Calcium and vitmin D---Please give me a break!

That Posture D is light on magnesium. It should be at 300 mgs. Unless you don't mind taking them separately.

One thing I forgot in the post above--Vitamin D is immunoprotective only when combined with a high-calcium diet. How high might be questioned, but I would still supplement!

Quote:

---

Solgar has a supplement that is 2:1 Magnesium/calcium--and I've just started reading articles describing the debate nutritionist are having about the 'proper' ratio. Twice as much magnesium (or equal amounts) to calcium are all advocated by different sources.

You mentioned RSD above. Is this it?

Quote:

---

BBS,

When I was in massage school my A&P instructor said that the mag/cal ratio should be 2/1 but all the supplements out there are the opposite! I'll have to check out the Solgar. Problem is, most come in such small doses that you have to take 4-6 of them each day and I already take maybe 10 supplements so another 4-6 pills seems like too much! Also, I've read that calcium doses should be split throughout the day, not taken all at once. Just my $0.02!

Jaybird

Jaybird, if you decide to take twice as much magnesium as calcium, I think splitting the dose of magnesium, as you do the calcium, is a good idea as magnesium can have a laxative effect in big doses....not exactly a 'convenient' benefit.

t

Yep BBS I was thinking the same thing. It bothered me reading that those who got most of their calcium from food had higher estrogen levels since estrogen is the enemy for me. I do not drink milk nor do I have much dairy in my diet. The only dairy I have is kefir (which does have d3) or yogurt (which doesn't) for the probiotics. I also drink OJ with calcium and D3 (recommended by my oncologist). The rest of my calcium and D3 I get from supplements. The little dairy I get is organic because I do not want anything with growth hormones. I had my vitamin D checked and it was normal; however, my bone density scan showed me to be on the high side of osteopena so I am now taking Fosamax plus d3.

I saw this today--was that the article you were thinking of?

 Benefits of Sunlight May Outweigh Skin Cancer Risks
As Reported by Bloomberg.com. 2008 Jan 7

Sunlight may help the body fight cancers of the internal organs, meaning that surviving cancer is more likely for people who live in sunny places or spend a lot of time outdoors. A study released on January 7 by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that the benefits of sunlight in combating some cancers may be more important than the increased skin cancer risk. The authors of the study stated that campaigns to teach people of the risks of sun exposure have gone too far. People avoid the sun to lower their skin cancer risk, but as a result they have made their body vitamin D deficient. The researchers also stated that while sunlight does not lower the incidence of cancer, people who get cancer in sunnier climates are more likely to survive the disease. This effect was also seen in skin cancers, which have a higher incidence in sunnier climates. The researchers recommend using a sunscreen that protects against UVA rays. This will protect against melanoma, but allows vitamin D to be absorbed by the skin.

 Rosemary, you can find the full article at the link below, but I think the excerpt below answers your question. Newer sunscreens, and especially those containing zinc oxide, are being developed to filter UVA.

Med College of WI article on sunscreen

...In recent years, however, it has become apparent that a different form of ultraviolet light, called UVA, may be even more important in causing some skin disorders. Although experts still believe that UVB is responsible for much of the skin damage caused by sunlight -- especially sunburn -- UVA may be an important factor in photoaging and skin cancers. Most sunscreens do a good job blocking UVB, but fewer sunscreens filter out most of the UVA, so they do not help to prevent the beginnings of melanoma formation.

...The longer wavelengths of UVB and UVA pass right through the atmosphere, even on a cloudy day. That's why you can still get sunburned on a cloudy or hazy day. The molecules in sunscreens absorb most UVB and prevent it from reaching the skin just as the molecules of the atmosphere absorb UVC and prevent it from reaching the ground. But UVA is another story.

Most sunscreens do not protect the skin from the longer UVA wavelengths. And that may be critical to the creation of skin cancer. Approximately 65% of melanomas and 90% of basal and squamous cell skin cancers are attributed to UV exposure. The precise wavelengths of ultraviolet that contribute to the formation of skin cancer still need to be sorted out. And scientists must still figure out how best to formulate sunscreens to provide effective protection against these wavelengths. Scientists lack a simple measure of UVA's impact on the skin, and that makes it difficult to determine how much UVA protection a sunscreen provides.

So, if we get too high a spf rating, then would we be allowing the right amount of rays in that allows vitamin D to be absorbed?

It's my face that I'm trying to protect, but they say we should have our face in the sun besides other body parts to get the D.  I wish they'd give us the right number spf to use so I don't have to figure it out.   Thanks again Kris.