Evening Gail,
>> At 11:21 AM 12/20/2007,
I have followed all these messages with interest. As you stated, I am not
sure all the messages and data serve to un confuse anyone that is confused.
Everyone seems to be looking for a magic set of numbers.
I have stood by my original numbers dating back to the 50's and 60's.
1500 Ca and 750 Mg.
>>Suggested not to take more than 500 mg. calcium & more magnesium. I still
>> don't really know what to think about it.
The numbers of 1500 and 750 held for many years, and are even found recently.
I am aware of the massive data that now supports different numbers.
A therapeutic dose should be different than a maintenance dose of course.
Many other associated things enter in and must be given equal consideration.
The big one...... "Proper Calcium Metabolism" is at the top of the list,
along with 100 things that effect this. The para thyroid gland function is
essential to even get to first base.
Sunlight, Vitamin D, and Phosphors all enter in.
I don't believe that you, me, or anyone will find the perfect magic
numbers. Too many variables enter into the picture.
Dee's statement,
I think its because calcium seems to be in almost everything we eat,
whereas magnesium isn't.
I agree that is true, for some people, but not everyone.
Overall eating habits and the availability of food are the determining
factors.
And I agree, the solution to the puzzle is not handwriting on the wall.
Some fast, quick and easy reference is here.
http://www.fugitt.com/trailmix.htm
Same data as the USDA database but faster and easier to use.
Any food listed can be checked in 5 to 10 seconds at most. ( all the items in
a 100 gram portion )
Ca, Mg, K, and Phosphorous, ( P ) are all shown, along with many more
items.
I carry Ca, Mg, and K around in my pocket. Never had a broke bone in
my life.
You can save all those files easily. I wanted them there for quick reference.
I know many people that have had joint replacement due to destroyed
metabolism by drugs. A disaster for sure.
Wayne
=====================
