This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Knowledge & Support Community

Hi all i have been keeping an eye on ccsvi Kuwait website on face book for while now and they seem convinced ther the more calcium we have the more severe ccsvi, seems we need to sort this out with hair samples, to see what our levels are.they also say vit d causes us to retain more calcium, and if we lower our calcium levels we will retain vit d ourselves.they seem convinced about this through research they are doing.Just hope they publish there findings, but dont see any harm in getting hair samples done just need to find were now. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kuwait-CC ... 1778096230
this is link to kuwait website on facebook posted about september 27th ,
they are a team checking hair samples, if your on facebook search ccsvi kuwait you should be able to find it, you could possibley post messages.

annb57,

Interesting about the calcium. My daughter just had blood work done and her GP said she was high in calcium. I asked if that was good and he said no because it meant that vitamin D was not being absorbed. She takes 5000 IU of D per day. He suggested she have her D levels checked and we are waiting for the results. I am curious to know if she should continue to take calcium supplements?

She had an MRV in August and was told she did not have CCSVI although I know it is not the gold standard test and they suggested she go back for a doppler when they get the new machine.

Drury

Do you have a link handy to the website?

Great first post, btw.

Hi Drury
What test did your daughter's dr do to measure the calcium?
My understanding is that it is hard to determine ca level, because blood works for homeostasis--that is, if too low in calcium, or need the calcium as buffer for acidic diet, your body takes the calcium from the bones--the bone calcium loss can be seen on scans (re ; osteo measurements etc), but because of this homeostasis mechanism, the blood level of calcium is usually kept within a narrow range.
So what did he measure??
My D levels, despite taking 800 IU's for years, was deficient when we finally measured it several years ago. Took mega doses to bring it up to better level. BUT my ca blood levels were always within range.
BUT recently got an ultrasound re: calcification of carotids and arteries, and do have a problem with this.

So, do you, or anyone else, know a bit more about this?? Is taking the excess D to bring it to the higher levels now recommended possibly NOT a good move, in light of calcification??
And yes, Annb57, a link to the Kuwait article would be greatly appreciated.

shye wrote: So what did he measure??
My D levels, despite taking 800 IU's for years, was deficient when we finally measured it several years ago. Took mega doses to bring it up to better level. BUT my ca blood levels were always within range.
BUT recently got an ultrasound re: calcification of carotids and arteries, and do have a problem with this.

So, do you, or anyone else, know a bit more about this?? Is taking the excess D to bring it to the higher levels now recommended possibly NOT a good move, in light of calcification??
And yes, Annb57, a link to the Kuwait article would be greatly appreciated.

I've been keeping my yap shut until I better understand through my own experience, but the Vit. D thing needs to be looked at, IMHO. I noticed a Vit. D benefit years before it all got hyped, so my reversal is somewhat epic.

Standard tests for Vit, D test only 25 D, but not 1.25 D, which is another metabolite. The 25 levels appear low, while the 1.25 D is sky-high because our Vit. D receptors are blocked. I'll leave the science to those who researched it, as my brain function is quite impaired. There is some interesting reading on the site. I am testing the protocol myself. I will write about my own experience when there is something to write. My understanding is that adaptive bacteria block the VDRs, which in fact weakens the immune system. I have always worked to strengthen my immune system - contrary to the neurologist's advice. My new doctor says that my "MS" is not so bad after 18 years because I have a more robust immune system. Go figure. Coincidentally, I upped my Vit. D intake up to 10,000 - 15,000 IU/day in the couple of years preceding my latest relapse, which was only interrupted by PTA, but is otherwise a year and a half long.

It makes sense to me, and I'm testing it on myself. I'll let you know in time. I now take no Vit. D supplements and avoid foods fortified with it (just about everything). Read it for yourself though.

a Weill Cornell Medical College
b Georgetown University
c Murdoch University
Vitamin D: the alternative hypothesis
Paul J. Alberta, Amy D. Proalb, Trevor G. Marshallc
A B S T R A C T
Early studies on vitamin D showed promise that various forms of the “vitamin” may be protective
against chronic disease, yet systematic reviews and longer-term studies have failed to confirm these
findings. A number of studies have suggested that patients with autoimmune diagnoses are deficient in
25-hydroxyvitamin-D (25-D) and that consuming greater quantities of vitamin D, which further elevates
25-D levels, alleviates autoimmune disease symptoms. Some years ago, molecular biology identified 25-
D as a secosteroid. Secosteroids would typically be expected to depress inflammation, which is in line
with the reports of symptomatic improvement. The simplistic first-order mass-action model used to
guide the early vitamin studies is now giving way to a more complex description of action. When active,
the Vitamin D nuclear receptor (VDR) affects transcription of at least 913 genes and impacts processes
ranging from calcium metabolism to expression of key antimicrobial peptides. Additionally, recent
research on the Human Microbiome shows that bacteria are far more pervasive than previously thought,
increasing the possibility that autoimmune disease is bacterial in origin. Emerging molecular evidence
suggests that symptomatic improvements among those administered vitamin D is the result of 25-D’s
ability to temper bacterial-induced inflammation by slowing VDR activity. While this results in shortterm
palliation, persistent pathogens that may influence disease progression proliferate over the longterm.

linky to full paper

bacteriality.com

Hi Ann,

I've also seen the suggestions of the Kuwait team regarding calcium. See link and last comment on calcium on 21 oct
<shortened url>

I've read the books of Dr Blaylock "Health and Nutrition Secrets That Can Save Your Life" and Dr Wahls "Minding my mitochondria". Both briefly talk about the health consequences of excess of calcium.

My understanding is that if one takes an incredible large dosis of vitamin D, without supervision/monitoring, it could lead to an excess of calcium. However to have this effect one needs truly to consume an incredibly high dosis of vit D.

It seems that a much more plausible cause of excess of calcium is actually lack of magnesium. Magnesium regulates the calcium channel. With low levels of magnesium calcium is released in excess in the body flooding our cells which is thought to be one of the triggers of cancer.

If I remember correctly Dr Blaylock's book, if one reduces the calcium intake this might actually be reflected in higher concentrations of calcium in the blood. What he recommends instead is to take magnesium supplements to regulate the calcium levels.


Rox

Wow johnson,
thanks SO much for the info and reference to bacteriality.com--fascinating stuff--will get back here after read more--but will definitely peruse it with eagerness.

Johnson, have you gotten your D and D1 measured recently?

I will see my dr in few weeks, and will get a script for the tests then. Should prove interesting. Meanwhile, seems prudent to stop the megadosing I've been doing with Vit D until read and comprehend more of this, and actually get the test results.

TMrox
yes, I had upped my magnesium considerable when started the Vit D increase, knowing that it helps regulate the Calcium.
I do think none of this is just one thing just affecting another, but multi-factorial--putting it all together is the difficult part; And am seeing that sometimes this megadosing (of whatever) might have negative consequences in the long run.

Once, in the year 2000, I had a test done through what was then Great Smokies Laboratories, now Genova laboratories... it was called a digestive stool analysis, and the result of it showed that I was completely devoid of acidophilus, of bifidus bacteria... I was full of Pseudomonas, strep B. etc.

Bifidus bacteria manufactures vitamin K... recently I had a very interesting biofeedback test using ZYTO technology. This test again said that I had no bifidus bacteria, and therefore no vitamin K... it is not just vitamin D that controls calcium metabolism, and I never had much luck with taking vitamin D and I am also a sun addict in the summer and I get completely tanned and brown...

I also showed up low using this test in the parathyroid hormone called calcitonin. The parathyroid glands are the only glands that are devoted to a single "duty" and that is calcium metabolism... I have started taking vitamin K2, 100 mcg, and I am going to increase that because I think (it is very early to say because I just started taking this about two weeks ago), but I think I have noticed a slight benefit in general well being...

it's very cheap

http://www.newswithviews.com/Howenstine/james59.htm

Merlyn,
since finding I have arteriosclerosis (calcium on carotids and abdominal arteries), am taking high dose K--"Super K" by Life Extension--
Ki 1000mcg
K2 1000 as 4
K2 100mcg as 7
total vit k activity 2100mcg
as well as more magnesiium
will get another ultrasound in 6 months time to see if decrease in depostion of Calcium from this protocol.

Shye, Johnson, TMrox, Merlyn. Wow! So much to learn and digest and I have only just had a quick glance at all of this.

Also want to mention something I read a while back (but not sure where) that the sun is the major player in Vit D and you do not get the same effect when you take pills. Reason they gave was that there are too many other things that come into play when being in sunshine or outdoors and it is not clear what role UV plays in all of this - has anybody tried the UV lights (not sunbeds) that are supposed to simulate being in the sun? Wonder if that would be better than pills?

I have heard that kidney stones can be a problem with too much D. A good friend of ours has had two very severe attacks.

Drury

Good grief. I started reading this thread because they seemed to have it backwards: vit D is suppose to help with calcium absorption, but the other way around? Lost in translation? Then, by the end, things seem to have gone back the other way... Somebody help!

I'm very interested in this topic. If anyone has a good book to recommend on the importance of vitamins/minerals (apart form Dr Blaylock and Wahls) please mention it.

Vitamin D indeed helps with the absorbtion of calcium. However in
excess, for example, 50 or more times the recommended daily allowance (RDA) over several months can cause toxicity and a high calcium level in the blood.

See: http://merck.com/mmhe/sec12/ch154/ch154j.html

To be fair to Vitamin D this degree of toxicity is rare. If Vitamin D toxicity occurs then this is treated by discontinuing vitamin D supplementation and restricting calcium intake.

A much much possible explanation for the excess of calcium found in blood is low levels of magnesium.

Magnesium is a natural calcium channel blocker. The ratio of calcium to magnesium should be approximately 2 to 1. http://www.restoreunity.org/high_blood_pressure.htm

to prevent imbalances vitamin D needs to be taken together with calcium and magensium:
http://www.msrc.co.uk/index.cfm?fuseact ... pageid=772

I just just found this interesting article:

"Elderly men and women who consumed higher levels of calcium and vitamin D are significantly more likely to have greater volumes of brain lesions, regions of damage that can increase risk of cognitive impairment, dementia, depression and stroke. "

"In addition to its well-known function in bone health, calcium is important to the functioning of nerve and muscle cells. But when too much calcium is taken up into blood vessel walls, the calcium becomes incorporated into bone-like deposits that can lead to loss of elasticity and narrowing of the blood vessels. Vitamin D helps regulate calcium retention and activity, which may further enhance this arterial calcification. If blood vessels in the brain are affected, damage could lead to brain lesions.

At this point," says Dr. Payne, "we do not know if high calcium and vitamin D intake are involved with the causation of brain lesions, but the study provides support to the growing number of researchers who are concerned about the effects of too much calcium, particularly among older adults, given the current emphasis on promoting high intakes of calcium and vitamin D."

See article at:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 115230.htm

Same Dr Payne has written the book "The Health Benefits of Vitamin K2"

Here an extract of one interview to Dr Pyane:

SWANSON: To me the most fascinating part of your book was the discussion on what you call "the calcium paradox." Please explain this to our readers.

DR. PAYNE: The "calcium paradox" refers to the fact that while we need calcium, too much or too much in the wrong manner can actually be harmful. You see, even though a person may be getting enough calcium in the diet, the body may be unable to retain it or deposit it into the bones; instead, it will accumulate elsewhere, typically in soft tissues such as veins and arteries, which is counterproductive to cardiovascular health. The whole thing can really be summed up by saying that unless we are able to get calcium to the right places, like the bones, we could actually damage our health by accumulating too much in other places, like the walls of our arteries.

SWANSON: To cut right to the heart of the matter, your book focuses on the apparent fact that Vitamin K2, specifically Menaquinone-7, is integral in getting calcium to the right place-into the bones and out of the arterial walls.

DR. PAYNE: That's exactly right. Menaquinone-7 accomplishes this goal better than any other Vitamin K compound.

SWANSON: I've read your book twice, and I must say that your documentation of the scientific research supporting the "calcium paradox" is quite impressive. Let's get back to that. If calcium doesn't get to the bones due to a lack of Vitamin K, what happens?

DR. PAYNE: What happens is that it accumulates in the blood and eventually deposits itself along the walls of the arteries and blood vessels. There's overwhelming evidence, documented in my book, which shows that when Vitamin K2 is lacking, calcium does not get taken up optimally into the bones. Plus, continuing research is telling us that by increasing our intake of K2, we can help this process along and put calcium in the right place-in the bones.

See rest of interview at:
http://www.nattopharma.com/?c=NEWSROOM& ... 0D.&n=true

If you are taking blood thinners you should ask your doctor before taking vitamin K,

TMrox-
thanks for the great articles.
At least I've been taking the K2--
but also way too much vit D and Calcium, and do have the arteriosclerosis.
In 6 months I will post back with results of ultrasound I will have re-done at that time re: the arteriosclerosis---meanwhile, I will continue with the K2, and stop all D and some of the Calcium.
Hoping it works to stop the calcium buildup in the arteries (and probably veins also )...