Supplements




https://www.pcrm.org/yourbodyinbalance
https://www.amazon.com/Your-Body-Balance-Science-Hormones/dp/1538747421


Migraines

not thought to be vascular, but firing, which citric acid can interfere with




Testosterone

-----------------------------------------

Fish Oil Supplements

1. High levels of DHA in blood of males leads to higher prostate cancer risk
2. don't effect heart risk or Alzheimers

Recommendation is to eat plant based omega 3, and less omega 6.
And take lots of greens because they have omega 3.

Only case for DHA supplementation is if higher familial risk of Alzheimers, but use vegan source.



https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/undergraduate_thesis_or_projects/n870zs439
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13668-016-0150-1

-----------------------------------------

August 27, 2019

Effect of High-Dose Vitamin D Supplementation on Volumetric Bone Density and Bone StrengthA Randomized Clinical Trial

JAMA. 2019;322(8):736-745. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.11889

Key PointsQuestion  Does higher-dose vitamin D supplementation improve bone mineral density (BMD, measured using high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography) and bone strength (measured as failure load)?
Findings  In this randomized clinical trial that included 311 healthy adults, treatment with vitamin D for 3 years at a dose of 4000 IU per day or 10 000 IU per day, compared with 400 IU per day, resulted in statistically significant lower radial BMD (calcium hydroxyapatite; −3.9 mg HA/cm3 and −7.5 mg HA/cm3, respectively); tibial BMD was significantly lower only with the daily dose of 10 000 IU. There were no significant differences in bone strength at either the radius or tibia.
Meaning  Among healthy adults, supplementation with higher doses of vitamin D did not result in improved bone health; further research would be needed to determine whether it is harmful.
Abstract
Importance  Few studies have assessed the effects of daily vitamin D doses at or above the tolerable upper intake level for 12 months or greater, yet 3% of US adults report vitamin D intakes of at least 4000 IU per day.
Objective  To assess the dose-dependent effect of vitamin D supplementation on volumetric bone mineral density (BMD) and strength.
Design, Setting, and Participants  Three-year, double-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted in a single center in Calgary, Canada, from August 2013 to December 2017, including 311 community-dwelling healthy adults without osteoporosis, aged 55 to 70 years, with baseline levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) of 30 to 125 nmol/L.
Interventions  Daily doses of vitamin D3 for 3 years at 400 IU (n = 109), 4000 IU (n = 100), or 10 000 IU (n = 102). Calcium supplementation was provided to participants with dietary intake of less than 1200 mg per day.
Main Outcomes and Measures  Co-primary outcomes were total volumetric BMD at radius and tibia, assessed with high resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography, and bone strength (failure load) at radius and tibia estimated by finite element analysis.
Results  Of 311 participants who were randomized (53% men; mean [SD] age, 62.2 [4.2] years), 287 (92%) completed the study. Baseline, 3-month, and 3-year levels of 25(OH)D were 76.3, 76.7, and 77.4 nmol/L for the 400-IU group; 81.3, 115.3, and 132.2 for the 4000-IU group; and 78.4, 188.0, and 144.4 for the 10 000-IU group. There were significant group × time interactions for volumetric BMD. At trial end, radial volumetric BMD was lower for the 4000 IU group (−3.9 mg HA/cm3 [95% CI, −6.5 to −1.3]) and 10 000 IU group (−7.5 mg HA/cm3 [95% CI, −10.1 to −5.0]) compared with the 400 IU group with mean percent change in volumetric BMD of −1.2% (400 IU group), −2.4% (4000 IU group), and −3.5% (10 000 IU group). Tibial volumetric BMD differences from the 400 IU group were −1.8 mg HA/cm3 (95% CI, −3.7 to 0.1) in the 4000 IU group and −4.1 mg HA/cm3 in the 10 000 IU group (95% CI, −6.0 to −2.2), with mean percent change values of −0.4% (400 IU), −1.0% (4000 IU), and −1.7% (10 000 IU). There were no significant differences for changes in failure load (radius, P = .06; tibia, P = .12).
Conclusions and Relevance  Among healthy adults, treatment with vitamin D for 3 years at a dose of 4000 IU per day or 10 000 IU per day, compared with 400 IU per day, resulted in statistically significant lower radial BMD; tibial BMD was significantly lower only with the 10 000 IU per day dose. There were no significant differences in bone strength at either the radius or tibia. These findings do not support a benefit of high-dose vitamin D supplementation for bone health; further research would be needed to determine whether it is harmful.




-------------------------------------------------------


https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article-abstract/104/8/3576/5393287

Dietary Calcium Intake and Bone Loss Over 6 Years in Osteopenic Postmenopausal Women

The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, Volume 104, Issue 8, August 2019, Pages 3576–3584, https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2019-00111


Abstract



Context
Calcium intakes are commonly lower than the recommended levels, and increasing calcium intake is often recommended for bone health.
Objective
To determine the relationship between dietary calcium intake and rate of bone loss in older postmenopausal women.
Participants
Analysis of observational data collected from a randomized controlled trial. Participants were osteopenic (hip T-scores between −1.0 and −2.5) women, aged >65 years, not receiving therapy for osteoporosis nor taking calcium supplements. Women from the total cohort (n = 1994) contributed data to the analysis of calcium intake and bone mineral density (BMD) at baseline, and women from the placebo group (n = 698) contributed data to the analysis of calcium intake and change in BMD. BMD and bone mineral content (BMC) of the spine, total hip, femoral neck, and total body were measured three times over 6 years.
Results
Mean calcium intake was 886 mg/day. Baseline BMDs were not related to quintile of calcium intake at any site, before or after adjustment for baseline age, height, weight, physical activity, alcohol intake, smoking status, and past hormone replacement use. There was no relationship between bone loss and quintile of calcium intake at any site, with or without adjustment for covariables. Total body bone balance (i.e., change in BMC) was unrelated to an individuals’ calcium intake (P = 0.99).
Conclusions
Postmenopausal bone loss is unrelated to dietary calcium intake. This suggests that strategies to increase calcium intake are unlikely to impact the prevalence of and morbidity from postmenopausal osteoporosis.




----------------------------------------------

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/how-well-does-calcium-intake-really-protect-your-bones-201509308384


How well does calcium intake really protect your bones?

Beverly Merz

Executive Editor, Harvard Women's Health Watch

Ask anyone how to prevent bone fractures and they’re likely to answer, “Get more calcium.” Medical experts have tended to agree. For example, the Institute of Medicine advises a calcium intake of 1,000 to 1,200 milligrams (mg) a day for most adults. But in the last five years, we’ve also learned that calcium — at least, in the form of supplements — isn’t risk-free. An intake of 1,000 mg from supplements has been associated with an increased risk of heart attack, stroke, kidney stones, and gastrointestinal symptoms.
Now an analysis of reams of research concludes that consuming calcium at that level doesn’t even reduce fractures in people over 50. And a related analysis indicates that increasing calcium intake has only a modest effect on bone density in people that age. Both were published online this week in the medical journal BMJ.
These results may seem startling, but they aren’t a surprise to Dr. David Slovik, associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and author of our Special Health Report Osteoporosis: A guide to prevention and treatment. “I don’t believe that we’ve ever thought that calcium per se reduces fractures; it’s one part of a larger picture,” he says. You really can’t say ‘Take enough calcium and you’ll be fine.’”

What the analyses found

The analyses were conducted by a team of New Zealand researchers led by Mark Bolland, who first identified the cardiovascular risk associated with calcium supplements. For the first analysis, they looked at more than 70 studies on the effects of dietary calcium and calcium supplements in preventing fractures. They considered both randomized clinical trials and observational studies, and the studies varied widely in terms of numbers of participants, calcium intake, vitamin D intake, and how fractures were reported. The researchers found that, over all, neither dietary calcium nor calcium supplements were associated with a reduction in fractures.
In the second analysis, the team reviewed 59 randomized controlled clinical trials that evaluated calcium intake and bone density. Fifteen of those studies involved dietary calcium, and 44 looked at calcium supplements. Over all, getting at least 800 mg of calcium a day from the diet or taking at least 1,000 mg of supplemental calcium a day increased bone density. But bone density only increased by about 0.6% to 1.8% — an amount too low to affect fracture risk.
It’s important to note that these studies included very few men. (Many people think that osteoporosis only affects women, but men can develop osteoporosis too.)

The study that started it all?

Bolland and colleagues pointed to one study that they think may be responsible for today’s calcium recommendations. This study was a randomized controlled trial conducted among 3,800 elderly French women (average age 84) in assisted living. The women initially had a low calcium intake (around 500 mg a day), low vitamin D levels, and low bone density. Those who received 1,200 mg of calcium and 800 international units (IU) of vitamin D supplements daily for three years had a 23% lower risk of hip fracture, and a 17% lower risk of fractures over all, than those taking placebos. The women who took calcium also built bone, while those on placebos continued to lose it. Those results — reported in 1992 and 1994 — are often cited by experts when drafting calcium recommendations for the general population. But Bolland argues that healthy, active people who don’t have a calcium or vitamin D deficiency aren’t likely to get the same protection from taking that much calcium.

What to do?

“The takeaway is that you shouldn’t be taking calcium with the idea that it will prevent bone fractures,” Dr. Slovik says. But he notes that adequate calcium and vitamin D intake is still essential for healthy bone. A deficiency of either can increase the risk of diseases like osteomalacia and rickets.
It’s impossible to determine how much calcium each of us, individually, needs. Try to get as much calcium as you can from food. If your doctor advises you to get 1,000 to 1,200 mg of calcium a day, you can safely add a daily calcium supplement of 500 or 600 mg without increasing your risk of heart attack or kidney stones. And don’t forget vitamin D. No one is challenging the recommendation for vitamin D — 600 to 800 IU a day from either food or supplements.



 ---------------------------------------------



 https://www.plantbasednews.org/lifestyle/-scientists-discover-vitamin-b12-water-lentils




Scientists Say They Have Discovered Vitamin B12 In Water Lentils

'This could be a game-changing event for the plant-based food community as it allows one to consume bioactive, natural, whole food plant-sourced B12'



The water lentil - or duckweed - is known as the world's smallest flowering plant (Photo: Parabel)


The water lentil - or duckweed - is known as the world's smallest flowering plant (Photo: Parabel)
Scientists say they have discovered a plant-based source of Vitamin B12 in water lentils.
Researchers at Parabel, a US-based producer of plant protein ingredients, say their water lentil (aka duckweed) crop contains approximately 750 percent of the US recommended daily value of the bioactive forms of Vitamin B12 (per 100 grams of dry plant).
According to Parabel, independent third-party laboratory testing has confirmed the crop (and the ingredient LENTEIN® plant protein) contain adenosylcobalamin, methylcobalamin, and hydroxocobalamin - the natural bioactive forms of Vitamin B 12.
This bioactive Vitamin B12 is not commonly found in plants. According to Parabel, the 'most common supplemental form of Vitamin B12 is synthetic, which has had some consumers concerned'.

'Potentially revolutionary'

Dr. Matthew Van Ert, Parabel's Chief Scientific Officer, said: "Parabel's hydroponic systems represent a scalable and potentially revolutionary platform to produce highly nutritious plant foods that contain bioactive vitamin B12 forms.
"Along with partners, we will begin conducting bioavailability studies to determine the effectiveness of water lentils as a natural, plant-based solution to address vitamin B12 deficiencies."



 -------------------------------------


 https://lentein.com/getting-the-right-amount-of-b12/















Comments