Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Magnesium

[Guest guest]

Hi JoAnn

I read through this highly complex and dense piece on the relationship of

Magnesium intake to various heart ailments. I can't pretend that I clearly

understood most of what was said, but I did get the distinct impresion that

Magnesium was critically important to heart patients. What I'd like to

know, is if it would be advisable, based on what was revealed in this paper,

to increase my intake still higher. I don't want to belabor the issue of my

heart disease, but I got the impression, though I'm not clear about it, that

they were advising an intake three-fold above usual dietary allowances. I

take this to mean, approx. 1.5 grams daily. I'm taking half that.

 

I'm not sure whether it was a paper you showed us JoAnn, that touched on a

problem with Calcium supplements, where the doctor quoted in the article,

said he didn't think people should take Calcium as a supplement. I'm having

trouble with this problem. I've stopped taking Calcium supplements, but

much to my surprise, when I went through the supplements I was taking, many

that were not " listed " as Calcium supplements, had a lot more Calcium than I

realized. I'm currently taking a tablet, which is described as a Potassium

supplement on the bottle, but when you check the contents in back, it tells

you that one tablet contains 99mg Potassium, but it also contains 178mg of

Calcium!; though there's no mention of Calcium on the front of the bottle!

When I totaled the amount of Calcium in all the supplements I was taking,

which never said a word about the Calcium content on the front of the

bottle, I came away with about 800mg of Calcium! Astonishing. I'm going to

gradually reduce this number as much as I can, and get my Calcium from

foods. But I'd like to increase my Magnesium by double, if I'm not

completely misreading the article you sent us.

Thanks for wading through this.

Best wishes

JP

 

-

" JoAnn Guest " <angelprincessjo

 

Friday, October 22, 2004 8:15 PM

Cardiovascular Risk Factors and

Magnesium

 

 

>

>

>

> Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Magnesium

> JoAnn Guest

> Oct 22, 2004 20:07 PDT

>

> Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Magnesium: Relationships to

> Atherosclerosis, Ischemic Heart Disease and Hypertension

> http://www.mgwater.com/alturacv.shtml

[Guest guest]

, " John Polifronio "

<counterpnt@e...> wrote:

>

> Hi JoAnn

> I read through this highly complex and dense piece on the

relationship of Magnesium intake to various heart ailments. I can't

pretend that I clearly understood most of what was said, but I did

get the distinct impresion that Magnesium was critically important

to heart patients. What I'd like to know, is if it would be

advisable, based on what was revealed in this paper, to increase my

intake still higher.

I don't want to belabor the issue of my heart disease, but I got

the impression, though I'm not clear about it, that they were

advising an intake three-fold above usual dietary allowances. I

take this to mean, approx. 1.5 grams daily. I'm taking half that.

>

> I'm not sure whether it was a paper you showed us JoAnn, that

touched on a problem with Calcium supplements, where the doctor

quoted in the article, said he didn't think people should take

Calcium as a supplement.

I'm having trouble with this problem. I've stopped taking Calcium

supplements, but much to my surprise, when I went through the

supplements I was taking, many that were not " listed " as Calcium

supplements, had a lot more Calcium than I

> realized.

 

I'm currently taking a tablet, which is described as a Potassium

> supplement on the bottle, but when you check the contents in back,

it tells you that one tablet contains 99mg Potassium, but it also

contains 178mg of Calcium!; though there's no mention of Calcium on

the front of the bottle!

> When I totaled the amount of Calcium in all the supplements I was

taking, which never said a word about the Calcium content on the

front of the bottle, I came away with about 800mg of Calcium!

Astonishing. I'm going to gradually reduce this number as much as I

can, and get my Calcium from foods. But I'd like to increase my

Magnesium by double, if I'm not completely misreading the article

you sent us.

> Thanks for wading through this.

> Best wishes, JP

 

 

Hi John!

I surely believe you would benefit from taking more magnesium

John! Shari Lieberman, Ph.D. advises taking 1,000 mgs for angina!

She also states that it is more bioavailable when taken in chelated

form (bound to amino acids).

In regards to your potassium supplements, apparently it is

hypothesized that calcium and vitamin D are needed to absorb

supplemental potassium.

This seems to me to be the reason why calcium is added to so many of

these supplements, however as you say it results in a totally

excessive overall intake. Also it could be that they're assuming

that your diet is high in sodium.

They say that those who eat a diet of highly processed foods with an

excessive sodium content require more calcium.Sodium competes with

calcium for absorption.

Americans who eat many refined foods require more calcium than Asian

cultures. Anyone with low protein and sodium intake may need as

little as 500 milligrams of calcium per day (which is about the

amount Japanese women consume).

Those with high protein and sodium consumption may need as much as

2000 milligrams of calcium per day.

[Principles Bone Biology, 2nd edition, Robert P. Heaney, 2002]

 

So you see that those of us who eat more fresh whole organic foods

require less calcium in any form!

 

Did those calcium supplements happen to mention the source? At one

time a few ago, I started taking Mindell's Free Life.

After noticing that they had mega amounts of various forms of

calcium I stopped using them altogether. Luckily at the same time I

was taking 1,200 of magnesium in divided doses.

 

I think calcium magnesium ratios are very critical for heart

patients. I think this was one of the things that brought me thru so

well. I paid close attention and always made sure that my magnesium

levels were elevated properly! I'm well aware of what the docs

advise, but some of the alternative books that I have come to rely

on disagree on this point! This is why a lot of people have heart

disease and why they become overmedicated as a result. The solution

is so simple, but so hard to grasp when we listen to the wrong

people.

I had nothing to lose and everything to gain so I started taking

magnesium like crazy.

The toxicity is very high for magnesium according to Shari

Lieberman, Ph.D. The fact is that most supplements have far more

calcium than magnesium.

I am currently taking standard process supplements and all of them

contain calcium, however in very minimal amounts considering that

found in other supplements..

In cases of existing heart disease, I prefer to stay on the

cautionary side.

 

I am keenly aware that excessive calcium, in supplements (calcium

is routinely overprescribed for female complaints and other things)!

Calcium supplements are not really absorbed well, unless in a liquid

form and if they're taken between meals as the govm't authorities

advise, the body usually has a problem making use of them. So unless

one has bone disease, I wouldn't advise it. Use you own discretion

however, I am just relating how I dealt with my problem and I

believe that it may be helpful for angina as well.

 

The human populations that consume the most calcium have the highest

mortality rates in the world.

There is another side to calcium that most advocates either don't

know or fail to mention.

Calcium accumulates in heart valves (mitral valve) if we take in too

much at a time and the way I understand it, this condition can be

irreversible.

 

Too much calcium not only results in calcifications, but calcium

overload can produce severe muscle spasms and cramping.

Calcium is a muscle constrictor while magnesium is a muscle

relaxant.

 

This is the main reason I took so much magnesium initially… because

it is so beneficial for relaxing the heart and arteries. This is

why it is so good for heart disease and high blood pressure ( any

existing buildup in our arteries restricts blood flow).

 

Magnesium also promotes oxygen flow to and from the heart and

promotes proper blood flow by relaxing muscles in our arteries.

A good supply of oxygen is critical for those suffereing from

arteriosclerosis

 

I know now that one of my problems was a shortage of red corpuscles

to carry the oxygen to and from the heart. Whenever we need blood

testing it is good to have this checked out as well. There are so

many other trace supplements which we should be taking, to me it is

really ludicrous to place so much emphasis on calcium when

overdosing on calcium can lead to a host of other problems.

This is one mineral that is not usually lacking in our standard

american diets.

 

If anything, we have overdosed on calcium to the exclusion of so

many other more important nutrients and this is where we run into

trouble. I think the article points to the root of heart and artery

problems. The facts maintain that the nations which consume the most

calcium, both in foods (dairy) and supplements, have some of the

highest heart attack rates in the world!

However statistics prove that when taken in a more bioavailable form

(plant foods), calcium doesn't pose near as much of a problem.

 

Calcium carbonate is the cheapest `mineral' form of calcium, the

predominant form being

(dolomite),a common cheap source of calcium in supplements today.

One of the primary characteristics of calcium carbonate is its

tendency to precipitate

" out of solution " back into its hard, rocklike form.

 

This form of calcium can and usually does accumulate in heart valves

(mitral valve).

(Dehydration, whether caused by the failure to drink enough water

(dehydration from drinking too many

carbonated soft drinks)

or taking medications…. diuretics, etc, can promote this).

Overdoses of nonorganically based elements, seen in many mineral

preparations must accumulate when they are continually taken, and

the result is usually bad in the long run. There is a lot of calcium

in most diets, and even a relatively small amount of calcium

supplementation, taken on a regular basis, can result in

undesirable, rocklike, nonbiologic deposits of calcium in the

tissues.

 

Kind Regards, JoAnn

 

PS. Just one other note about potassium. The medical profession

prescribes potassium for offsetting the risks of taking diuretics.

When researched more extensively, we find that this does not even

start to clear up the risks of taking diuretics! The result being

one very confused patient(s)! Someone I know is taking 99mgs

potassium and is scared to death of eating a banana the same day

that she takes the supplement. This sort of thinking (I'm assuming that it comes

from her doctor) is what leads to the prevalence of even more suffering and

disease!

JG

> > Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Magnesium

> > JoAnn Guest

> > Oct 22, 2004 20:07 PDT

> >

> > Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Magnesium: Relationships to

> > Atherosclerosis, Ischemic Heart Disease and Hypertension

> > http://www.mgwater.com/alturacv.shtml

[Guest guest]

JoAnn

Thanks for that reply. When Shari Lieberman, phd, says that toxicity for

magnesium is high, does that mean all forms? Should I take her remark to

mean that I shouldn't take a gram or more of magnesium? Or is the " form "

of magnesium that arouses her concern. I assume you're still taking

substantial magnesium yourself?

I just cheked, and nearly all the calcium I'm currently taking is hidden in

preparations which are named on the front of the bottle, but none of them

mention calcium. The form of calcium mentioned on the 'back " of the bottles

is something they call " di-calcium phosphate, " whatever that is. A small

amount of another form of Calcium was added to a " Bio-Flavanoid " supplement

I'm taking, and it's referred to as Calcium " sulphate. "

Thanks once again for your invaluable research.

 

JP

 

 

 

-

" JoAnn Guest " <angelprincessjo

 

Saturday, October 23, 2004 6:03 PM

Re: Cardiovascular Risk Factors and

Magnesium

 

 

 

 

, " John Polifronio "

<counterpnt@e...> wrote:

>

> Hi JoAnn

> I read through this highly complex and dense piece on the

relationship of Magnesium intake to various heart ailments. I can't

pretend that I clearly understood most of what was said, but I did

get the distinct impresion that Magnesium was critically important

to heart patients. What I'd like to know, is if it would be

advisable, based on what was revealed in this paper, to increase my

intake still higher.

I don't want to belabor the issue of my heart disease, but I got

the impression, though I'm not clear about it, that they were

advising an intake three-fold above usual dietary allowances. I

take this to mean, approx. 1.5 grams daily. I'm taking half that.

>

> I'm not sure whether it was a paper you showed us JoAnn, that

touched on a problem with Calcium supplements, where the doctor

quoted in the article, said he didn't think people should take

Calcium as a supplement.

I'm having trouble with this problem. I've stopped taking Calcium

supplements, but much to my surprise, when I went through the

supplements I was taking, many that were not " listed " as Calcium

supplements, had a lot more Calcium than I

> realized.

 

I'm currently taking a tablet, which is described as a Potassium

> supplement on the bottle, but when you check the contents in back,

it tells you that one tablet contains 99mg Potassium, but it also

contains 178mg of Calcium!; though there's no mention of Calcium on

the front of the bottle!

> When I totaled the amount of Calcium in all the supplements I was

taking, which never said a word about the Calcium content on the

front of the bottle, I came away with about 800mg of Calcium!

Astonishing. I'm going to gradually reduce this number as much as I

can, and get my Calcium from foods. But I'd like to increase my

Magnesium by double, if I'm not completely misreading the article

you sent us.

> Thanks for wading through this.

> Best wishes, JP

 

 

Hi John!

I surely believe you would benefit from taking more magnesium

John! Shari Lieberman, Ph.D. advises taking 1,000 mgs for angina!

She also states that it is more bioavailable when taken in chelated

form (bound to amino acids).

In regards to your potassium supplements, apparently it is

hypothesized that calcium and vitamin D are needed to absorb

supplemental potassium.

This seems to me to be the reason why calcium is added to so many of

these supplements, however as you say it results in a totally

excessive overall intake. Also it could be that they're assuming

that your diet is high in sodium.

They say that those who eat a diet of highly processed foods with an

excessive sodium content require more calcium.Sodium competes with

calcium for absorption.

Americans who eat many refined foods require more calcium than Asian

cultures. Anyone with low protein and sodium intake may need as

little as 500 milligrams of calcium per day (which is about the

amount Japanese women consume).

Those with high protein and sodium consumption may need as much as

2000 milligrams of calcium per day.

[Principles Bone Biology, 2nd edition, Robert P. Heaney, 2002]

 

So you see that those of us who eat more fresh whole organic foods

require less calcium in any form!

 

Did those calcium supplements happen to mention the source? At one

time a few ago, I started taking Mindell's Free Life.

After noticing that they had mega amounts of various forms of

calcium I stopped using them altogether. Luckily at the same time I

was taking 1,200 of magnesium in divided doses.

 

I think calcium magnesium ratios are very critical for heart

patients. I think this was one of the things that brought me thru so

well. I paid close attention and always made sure that my magnesium

levels were elevated properly! I'm well aware of what the docs

advise, but some of the alternative books that I have come to rely

on disagree on this point! This is why a lot of people have heart

disease and why they become overmedicated as a result. The solution

is so simple, but so hard to grasp when we listen to the wrong

people.

I had nothing to lose and everything to gain so I started taking

magnesium like crazy.

The toxicity is very high for magnesium according to Shari

Lieberman, Ph.D. The fact is that most supplements have far more

calcium than magnesium.

I am currently taking standard process supplements and all of them

contain calcium, however in very minimal amounts considering that

found in other supplements..

In cases of existing heart disease, I prefer to stay on the

cautionary side.

 

I am keenly aware that excessive calcium, in supplements (calcium

is routinely overprescribed for female complaints and other things)!

Calcium supplements are not really absorbed well, unless in a liquid

form and if they're taken between meals as the govm't authorities

advise, the body usually has a problem making use of them. So unless

one has bone disease, I wouldn't advise it. Use you own discretion

however, I am just relating how I dealt with my problem and I

believe that it may be helpful for angina as well.

 

The human populations that consume the most calcium have the highest

mortality rates in the world.

There is another side to calcium that most advocates either don't

know or fail to mention.

Calcium accumulates in heart valves (mitral valve) if we take in too

much at a time and the way I understand it, this condition can be

irreversible.

 

Too much calcium not only results in calcifications, but calcium

overload can produce severe muscle spasms and cramping.

Calcium is a muscle constrictor while magnesium is a muscle

relaxant.

 

This is the main reason I took so much magnesium initially. because

it is so beneficial for relaxing the heart and arteries. This is

why it is so good for heart disease and high blood pressure ( any

existing buildup in our arteries restricts blood flow).

 

Magnesium also promotes oxygen flow to and from the heart and

promotes proper blood flow by relaxing muscles in our arteries.

A good supply of oxygen is critical for those suffereing from

arteriosclerosis

 

I know now that one of my problems was a shortage of red corpuscles

to carry the oxygen to and from the heart. Whenever we need blood

testing it is good to have this checked out as well. There are so

many other trace supplements which we should be taking, to me it is

really ludicrous to place so much emphasis on calcium when

overdosing on calcium can lead to a host of other problems.

This is one mineral that is not usually lacking in our standard

american diets.

 

If anything, we have overdosed on calcium to the exclusion of so

many other more important nutrients and this is where we run into

trouble. I think the article points to the root of heart and artery

problems. The facts maintain that the nations which consume the most

calcium, both in foods (dairy) and supplements, have some of the

highest heart attack rates in the world!

However statistics prove that when taken in a more bioavailable form

(plant foods), calcium doesn't pose near as much of a problem.

 

Calcium carbonate is the cheapest `mineral' form of calcium, the

predominant form being

(dolomite),a common cheap source of calcium in supplements today.

One of the primary characteristics of calcium carbonate is its

tendency to precipitate

" out of solution " back into its hard, rocklike form.

 

This form of calcium can and usually does accumulate in heart valves

(mitral valve).

(Dehydration, whether caused by the failure to drink enough water

(dehydration from drinking too many

carbonated soft drinks)

or taking medications.. diuretics, etc, can promote this).

Overdoses of nonorganically based elements, seen in many mineral

preparations must accumulate when they are continually taken, and

the result is usually bad in the long run. There is a lot of calcium

in most diets, and even a relatively small amount of calcium

supplementation, taken on a regular basis, can result in

undesirable, rocklike, nonbiologic deposits of calcium in the

tissues.

 

Kind Regards, JoAnn

 

PS. Just one other note about potassium. The medical profession

prescribes potassium for offsetting the risks of taking diuretics.

When researched more extensively, we find that this does not even

start to clear up the risks of taking diuretics! The result being

one very confused patient(s)! Someone I know is taking 99mgs

potassium and is scared to death of eating a banana the same day

that she takes the supplement. This sort of thinking (I'm assuming that it

comes from her doctor) is what leads to the prevalence of even more

suffering and disease!

JG

> > Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Magnesium

> > JoAnn Guest

> > Oct 22, 2004 20:07 PDT

> >

> > Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Magnesium: Relationships to

> > Atherosclerosis, Ischemic Heart Disease and Hypertension

> > http://www.mgwater.com/alturacv.shtml

[Guest guest]

, " John Polifronio "

<counterpnt@e...> wrote:

>

> JoAnn

 

> Thanks for that reply. When Shari Lieberman, phd, says that

toxicity for magnesium is high, does that mean all forms? Should I

take her remark to mean that I shouldn't take a gram or more of

magnesium? Or is the " form " of magnesium that arouses her

concern. I assume you're still taking substantial magnesium

yourself?

 

> I just cheked, and nearly all the calcium I'm currently taking is

hidden in preparations which are named on the front of the bottle,

but none of them mention calcium.

 

The form of calcium mentioned on the 'back " of the bottles is

something they call " di-calcium phosphate, " whatever that is. A

small amount of another form of Calcium was added to a " Bio-

Flavanoid " supplement

> I'm taking, and it's referred to as Calcium " sulphate. "

> Thanks once again for your invaluable research.

> JP

 

Hi John! I believe that Shari's remark means simply that magnesium

(unlike calcium) is relatively harmless even at high dosages (3,000

to 5,000 mgs daily (although she says it may have a cathartic effect

at those levels, as found in OTC laxatives). But then again, you never really

know how much you're absorbing because calcium competes with mg for absorption!

She says that the only

ones who shouldn't take mg in high doses are those who have kidney

failure. In healthy individuals these amounts are not problematic.

The way to determine how much to take really depends on the amounts

of'elemental'mg. The other magnesium article I sent had quite a bit

to say about this. The potency is determined by the amounts of

elemental magnesium involved.

Toxicity of magnesium is established at 9,000 mgs. Although she

doesn't state, I'm assuming this means ALL forms!

And yes, I do still take substantial amounts of magnesium, although not with the

same urgency that I previously did. Now that I am able to do more of my own

cooking, I'm enjoying more magnesium rich foods. For example I try to eat

spinach and other dark green leafy things just about every day.

 

Oh BTW I did a search on di-calcium phosphate and I learned that it

is similar to coral calcium in some respects. It has trace amounts

of lead included. They found this to be true of coral calcium and I

believe this was one of the reasons that the FDA had a problem with

their claims. There were other toxic metals included as well.

Here is the rundown on it, if you're interested...

 

dicalcium phosphate:

Index Norm

 

Total Phosphorus (P) amount, %, no less than 19.5

Calcium (Ca) amount, %, no less than 25

Relative Phosphorus (P) solubility in 0.4% HCl, % 97

pH (1% solution) 6.0-7.5

Calcium and phosphorus ratio (Ca/P) 1.26-1.32

Water content (%), no more than 3

Ashes insoluble in HCl, %, no more than 10

Particle size bigger than 3 mm, %, no more than 0

Particle size from 0mm to 1mm, %, no less than 98

Arsenic (As) content, mg/kg, less than 0.5

Lead (Pb) content, mg/kg, less than 1.0

Cadmium (Cd) content, mg/kg, less than 0.1

Mercury (Hg) content, mg/kg, less than 0.05

 

 

Regards, JoAnn

[Guest guest]

Very illuminating JoAnn!

Your explanation regarding di-Calcium Phosphate, is one of the reasons I'll

be gradually ridding myself of this and other Calcium supplements. I'm

going to try between 1 and 1 & 1/2 gms, Magnesium.

Best Wishes.

JP

 

-

" JoAnn Guest " <angelprincessjo

 

Saturday, October 23, 2004 9:39 PM

Re: Cardiovascular Risk Factors and

Magnesium

 

 

>

>

> , " John Polifronio "

> <counterpnt@e...> wrote:

>>

>> JoAnn

>

>> Thanks for that reply. When Shari Lieberman, phd, says that

> toxicity for magnesium is high, does that mean all forms? Should I

> take her remark to mean that I shouldn't take a gram or more of

> magnesium? Or is the " form " of magnesium that arouses her

> concern. I assume you're still taking substantial magnesium

> yourself?

>

>> I just cheked, and nearly all the calcium I'm currently taking is

> hidden in preparations which are named on the front of the bottle,

> but none of them mention calcium.

>

> The form of calcium mentioned on the 'back " of the bottles is

> something they call " di-calcium phosphate, " whatever that is. A

> small amount of another form of Calcium was added to a " Bio-

> Flavanoid " supplement

>> I'm taking, and it's referred to as Calcium " sulphate. "

>> Thanks once again for your invaluable research.

>> JP

>

> Hi John! I believe that Shari's remark means simply that magnesium

> (unlike calcium) is relatively harmless even at high dosages (3,000

> to 5,000 mgs daily (although she says it may have a cathartic effect

> at those levels, as found in OTC laxatives). But then again, you never

> really know how much you're absorbing because calcium competes with mg for

> absorption! She says that the only

> ones who shouldn't take mg in high doses are those who have kidney

> failure. In healthy individuals these amounts are not problematic.

> The way to determine how much to take really depends on the amounts

> of'elemental'mg. The other magnesium article I sent had quite a bit

> to say about this. The potency is determined by the amounts of

> elemental magnesium involved.

> Toxicity of magnesium is established at 9,000 mgs. Although she

> doesn't state, I'm assuming this means ALL forms!

> And yes, I do still take substantial amounts of magnesium, although not

> with the same urgency that I previously did. Now that I am able to do more

> of my own cooking, I'm enjoying more magnesium rich foods. For example I

> try to eat spinach and other dark green leafy things just about every day.

>

> Oh BTW I did a search on di-calcium phosphate and I learned that it

> is similar to coral calcium in some respects. It has trace amounts

> of lead included. They found this to be true of coral calcium and I

> believe this was one of the reasons that the FDA had a problem with

> their claims. There were other toxic metals included as well.

> Here is the rundown on it, if you're interested...

>

> dicalcium phosphate:

> Index Norm

>

> Total Phosphorus (P) amount, %, no less than 19.5

> Calcium (Ca) amount, %, no less than 25

> Relative Phosphorus (P) solubility in 0.4% HCl, % 97

> pH (1% solution) 6.0-7.5

> Calcium and phosphorus ratio (Ca/P) 1.26-1.32

> Water content (%), no more than 3

> Ashes insoluble in HCl, %, no more than 10

> Particle size bigger than 3 mm, %, no more than 0

> Particle size from 0mm to 1mm, %, no less than 98

> Arsenic (As) content, mg/kg, less than 0.5

> Lead (Pb) content, mg/kg, less than 1.0

> Cadmium (Cd) content, mg/kg, less than 0.1

> Mercury (Hg) content, mg/kg, less than 0.05

>

>

> Regards, JoAnn

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hello,

 

Patrick Holford mentions in his book optimum nutrition that you should

take 3 parts Calcium and two parts magnesium.

 

Randolf Weinand

 

, " John Polifronio "

<counterpnt@e...> wrote:

>

> Very illuminating JoAnn!

> Your explanation regarding di-Calcium Phosphate, is one of the

reasons I'll

> be gradually ridding myself of this and other Calcium supplements.

I'm

> going to try between 1 and 1 & 1/2 gms, Magnesium.

> Best Wishes.

> JP

>

> -

> " JoAnn Guest " <angelprincessjo>

>

> Saturday, October 23, 2004 9:39 PM

> Re: Cardiovascular Risk

Factors and

> Magnesium

>

>

> >

> >

> > , " John

Polifronio "

> > <counterpnt@e...> wrote:

> >>

> >> JoAnn

> >

> >> Thanks for that reply. When Shari Lieberman, phd, says that

> > toxicity for magnesium is high, does that mean all forms? Should I

> > take her remark to mean that I shouldn't take a gram or more of

> > magnesium? Or is the " form " of magnesium that arouses her

> > concern. I assume you're still taking substantial magnesium

> > yourself?

> >

> >> I just cheked, and nearly all the calcium I'm currently taking is

> > hidden in preparations which are named on the front of the bottle,

> > but none of them mention calcium.

> >

> > The form of calcium mentioned on the 'back " of the bottles is

> > something they call " di-calcium phosphate, " whatever that is. A

> > small amount of another form of Calcium was added to a " Bio-

> > Flavanoid " supplement

> >> I'm taking, and it's referred to as Calcium " sulphate. "

> >> Thanks once again for your invaluable research.

> >> JP

> >

> > Hi John! I believe that Shari's remark means simply that magnesium

> > (unlike calcium) is relatively harmless even at high dosages (3,000

> > to 5,000 mgs daily (although she says it may have a cathartic effect

> > at those levels, as found in OTC laxatives). But then again, you

never

> > really know how much you're absorbing because calcium competes

with mg for

> > absorption! She says that the only

> > ones who shouldn't take mg in high doses are those who have

kidney

> > failure. In healthy individuals these amounts are not problematic.

> > The way to determine how much to take really depends on the

amounts

> > of'elemental'mg. The other magnesium article I sent had quite a bit

> > to say about this. The potency is determined by the amounts of

> > elemental magnesium involved.

> > Toxicity of magnesium is established at 9,000 mgs. Although she

> > doesn't state, I'm assuming this means ALL forms!

> > And yes, I do still take substantial amounts of magnesium, although

not

> > with the same urgency that I previously did. Now that I am able to

do more

> > of my own cooking, I'm enjoying more magnesium rich foods. For

example I

> > try to eat spinach and other dark green leafy things just about every

day.

> >

> > Oh BTW I did a search on di-calcium phosphate and I learned that it

> > is similar to coral calcium in some respects. It has trace amounts

> > of lead included. They found this to be true of coral calcium and I

> > believe this was one of the reasons that the FDA had a problem with

> > their claims. There were other toxic metals included as well.

> > Here is the rundown on it, if you're interested...

> >

> > dicalcium phosphate:

> > Index Norm

> >

> > Total Phosphorus (P) amount, %, no less than 19.5

> > Calcium (Ca) amount, %, no less than 25

> > Relative Phosphorus (P) solubility in 0.4% HCl, % 97

> > pH (1% solution) 6.0-7.5

> > Calcium and phosphorus ratio (Ca/P) 1.26-1.32

> > Water content (%), no more than 3

> > Ashes insoluble in HCl, %, no more than 10

> > Particle size bigger than 3 mm, %, no more than 0

> > Particle size from 0mm to 1mm, %, no less than 98

> > Arsenic (As) content, mg/kg, less than 0.5

> > Lead (Pb) content, mg/kg, less than 1.0

> > Cadmium (Cd) content, mg/kg, less than 0.1

> > Mercury (Hg) content, mg/kg, less than 0.05

> >

> >

> > Regards, JoAnn

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Yeah....and if you were taking 9 grams of Mg daily you would certainly know

about it. You would have diarrhea like you have never known diarrhea!

 

Take Mg to bowel tolerance.

also....take it separate from calcium for Mg benefits.

Take WITH calcium for calcium absorption

 

 

 

, " randolf_everywhere "

<Ihavean@a...> wrote:

>

>

>

>

> Hello,

>

> Patrick Holford mentions in his book optimum nutrition that you should

> take 3 parts Calcium and two parts magnesium.

>

> Randolf Weinand

>

> , " John Polifronio "

> <counterpnt@e...> wrote:

> >

> > Very illuminating JoAnn!

> > Your explanation regarding di-Calcium Phosphate, is one of the

> reasons I'll

> > be gradually ridding myself of this and other Calcium supplements.

> I'm

> > going to try between 1 and 1 & 1/2 gms, Magnesium.

> > Best Wishes.

> > JP

> >

> > -

> > " JoAnn Guest " <angelprincessjo>

> >

> > Saturday, October 23, 2004 9:39 PM

> > Re: Cardiovascular Risk

> Factors and

> > Magnesium

> >

> >

> > >

> > >

> > > , " John

> Polifronio "

> > > <counterpnt@e...> wrote:

> > >>

> > >> JoAnn

> > >

> > >> Thanks for that reply. When Shari Lieberman, phd, says that

> > > toxicity for magnesium is high, does that mean all forms? Should I

> > > take her remark to mean that I shouldn't take a gram or more of

> > > magnesium? Or is the " form " of magnesium that arouses her

> > > concern. I assume you're still taking substantial magnesium

> > > yourself?

> > >

> > >> I just cheked, and nearly all the calcium I'm currently taking is

> > > hidden in preparations which are named on the front of the bottle,

> > > but none of them mention calcium.

> > >

> > > The form of calcium mentioned on the 'back " of the bottles is

> > > something they call " di-calcium phosphate, " whatever that is. A

> > > small amount of another form of Calcium was added to a " Bio-

> > > Flavanoid " supplement

> > >> I'm taking, and it's referred to as Calcium " sulphate. "

> > >> Thanks once again for your invaluable research.

> > >> JP

> > >

> > > Hi John! I believe that Shari's remark means simply that magnesium

> > > (unlike calcium) is relatively harmless even at high dosages (3,000

> > > to 5,000 mgs daily (although she says it may have a cathartic effect

> > > at those levels, as found in OTC laxatives). But then again, you

> never

> > > really know how much you're absorbing because calcium competes

> with mg for

> > > absorption! She says that the only

> > > ones who shouldn't take mg in high doses are those who have

> kidney

> > > failure. In healthy individuals these amounts are not problematic.

> > > The way to determine how much to take really depends on the

> amounts

> > > of'elemental'mg. The other magnesium article I sent had quite a bit

> > > to say about this. The potency is determined by the amounts of

> > > elemental magnesium involved.

> > > Toxicity of magnesium is established at 9,000 mgs. Although she

> > > doesn't state, I'm assuming this means ALL forms!

> > > And yes, I do still take substantial amounts of magnesium, although

> not

> > > with the same urgency that I previously did. Now that I am able to

> do more

> > > of my own cooking, I'm enjoying more magnesium rich foods. For

> example I

> > > try to eat spinach and other dark green leafy things just about every

> day.

> > >

> > > Oh BTW I did a search on di-calcium phosphate and I learned that it

> > > is similar to coral calcium in some respects. It has trace amounts

> > > of lead included. They found this to be true of coral calcium and I

> > > believe this was one of the reasons that the FDA had a problem with

> > > their claims. There were other toxic metals included as well.

> > > Here is the rundown on it, if you're interested...

> > >

> > > dicalcium phosphate:

> > > Index Norm

> > >

> > > Total Phosphorus (P) amount, %, no less than 19.5

> > > Calcium (Ca) amount, %, no less than 25

> > > Relative Phosphorus (P) solubility in 0.4% HCl, % 97

> > > pH (1% solution) 6.0-7.5

> > > Calcium and phosphorus ratio (Ca/P) 1.26-1.32

> > > Water content (%), no more than 3

> > > Ashes insoluble in HCl, %, no more than 10

> > > Particle size bigger than 3 mm, %, no more than 0

> > > Particle size from 0mm to 1mm, %, no less than 98

> > > Arsenic (As) content, mg/kg, less than 0.5

> > > Lead (Pb) content, mg/kg, less than 1.0

> > > Cadmium (Cd) content, mg/kg, less than 0.1

> > > Mercury (Hg) content, mg/kg, less than 0.05

> > >

> > >

> > > Regards, JoAnn

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

I've read recent reports that indicate that it's not a good idea to get your

Calcium from supplements, but rather from good food sources. JoAnn has sent

me info that Magnesium is well tolerated by the body, even up to amounts

above 6 grams. I'm taking 1 to 1.5 grams of Magnesium daily, and get about

3/4 of that amount in supplements that add Calcium without mentioning it on

the front of the bottle. Years ago, Magnesium was not in the news, while

Calcium has always been. As time passed the view came to be that Magnesium

should be taken in about half the amount of Calcium. More recently, I've

read researchers that believe that Magnesium should be taken in a 1 to 1

ratio to Calcium. The most recent news I've seen, is that much Calcium in

supplemental form, is poorly handled by the body, contributes to

calcification in the arteries, and should be avoided in supplements, and

derived from a Calcium rich vegetable and fruit based diet. Nutrition, like

all genuine sciences, changes constantly.

JP

 

 

-

" defonz3 " <defonz3

 

Sunday, October 24, 2004 9:28 AM

Re: Cardiovascular Risk Factors and

Magnesium

 

 

>

>

>

> Yeah....and if you were taking 9 grams of Mg daily you would certainly

> know

> about it. You would have diarrhea like you have never known diarrhea!

>

> Take Mg to bowel tolerance.

> also....take it separate from calcium for Mg benefits.

> Take WITH calcium for calcium absorption

>

>

>

> , " randolf_everywhere "

> <Ihavean@a...> wrote:

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> Hello,

>>

>> Patrick Holford mentions in his book optimum nutrition that you should

>> take 3 parts Calcium and two parts magnesium.

>>

>> Randolf Weinand

>>

>> , " John Polifronio "

>> <counterpnt@e...> wrote:

>> >

>> > Very illuminating JoAnn!

>> > Your explanation regarding di-Calcium Phosphate, is one of the

>> reasons I'll

>> > be gradually ridding myself of this and other Calcium supplements.

>> I'm

>> > going to try between 1 and 1 & 1/2 gms, Magnesium.

>> > Best Wishes.

>> > JP

>> >

>> > -

>> > " JoAnn Guest " <angelprincessjo>

>> >

>> > Saturday, October 23, 2004 9:39 PM

>> > Re: Cardiovascular Risk

>> Factors and

>> > Magnesium

>> >

>> >

>> > >

>> > >

>> > > , " John

>> Polifronio "

>> > > <counterpnt@e...> wrote:

>> > >>

>> > >> JoAnn

>> > >

>> > >> Thanks for that reply. When Shari Lieberman, phd, says that

>> > > toxicity for magnesium is high, does that mean all forms? Should I

>> > > take her remark to mean that I shouldn't take a gram or more of

>> > > magnesium? Or is the " form " of magnesium that arouses her

>> > > concern. I assume you're still taking substantial magnesium

>> > > yourself?

>> > >

>> > >> I just cheked, and nearly all the calcium I'm currently taking is

>> > > hidden in preparations which are named on the front of the bottle,

>> > > but none of them mention calcium.

>> > >

>> > > The form of calcium mentioned on the 'back " of the bottles is

>> > > something they call " di-calcium phosphate, " whatever that is. A

>> > > small amount of another form of Calcium was added to a " Bio-

>> > > Flavanoid " supplement

>> > >> I'm taking, and it's referred to as Calcium " sulphate. "

>> > >> Thanks once again for your invaluable research.

>> > >> JP

>> > >

>> > > Hi John! I believe that Shari's remark means simply that magnesium

>> > > (unlike calcium) is relatively harmless even at high dosages (3,000

>> > > to 5,000 mgs daily (although she says it may have a cathartic effect

>> > > at those levels, as found in OTC laxatives). But then again, you

>> never

>> > > really know how much you're absorbing because calcium competes

>> with mg for

>> > > absorption! She says that the only

>> > > ones who shouldn't take mg in high doses are those who have

>> kidney

>> > > failure. In healthy individuals these amounts are not problematic.

>> > > The way to determine how much to take really depends on the

>> amounts

>> > > of'elemental'mg. The other magnesium article I sent had quite a bit

>> > > to say about this. The potency is determined by the amounts of

>> > > elemental magnesium involved.

>> > > Toxicity of magnesium is established at 9,000 mgs. Although she

>> > > doesn't state, I'm assuming this means ALL forms!

>> > > And yes, I do still take substantial amounts of magnesium, although

>> not

>> > > with the same urgency that I previously did. Now that I am able to

>> do more

>> > > of my own cooking, I'm enjoying more magnesium rich foods. For

>> example I

>> > > try to eat spinach and other dark green leafy things just about every

>> day.

>> > >

>> > > Oh BTW I did a search on di-calcium phosphate and I learned that it

>> > > is similar to coral calcium in some respects. It has trace amounts

>> > > of lead included. They found this to be true of coral calcium and I

>> > > believe this was one of the reasons that the FDA had a problem with

>> > > their claims. There were other toxic metals included as well.

>> > > Here is the rundown on it, if you're interested...

>> > >

>> > > dicalcium phosphate:

>> > > Index Norm

>> > >

>> > > Total Phosphorus (P) amount, %, no less than 19.5

>> > > Calcium (Ca) amount, %, no less than 25

>> > > Relative Phosphorus (P) solubility in 0.4% HCl, % 97

>> > > pH (1% solution) 6.0-7.5

>> > > Calcium and phosphorus ratio (Ca/P) 1.26-1.32

>> > > Water content (%), no more than 3

>> > > Ashes insoluble in HCl, %, no more than 10

>> > > Particle size bigger than 3 mm, %, no more than 0

>> > > Particle size from 0mm to 1mm, %, no less than 98

>> > > Arsenic (As) content, mg/kg, less than 0.5

>> > > Lead (Pb) content, mg/kg, less than 1.0

>> > > Cadmium (Cd) content, mg/kg, less than 0.1

>> > > Mercury (Hg) content, mg/kg, less than 0.05

>> > >

>> > >

>> > > Regards, JoAnn

>> > >

>> > >

>

[Guest guest]

Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Magnesium: Relationships to

Atherosclerosis, Ischemic Heart Disease and Hypertension

http://www.mgwater.com/alturacv.shtml

---

-----------

 

B.M. Altura, B.T. Altura

 

Department of Physiology, State University of New York Health

Science Center at Brooklyn, N.Y., USA

---

-----------

 

Key Words. Atherogenesis - Coronary vasospasm Bioenergetics,

cellular -

Dietary Mg intake - Lipid accumulation- Modulation of Ca metabolism

in cardiac and vascular muscle

 

Abstract. Hypertension and atherosclerosis are well-known precursors

of ischemic heart disease, stroke and sudden cardiac death. Although

there is general agreement that the atheroma is the hallmark of

atherosclerosis and is found in coronary obstruction, there is no

agreement as to its etiology.

 

It is now becoming clear that a lower than normal dietary intake of

Mg

can be a strong risk factor for hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias,

ischemic heart disease, atherogenesis and sudden cardiac death.

 

Deficits in serum Mg appear often to be associated with arrhythmias,

coronary vasospasm and high blood pressure. Experimental animal

studies suggest interrelationships between atherogenesis,

hypertension (both

systemic and pulmonary) and ischemic heart disease.

 

Evidence is accumulating for a role of Mg2+ in the modulation of

serum lipids and lipid uptake in macrophages, smooth muscle cells

and the arterial wall.

 

Shortfalls in the dietary intake of Mg clearly exist in

Western World populations, and men over the age of 65 years, who are

at greatest risk for development and death from ischemic heart

disease, have the greatest shortfalls in dietary Mg. It is becoming

clear that Mg exerts multiple cellular and molecular effects on

cardiac and vascular smooth muscle cells which explain its

protective actions.

 

Introduction

 

Globally, among the leading causes of death, hypertension and

atherosclerosis rank at the top of the list. These cardiovascular

diseases, obviously, are the forerunners or precursors of ischemic

heart

disease, stroke and sudden cardiac death.

 

Among mortality and morbidity indices for man, ischemic heart

disease ranks at the top of the list. In the industrialized world

ischemic heart disease is the leading killer and accounts for

approximately 35% of all deaths each year. The incidence of this

disorder rises to 80% in people over 70 years of age. The most

common cause of death results from

insufficient coronary blood flow.

 

Some deaths can occur rather suddenly, for example, sudden-death

ischemic heart disease. Possibly, as many as 40-60% of the latter

may occur in the complete absence of any prior atherosclerosis,

thrombus

formations or cardiac arrhythmias [for review, see 1].

 

These syndromes are often referred to as nonocclusive sudden-death

ischemic heart disease. Other forms of ischemic heart disease can

result in death as a consequence of an acute coronary occlusion or

ventricular fibrillation,

whereas others are still thought to come about from slow,

progressive occlusion of coronary vessels over a period of weeks to

years.

 

Although there is general agreement that the atheroma is the

hallmark of atherosclerosis and is found in coronary obstruction,

there is no

agreement at present as to either the characterization of the early

intimal changes or their etiology.

 

Hallmarks of Atherosclerosis

 

Irrespective of the etiology of atheromas, the lesions usually

consist

of a fibrous cap containing smooth muscle cells, macrophages, foam

cells and lymphocytes [for reviews, see 2, 31.

 

In addition, there appears formation of dangerous necrotic centers

consisting of cholesterol crystals, cholesterol esters, calcium ions

and dying foam cells. What produces these characteristics is not

completely known.

 

Although vascular smooth muscle cells in atheromas change from a

contractile to a noncontractile state and become responsive to

platelet-derived growth factor and elaborate connective tissue, no

one knows how these cells are transformed.

 

Finally, although T lymphocytes, platelets, neutrophils and

macrophages

are found in developing atherosclerotic plaques, it is not known

what allows such cells to enter the vessel wall or be attracted to

the potential plaque site.

 

Theories on the Etiology of Hypertension

 

Although many theories have been suggested in the etiology of

hypertension, it is not known why peripheral blood vessels exhibit

increased responsiveness to pressor substances [for review, see 4].

It is not known why peripheral blood vessels undergovasoconstriction

either.

 

And, of course, it is not known why hypertension leads to a high

incidence of strokes and sudden cardiac death.

 

Is it possible that the atherosclerotic and hypertensive events are

related to the diet or the dietary intake of a particular food

substance, metabolite or element? Are these vascular disease

processes

related to mineral metabolism, per se?

 

Why is the incidence of hypertension, atherosclerosis, sudden-death

ischemic heart disease and stroke low, in South African Bantu

natives,

Bedouins in the Arabian desert, Aborigines in Australia and

Greenlanders?

 

And why, when these indigenous populations move to Western

civilizations, do the incidences of these cardiovascular diseases

equal

those of Western civilized populations?

 

Relation of Soil Magnesium Content and Water Hardness to Incidence

of

Cardiovascular Disease

 

If one divides the US into Eastern and Western halves, you begin to

see several interesting phenomena. First, the soil Mg content in the

Eastern USA is about one third that of the Western USA (table 1).

Second, the water hardness of the Eastern USA is one half that of

the Western USA (table 1).

 

Third, although the death rate for cardiovascular diseases in the

Eastern USA is significantly higher than that of the Western USA,

noncardiovascular death rates are equivalent (table 1). Similar

phenomena have been observed in Canada, Finland and South Africa [6-

11].

In 1983, Leary and Reves [10] published findings from 12 magisterial

districts in South Africa demonstrating that as the concentration of

Mg

in the drinking water was found to be less and less, in various

geographical regions, the death rate from ischemic heart disease was

seen to rise more and more. Studies such as these and others like

them [6-9, 11] suggest that maybe there is an important relationship

between dietary Mg intake and the incidence of heart disease.

 

 

Importance of Dietary Mg versus Ca Intake

 

Approximately, 12 years ago, Karppanen et al. [12] in Finland

published interesting findings in which it was suggested that the

ratio of dietary calcium to magnesium may be linked to ischemic

heart disease. According to the most recent USA dietary surveys, the

Ca:Mg ratio in average American diets is rising [ 13].

 

Incidence of Hypomagnesemia in Hospitalized Patients: Possible

Relationship to Incidence of Cardiovascular Disease

 

During the past 10 years, a considerable number of studies have

appeared which indicate that hospitalized patients have incidences

of hypomagnesemia ranging from 7 to 60%, depending upon the type of

patient [for reviews, see [1, 14].

 

What is particularly important to note here is that many of these

patients are in acute coronary care units and intensive care units.

Many of these patients present with numerous cardiovascular

abnormalities

including cardiac arrhythmias, atrial fibrillation, hypertension,

strokes and myocardial infarctions.

 

Deficit of Myocardial Mg Content and Ischemic Heart Disease

 

Ever since the early studies of Iseri et al. [15] in 1952, there has

been an increasing number of case reports and studies which indicate

that hearts of patients who die of sudden-death ischemic heart

disease

exhibit deficits of Mg [for reviews, see 9, 11, 14]. On the average.

there appears to be about a 20% deficit in cardiac Mg content in

these patients.

 

Mg is the only metal to be decreased to this extent consistently. It

is important to note that we and others have found that coronary

arteries of such victims often exhibit deficits of 30-40% in total

Mg content. These deficits in Mg content do not appear to be a

consequence of cardiac necrosis for several reasons. First of all,

nonnecrosed cardiac tissue areas clearly exhibit approximately the

same 20% reduction in myocardial Mg, unlike the necrotic areas which

can exhibit deficits of almost 50% in Mg content of [9, 11, 16-181.

 

Anginal History and Myocardial Mg Content

 

It is rather interesting to note that patients with a history of

angina on autopsy exhibit severe cardiac deficits in Mg, whereas

patients without a history of angina appear to exhibit a near-normal

myocardial Mg content .

 

Is deficiency of myocardial Mg limited only to angina

pectoris and sudden-death ischemic heart disease, or is Mg

deficiency also found in other myocardial syndromes?

 

Loss of Myocardial Mg in Cardiac lschemic Syndromes

 

An examination of the literature reveals a growing body of evidence

to indicate that loss of myocardial Mg is seen in a host of

myocardial lschemic syndromes from myocardial infarction,

arrhythmias, torsades de pointes to experimental and iatrogenic

ischemic injuries [for reviews,

see 9, 11, 14]. Many of these are clearly associated with prior

histories of atherosclerosis and/or hypertension.

 

Hypertensive Vascular Disease and Mg Deficiency

 

Is hypertensive disease associated with Mg deficiency in blood

and/or tissues? If so, hypertensive disease should be brought about

in some cases solely by Mg deficiency, and hypertension should be

exacerbated by Mg deficiency. Finally, a variety of hypertensive

syndromes should be amenable to treatment with Mg salts.

 

At this point, we would like to take the opportunity to review some

of this evidence, including some of our own findings.

 

A number of studies in spontaneously hypertensive rats clearly

demonstrate (except for one study by Overlack et al. [20]) that the

serum content of total Mg is significantly reduced in hypertensive

animals [for review, see 21].

 

An examination of most of the clinical studies on hypertensive

patients,

so far studied, who received diuretics, where blood pressure often

continued to rise, demonstrates that serum Mg is clearly, reduced by

about 15-20% [for review, see 21].

 

A few years ago, Resnick et al. [22] examined red blood cells from

hypertensive subjects and found that the ionized Mg2+ determined by

31P

nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy was inversely related

to

the diastolic blood pressure. That is. the greater the elevation in

diastolic blood pressure, the lower the ionized red blood cell Mg2+

content [22].

 

Salt-Induced Hypertension and Mg

 

If all of this is so, then even salt-induced hypertension might be

expected to be associated with Mg deficiency and should be treatable

with Mg salts.

 

We, therefore, utilized various groups of uninephrectomized male

Wistar rats given weekly implants of deoxycorticosterone acetate in

order to produce malignant salt-induced hypertension. Some animals

were allowed to drink Mg aspartate HCl freely, daily, for periods up

to 12 weeks.

Others were allowed to drink the Mg salt 4 weeks after salt

hypertension for an additional 12 weeks.

 

Table 2 summarizes some of our data. By 3 weeks, mean arterial blood

pressure was elevated in all deoxycorticosterone acetate + salt

groups.

However, by 9 weeks, the groups which received Mg supplements

exhibited significant lowering of blood pressure.

 

Many of the untreated animals with malignant hypertension died at 4-

7 weeks of blood pressure levels in excess of 245 mm Hg.

 

Figure 1 clearly shows that there is a deficit in serum Mg in

uninephrectomized rats with salt-induced hypertension and that serum

Mg levels are restored to normal in rats allowed to drink Mg.

 

 

Interestingly, serum phosphate levels are also reduced in animals

with malignant hypertension, whereas rats given Mg exhibit a

restoration of phosphate to normal levels. Hypophosphatemia itself

is known to produce high blood pressure. Whether or not this

contributes to salt-induced hypertension in these animals is under

investigation.

---

-----------

 

 

 

---

-----------

 

 

In view of these experiments, we wondered whether pulmonary

hypertension

is amenable to Mg therapy and whether the vascular remodeling that

normally takes place in the pulmonary circulation in this syndrome

can

be ameliorated or prevented by Mg. Rats were administered 40 mg/kg

of

monocrotaline. This plant extract is known to produce specific

pulmonary

hypertension in all mammals so far investigated, and a pulmonary,

vascular remodelling takes place within 14-21 days. We examined all

animals 21 days after monocrotaline [23].

 

Animals which received monocrotaline exhibited significant elevation

in

pulmonary blood pressure [23]. Controls and control animals which

received oral Mg aspartate HCl exhibited no alteration in pulmonary

pressure. However, monocrotaline-treated animals which received Mg

aspartate HCl for 21 days exhibited a significant amelioration of

pulmonary hypertension [23].

 

If true pulmonary hypertension is observed in human subjects or

animals, the right ventricular to left ventricular ratio should be

elevated. Our monocrotaline- treated animals clearly manifested a

right ventricular to left ventricular ratio that was increased as

expected [23].

 

The monocrotaline-treated animals, however, which received Mg

therapy, clearly exhibited reduction in the elevated right

ventricular to left ventricular ratio suggesting a reversal of the

pulmonary hypertension

[23, 24].

 

If the latter is true, then we would expect to see attenuation of

the pulmonary hyperplasia of the arterial wall normally seen in

pulmonary hypertension.

 

Arteriolar and arterial walls clearly underwent significant

hyperplasia,

after monocrotaline, with encroachment of the lumens [23-25]. Mg

therapy, reversed the monocrotaline-induced hyperplasia. Obviously,

elevated levels of Mg must exert significant attenuating effects on

collagen and elastin synthesis and smooth muscle cell hyperplasia

[23-25].

These actions might therefore be of value in the treatment of

atherosclerosis.

 

Genetic Predisposition to Hypertension and Tissue Mg Levels

 

Is there any evidence to indicate that teenagers, that is children

below

the age of 20 years, may exhibit Mg deficits which could be a risk

factor for the development of hypertensive vascular disease?

 

In the past 2 years, a group in Japan (headed by Shibutani in Hyogo

Medical College) has begun to publish a number of reports which

suggest

that male children of parents with a genetic history of familial

hypertension exhibit significant deficits in red blood cell Mg

content

[26]. This may be the first study to clearly suggest that a

predilection for high blood pressure could develop in young males

if, genetically, they exhibit deficits in tissue Mg.

 

Dietary Mg Intake and Atherogenesis

 

If atherosclerosis is a strong risk factor for hypertension,

ischemic

heart disease and stroke, and these are truly interrelated, then Mg

should exert strong effects on atherogenesis. We, therefore, decided

to examine rabbits given 1 or 2% cholesterol with varying Mg intake

[27].

 

The Mg intake was varied from 40% of normal to normal or 2.5 times

the normal intake. The animals were followed serially for up to 10

weeks.

Aortas were excised and stained with Sudan 4 and examined

histologically for lesions.

 

No lesions could be found from rabbits ingesting normal chow with

normal lipid and Mg intake or normal synthetic chow [27].

 

High cholesterol intake in the presence of normal dietary Mg

resulted in significant atherosclerotic lesions.

 

The animals receiving low dietary Mg and 2% cholesterol exhibited

lesions far in excess of those observed with normal Mg intake [27].

However, if the intake of Mg was raised to 2.5 times normal, despite

the high cholesterol intake, the atheromas were greatly attenuated,

suggesting that Mg intake can modulate atherogenesis.

 

Overall, the data clearly indicate that the greater the lipid

intake, the greater the number of atherosclerotic lesions [27]. In

addition,

these data indicate that the lower the dietary intake of Mg, the

greater the risk for developing atheromas.

Stating this another way, it is also clear that the higher the

intake of Mg, the less chance for developing atheromas despite high

lipid intake.

 

Our data would seem to suggest that Mg must exert significant

effects on smooth muscle, macrophage and monocyte accumulation of

lipids and might affect chemotaxis and the activity of growth

factors implicated in atherogenesis.

 

If this is all true, then dietary intake of Mg would be an important

and maybe critical factor in the prevention of atherosclerosis,

hypertension, cardiac disease, stroke and sudden cardiac death. In

addition, such a hypothesis would suggest that a suboptimal dietary

intake of Mg should put human subjects at risk for development of

cardiovascular disease.

 

Progressive Decline in Dietary Intake of Mg over the Past 90 Years

 

It is rather interesting that if one examines the intake of Mg over

the past 90 years, we note that there is a progressive and alarming

decline in Mg intake at the present time (table 3).

 

An examination of a recent US Department of Agriculture HANES

dietary survey reported in 1985 indicates clear and significant

shortfalls in

dietary Mg, assuming an intake of 350 mg/day is needed for normal Mg

balance [13]. It is also clear from this survey that men over the

age of

65 years, who are known to present the greatest risk for death from

ischemic heart disease (vide supra), exhibit the greatest shortfalls

for

dietary Mg of all male age groups. This may be more than

coincidental.

 

Protective Mechanisms of Mg Action against Death from Ischemic Heart

Disease

 

If Mg can ameliorate atherosclerosis and hypertension, and promote

coronary vasodilation and unloading of the heart (8, 9, 11,14, 21],

are

these the primary mechanisms of the protective actions of magnesium

ions

against death from ischemic heart disease, or does Mg exert direct

actions on myocardial bioenergetics as well [14, 21]? We will

therefore

present and discuss some of our recent experiments on intact

perfused

hearts which may have direct bearing on this question.

 

31P NMR Spectroscopy, Myocardial Bioenergetics, [Mg2+]i and [pH]i

 

In order to get an assessment of cellular bioenergetics, we have

employed 31P NMR spectroscopy and near-infrared spectroscopy [28,

29].

When the perfusate magnesium ion concentration is elevated to

hypermagnesemic levels (2.4-4.8 mM), coronary flow, stroke volume,

cardiac output and aortic pressure are seen to rise rather

significantly, suggesting that Mg ions can exhibit inotropic-like

effects. At the same time, the heart rate and rate-pressure product

are

decreased, suggesting that Mg unloads the heart and increases its

efficiency.

 

The 31P NMR spectra for elevated magnesium indicated that elevated

[Mg2+]o results in elevated phosphocreatine levels (by 22-40%).

Second,

inorganic phosphate levels were decreased, and there were chemical

shifts in the 31P NMR spectra produced by elevated Mg [28, 29].

 

Clearly, elevated Mg resulted in spectral shifts, which suggest that

alterations in myocardial intracellular, free Mg ions and

intracellular

pH must have occurred. Elevation in [Mg2+]o (i.e. 2.4-4.8 mM)

clearly

resulted in elevation of intracellular, free Mg ions and

alkalinization

of the cytosol. Elevation of the intracellular pH in the presence of

elevation of intracellular, free Mg ions would increase the creatine

kinase reaction, resulting in more phosphocreatine, contractile

force

and stroke volume, exactly as we have observed.

 

It was clear from our data that elevation in extracellular Mg ions

to

4.8 mM resulted in a 40% rise in phosphocreatine.

 

 

Influence of [Mg2+]o on Mitochondrial Levels of Cytochrome Oxidase

and

Oxymyoglobin

 

Using a noninvasive near-infrared spectroscopic technique, we have

clearly found that the mitochondrial levels of oxidized cytochrome

aa3

and oxymyoglobin are increased by elevation in extracellular Mg ions

31P

NMR [28]. These data coupled with the data suggest that the

efficiency

of the myocardium is enhanced by Mg ions.

 

Reduction in [Mg2+]o Results in Myocardial Cellular Reduction in

[Mg2+]i, [pH]i, Oxymyoglobin and Oxidized Cytochrome aa3

 

If, however, the extracellular Mg ions are reduced below normal, the

cytosol becomes acidic and the intracellular free Mg ion level is

significantly altered [30].

 

Preliminary experiments indicate that reduction in extracellular Mg

ions

or hypomagnesemia leads to rapid falls in oxymyoglobin levels.

Finally,

our recent near-infrared experiments indicate that subjection of

intact

rat hearts to hypomagnesemia clearly, results in increased

mitochondrial

levels of reduced cytochrome oxidase aa3.

 

Conclusions

 

It is becoming clear that a large body of epidemiologic data

supports

the idea that lower than normal dietary intake of Mg can be a strong

risk factor for hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias, ischemic heart

disease and sudden cardiac death. Lower than normal myocardial and

coronary vascular Mg content seems to pose serious risks for angina,

coronary vasospasm, ischemic heart disease and sudden cardiac death.

 

Deficits in serum Mg appear often to be associated with arrhythmias,

coronary vasospasm and high blood pressure.

 

Experimental animal studies seem to suggest interrelationships

between

atherogenesis, hypertension and ischemic heart disease. Evidence is

clearly accumulating to implicate a role for Mg in the modulation of

serum lipids, lipid uptake in macrophages, smooth muscle cells and

the

arterial wall.

 

There clearly appear to be considerable shortfalls in dietary intake

of

Mg in Western world populations, and that men over the age of 65

years,

who are at greatest risk for death from ischemic heart disease, have

the

greatest shortfalls in dietary Mg.

 

Although Mg clearly influences calcium uptake and distribution in

vascular smooth muscle cells which can modulate vasomotor tone [3,

9,

14, 21, 28, 31-33], it is now becoming clear that Mg ions can

directly

alter myocardial cellular bioenergetics and influence (possibly

dictate)

efficiency of the myocardium. Noninvasive techniques such as 31P NMR

spectroscopy, near-infrared spectroscopy and image analysis should

aid

in the clarification of the role of Mg as an important risk factor

in

cardiovascular disease.

 

Acknowledgement

 

The original work received herein was supported in part by NIAAA

research grant AA-08674.

 

References

 

1 Altura BM: Ischemic heart disease and magnesium. Magnesium

1988;7:57-67.

 

2 Ross R: The pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. N Engl J Med

1986;314:488-500.

 

3 Lee KT, Onodera K. Tanaka K (eds): Atherosclerosis II. Recent

Progress

in Atherosclerosis Research. Ann NY Acad Sci 1990;598:1-589.

 

4 Laragh J, Brenner BM: Hypertension: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis and

Management. New York, Raven Press, 1990, vol 1 and 11.

 

5 Masironi R: Geochemistry and cardiovascular diseases. Philos Trans

R

Soc Lond 1979;288:193-203.

 

6 Marier J, Neri LC, Anderson TW: Water hardness, human health and

importance of magnesium, rep No 17581. Ottawa, Natl Res Council

Canada,1979.

 

7 Marier J, Neri LC: Quantifying the role of magnesium in the

interrelationship between human mortality/morbidity and water

hardness.

Magnesium 1985;4:53-59.

 

8 Altura BM: Magnesium and regulation of contractility: in Altura BM

(ed): Advances in Microcirculation: Regulation of the

Microcirculation.

Basel, Karger. 1982, pp 77-113.

 

9 Altura BM, Altura BT: Magnesium-calcium interaction and

contraction of

arterial smooth muscle in ischemic heart diseases, hypertension and

vasospastic disorders. in Wester P (ed): Electrolytes and the Heart.

New

York, Transmedica, 1983, pp 41-56.

 

10 Leary, WP, Reyes AJ: Magnesium and sudden death. S Afr Med J

1983;64:697-698.

 

11 Altura BM, Altura BT: New perspectives on the role of magnesium

in

the pathophysiology of the cardiovascular system. I. Clinical

aspects.

Magnesium 1985;4:226-244.

 

12 Karppanen HR. Pennanen R. Passinen L: Minerals, coronary heart

disease and sudden coronary death. Adv Cardiol 1978;25:9-24.

 

13 Morgan KJ, Stampley GE, Zabik ME, Fischer DR: Magnesium and

calcium

intakes in the US population. J Am Coll Nutr 1985;4:195-206.

 

14 Altura BM, Altura BT: Magnesium and the cardiovascular system:

Experimental and clinical aspects updated: in Sigel H, Sigel A

(eds):

Metal Ions in Biological Systems. New York, Dekker, 1990, vol 26:

Compendium on Magnesium: Its Physiology, Biochemistry, and

Nutrition. pp

359-416.

 

15 lseri LC, Alexander EC, MacCaughey RS, Boyle AJ, Meyers G: Water

and

electrolyte content of cardiac and skeletal muscle in heart failure

and

myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 1952;43:215-227.

 

16 Heggtveit MA, Tanser P, Hunt B: Magnesium content of normal and

ischemic hearts. Proc 7th Int Congr Clin Pathol, Montreal, 1969, p

53.

 

17 Speich M, Bousquet B, Nicholas G, Delajartre AY: Incidences de

l'infarctus du myocarde sur les teneurs en magnesium plasmatique

erythrocytaire et cardiaque. Rev Fr Endocrinol Clin 1979;20:159-163.

 

18 Speich M, Bousquet B, Nicholas G: Concentrations of magnesium,

calcium, potassium and sodium in human heart muscle after acute

myocardial infarction. Clin Chem 1980;26:1662-1665.

 

19 Johnson CJ, Peterson DR, Smith EK: Myocardial tissue

concentration of

magnesium and potassium in men dying suddenly from ischemic heart

diease. Am J Clin Nutr 1979;32:967-970.

 

20 Overlack A, Zenzen JG, Ressel C, Muller HM, Stumpe KO: Influence

of

magnesium on blood pressure and the effect of nifedipine in rats.

Hypertension 1987;9:139-143.

 

21 Altura BM, Altura BT: Role of magnesium in pathogenesis of

hypertension. Relationship to its actions on cardiac and vascular

smooth

muscle: in Laragh JH, Brenner BM (eds): Hypertension:

Pathophysiology.

Diagnosis and Management. New York, Raven Press, vol 1, 1990, pp

1003-1025.

 

22 Resnick LM, Gupta RK, Laragh JH: lntracellular magnesium in

erythrocytes of essential hypertension relation to blood pressure

and

serum divalent cations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1984;81:6511-6515.

 

23 Mathew R, Gloster ES, Altura BT, Altura BM: Magnesium aspartate

hydrochloride attenuates monocrotaline pulmonary artery hypertension

in

rats. Clin Sci 1988;75:661-667.

 

24 Mathew R, Altura BM: Magnesium and the lungs. Magnesium

1988:7:173-187.

 

25 Mathew R, Altura BT, Altura BM: Strain differences in pulmonary

hypertensive response to monocrotaline alkaloid and the beneficial

effect of oral magnesium treatment. Magnesium 1989;8:110-116.

 

26 Shibutani Y, Sakamoto MK, Katsuno S, Yoshimoto S, Matsura T:

Serum

and erythrocyte magnesium levels in junior high school students:

Relation to blood pressure and a family history of hypertension.

Magnesium 1988;7:188-194.

 

27 Altura BT, Brost M, Bloom S, Barbour RL, Stempak JK, Altura BM:

Magnesium dietary intake modulates blood lipid levels. Proc Natl

Acad

Set USA 1990;87:1840-1844.

 

28 Altura BM, Barbour RL, Reiner SD, Zhang A, Cheng TP, Down JL,

Gupta

RK, Wu F, Altura BT: Influence of Mg2+ on distribution of ionized

Ca2+

in vascular smooth muscle and on cellular bioenergetics and

intracellular free Mg2+ and pH in perfused hearts probed by digital

imaging microscopy, 31P NMR and reflectance spectroscopy: in Zhakari

S,

Witt E (eds): Imaging Techniques in Alcohol Research. Monograph 21,

Washington, NIAAA, pp 235-272.

 

29 Barbour RL, Altura BM, Reiner SD, Dowd TL, Gupta RK, Wu F, Altura

BT:

Influence of Mg2+ on cardiac performance, intracellular free Mg2+

and pH

in perfused hearts as assessed with 31P-NMR spectroscopy. Magnes

Trace

Elem 1992;10:99-116.

 

30 Barbour RL, Gupta RK, Dowd TL, Reiner SD, Wu F, Altura BT, Altura

BM:

Response of cardiac energetics to elevated and low magnesium in

perfused

rat hearts. J Magn Reson Imaging, in press.

 

31 Altura BM, Altura BT: Magnesium and vascular tone and reactivity.

Blood Vessels 1978;15:5-16.

 

32 Altura BM, Altura BT: Magnesium, electrolyte transport and

coronary

vascular tone. Drugs 1984; 28(suppl 1): 120-142.

 

33 Altura BM, Altura BT, Carella A, Turlapaty PDMV: Ca2+ coupling in

vascular smooth muscle: Mg2+ and buffer effects on contractility and

membrane Ca2+ movements. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 1982;60:459-482.

 

Prof. Dr. B.M. Altura

Box 31

SUNY Health Science Center 450 Clarkson Avenue

Brooklyn, NY 11203 (USA)

 

---

-----------

 

 

THE MAGNESIUM WEB SITE

 

>From the 1996 FDA Science Forum. Abstract.

---

 

 

http://www.mgwater.com/mgrda.shtml

 

Is the RDA for Magnesium Too Low?

N.A. Littlefield and B.S. Hass, NCTR, FDA, Jefferson AR 72079

 

Since magnesium (Mg), an essential nutrient, is abundant in the

environment and food supply, it is generally assumed that Mg

deficiency is not a problem.

 

However, the literature indicates that deficiencies may exist in

both

thirdworld and industrialized nations and may influence cardiac and

vascular diseases, diabetes, bone deterioration, renal failure,

hypothyroidism, and stress.

 

Because Mg in certain forms is not easily absorbed and no classical

symptoms exist, the problem of Mg deficiency is readily masked,

especially in high risk groups such as diabetics, alcoholics, those

taking hypertension medication, and some athletes.

 

The current Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) for the US is 6

mg/Kg/day,

which translates to 420 mg for a 70 Kg man. The estimated intake in

the US is 300 mg/day.

 

Studies show that as much as 3 times this amount may be needed by

the

general population and especially by those predisposed to cardiac

disease states. This report summarizes recent research on Mg in

human diets and the results of Mg deficiencies.