Rubicon: Good post and I agree as my reading from various sources has me thinking twice about what supplements I have been taken. However, I don't put myself in the category of ever taking mega doses of vitamins.

The September 2012 issue of Consumer Reports has an interesting article worth reading entitled "10 Surprising Dangers of Vitamins & Supplements. In recent months I have to admit that I have been re-visiting the vitamins and supplements that I have been taking.

So many studies and so much to learn and I totally agree there are times when vitamins and supplements are beneficial.

Fat-Soluble Vitamins

Please click on this hyperlink above and keep scrolling down to read in its entirety.....



Interesting re water soluble vitamins and fat soluble vitamins.

(This was updated on August 3, 2012.)



Too many vitamins and supplements can be too much of a good thing.

We do not take any at all, period.

Moderation. just sayin.

And consider this: Another way to get 100% of recommended calcium is to eat 4 CUPS of garlic a day!
"Garlic contains 246 mg per cup or 25% of the RDA."

We'll be giant-sized or stinky, but we'll have good bones. :icon_wink:

FYI re Calcium and bones, google Vivian Goldschmidt and her program "Save our Bones". Very interesting info. Be careful that your body can absorb any calcium that you take, as otherwise it will lodge in your joints etc and harden in places that won't serve you.

I have found that dietary sources of calcium work best for me, rather than through supplements, but I take at least 300-400 mg. magnesium and 2000 vit D in supplementation so that the calcium that I do get will have a chance to be absorbed. I also will use homeopathy-Mag Phos- if I feel the need for more magnesium.

I don't do dairy (except eggs daily and yogurt on occasion) so most of my calcium comes from veggies and nuts.

Old myths die hard and there are tons of them out there.

LW888

[QUOTE=uujudy;534995]
And consider this: Another way to get 100% of recommended calcium is to eat 4 CUPS of garlic a day!
"Garlic contains 246 mg per cup or 25% of the RDA."
We'll be giant-sized or stinky, but we'll have good bones. [QUOTE]

I have a visual of plus-size women with excellent bones and reeking of garlic, all line dancing at LSL. :evil6:

Sorry Jimbo, I don't mean to make light of this subject. We're all interested in better nutrition. I think I always believed the "one a day is good for you" hype. I will certainly be doing more research on the safety aspect of taking supplements.

My next-door neighbour is 84. She is healthier and has more energy than most 50 year olds. She never visits medical doctors, just a Naturopath. Kinda makes me wonder. She never takes prescription medication. She has a lot of friends, loves life, and drinks red wine every day.

Just pulled this up on the benefits of red wine:


Red wine leads to better sex. Its not surprising that the Italian researchers are the ones who discovered that women who drink wine have better sex than those who don’t drink at all. Its true, a glass or two of red wine are more than enough to increase a woman’s libido.

Red wine makes you smart. Scientists have found that red wine is good for your brain. The polyphenols in red wine affect the brain’s capacity to function and enhances your capacity for resolving complex matters. Like whether to have a bean burrito or Tuscan pizza with that Sonoma Pinot.

Red wine keeps you thin. New research from the Archives of Internal Medicine suggests that women who regularly consume moderate amounts of alcohol are less likely to gain weight than nondrinkers. Sadly, guys this applies to ladies only. It turns out that, alcohol seems to speed up only woman’s metabolism. Too bad guys, but ladies: bottoms up to keep it tight.

Red wine is a ‘wonder drug.’ An Australian study in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that red wine (mostly, the resveratrol in red wine) makes your bones stronger. Its also good for your diabetes and keeps you young, not to mention making you smarter (see #2). And another study in Australia found red wine is the driving force behind health benefits that include cancer prevention and protection of the heart and brain.

AND OH NOOOOOO!!!!!!

You may not be able to get red wine in the future. Ask any vineyard owner and they’ll tell you that the narrow zones for growing winegrapes are highly sensitive to changes in climate. Recently, international experts confirmed the steady rise in global temperatures threatens vineyards around world and especially in Mediterranean regions (like Bordeaux) and sometime between 2050 and 2100 many regions may be unsuitable for winegrowing at all. Another study from Southern Oregon University found other factors that might lead to the demise of wine as we know it including scarce water supplies, changes in the balanced composition and flavor in wine grapes, changes in regional wine styles and changes in viable grape growing regions. It makes you want to cry doesn’t it?

Not me...Red wine always was a migraine trigger for me.

And...I found if I drank three or four glasses of any wine, I became intelligent and omnipotent. I gave it up after years of practicing drinking wine, I never got any better at it.

Just goes to show we are all uniquely put together and what works for one does not necessarily work for another.

You raise some good questions. But it's a complicated subject so I'll need some time to think about it.

Let me just say one thing about calcium: If a person's system is working correctly, calcium from food gets automatically regulated. If we get too much, the excess is supposed to be disposed of and if we get too little it is supposed to be conserved. But if we take large doses of calcium supplements over a long period of time, this can disrupt the mechanism and it can stop working. How large of a dose would that have to be? I don't know. And what are the consequences? You set yourself up for osteoporosis

Some would say get a diagnosis first that you have a deficiency. But even that might pose a problem. Let me give it more thought.

[quote=Barefoot;535005][QUOTE=uujudy;534995]
And consider this: Another way to get 100% of recommended calcium is to eat 4 CUPS of garlic a day!
"Garlic contains 246 mg per cup or 25% of the RDA."
We'll be giant-sized or stinky, but we'll have good bones. Sounds like the old grannies of yore ...........the ones I knew anyway.
Natural is the way to go. Staying "off" the medical treadmill and NOT being obsessed with what one eats or doesn't eat.....but living a joyful life......seems to make more sense to me. Anyone with half a brain who watches the evening news and hears the pharmaceutical company "hype" about their latest drugs (the side effects of lymphoma, cancers, etc., etc., etc.) would wonder , for sure. Not to mention all the "tests" that are now no longer necessary.........or the drugs that are now involved in major recalls or class action lawsuits as having been harmful.

We knew people who worked for big pharma companies. It's a business.

Good post "Bare". We all learn as we go and have the brains to change our opinions when necessary. Nothing in this world is cast in stone.
Everything in moderation. Also, we should use our "instincts" more and not follow like sheep.

We know doctors and nurses who have told us that they WOULD NOT take chemo or radiation as it is toxic to the system and the healthy cells. Off track here, as it has nothing to do with supplements.

[quote=senior citizen;535417][quote=Barefoot;535005]You know I respect you mightily Senior but....Your last sentence jumped out at me. Yes it sure is toxic to the system and to healthy cells, but it is all we have now. Believe me when I say they are wrong to encourage people to NOT take chemo and or radiation. Very strange to hear that any medical person would say they wouldn't choose to live.

At this time, it is ALL we have in many cases in the war against cancer and it is a life saver, hard as it is on you. It saved my life, Helene's life and seven of our family members. There will be coming a way to handle that awful disease that is not as ugly someday, probably connected to genetics but for now, a person should not make these decisions on their own . The best thing you can do if you suspect cancer is to go to a large encology group like the Moffitt center in Tampa, and take their advice.

I had to say that. It is VERY close to my heart. We are alive and kicking today because of those caustic cures.

[quote=graciegirl;535419][quote=senior citizen;535417]You and yours were most definitely among the fortunate survivors.
God Bless you both. I was just quoting the oft repeated sentiments of local doctors and nurses (R.N.'s) who perhaps see the unfortunate outcomes as well......and the toll it takes on the patients and their families. Again, you were the lucky ones. These health care providers see it all, sad to say.....and that was their personal opinions for themselves and their families. These things were told in private conversation. I'm sure they are following their hospital's policy as far as treatment. We have a great oncology staff at our hospital........and I don't want to be negative here but we know many YOUNG women with little children who had the aggressive form of breast cancer that were not cured..........and these were all treated at Darmouth in N.H. Our daughter's best friend recently passed at age 42.......and others we know, also young.......after aggressive chemo, radiation, etc. As you've said before, there are all different types of cancers. The information is out there that for some people, the treatment is worse than the disease itself. I'm not including your personal treatment in that comment.

We also know folks who were treated at Duke University but it just "bought time". These were aggressive cancers, caught early, but not with favorable outcomes. The doctors we know are internists and the nurses are registered nurses. It's just their personal opinions; not what they practice in real life. They were referring to their own bodies should they get cancer.

We've also lost a lot of friends who had the full gamut of strong chemotherapy and radiation........their quality of life was awful for the next two years. They lost all their ability to walk, to feel things (neuropathy, etc.), got blood clots from the "ports" in their shoulder or whatever, had to constantly have blood transfusions. Just a downhill slide.

Right now my prayers are with Robin Roberts from Good Morning America who survived breast cancer/chemo and radiation five years ago only to have now a "pre leukemia" for which she needs a bone marrow transplant. However, the other day, she excused herself from the morning show as she didn't feel well and said she thinks she was going to take her vacation "early"......all along during this treatment before the bone marrow transplant, she's been coming into work.......her sister is a perfect match, so my prayers are that she will do well........however, her own doctors told her that her condition NOW was definitely CAUSED by the aggressive chemo and radiation from her breast cancer treatment five years ago.

We also have friends whose husband and father had hodgkins lymphoma when the children were little, he was treated and supposedly cured.
Not too long later, the treatment caused leukemia.......his widow was told that by his oncologist. They know the drugs are poison to the healthy cells. It's all a personal choice.

My husband's mom passed away of cancer before chemo was ever available.........she had no pain at all at the end......just kind of slipped away. Her last year was not chock full of chemo and radiation sickness. That was a long time ago obviously.....however, a world of difference from what our friends have gone through in recent years.

I am not a doctor, just a cancer survivor. A grateful one.
 

Chemo and radiation do not stop all cancers to be sure. Young womens breast cancer is almost always the worst form. And some cancer is so advanced when discovered that nothing can arrest it. There are many variables and cancer is really many diseases.

But when you are diagnosed, you don't have time to get a medical degree, you have to find the best medical facility and go by what they say.

When a person has a form of cancer in a stage that is irreversible then no treatment can save them but in many cases it can make it into almost a long time chronic condition with pretty liveable years to enjoy.

Fear of cancer and of death make people seek unproven alternative solutions. A neighbor diagnosed at the same time as I was with the same cancer opted to go to New Mexico to receive treatment there from a doctor who claimed to have a new way to deal with cancer. She begged me not to have chemo and radiation. You all know what I will not say out loud. She should not have chosen that route. She was very sure it was helping her but it ultimately did not and she died. She may have died with chemo and radiation, I don't know. But I feel I must tell others to trust large medical facilities who have a reputation for valid treatment of cancer.

I almost foam at the mouth when I hear people like Suzanne Sommers say not to have chemo and radiation.

Well, these doctors and nurses live with the disease every day at the hospital and oncology center and I assure you they are not as "ditzy" as Suzanne Sommers who may have had a mild form of the cancer which had not metastacized. I don't know her personal story, but she's still alive. I also know women in their 80's now who had ductal breast cancer when young and are still alive (the milk ducts). They did have mastectomies back then but NO chemo.

The aggressive form is just that.......aggressive. The young moms I referred to, leaving behind children under age 12, had all of the very best modern treatment and yet it still spread to their ribs, their lungs, their bones, their brains, their eyeballs, you name it.......very very sad.
Their adrenal glands, their liver and kidneys......this was AFTER radical mastectomy, reconstruction surgery of the two breasts and aggressive chemotherapy and radiation..........everyone is different obviously.

I've often wondered if the "cells" don't migrate during the reconstructive surgery???? Obviously, cancer cells are invisible to the surgeon's eye at the time of surgery. I pray for them all.

Gracie, I agree with your comment about Suzanne Sommers. I think she is making really irresponsible recommendations, and it's mostly for publicity. I know that if I ever heard those dreaded words, "you have cancer", I would seek out the opinions of the best medical experts available. And I would follow their recommendations.

Agree, take all known meds treatments you can only try other methods as a secondary treatment, all under doctors care.

You may only have one chance to be wrong her way.

Everyone should definitely follow their physician's advice and also get second and third opinions if possible.

Earlier, I was merely stating the "private personal feelings and opinions" of friends and neighbors of ours who just also happen to be doctors and nurses......and who do follow the policy of their employer which would be the hospital.

I'm sure doctors get burnout after seeing so many sad outcomes no matter what they try. Even oncologists know the odds and know about the toxicity of the chemicals involved........yet they have to do their jobs.

In a life threatening moment, even those who think they would "opt out" might "opt in".......not wishing to think of the other alternative.

I think it was very honest of these doctors and nurses to be able to state their personal opinions as to what THEY WOULD DO FOR THEMSELVES and their own families..........not what they would not do to the patients.

You'd have to have been there during the various conversations to know where they were coming from. Actually, a lot of highly educated doctors are now trying more natural forms of healing, along with the old traditional ways.

We not only have older friends who are in the medical field but the younger generation, our children's age, who are new doctors......and they even know it's all about the chemicals nowadays and it's just an educated guess as far as what will work and what won't work.....not just for cancer, but for many other ailments as well.

In 2005 there was a study reported in the British Medical Journal that didn't show any reduction in fracture risk for women who took 1,000 milligrams of calcium and 800 IUs of vitamin D a day.

Another study, The Women's Health Initiative, reported that calcium and vitamin D may lower risk of hip-fracture in women over 60. However, they also reported a 17% higher risk for kidney stones. It doesn't sound very promising when they quantify the risk for kidny stones but not for hip-fracture.

I've done a lot of reading about calcium and bone health over the past couple of days. I checked several books including Dr. Oz to be reminded of things that have been written. And the more I read the more I am reminded that it's not so much what you should do but what you shouldn't do. What shouldn't you do? Don't eat the Standard American Diet! (SAD)

What's good for absorption of calcium:

Low intake of dietary calcium along with moderate exercise

Vitamin D

What's bad for absorption

High levels of dietary fat

Foods high in phytates

Low estrogen/testosterone levels

Low stomach acid

Refined sugar

Caffeine

Smoking

Excess salt

Alcohol

High protein diet (especially animal protein, including dairy)

High level of phosphorus (cheese, meat, soft drinks and processed foods of all kinds)

Whole books have been written on this subject so the above information doesn't cover everything. I have included what I consider to be the most important information.

Surprising news about calcium
 

I was surprised by this new information about calcium deficiency, especially since the countries with the highest calcium intake also have the highest incidence of osteoporosis. I didn't know that.
Surprising Nutrient Deficiency Linked to Osteoporosis | Care2 Healthy Living

I'm sure it won't hurt anyone to increase the amount of lycopene in their diet. Are there blood tests that can be done for every mineral and vitamin to determine if we're "over or under" the recommended amount? Of course the recommended amount seems to change with every new study that is released.:confused:

That's the truth!