Ends Up in Your Body

    Calcium is the most abundant mineral in your body, necessary for not only bone health but also regulating your heartbeat, conducting nerve impulses, clotting blood and stimulating hormone secretions. Your body does not make calcium, and in fact loses calcium daily through your skin, nails, hair, sweat and elimination, which is why you must replace it via your diet.

    It has been estimated, however, that your body excretes as little as 100 mg a day, making the current recommendations by the National Osteoporosis Foundation for women over 50 to take 1200 mg a day, a bit troubling.  When we compare our calcium-rich diet to the traditional calcium-poor Chinese peasant diet, which was free of cow's milk and calcium supplements, approximately 250 mg a day of plant-based calcium was all that was needed to fulfill their bodily needs – and this is a culture with no word for "osteoporosis" in its 3,000+ year old language!

    The truth is that taking any calcium in excess or isolation, without complementary nutrients like magnesium, vitamin D and vitamin K2, which help keep your body in balance, can have adverse effects, such as calcium building up in coronary arteries and causing heart attacks. Even taking calcium with vitamin D does not appear to be enough to prevent these types of adverse effects.

    So when you take a biologically foreign form of calcium (such as limestone, oyster shell and bone meal (hydroxylapatite), or when your body's ability to direct calcium to the right places becomes impaired (as when you are deficient in vitamin K2), calcium may be deposited where it shouldn't be, which can lead to multiple health problems.

    Often, much of the burden of removing the excess calcium falls on the kidneys, which is why it has been proven on numerous occasions that calcium carbonate rapidly calcifies arteries in those with compromised kidney function, especially hemodialysis patients.  Calcium deposits are, in fact, major contributors and even causative factors in many conditions, including the following:
    Cellulite and scar tissue 	Coronary artery disease and atherosclerosis 	Dental plaque and gum disease 	Hypothyroidism
    Obesity and diabetes 	Alzheimer's disease 	Breast cancer and cysts (fibrocystic breasts) 	Gallstones, colon cancer and Crohn's disease
    Kidney stones 	Ovarian cysts 	Cataracts, glaucoma, and macular degeneration 	Bone spurs, stiff joints, osteoarthritis, tendonitis and bone cancer 

Too Much Calcium May Create Mineral Deficiencies that Promote Disease

    Robert Thompson, M.D. wrote a book on this subject called The Calcium Lie, which explains that bone is comprised of at least a dozen minerals, and the exclusive focus on calcium supplementation is likely to worsen bone density and actually increase your risk for osteoporosis. Dr. Thompson believes overconsumption of calcium creates other mineral deficiencies and imbalances that will increase your risk of heart disease, kidney stones, gallstones, osteoarthritis, hypothyroidism, obesity and type 2 diabetes.

    If your calcium supplement is being turned into "little rocks" that are being deposited in your soft tissues and arteries, you can begin to understand how this could be increasing your risk for a heart attack, stroke or other health condition.

    Many believe that arterial plaque is simply a buildup of cholesterol. But in reality, more than 90 percent of these fatty plaques are calcified. Cholesterol is soft and waxy and does not impair the elasticity of your arteries. But calcium deposits are like concrete, "hardening" your arteries and impairing their ability to expand. It is calcium -- not cholesterol -- that induces arterial stiffness and makes the plaque less stable and more prone to chipping off and subsequently inducing a life-threatening clot.

    This is particularly important for postmenopausal women because hormone balance is necessary for proper calcium signaling -- directing your body to deposit calcium into your bones. When hormones fall out of balance, this signaling causes calcium to slowly exit your bones and become deposited in your arteries instead. Simply taking a calcium supplement will not solve the problem because if your body cannot direct the calcium to the right spot, it will cause far more harm than good.

Why Vitamin K2 is Crucial if You Take Vitamin D and Calcium …

    Vitamin K2 engages in a delicate dance with vitamin D; whereas vitamin D provides improved bone development by helping you absorb calcium, there is new evidence that vitamin K2 directs the calcium to your skeleton, while preventing it from being deposited where you don't want it -- i.e., your organs, joint spaces, and arteries. As mentioned, a large part of arterial plaque consists of calcium deposits (atherosclerosis), hence the term "hardening of the arteries."

    Vitamin K2 has also actually been found to decalcify certain tissues undergoing pathological (also known as ectopic) calcification.

    Vitamin K2 activates a protein hormone called osteocalcin, produced by osteoblasts, which is needed to bind calcium into the matrix of your bone. Osteocalcin also appears to help prevent calcium from depositing into your arteries. In other words, without the help of vitamin K2, the calcium that your vitamin D so effectively lets in might be working AGAINST you -- by building up your coronary arteries rather than your bones. This is why if you take calcium and vitamin D but are deficient in vitamin K, you could be worse off than if you were not taking those supplements at all.

Food is the Best Source of Calcium

    In order for calcium to do your body good, it must be in a bioavailable form and balanced out with vitamins D and K and other important trace minerals, as part of a total nutritional plan.

     Good sources include raw milk and cheese from pasture-raised cows (who eat the plants), leafy green vegetables, the pith of citrus fruits, carob, sesame seeds and wheatgrass, to name a few. It's worth mentioning that the studies done about calcium from dairy products are all done with pasteurized dairy, rather than raw dairy products that have more of their nutrients intact, and this muddies the results of these studies.

    Calcium from dietary sources is typically better absorbed and utilized than calcium from supplements, which is why studies involving calcium from natural food sources have shown favorable results, including a 25 percent lower risk of dying from all causes, and a 23 percent lower risk of dying from heart disease.

    You also need sources of silica and magnesium, which some researchers say is actually enzymatically "transmuted" by your body into the kind of calcium your bones can use. This theory was first put forth by French scientist Louis Kevran, a Nobel Prize nominee who spent years studying how silica, calcium, magnesium, and other minerals are related and transmutable into one another through low-energy nuclear transformation only found within living systems.

    His theory explains how cows and chickens produce far more calcium in their milk and eggs than is found in their diet, or why, workers exposed to extremely high temperatures (130 degrees F) in the Middle East are known to consume salt tablets, which their bodies convert to potassium (as measured by their excreta), resulting in a reduction in their bodily temperature.

    Good sources of bone-strengthening silica are cucumbers, bell peppers, tomatoes, and a number of herbs including horsetail, nettles, oat straw, alfalfa, and raw cacao, which is also extremely rich in highly bioavailable magnesium.

    Dr. Thompson recommends the use of natural unprocessed salt as a far better alternative to calcium supplements because it provides the trace minerals you simply cannot get from food grown in today's mineral-depleted soils. My favorite source of trace minerals is pure, unprocessed Himalayan salt, which contains 84 elements needed by your body.

    The bottom line is, optimize your vitamin D levels through sun exposure and consume a variety of fresh, local organic whole foods, including vegetables, fruits, nuts, seeds, organic meats and eggs, unprocessed salt, and raw organic unpasteurized dairy, which will give you the bioavailable calcium your body needs along with the trace minerals and other cofactors it needs to be absorbed and properly utilized by your body.

A new study should put the final nail in the coffin for any lingering beliefs that calcium supplements are good for you.

The new study finds that people over 50 don't get stronger bones either by taking supplements or from eating extra servings of calcium-rich foods such as dairy products.

The findings, reported in the British Medical Journal's online publication BMJ.com, support what U.S. health officials have been telling Americans for a few years now — taking calcium supplements is not just a waste of time, but it could be harmful. The extra calcium doesn't go to strengthen bones but instead can build up in the arteries, causing heart disease, or in the kidneys, causing kidney stones.

Dr. Ian Reid of the University of Auckland in New Zealand and colleagues did what's called a meta-analysis —they gathered all the high-quality studies they could find from around the world to see what they showed.

Most of the studies showed people over 50 get no benefit at all from taking either calcium supplements or from eating calcium in food. People were just as likely to have a fracture. A few studies showed that people who took calcium supplements might have a lower risk, but they were not very clear.
"“Dietary calcium intake is not associated with risk of fracture.”"

The most powerful type of study, a randomized controlled trial, showed no differences.

"Dietary calcium intake is not associated with risk of fracture, and there is no clinical trial evidence that increasing calcium intake from dietary sources prevents fractures," they wrote. "Evidence that calcium supplements prevent fractures is weak and inconsistent."

In 2012, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force issued new recommendations saying there's not enough evidence to recommend taking calcium or vitamin D supplements, and recommending against it in some cases.

It's not welcome news, because the National Osteoporosis Foundation estimates that 54 million Americans are at risk of the bone-thinning disease. About half of all women over 50 will have a broken bone caused by osteoporosis.

Women over 50 are advised to get 1,200 mg of calcium a day and women under 50 are advised to get 1,000 mg a day. Men are advised to get 1,000 mg a day although men over 70 are supposed to get 1,200 mg. Dairy products are rich in calcium but so are leafy green vegetables, fortified milks such as soymilk and some juices and breakfast cereals.

And vitamin D helps the body absorb calcium. Sunlight helps the body produce its own vitamin D. The vitamin is added to some foods such as orange juice and dairy products and is found in some fish.

Despite this, most Westerners don't get enough calcium from food or supplements. Doctors had hoped that if people just took more supplements, they'd be better off, but the studies are not supporting this.

"The weight of evidence against such mass medication of older people is now compelling, and it is surely time to reconsider these controversial recommendations," Dr. Karl Michaelsson of Uppsala University in Sweden, who studies osteoporosis, wrote in an commentary.
"“It is surely time to reconsider these controversial recommendations.”"

Michaelsson has led research that found people who drank the most milk had more bone fractures and were more likely to die within a certain period than people who drank less.

And studies have shown that taking supplements can also cause harm.

"Clinical trials of calcium supplements at doses of 1,000 mg/day, however, have reported adverse effects, including cardiovascular events, kidney stones, and hospital admissions for acute gastrointestinal symptoms," Reid's team wrote.

"Consequently, older people have been encouraged to improve bone health by increasing their calcium intake through food rather than by taking supplements. This advice assumes that increasing dietary calcium intake to the recommended level of 1,200 mg a day or more prevents fractures without causing the adverse effects of calcium supplements."
[Is too much milk bad for you?]
Is too much milk bad for you? 0:22

But the published studies didn't show any benefit, Reid's team found. A second review, also led by Reid, found that people who ate the most calcium in their diets, mostly from dairy sources, tended to have slightly stronger bones as measured by bone mineral density, but this didn't translate into fewer broken bones.

Other studies have questioned the benefits of all sorts of supplements. Some might even fuel the growth of cancer.

Despite these findings, Americans love their supplements. A survey done in 2012 found 75 percent of Americans who take supplements would take them, even if they are proven not to benefit health. Americans spend $12 billion a year on supplements. 

The Health Risks of Eating Conventional Potatoes

Max Goldberg November 30, 2013

health-risks-potatoes

Whenever I think about a lot of the food that I ate growing up, it isn’t overly pleasant. It was the standard American diet with all of the processed, fast food that most of the country still consumes today.

Fortunately, my childhood took place before the emergence of GMOs (mid-90s) and growth hormone milk (late 80s), so I escaped some of the really bad things when my body was in its crucial stage of development.

One food that I fondly remember eating, and loving, at family dinners was potatoes. And it wasn’t just the insides of the potatoes. I particularly loved eating the skins. Yet, little did I or my parents know just how toxic they were.

When many people think of the most important foods to be eating organic, potatoes do not immediately come to mind as quickly as apples, grapes, or spinach do. But they should and here’s why.

THE PROBLEMS WITH CONVENTIONAL POTATOES

1) According to the USDA’s Pesticide Data Program, 35 different pesticides have been found on conventional potatoes.

And out of these 35:

– 6 are known or probably carcinogens

– 12 are suspected hormone disruptors

– 7 are neurotoxins

– 6 are developmental or reproductive toxins

The chemical that is found on 76% of all conventional potatoes is chlorpropham, an herbicide that is used to stop the growth of weeds and to inhibit potato sprouting.

Not only is this chemical toxic to honey bees, but according to the Extension Toxicology Network, chronic exposure of laboratory animals to chlorpropham has caused “retarded growth, increased liver, kidney and spleen weights, congestion of the spleen, and death.”

2) As a root vegetable, potatoes absorb all of the pesticides, herbicides, and insecticides that are sprayed above the ground and then eventually make their way into the soil.

With potatoes, however, the chemical treatment is quite extensive.

During growing season – They get treated with fungicides

Before harvesting – They get sprayed with herbicides to kill off the fibrous vines

After being dug up – They get sprayed again to prevent them from sprouting

3) Quite often, the most important information about a food is what growers or “insiders” have to say about it.

Jeff Moyer, farm director at the Rodale Institute and former chair of the National Organic Standards Board, has been quoted as saying “I’ve talked with potato growers who say point-blank they would never eat the potatoes they sell. They have separate plots where they grow potatoes for themselves without all the chemicals.”

ORGANIC POTATOES ARE THE ANSWER

Needless to say, when I eat potatoes, I only eat organic potatoes because organic production does not allow for the use of all of these toxic chemicals.

Please share this post with your friends and family, so they can be purchasing the safest potatoes possible.