Coral Calcium – Goes Beyond Bone Healing
Learn more by calling 800-210-1268
With the increasing number of health supplements these days, you might get confused as to which product will bring you more benefits.
First, you have to ask yourself, “What kind of supplement does your body need?” If you think, it’s bone healing that your body requires, then why don’t you go for a complete calcium mineral supplement?
Calcium is a very important mineral needed by the body in order to have stronger bones. But do you know that the benefit of calcium does not end there? It actually goes beyond healing and that is through a supplement known as coral calcium.
What is coral calcium?
As the name implies, coral calcium comes from coral reefs, which are living organisms that can be found in the ocean off the islands of Okinawa. However, this supplement is not produced directly from living coral reefs, but instead from the remains of a deceased one. When these coral reefs die naturally, the old replaced coral descends to the ocean floor and eventually settles in pockets about 3 to 5 miles from the reef. This is where is it ecologically harvested by a company licensed through the Japanese government. It is called coral calcium, because it is really high in calcium but is also contains magnesium and other mineral content because of the tiny polyps that feed on lots of mineral-rich plankton.
How does coral calcium benefit you, aside from bone healing?
Although there are no clear medical evidences or clinical studies which can prove that coral calcium can treat over 200 diseases, it is still proven to be beneficial in many other ways. These include the following:
1.) Promotes the healthy functioning of the heart
2.) Lowers blood pressure
3.) Makes teeth stronger
4.) Helps nutrients disperse across the cell membranes
5.) Combats osteoporosis
6.) Reduces pregnancy problems
7.) Reduces premenstrual syndrome
8.) Alleviates the body from “free radical damage”
9.) Prevents degenerative diseases
10.) Helps overcome calcium deficiency
Can coral calcium fight diseases?
As mentioned above, although some manufacturers claim that coral calcium can cure over 200 diseases, including cancer, this is still left unproven. But as far as fighting diseases is concerned, it can very much provide that. However, other healthy measures should be observed such as consumption of a well rounded diet including coral calcium, reasonable amounts of protein, plant-based nutrients, regular exercise, and living a less stressful lifestyle.
Learn more about the Best Coral Calcium – Bob’s Best Coral Calcium 2000
The following was released today by the Vitamin D Council:
Vitamin D – SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif., Dec. 1, 2010
After 13 years of silence, the quasi governmental agency, the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) Food and Nutrition Board (FNB), yesterday recommended that a three – pound premature infant can take virtually the same amount of vitamin D as a 300 pound pregnant woman. While that 400 IU/day dose is close to adequate for infants, 600 IU/day in pregnant women will do nothing to help the three childhood epidemics most closely associated with gestational and early childhood vitamin D deficiencies: asthma, auto-immune disorders, and, as recently reported in the largest pediatric journal in the world, autism (1). Professor Bruce Hollis of the Medical University of South Carolina has shown pregnant and lactating women need at least 5,000 IU/day, not 600.
The FNB also reported that vitamin D toxicity might occur at an intake of 10,000 IU/day (250 micrograms), although they could produce no reproducible evidence that 10,000 IU/day has ever caused toxicity in humans and only one poorly conducted study indicating 20,000 IU/day may cause mild elevations in serum calcium but not clinical toxicity.
Viewed with different measure, this FNB report recommends that an infant should take 10 micrograms/day (400 IU) and the pregnant women 15 micrograms/day (600 IU). As a single 30 minutes dose of summer sunshine gives adults more than 10,000 IU (250 micrograms), the FNB is apparently also warning that natural vitamin D input – as occurred from the sun before the widespread use of sunscreen – is dangerous. That is, the FNB is implying that God does not know what she is doing.
Disturbingly, this FNB committee focused on bone health, just like they did 14 years ago. They ignored the thousands of studies from the last ten years that showed higher doses of vitamin D helps: heart health, brain health, breast health, prostate health, pancreatic health, muscle health, nerve health, eye health, immune health, colon health, liver health, mood health, skin health, and especially fetal health. Tens of millions of pregnant women and their breast-feeding infants are severely vitamin D deficient, resulting in a great increase in the medieval disease, rickets. The FNB report seems to reason that if so many pregnant women have low vitamin D blood levels then it must be OK because such low levels are so common. However, such circular logic simply represents the cave man existence of most modern day pregnant women.
Hence, if you want to optimize your vitamin D levels – not just optimize the bone effect – supplementing is crucial. But it is almost impossible to significantly raise your vitamin D levels when supplementing at only 600 IU/day (15 micrograms). Pregnant women taking 400 IU/day have the same blood levels as pregnant women not taking vitamin D; that is, 400 IU is a meaninglessly small dose for pregnant women. Even taking 2,000 IU/day of vitamin D will only increase the vitamin D levels of most pregnant women by about 10 points, depending mainly on their weight. Professor Bruce Hollis has shown that 2,000 IU/day does not raise vitamin D to healthy or natural levels in either pregnant or lactating women. Therefore supplementing with higher amounts — like 5000 IU/day — is crucial for those women who want their fetus to enjoy optimal vitamin D levels, and the future health benefits that go along with it.
For example, taking only two of the hundreds of recently published studies, Professor Urashima and colleagues in Japan gave 1,200 IU/day of vitamin D3 for six months to Japanese 10 year-olds in a randomized controlled trial. They found vitamin D dramatically reduced the incidence of influenza A as well as the episodes of asthma attacks in the treated kids while the placebo group was not so fortunate. If Dr. Urashima had followed the newest FNB recommendations, it is unlikely that 400 IU/day treatment arm would have done much of anything and some of the treated young teenagers may have come to serious harm without the vitamin D. Likewise, a randomized controlled prevention trial of adults by Professor Joan Lappe and colleagues at Creighton University, which showed dramatic improvements in the health of internal organs, used more than twice the FNB’s new adult recommendations.
Finally, the FNB committee consulted with 14 vitamin D experts and – after reading these 14 different reports – the FNB decided to suppress their reports. Many of these 14 consultants are either famous vitamin D researchers, like Professor Robert Heaney at Creighton, or in the case of Professor Walter Willett at Harvard, the single best-known nutritionist in the world. So, the FNB will not tell us what Professors Heaney and Willett thought of their new report? Why not? Yesterday, the Vitamin D Council directed our attorney to file a federal Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the IOM’s FNB for the release of these 14 reports.
I, my family, most of my friends, hundreds of patients, and thousands of readers of the Vitamin D Council newsletter, have been taking 5,000 IU/day for up to eight years. Not only have they reported no significant side-effects, indeed, they have reported greatly improved health in multiple organ systems. My advice: especially for pregnant women, continue taking 5,000 IU/day until your (OH)D] is between 50 ng/ml and 80 ng/ml (the vitamin D blood levels obtained by humans who live and work in the sun and the mid-point of the current reference ranges at all American laboratories). Gestational vitamin D deficiency is not only associated with rickets, but a significantly increased risk of neonatal pneumonia (2), a doubled risk for preeclampsia (3), a tripled risk for gestational diabetes (4), and a quadrupled risk for primary cesarean section (5).
Yesterday, the FNB failed millions of pregnant women whose as yet unborn babies will pay the price. Let us hope the FNB will comply with the spirit of “transparency” by quickly responding to our freedom of Information requests.
John Cannell, MD
1241 Johnson Avenue, #134
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(2)Karatekin G, Kaya A, Salihoglu O, Balci H, Nuhoglu A. Association of subclinical vitamin D deficiency in newborns with acute lower respiratory infection and their mothers. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2009;63(4):473-7.
For More Information on Vitamin D
Higher Doses Reduce Risk of Common Health Concerns
by Chris D. Meletis, ND
Vitamin D3 is one of the most useful nutritional tools we have at our disposal for improving overall health. This vitamin is unique because cholecalciferol (Vitamin D3) is a vitamin derived from 7-dehyrocholesterol; however, Vitamin D3 acquires hormone-like actions when cholecalciferol (Vitamin D3) is converted to 1,25-dihydroxy Vitamin D3 (Calcitriol) by the liver and kidneys. As a hormone, Calcitriol controls phosphorus, calcium, and bone metabolism and neuromuscular function. Vitamin D3 is the only vitamin the body can manufacture from sunlight (UVB). Yet, with today’s indoor living and the extensive use of sunscreens due to concern about skin cancer, we are now a society with millions of individuals deficient in life-sustaining bone building and immune modulating 1,25-dihydroxy Vitamin D3.
For more than a century, scientists have recognized that Vitamin D3 is involved in bone health. Research has continued to accumulate, documenting Calcitriol’s role in the reduction of the risk of fractures to a significant degree. The latest research, however, shows that 1,25-dihyroxy Vitamin D3 deficiency is linked to a surprising number of other health conditions such as depression, back pain, cancer, both insulin resistance and pre-eclampsia during pregnancy, impaired immunity and macular degeneration.
As it becomes clear that Vitamin D3 plays a wide role in overall health, it’s becoming equally clear that a large percentage of individuals are deficient in this important nutrient, which has hormone-like activity. The fear of skin cancer has stopped many individuals from obtaining beneficial amounts of sunlight. The skin uses the energy of UVB to convert 7-dehydrocholesterol into Vitamin D3. Even individuals, who venture out into the sun often and use suntan lotion, may be deficient in Vitamin D3. Furthermore, as we age, we are less equipped to produce sufficient quantities of this vital nutrient. One study found that age-related declines in kidney function may require older people to ingest more Vitamin D3 to maintain the same blood levels as younger people.1
The Recommended Daily Intake (RDI) of Vitamin D3 is set so low those mature individuals who consume this small amount (400 to 600 International Unites (I.U.’s)) are still likely to be deficient if they live north of the Tropic of Cancer or south of the Tropic of Capricorn. In fact, researchers have discovered that the RDI, which was considered adequate to prevent osteomalacia (a painful bone disease) or rickets, is not high enough to protect against the majority of diseases linked to 1,25-dihyroxy Vitamin D3 deficiency. For example, an analysis of the medical literature found that at least 1,000 to 2,000 IU of Vitamin D3 per day is necessary to reduce the risk of colorectal cancer and that lower doses of Vitamin D3 did not have the same protective effect.2
Researchers Call for Higher Doses
In an editorial in the March 2007 edition of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, a prominent group of researchers from leading institutions such as the University of Toronto, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Tufts University and University Hospital in Zurich, Switzerland, lashed out at the conventional media for its inaccurate reporting of Vitamin D supplementation.3
The researchers wrote, “Almost every time the public media report that Vitamin D nutrition status is too low, or that higher Vitamin D intakes may improve measures of health, the advice that accompanies the report is outdated and thus misleading. Media reports to the public are typically accompanied by a paragraph that approximates the following: ‘Current recommendations from the Institute of Medicine call for 200 IU/day from birth through age 50 years, 400 IU for those aged 51–70 years, and 600 IU for those aged >70 years. Some experts say that optimal amounts are closer to 1,000 IU daily. Until more is known, it is wise not to overdo it.’ The only conclusion that the public can draw from this is to do nothing different from what they have done in the past.”
The researchers point out that supplemental intake of 400 IU per day barely raises blood concentrations of 25(OH)D, which is the circulating Vitamin D metabolite that serves as the most frequently measured indicator of Vitamin D status. To raise 25(OH)D from 50 to 80 nmol/L requires an additional intake of 1,700 IU Vitamin D per day.
The researchers went on to write that, “The balance of the evidence leads to the conclusion that the public health is best served by a recommendation of higher daily intakes of Vitamin D. Relatively simple and low-cost changes, such as increased food fortification or increasing the amount of Vitamin D in Vitamin supplement products, may very well bring about rapid and important reductions in the morbidity associated with low Vitamin D status.”
One of the challenges is the outdated acceptable upper limit for Vitamin D3 consumption, which was set at 2,000 IU. However, researchers point out that more recent studies have shown that 10,000 IU is the safe upper limit.4
Dr. R. Vieth, one of the foremost authorities on Vitamin D3 supplementation, has extensively studied Vitamin D, and lamented the low requirements for Vitamin D3 in a recent issue of the Journal of Nutrition: “Inappropriately low UL [upper limit] values, or guidance values, for Vitamin D have hindered objective clinical research on Vitamin D nutrition; they have hindered our understanding of its role in disease prevention, and restricted the amount of Vitamin D in multivitamins and foods to doses (that are) too low to benefit public health.”5
When examining the medical literature, it becomes clear that Vitamin D3 affects human health in an astonishing number of ways and that not obtaining enough of this important nutrient can leave the door open to developing a number of health conditions.
Vitamin D3 deficiency is common in older adults and has been implicated in psychiatric and neurologic disorders. For example, in one study of 80 older adults (40 with mild Alzheimer’s disease and 40 nondemented persons), Vitamin D3 deficiency was associated with low mood and with impairment on two of four measures of cognitive performance.6
Musculoskeletal disorders have been linked to Vitamin D3 deficiency in a number of studies. One of the newest studies explored the role that low Vitamin D3 levels play in the development of chronic low back pain in women. Sixty female patients in Egypt complaining of low back pain lasting more than three months were studied. Researchers measured levels of Vitamin D3 in the women with low back pain and compared those levels to those of 20 matched healthy controls.
The study revealed that patients with low back pain had significantly lower Vitamin D3 levels than controls. Low Vitamin D3 levels (25 OHD < 40 ng/ml) were found in 49/60 patients (81 percent) and 12/20 (60 percent) of controls.7
One of the best known and long-established benefits of Vitamin D3 is its ability to improve bone health and the health of the musculoskeletal system. It is well documented that Vitamin D3 deficiency causes osteopenia, precipitates and exacerbates osteoporosis, causes a painful bone disease known as osteomalacia, and exacerbates muscle weakness, which increases the risk of falls and fractures. Vitamin D3 insufficiency may alter the regulatory mechanisms of parathyroid hormone (PTH) and cause a secondary hyperparathyroidism that increases the risk of osteoporosis and fractures.8
Scientists are developing a greater appreciation for Vitamin D3’s ability to improve cognition. In a recent study, Vitamin D3 deficient subjects scored worse on mental function tests compared to individuals who had higher levels of the Vitamin.9 The researchers wrote, “In conclusion, the positive, significant correlation between serum 25(OH)D concentration and MMSE [mental state examination scores] in these patients suggests a potential role for Vitamin D in cognitive function of older adults.”
One researcher first noted the connection between Vitamin D3 and protection from cancer in the 1940s, when he discovered that individuals at sunny latitudes had a reduced rate of deaths from cancer. He suggested that sunlight provided “a relative cancer immunity.”
Since then, a number of studies have strongly suggested that Vitamin D3 deficiency is associated with an increased risk of developing many forms of cancer including breast, ovarian, prostate and colon cancer.10 In one recent clinical trial, researchers studied 1,179 healthy, postmenopausal women (all 55 years or older and free of known cancers for at least 10 years prior to entering the study) who were taking large amounts of Vitamin D3 with calcium. The subjects were randomly assigned to take daily dosages of: (1) 1,400-1,500 mg supplemental calcium, (2) 1,400-1,500 mg supplemental calcium plus 1,100 IU of Vitamin D3, or (3) placebos. Over the four-year trial, women in the calcium/Vitamin D3 group experienced a 60 percent or greater reduced risk of cancer than their peers in the placebo group, who were not consuming these supplements.
Because there was the chance that some women may have had undiagnosed cancers at the study’s start, the researchers threw out the first-year results and then analyzed the results from the last three years of the trial. These later years resulted in even more dramatic decrease, with the calcium/Vitamin D3 group experiencing a 77 percent reduction in cancer risk.
There was no statistically significant difference in cancer incidence between the participants taking placebos and subjects consuming only calcium supplements.11
Another interesting study demonstrated that in vitro Vitamin D3 may cause tumor cells to be more sensitive to chemotherapy drugs, increasing the efficacy of the cancer treatment.12
Scientists have linked various aspects of immune health to a Vitamin D3 deficiency. Vitamin D3 regulates T cells, which are important to the functioning of a strong immune system. Vitamin D3 acts as an immune system modulator, preventing excessive expression of inflammatory cytokines and increasing the killing efficiency of macrophages. In addition, it dramatically stimulates the expression of potent anti-microbial peptides, which exist in immune system cells such as neutrophils, monocytes, natural killer cells, and in cells lining the respiratory tract. These Vitamin-D3-stimulated peptides play a major role in protecting the lung from infection.13
In addition, Vitamin D3 deficiency may influence development and progression of various autoimmune diseases.14
Vitamin D3 deficiency has been linked to a host of other conditions such as high blood pressure, fibromyalgia, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, and an increased risk of pre-eclampsia and insulin resistance during pregnancy.11,15-16 Most recently, low Vitamin D3 levels have been linked to an increased prevalence of early age-related macular degeneration.17
In many of my patients, even after consuming 2,000 to 4,000 IU of Vitamin D3 per day, their test results indicate that their Vitamin D3 levels have not increased. These patients needed to consume 8,000 IU of Vitamin D3 per day to achieve proper blood levels of the Vitamin. Patients should, therefore, have their physicians test their serum 1,25-dihyroxy D3 levels to determine the proper level of supplementation required. Testing is very important due to the fact that, in a small number of patients, Vitamin D3 supplementation can raise calcium levels to an excessively high level. I have found this to be especially true in African American patients. Testing for 1,25-dihyroxy Vitamin D3, PTH and calcium blood levels should therefore become a part of every woman’s regular blood work.
A growing number of researchers who have widely studied Vitamin D3 are almost begging the general public to consume more of this important nutrient. Due to Vitamin D3’s high safety profile in doses up to 10,000 IU per day and because of the wide role it plays in our health, consuming 2,000 to 4,000 IU per day of this nutrient at times of the year when sunlight is scarce is a prudent way to improve overall health.
For years, Robert Barefoot has been recommending that 15,000 iu of Vitamin D3 be used as a daily supplement. Bob believes that soon, this small amount will replace the above recommendation to support the overall health of people everywhere.
1. Vieth R, Ladak Y, Walfish PG. Age-related changes in the 25-hydroxyVitamin D versus parathyroid hormone relationship suggest a different reason why older adults require more Vitamin D. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003 Jan;88(1):185-91.
2. Gorham ED, Garland CF, Garland FC, Grant WB, Mohr SB, Lipkin M, Newmark HL, Giovannucci E, Wei M, Holick MF. Optimal Vitamin D status for colorectal cancer prevention: a quantitative meta analysis. Am J Prev Med. 2007 Mar;32(3):210-6.
3. Vieth R, Bischoff-Ferrari H, Boucher BJ, Dawson-Hughes B, Garland CF, Heaney RP, Holick MF, Hollis BW, Lamberg-Allardt C, McGrath JJ, Norman AW, Scragg R, Whiting SJ, Willett WC, Zittermann A. The urgent need to recommend an intake of Vitamin D that is effective. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. March 2007;85(3):649-650.
4. Hathcock JN, Shao A, Vieth R, Heaney R. Risk assessment for Vitamin D. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Jan;85(1):6-18.
5. Vieth R. Critique of the considerations for establishing the tolerable upper intake level for Vitamin D: critical need for revision upwards. J Nutr. 2006 Apr;136(4):1117-22.
6. Wilkins CH, Sheline YI, Roe CM, Birge SJ, Morris JC. Vitamin D deficiency is associated with low mood and worse cognitive performance in older adults. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2006 Dec;14(12):1032-40.
7. Lotfi A, Abdel-Nasser AM, Hamdy A, Omran AA, El-Rehany MA. HypoVitaminosis D in female patients with chronic low back pain. Clin Rheumatol. 2007 Mar 22; [Epub ahead of print].
8. Pérez-López FR. Vitamin D and its implications for musculoskeletal health in women: An update. Maturitas. 2007 Jun 28; [Epub ahead of print].
9. Przybelski RJ, Binkley NC. Is Vitamin D important for preserving cognition? A positive correlation of serum 25-hydroxyVitamin D concentration with cognitive function. Arch Biochem Biophys. 2007 Apr 15;460(2):202-5.
10. Grant WB. An estimate of premature cancer mortality in the U.S. due to inadequate doses of solar ultraviolet-B radiation. Cancer. 2002 Mar 15;94(6):1867-75.
11. Lappe J, Travers-Gustafson D, Davies K, Recker R, Heaney R. Vitamin D and calcium supplementation reduces cancer risk: results of a randomized trial. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. June 8;85(6):1586-1591.
12. Ma Y, et al. Study presented at the 2007 centennial meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), April 14 to 18, 2007, Los Angeles.
13. Cannell JJ, Vieth R, Umhau JC, Holick MF, Grant WB, Madronich S, Garland CF, Giovannucci E. Epidemic influenza and Vitamin D. Epidemiol Infect. 2006 Dec;134(6):1129-40.
14. Kuryłowicz A, Bednarczuk T, Nauman J. [The influence of Vitamin D deficiency on cancers and autoimmune diseases development.] [Article in Polish] Endokrynol Pol. 2007;58(2):140-152.
15. Bodnar LM, Catov JM, Simhan HN, Holick MF, Powers RW, Roberts JM. Maternal Vitamin D deficiency increases the risk of preeclampsia. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007 May 29; [Epub ahead of print].
16. Maghbooli Z, Hossein-Nezhad A, Karimi F, Shafaei AR, Larijani B. Correlation between Vitamin D(3) deficiency and insulin resistance in pregnancy. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2007 Jul 2; [Epub ahead of print].
17. Parekh N, Chappell RJ, Millen AE, Albert DM, Mares JA. Association Between Vitamin D and Age-Related Macular Degeneration in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988 Through 1994. Arch Ophthalmol. May 2007;125: 661-669.