Re: With calcium, food trumps pills

[Guest guest]

Hi folks:

I would like to suggest another possible flaw in this study. Did

they take account of body mass?

It seems obvious to me that the subjects taking the supplements were

more health-conscious than those who weren't. And a higher level of

health-consciousness would make it likely that the supplement-takers

will also have done many other things to improve their health.

Including maintaining a more sensible weight.

As we all know, probably the single most significant factor affecting

bone mass is body weight. So I predict the pill-takers were on

average slimmer and so had smaller bones ........... not even

necessarily more porous bones.

So, does this relationship they believe they found apply among those

with the same body mass? I guess the full text would tell us.

Rodney.

>

> Nothing we didn't already know...

> Diane

>

>

> http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070627/D8Q1F29O0.html

>

>

> Most women know that calcium is critical in preventing osteoporosis,

> the disease of progressive bone loss and fractures that affects

> millions of Americans.

>

> But which source is better - calcium-rich foods or supplements? A

> preliminary study by researchers at Washington University School of

> Medicine suggests dietary calcium may be better at protecting bone

health.

>

> Though not definitive, the study found that women who get most of

> their daily calcium from food have healthier bones and higher bone

> density than women whose calcium comes mainly from supplemental

tablets.

>

> That was true even though the supplement-takers had higher average

> levels of calcium.

>

> Calcium from dietary sources is generally better absorbed than that

> from supplements, which could help explain the difference, said the

> study's lead author, Dr. Reina Armamento-Villareal.

>

> Those getting calcium from foods also had more estrogen in their

> bodies; the hormone is needed to maintain bone mineral density.

> Researchers can't yet explain the food-estrogen connection.

>

> The research is preliminary and offers " a springboard to do

something

> more, a hypothesis to test, " said Armamento-Villareal, a bone

> specialist and assistant professor in the School of Medicine's

> division of bone and mineral diseases. It was published in the May

> issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

>

> Researchers asked 183 postmenopausal women to meticulously document

> their diet and their calcium supplement intake for seven days. They

> tested their bone mineral density and their urine for levels of

estrogen.

>

> The women then were divided into three groups: those who got at

least

> 70 percent of their daily calcium from supplements, those who got

the

> same amount from dairy products and other food, and those whose

> calcium-source percentages fell somewhere in between.

>

> The " diet group " took in the least calcium, an average of 830

> milligrams per day. Yet, the group had higher bone density in their

> spines and hip bones than women in the " supplement group, " who

> consumed 1,030 milligrams per day.

>

> Women in the " diet plus supplement group " tended to have the highest

> bone mineral density as well as the highest calcium intake at 1,620

> milligrams per day.

>

> An analysis showed that women in the " diet group " and the " diet plus

> supplement group " had higher levels of estrogen, needed for bone

> mineral density.

>

> Dr. Recker, who heads osteoporosis research at the Creighton

> University School of Medicine in Omaha, noted weaknesses in the

study,

> which he said " is certainly not definitive. "

>

> Those who got calcium from their diet might have also taken in more

> vitamin D from milk, which would aid in calcium absorption. As for

the

> estrogen connection, they might have eaten plant sources containing

> more of the hormone, he said.

>

> " Nevertheless it's not to be ignored, " Recker said. " Observation

> studies are very good for generating a hypothesis to be tested later

> in an outright experiment. "

>

> Dairy foods and calcium-fortified orange juice are excellent sources

> of calcium. Dark green, leafy vegetables also contain it, though it

is

> not as readily absorbed as calcium from dairy, researchers said.

>

> Armamento said she'd like to do a long-term study of teenagers whose

> bones are still developing to see what, if any, differences might

> emerge among young women taking calcium from diet versus

supplements.

>

> " It's a lifestyle issue, " she said, noting that some teenagers avoid

> dairy products.

>

[Guest guest]

Higher levels of vitamin D3 supplementation also result in better

bone-density outcomes in accordance with the PDF that I sent Francesca

with all of the Vit D3 slides--even in the absence of additional

calcium.

Maco

At 12:23 PM 6/28/2007, you wrote:

Hi folks:

I would like to suggest another possible flaw in this study. Did

they take account of body mass?

It seems obvious to me that the subjects taking the supplements were

more health-conscious than those who weren't. And a higher level of

health-consciousness would make it likely that the supplement-takers

will also have done many other things to improve their health.

Including maintaining a more sensible weight.

As we all know, probably the single most significant factor affecting

bone mass is body weight. So I predict the pill-takers were on

average slimmer and so had smaller bones ........... not even

necessarily more porous bones.

So, does this relationship they believe they found apply among those

with the same body mass? I guess the full text would tell us.

Rodney.

>

> Nothing we didn't already know...

> Diane

>

>

>

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070627/D8Q1F29O0.html

>

>

> Most women know that calcium is critical in preventing

osteoporosis,

> the disease of progressive bone loss and fractures that affects

> millions of Americans.

>

> But which source is better - calcium-rich foods or supplements?

A

> preliminary study by researchers at Washington University School

of

> Medicine suggests dietary calcium may be better at protecting bone

health.

>

> Though not definitive, the study found that women who get most

of

> their daily calcium from food have healthier bones and higher

bone

> density than women whose calcium comes mainly from supplemental

tablets.

>

> That was true even though the supplement-takers had higher

average

> levels of calcium.

>

> Calcium from dietary sources is generally better absorbed than

that

> from supplements, which could help explain the difference, said

the

> study's lead author, Dr. Reina Armamento-Villareal.

>

> Those getting calcium from foods also had more estrogen in

their

> bodies; the hormone is needed to maintain bone mineral density.

> Researchers can't yet explain the food-estrogen connection.

>

> The research is preliminary and offers " a springboard to do

something

> more, a hypothesis to test, " said Armamento-Villareal, a

bone

> specialist and assistant professor in the School of Medicine's

> division of bone and mineral diseases. It was published in the

May

> issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

>

> Researchers asked 183 postmenopausal women to meticulously

document

> their diet and their calcium supplement intake for seven days.

They

> tested their bone mineral density and their urine for levels of

estrogen.

>

> The women then were divided into three groups: those who got at

least

> 70 percent of their daily calcium from supplements, those who got

the

> same amount from dairy products and other food, and those whose

> calcium-source percentages fell somewhere in between.

>

> The " diet group " took in the least calcium, an average of

830

> milligrams per day. Yet, the group had higher bone density in

their

> spines and hip bones than women in the " supplement group, "

who

> consumed 1,030 milligrams per day.

>

> Women in the " diet plus supplement group " tended to have

the highest

> bone mineral density as well as the highest calcium intake at

1,620

> milligrams per day.

>

> An analysis showed that women in the " diet group " and the

" diet plus

> supplement group " had higher levels of estrogen, needed for

bone

> mineral density.

>

> Dr. Recker, who heads osteoporosis research at the

Creighton

> University School of Medicine in Omaha, noted weaknesses in the

study,

> which he said " is certainly not definitive. "

>

> Those who got calcium from their diet might have also taken in

more

> vitamin D from milk, which would aid in calcium absorption. As for

the

> estrogen connection, they might have eaten plant sources

containing

> more of the hormone, he said.

>

> " Nevertheless it's not to be ignored, " Recker said.

" Observation

> studies are very good for generating a hypothesis to be tested

later

> in an outright experiment. "

>

> Dairy foods and calcium-fortified orange juice are excellent

sources

> of calcium. Dark green, leafy vegetables also contain it, though it

is

> not as readily absorbed as calcium from dairy, researchers

said.

>

> Armamento said she'd like to do a long-term study of teenagers

whose

> bones are still developing to see what, if any, differences

might

> emerge among young women taking calcium from diet versus

supplements.

>

> " It's a lifestyle issue, " she said, noting that some

teenagers avoid

> dairy products.

>

[Guest guest]

Sorry, I don't have access to the full text for this journal. Here's

the abstract:

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 85, No. 5, 1428-1433, May

2007

© 2007 American Society for Nutrition

ORIGINAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATION

Effects of dietary calcium compared with calcium supplements on

estrogen metabolism and bone mineral density1,2,3,4

Nicola Napoli, , o Civitelli and Reina C

Armamento-Villareal

1 From the Division of Bone and Mineral Diseases, Washington

University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO

Background: High calcium intake has been associated with both high

bone mineral density (BMD) and high urinary estrogen metabolites.

However, the role of dietary calcium and calcium supplements on

estrogen metabolism and BMD remains unknown.

Objective: The objective was to investigate the importance of the

source of calcium intake on estrogen metabolism and BMD.

Design: The average total daily calcium intake from supplements and

diet, urinary estrogen metabolites, and spine and proximal femur BMD

were studied in 168 healthy postmenopausal white women.

Results: Women who obtained calcium primarily from the diet or from

both the diet and supplements had significantly (P = 0.03) lower

ratios of nonestrogenic to estrogenic metabolites (2-hydroxyestrone

1/16{alpha}-hydroxyestrone) than did those who obtained calcium

primarily from supplements. Adjusted BMD z scores were significantly

greater in the subjects who obtained calcium primarily from the diet

or from both the diet and supplements than in those who obtained

calcium primarily from calcium supplements at the spine (P = 0.012),

femoral neck (P = 0.02), total femur (P = 0.003), and intertrochanter

(P = 0.005). This difference was evident especially in those who

obtained calcium primarily from the diet, whose total calcium intake

was lower than that in those who obtained calcium primarily from

supplements.

Conclusion: Calcium from dietary sources is associated with a shift in

estrogen metabolism toward the active 16{alpha}-hydroxyl metabolic

pathway and with greater BMD and thus may produce more favorable

effects in bone health in postmenopausal women than will calcium from

supplements.

>

> Hi folks:

>

> I would like to suggest another possible flaw in this study. Did

> they take account of body mass?

>

> It seems obvious to me that the subjects taking the supplements were

> more health-conscious than those who weren't. And a higher level of

> health-consciousness would make it likely that the supplement-takers

> will also have done many other things to improve their health.

> Including maintaining a more sensible weight.

>

> As we all know, probably the single most significant factor affecting

> bone mass is body weight. So I predict the pill-takers were on

> average slimmer and so had smaller bones ........... not even

> necessarily more porous bones.

>

> So, does this relationship they believe they found apply among those

> with the same body mass? I guess the full text would tell us.

>

> Rodney.

>

>