all things magnesium

Discuss herbal therapies, vitamins and minerals, bee stings, etc. here

study: high dietary protein/Ca/vitD3 + alcohol=higher Mg nee

Postby jimmylegs » Mon Oct 10, 2016 7:29 am

excerpt from an oldie but a goodie. this dynamic has not improved over the last FIFTY YEARS. rather, the opposite.

Seelig, M. S. (1964). The requirement of magnesium by the normal adult Summary and analysis of published data. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 14(6), 342-390.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/14/6/342.short

"The Occidental diet, however, provides an average of 250 to 300 mg. of magnesium daily, or less than 5 mg. per kg. per day for most adults. Because the Western diet is often also rich in protein, calcium and vitamin D, and alcohol ingestion is common, it is suggested that the optimal daily intake of magnesium should be 7 to 10 mg. per kg. per day.
The existence of subacute or chronic magnesium deficiency is difficult to diagnose. Because the tissues damaged by magnesium depletion are those of the cardiovascular, renal and the neuromuscular systems, early damage is not readily detectable. It is postulated that long-term suboptimal intakes of magnesium may participate in the pathogenesis of chronic diseases of these systems"
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

Advertisement

study: PPI meds deplete serum magnesium

Postby jimmylegs » Sat Nov 26, 2016 9:03 am

docs have you on PPIs? we've posted plenty about this here at TiMS but just to refresh here's a new study underscoring the need to monitor your mag status, esp while on meds which deplete nutrients that are particularly problematic for ms patients!

PTU-112 Proton Pump Inhibitors – A Risk for Micronutrient Deficiency. But Are We Looking Out for This? (2016)
http://gut.bmj.com/content/65/Suppl_1/A111.1.abstract
"Of 41 patients identified, 38 (92.7%) had not had serum magnesium checked in the last 12 months including 15 (36.59%) who had never had it checked. 32 (78.1%) had not had serum ferritin or B12 checked in the past 12 months. Including 9 (21.95%) whom had never had it checked. The median (!) magnesium level was low (0.77, range 0.76–0.89). The median ferritin was normal (106, range 13–196). There was one incidence of B12 deficiency (2.44% all patients, 31.3% of all those tested). Median serum B12 was normal (351, range 10.6–645)."
quite the b12 number, don't think i'd be blaming the ppis alone for that one. worst result i ever had as a long term vegan was essentially undetectable (assay was sensitive down to 75 and the lab results said verbatim 'less than 75').

<rant>serum magnesium should be part of regular bloodwork for everyone, not just ms patients. and since we can consistently identify statistically significant differences between control and patient means in the literature, that means serum mag is not a poor indicator of status. it means having a result inside the normal range does not mean no action is required. the 'normal' range itself is linguistically deceptive. patients and their health care professionals need to be very clear about the fact that normal includes sick AND optimal/healthy. it means that the max and min on the status quo 'normal' ranges used at labs and misinterpreted by docs if ordered at all are at best misleading and at worst irresponsible / negligent. for that matter, why would a doc bother ordering a test that ALWAYS comes back normal no matter how many magnesium deficiency symptoms their patient may have? it's nonsense. ranges need to be updated so that the problems which are common sense over in the public health arena, don't continue to slide under the radar in the clinical setting.</rant>
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

study: serum mag 'significantly lower normal' in MS patients

Postby jimmylegs » Fri Dec 23, 2016 5:16 pm

does cover a lot of ground, but key findings more relevant to mg than any other specifically :)

Comparison of serum Concentration of Se, Pb, Mg, Cu, Zn, between MS patients and healthy controls
http://www.ephysician.ir/2016/2759.pdf
"Blood level of Mg was significantly lower in MS patients. But it should be noted that even with the low level of serum magnesium in MS
patients, this value is still in the normal range." um yeah we know lol

arg i HATE when there's just p values in results but whatever :P
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

study: low mag increases mortality risk assoc. w low vit D3

Postby jimmylegs » Tue Jan 17, 2017 3:29 pm

think we have some sentence fragments muddying this abstract a bit, but for now, another piece of the puzzle at least:

The association between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 concentration and risk of disease death in men: modification by magnesium intake
http://link.springer.com/article/10.100 ... 015-0006-9
Low vitamin D status increases the risk of death. Magnesium plays an essential role in vitamin D metabolism and low magnesium intake may predispose to vitamin D deficiency and potentiate the health problems. We investigated whether magnesium intake modifies the serum 25(OH)D3 concentration and its associations with mortality in middle-aged and older men.
We included 1892 men aged 42–60 years without cardiovascular disease or cancer at baseline in 1984–1989 from the prospective, population-based Kuopio Ischaemic Heart Disease Risk Factor Study.
Serum 25(OH)D3 was measured with the high-performance liquid chromatography using coulometric electrode array detection. Magnesium intake was assessed with 4-day food recording. Deaths were ascertained by a computer linkage to the national cause of death register. Deaths due accidents and suicides were excluded.
Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to analyze the associations. The multivariate-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for death in the lowest (<32.1 nmol/L) versus the highest (>49.4 nmol/L) serum 25(OH)D3 tertile was 1.31 (95 % CI 1.07–1.60, Ptrend = 0.01).
Stratified by the magnesium intake, the higher risk was observed only in the lower magnesium intake median (<414 mg/day); HR = 1.60 (95 % CI 1.19–2.13, Ptrend = 0.002) in the lowest versus the highest 25(OH)D3 tertile, whereas the corresponding HR = 1.07, 95 % CI 0.75–1.36, Ptrend = 0.63) in the higher magnesium intake median, P for interaction = 0.08.
In this cohort of middle-aged and older men low serum 25(OH)D3 concentration was associated with increased risk of death mainly in those with lower magnesium intake.
pretty sucky vit d3 averages in there. need a closer look at the magnesium groups. when i have time, will dig into the full text, if i can, to see if there's better clarity available.
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

study: high dietary mag may reduce risk of hypertension

Postby jimmylegs » Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:05 am

excerpt from an outgoing weekend email:

"
Dietary Magnesium Intake and Risk of Incident Hypertension Among Middle-Aged and Older US Women in a 10-Year Follow-Up Study
"To assess the hypothesis that magnesium intake is beneficial in the primary prevention of hypertension, 28,349 female United States health professionals aged ≥45 years participating in the Women’s Health Study (WHS), who initially reported normal blood pressure (systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg, no history of hypertension or antihypertensive medications), were prospectively studied. A semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire was used to estimate magnesium intake. During a median follow-up of 9.8 years, 8,544 women developed incident hypertension. After adjustment for age and randomized treatment, magnesium intake was inversely associated with the risk for developing hypertension; women in the highest quintile (median 434 mg/day) had a decreased risk for hypertension (relative risk 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81 to 0.93, p for trend <0.0001) compared with those in the lowest quintile (median 256 mg/day)." ... blah blah blah statistics ... "In conclusion, the results suggest that higher intake of dietary magnesium may have a modest effect on the development of hypertension in women."

so, digging in on this abstract, some math games. we know daily amount should be 7-10mg/kg/day

let's say the higher intake quintile is going for 10mg/kg/day, that means going by the median intake that they weigh 43 kg or 94 lbs or 6.7 stone. so that's not going to be a very realistic assumption i don't think.

now let's say they were only going for 7mg/kg/day, that makes that median group 62 kg or 140 lbs or 10 stone.

so if 10 stone is what we'll consider a reasonable weight for an average middle aged woman, that means only the top 10% in the study above (i'm thinking 10% because it's those above median for the highest quintile or 20%) of female health care professionals were getting even up to the low end of daily magnesium intake recommendations.

So 90% of female health care pros don't meet the minimum mag intake requirements, and yet a chunk of those made it in to the analysis of mag's effect on blood pressure by virtue of at least being in the top 20%. i think that by including the participants in the bottom half of that upper quintile, ie a bunch of people with below optimal mag intake, that the researchers weakened the observable impact of magnesium intake on blood pressure in their analysis, and i suspect that's likely part of the reason why they came out with a 'modest' effect.

ps i just dug into the full text and the absolute highest single daily mag intake was 470mg so if that individual was going for the 10mg/kg/day they're 47kg or 104 lbs or 7.4 stone. if they're going for 7mg/kg/d they're 67 kg or about 150 lbs or 10.6 stone. not too likely that many ladies in this study were actually hitting that 7-10mg/kg range properly.

and yet, from the study results, this:
"The median intake of magnesium was 330 mg/day for our cohort of middle-aged women, close to the recommended dietary allowance of 320 mg/day for adult women.17 "
great RDA, public health department...

as for the blood pressure side of this one, and this is why i wanted into the full text mostly, in the upper quintile you do see a trend of more subjects in the healthier lower ranges for both systolic (ie up to 119) and diastolic (ie up to 74). bet it would be even better if more ppl were getting a proper intake!"
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

study: magnesium effective and safe for PMS

Postby jimmylegs » Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:03 pm

LOL don't think i had actually seen this study.
pro tip: you don't need this product. before i even knew how to keep my dietary intake topped up, plain old off the shelf mag sorted out my lifelong agony, and long before i even figured out magnesium glycinate.

Pilot Study of the Efficacy and Safety of a Modified-Release Magnesium ... for the Treatment of Premenstrual Syndrome
http://link.springer.com/article/10.216 ... 7010-00004
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

study: nutrient interactions: does low mag interact with D3

Postby jimmylegs » Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:55 am

had missed this one earlier. it's past time people started paying more attention to this issue in the academic literature. glad this article exists.

Rosanoff, A., Dai, Q., & Shapses, S. A. (2016). Essential Nutrient Interactions: Does Low or Suboptimal Magnesium Status Interact with Vitamin D and/or Calcium Status?. Advances in Nutrition: An International Review Journal, 7(1), 25-43.
http://advances.nutrition.org/content/7/1/25.full.pdf
Although much is known about magnesium, its interactions with calcium and vitamin D are less well studied. Magnesium intake is low in populations who consume modern processed-food diets. Low magnesium intake is associated with chronic diseases of global concern [e.g., cardiovascular disease (CVD), type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and skeletal disorders], as is low vitamin D status. No simple, reliable biomarker for whole-body magnesium status is currently available, which makes clinical assessment and interpretation of human magnesium research difficult. Between 1977 and 2012, US calcium intakes increased at a rate 2–2.5 times that of magnesium intakes, resulting in a dietary calcium to magnesium intake ratio of >3.0. Calcium to magnesium ratios <1.7 and >2.8 can be detrimental, and optimal ratios may be ∼2.0. Background calcium to magnesium ratios can affect studies of either mineral alone. For example, US studies (background Ca:Mg >3.0) showed benefits of high dietary or supplemental magnesium for CVD, whereas similar Chinese studies (background Ca:Mg <1.7) showed increased risks of CVD. Oral vitamin D is widely recommended in US age-sex groups with low dietary magnesium. Magnesium is a cofactor for vitamin D biosynthesis, transport, and activation; and vitamin D and magnesium studies both showed associations with several of the same chronic diseases. Research on possible magnesium and vitamin D interactions in these human diseases is currently rare. Increasing calcium to magnesium intake ratios, coupled with calcium and vitamin D supplementation coincident with suboptimal magnesium intakes, may have unknown health implications. Interactions of low magnesium status with calcium and vitamin D, especially during supplementation, require further study.
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

study: Mg deficiency and excess vit D3 effects on swine arte

Postby jimmylegs » Sun Mar 05, 2017 6:34 am

Effects of a dietary magnesium deficiency and excess vitamin D3 on swine coronary arteries
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2159962
"The effect of a moderate magnesium (Mg) deficiency on coronary arteries of 61 swine, fed various levels of vitamin D3, was studied by light and electron microscopy.
The effect of subnormal Mg intake on vitamin D3-induced intimal lesions of the arteries showed a trend towards increased damage.
The degree of cell degeneration and intimal thickening, which was induced by high vitamin D intakes, was as great in swine whose diet was low in Mg and moderately high in vitamin D, as it was in those on twice as much vitamin D.
Also, the degree of arterial calcification was intensified by inadequate Mg intake at the two higher vitamin D intakes
.
Present findings indicate that suboptimal dietary Mg, in combination with an excess of vitamin D, has an additive effect in the initiation of ultrastructural changes in the coronary arteries. Extension of the study is indicated to ascertain the extent to which further reduction of Mg intake can potentiate vitamin-D-induced coronary lesions."


eep wonder what i might have done to my arteries after yrs of high d3 and secondary mag depletion :S
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

study: Genotoxic Effects of Magnesium Deficiency

Postby jimmylegs » Wed Mar 08, 2017 2:42 pm

Genotoxic Effects of Magnesium Deficiency in the Cardiovascular System and their Relationships to Cardiovascular Diseases and Atherogenesis
full text: http://bit.ly/2m0c9UL
from intro:
Disturbances in diets are known to promote lipid deposition and accelerate the growth and transformation of smooth muscle and endothelial cells in the vascular walls of blood vessels and promote vascular and cardiac dysfunctions of several types; e.g., atherosclerosis, heart rhythm disturbances, decreases in cardiac ejection of blood, decreased force of ventricular and atrial contractility, decreases in arterial blood pressure, diminished venous return to the heart, cardiac tamponade, hypertension, strokes, sudden-cardiac death, myocardial infarctions, etc. [5-7].
A number of epidemiologic studies in North America and Europe have shown that people consuming Western-type diets are low in magnesium(Mg) content (i.e., 30-65% of the RDA for Mg) [7-11]. Most of these diets in the U.S.A. show that 60-80% of Americans are consuming 185-235 mg/day of Mg [6,10].
In 1900, in contrast, Americans were consuming 450-550 mg/day of Mg [6,8].
Using sensitive and newly designed specific Mg2+ ion selective electrodes, our laboratories demonstrated that patients with hypertension, IHD, cardiac failure, strokes, diabetes mellitus types 1 and 2, pregnant women with gestational diabetes, renal-induced vascular changes (associated with elevated serum cholesterol), preeclampsia, hemorrhage, sickle cell anemia in children (and adults), and atherosclerosis exhibit significant reductions in serum/plasma/whole blood levels of ionized, but not total blood levels of Mg [6,8,18,40-62]. In addition, our laboratories have also shown that dietary deficiency in rabbits and rats causes vascular remodeling concomitant with atherogenesis (i.e., arteriolar wall hypertrophy and alterations in the matrices of the vascular walls) and hypertension
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

for those about to rock..

Postby jimmylegs » Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:31 pm

take magnesium?! i was looking for something else but ok.. noted. lol

Oral magnesium intake reduces permanent hearing loss induced by noise exposure
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 0994900361

Introduction: Following animal experiments where correlations were observed between serum magnesium level and noise-induced permanent hearing threshold shifts (NIPTS), we tested the prophylactic effect of magnesium in human subjects exposed to hazardous noise.

Methods: Subjects were 300 young, healthy, and normal-hearing recruits who underwent 2 months of basic military training. This training necessarily included repeated exposures to high levels of impulse noises while using ear plugs. During this placebo-controlled, double-blind study, each subject received daily an additional drink containing either 6.7 mmol (167 mg) magnesium aspartate or a similar quantity of placebo (Na-aspartate).

Results: NIPTS was significantly more frequent and more severe in the placebo group than in the magnesium group, especially in bilateral damages. NIPTS was negatively correlated to the magnesium content of blood red cells but especially to the magnesium mononuclear cells. Long-term additional intake of a small dose of oral magnesium was not accompanied by any notable side effect.

Concluslon: This study may introduce a significant natural agent for the reduction of hearing damages in noise-exposed population.
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

Re: all things magnesium

Postby jimmylegs » Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:46 am

Magnesium in Prevention and Therapy
http://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/7/9/5388/htm
Dietary surveys of people in Europe and in the United States still reveal that intakes of magnesium are lower than the recommended amounts [20,21,22]. Epidemiological studies in Europe and North America have shown that people consuming Western-type diets are low in magnesium content, i.e. <30%–50% of the RDA for magnesium. It is suggested that the dietary intakes of magnesium in the United States have been declining over the last 100 years from about 500 mg/day to 175–225 mg/day. This is likely a result of the increasing use of fertilizers and processed foods [5,9,22,23,24].

In healthy individuals, magnesium serum concentration is closely maintained within the physiological range. The normal reference range for the magnesium in blood serum is 0.76–1.15 mmol/L [7,16,17,18,19].
According to many magnesium researchers, the appropriate lower reference limit of the serum magnesium concentration should be 0.85 mmol/L, especially for patients with diabetes [17,18,52,53]. For example, in the NHANES I study the reference interval for serum magnesium was determined in 15,820 individuals between the ages of 18 and 74 years. The results of this study identified the reference interval as 0.75 mmol/L to 0.955 mmol/L with a mean concentration of 0.85 mmol/L[54]. In a European study, magnesium deficiency was determined clinically and compared with the serum magnesium concentration. It was found that in individuals with serum magnesium level of 0.70 mmol/L, 90% of the individuals had clinical magnesium deficiency and at a cut off magnesium level of 0.75 mmol/L, 50% of individuals had clinical magnesium deficiency. At a cut off level of 0.80 mmol/L, 10% of individuals had clinical magnesium deficiency and at a cut off of 0.90 mmol/L, only 1% of the individuals had clinical magnesium deficiency [55].

so aiming higher than 0.90 would be wise to keep clear of whatever the study above considers clinical evidence of deficiency... considering that older studies recommend at least 0.95 and studies examining 'healthy controls' in particular, average serum levels can be still higher.
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

Re: all things magnesium

Postby jimmylegs » Thu Mar 16, 2017 2:56 pm

would be interesting to see the full text on this one:

A Case of Chronic Hypomagnesemia in a Cancer Survivor
M Velimirovic, JC Ziperstein, AZ Fenves - Hospital Practice, 2017 - Taylor & Francis
... Her medication list included folic acid, calcium, and vitamin D3 supplementation, levothyroxine,
a multivitamin, docusate, fludrocortisone, and midodrine for ... was repleted with both IV and PO
formulations, and she was discharged on a standing dose of oral magnesium. ...
odd sx? no dx? check w/ dietitian
DRI=MINIMUM eg bit.ly/1vgQclQ
99% don't meet these. meds/lifestyle can affect levels
status can be low in ms & other cond'ns
'but my results are normal'. typical panels don't test all
deficits occur in 'normal' range
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 10057
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

Previous

Return to Natural Approach

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Contact us | Terms of Service