Interesting article about magnesium

[Pat]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carolyn-d ... 40931.html

[Gabes-Apg]

Pat
great article thanks for posting

My nutritionist said the same thing, now that I am doing large Magnesium supplementation, I have reduced the Vit D3 supplementation a bit. I will get the Vit d3 level tested in Aug/Sept and see what it is.

Having reduced inflammation, and minimal histamine reactions, my body wont be chewing through the Vit D3 as much.

[MarthaE]

How can I get enough magnesium with all my food allergies and problems with D? The D problem keeps me from magnesium.

[Gabes-Apg]

soak feet in epsom salts
use magnesium spray on legs/back
Zizzle uses a magnesium cream as deodorant.

A quick google search 'Magnesium skin' brought up a heap of results
one good example
http://www.ancient-minerals.com/transde ... w-topical/

for those that can take some oral take small doses periodically through the day (not large dose at once)

[MarthaE]

Thanks Gabes!

[Gabes-Apg]

There is even a book about it!
http://drsircus.com/books/e-book/transd ... m-therapy/

[MarthaE]

Awesome!

[Pat]

Thanks, Gabes. This is why it is so important not to put some of the lotions on our bodies. It is all absorbed through the skin!

Pat

[Zizzle]

I use Life-flo Magnesium oil as my deodorant. Works great! 2 squirts under and around each armpit. I rub it in almost down to my elbows.

[Gabes-Apg]

So True Pat

This is why it is so important not to put some of the lotions on our bodies. It is all absorbed through the skin!

This is why i cant use any product that has Soy Based Vit E in it!
and avoid shampoos with wheatgerm and Oat (which alot of the 'organic' shampoos have)

[Pat]

Zizzle,

I looked in my cabinet full of supplements that I have saved and found I had some Life-flo magnesium. I have to be careful not to shave right before I put it on though. It burns!!!! I try to shave at a different time and it works. Thanks for the suggestion!

Pat

[Zizzle]

More on the Magnesium- Vitamin D controversy.

http://gotmag.org/the-vitamin-d-controversy/

So if I have a D level of 40 now, how much D3 should I take daily, and how much mag glycinate? And how much calcium? I'm so confused!! I also bought a Vit K supplement. Do I take these together or at different times?/

[tex]

Zizzle,

There appears to be a lot of good information in that article. But it also contains some half-truths that distort the true picture (obviously done to support his agenda).

Given that Vit-D is a Hormone, it’s worth noting that ALL Hormones have a Target Cell and a Target Mission. Vit-D’s Target Cells are the Intestines, and its Target Mission is to have the Intestines ABSORB MORE CALCIUM AND PUT IT INTO THE BLOOD STREAM, AT THE EXPENSE OF MAGNESIUM ABSORPTION…

The claim that the intestines are THE target of vitamin D is a distortion of the truth. Vitamin D has many targets in the body. From page 38 of my book:

Vitamin D affects many organs in the body.
In order for vitamin D to have an effect, vitamin D receptors must be present of course, and vitamin D receptors (VDRs) can be found in organs such as bone, skeletal muscle, heart muscle, cartilage, intestines, brain, thyroid, adrenals, kidneys, liver, reproductive organs, retina, hair follicles, fat tissue, and others. In addition, researchers have pinpointed at least 2,776 locations in the human genome where vitamin D receptors can be found, and they have determined that vitamin D receptors can change the expression of at least 229 genes, in response to vitamin D.16 That's an extremely broad range of influence, to say the least. The ability to alter gene expression carries almost incomprehensible significance.

Here's reference 16 from that quote:

16. Ramagopalan, S. V., Heger, A., Berlanga, A. J., Maugeri, N. J., Lincoln, M. R., Burrell, A., . . . Knight, J. C. (2010). A ChIP-seq defined genome-wide map of vitamin D receptor binding: Associations with disease and evolution. Genome Research 20, 1,352–1,360. Advance online publication. doi:10.1101/gr.107920.110

Likewise, the claim that "its Target Mission is to have the Intestines ABSORB MORE CALCIUM AND PUT IT INTO THE BLOOD STREAM, AT THE EXPENSE OF MAGNESIUM ABSORPTION…" is just his opinion, and not based on fact. It's only one of vitamin D's missions. There are many others, and most of them appear to be associated with the immune system, not mineral absorption. Furthermore, his statement that vitamin D is a hormone, is not quite accurate, because only the active form is a hormone. Again, he's using half-truths to make his point, and by omission, that makes his claims somewhat misleading. And he totally avoids mentioning the primary reason why the fact that the active form of vitamin D is a hormone is so critically important. To illustrate what I mean, here's a description of vitamin D's hormonal function (from pages 56–57) in the book.

Vitamin D is actually a hormone.
In fact, the active form of vitamin D, 1,25(OH)2D3, is a steroid hormone, while the inactive form, 25(OH)D3, can be described as a precursor to a hormone. But before hormones can serve any useful purpose in the body, they must be able to relay their molecular information and instructions, and they do this by binding to specialized proteins called receptors. In humans (and in fact, in all vertebrates), there are five major categories of steroid hormone receptors. They are known as androgen receptors, estrogen receptors, glucocorticoid receptors, mineralocorticoid receptors, and progestin receptors.

Each type is specialized to match the needs of the hormones that it binds with. In the case of the glucocorticoid receptors, they contain nuclear receptors, and this is important to our discussion here, because the active form of vitamin D is a nuclear hormone. For anyone not familiar with this designation, no, a "nuclear" hormone is not radioactive. "Nuclear", in this case, simply refers to the fact that cells in this group are of a type that have a membrane-enclosed nucleus that contains most of their genetic material.

The unique characteristic of nuclear receptors that distinguishes them from other types of receptors is their ability to directly bind with DNA and modify gene expression. Nuclear receptors are able to sense and bind to certain hormones such as cortisol, thyroid, and vitamin D. These hormones act as ligands and activate the respective receptors. For biological purposes, a ligand is simply a substance (typically a small molecule) that binds with a biologically-active (meaning that it is produced by a living organism) molecule in order to form a complex that serves a biological purpose.

Since nuclear receptors have the ability to bind directly to DNA, this means that when they are properly activated, the receptors are able to regulate the expression of adjacent genes. In other words, when the presence of a specific type of hormone is detected, and binding occurs, this activates the receptor, and the corresponding gene is either up-regulated or down-regulated, according to the normal function of the hormone

.

It's the ability to alter gene response! That's why the hormonal abilities of the active form of vitamin D are so important.

Still, despite the glitches, IMO, there is a lot of valuable information in the article. This statement, for example, I find very interesting, because it appears to describe what happened to me this summer, when my vitamin D level crashed (while my serum calcium was somewhat elevated).

Because the body in its innate wisdom KNOWS that there is TOO MUCH CALCIUM in the blood, so it is keeping the Storage Vit-D level low for two reasons: 1) there’s too much Calcium already in the blood; and 2) there’s not enough Magnesium to flip the Storage-D into Active-D.

I wish he had noted a reference for that. How does it know? Did he just guess? He makes the claim as if it's a commonly known fact, but that certainly is not the case. Did you know it? I didn't.

There are a lot of other observations that could be questioned, but to cut to the chase, his recommendations on how to deal with this issue leave a heck of a lot to be desired, IMO.

Final comments, what to do? Get more sunshine! Up your Mg supplementation! And should you live near the North Pole or the Upper Midwest), do what your Scandinavian Ancestors did for thousands of years: eat foods that are infused with not just Magnesium, but also Vit-A, and Vit-K which are essential co-factors for the proper metabolism of Vit-D — and how many practitioners have commented on that critical aspect of Vit-D metabolism?!? Aside from Chris Masterjohn, PhD, and Carolyn Dean, MD, ND, the chorus is very, very thin. CAVEAT EATOR!

So, please eat grass-fed Liver, free-range eggs, wild-caught deep-sea fish. These are rich sources of the key nutrients noted above. The last thing I would be putting in my body, or the bodies of my clients, is a synthetically derived “Vitamin” that is made from sheep-skin oil (Lanolin) that is exposed to UV-B light in a factory. It doesn’t sound too natural to me, so I prefer the form that has worked flawlessly on this Planet for thousands of years, and seems to work on most continents outside of North America…

Obviously, running around without much clothing is not going to work very well in the winter, and unfortunately, it's not practical for most of us to eat like an Eskimo, or prehistorical Nordic explorers.

This guy is a bit too primitive to suit my civilized tastes. So vitamin D made from Lanolin is not natural. Frankly I don't give a rat's ass whether it's natural of not, as long as it works, and it definitely does work just fine. Sure, we should get all we can from the sun, but unfortunately, that just isn't always practical these days.

I couldn't help but notice that you apparently weren't sold on his advice either, since you are asking for recommendations for "synthetic" (there's a horrible unnatural word) vitamin recommendations.

Here's my 2 cents worth:

How much vitamin D are you taking now? Your level is not bad — what do you want it to be? Here's a link to some charts that show an estimate of dosage increases needed to reach desired levels (based on existing levels):

http://grassrootshealth.net/media/image ... single.pdf

I didn't have much luck with magnesium glycinate, so I have no idea how much it might take. Normal needs for K2 apparently run in the 200—400 mcg range. I would subtract the amount that I estimate to be contained in my average diet, and supplement the difference. Most of us have enough calcium in our diet to meed our needs and then some. Adequate serum levels of magnesium, vitamin D, and vitamin K2 are the key to calcium absorption.

But it's true that magnesium and calcium compete, so too much magnesium can lead to inadequate calcium, and vice versa. And as the author of that article points out, too much vitamin D can lead to excessive calcium blood levels, and if vitamin D levels decline (for no obvious reason), that can mean that our level may have been too high, resulting in reduced magnesium absorption because of calcium competition resulting in elevated calcium levels.

It appears to me that making valid decisions about a lot of simple health issues (such as whether or not to take vitamin and mineral supplements, and if so, how much), is way too complex for the human brain. It requires hours and hours of study, and beau coups of guesswork.

The more we learn, the less we seem to know.

Tex

[Zizzle]

The more we learn, the less we seem to know.

So true Tex. just when I thought I was on a reasonably acceptable treatment and supplement regimen, I read more and I feel like I'm back at square one!! Darn methylation genes are making me feel like an idiot too!