Vitamin K in a large dose... calcification, autism, oxalates....

http://www.gutresearch.com/VitaminK.pdf

It talks about using 15 mg of Vitamin K.... any thoughts on this CS?

1....,

The author was a member of the yahoo oxalate forum. She branched off and created her own following seperate from that forum. In short, some of the info is not accurate especially concerning Vitamin K and oxalates.

So would you not recommend a high dose of vit k??

I do recommend Vitamin K but not for oxalate issues.

Here is a good statement from the owner of the yahoo forum


----------------------------------------------

Many people with bad intestinal tracts have poor assimilation of vitamin K and
all the other fat soluble vitamins mainly because of problems digesting fat.
This has nothing to do with oxalate, but it is a problem in its own right.

It does have something to do with calcium regulation, but is only one type of
regulation among many. Vitamin K doesn't really seem to move calcium regulation
in a direction that is helpful to LOD because it may reduce the levels of
calcium that are needed to bind oxalate.

Studies have shown that calcium and magnesium PROTECT the body from the damage
from oxalate, even when given directly in the blood through an IV, because
oxalate as a free ion gets into cells where it does its damage when it ISN'T
bound to calcium. So having vitamin K reducing calcium where its dependent
proteins are located is if anything a disadvantage! It is very difficult to
support a need for high doses of vitamin K with the existing science.

I also recently did a lit review here looking at any established relationship
between vitamin K and calcium channels, and again, the effect appeared to be
negative rather than positive, but involved a form of vitamin K no longer given
to humans, but only pets. There were no studies on other forms of vitamin K and
certainly no studies showing a beneficial mechanism.

It is harder for oxalate to get in cells when it is a salt, but when it is a
free ion, once it moves into places like the nucleus, the mitochondrion and the
endoplasmic reticulum, free oxalate can be a severe disrupter of calcium
regulation and that disrupts endocytosis (cells bringing in food from outside
the cell) and exocytosis (which is delivering goods from the cell to the outside
world. That would include functions like the discharge of hormones and
neurotransmitters. Oxalate also tangles with cell death regulation by what it
does to calcium regulation INSIDE cells as a free anion.

So the strategy that works better is to decrease your absorption of oxalate from
food by taking calcium before meals. This is not conjecture. There are studies
after studies showing that calcium taken before meals reduces the absorption of
oxalate. This is not a megadose...a fourth of the RDA of calcium, taken without
vitamin D, is plenty!

Asem, I don't know where you got your information about vitamin K, but I wish I
knew who besides Catherine Tamaro and her vitamin K listserve was putting out
the information that vitamin K has anything to do with oxalate. It is a
separate issue. The ideas that there might be a link between oxalate and
vitamin K was based on a very basic misunderstanding about why and how oxalate
is toxic.

If you want to read the review of her paper I did way back when addressing
individual points, I think it is in our archives.

If vitamin K dependent proteins are binding calcium before it gets in cells, it
is actually causing more harm to someone high in oxalate than helping.

Catherine mistook the issue with oxalate being the formation of kidney stones or
crystals elsewhere made of calcium oxalate, when we really don't see kidney
stones often at all in autism despite high levels of urinary oxalate. A study
now in peer review about autism confirmed a general lack of added risk in autism
for kidney stones, and found the reason kidney stones don't seem to be a risk in
autism...but it confirmed that oxalate is really high, even in those not on
special diets or with GI problems or with urinary problems. These were children
we might have thought WOULDN'T have an oxalate problem, but they did!

Oxalate being significantly higher than normal in children with autism we would
consider low risk for oxalate was confirmed in their study in both blood and
urine.

When oxalate gets into cells as a free anion, it inhibits the carboxylase
enzymes which are biotin dependent, and it inhibits many individual enzymes
involved in the very process of cells making their own energy. The improvements
we've seen on LOD are very tied up in THAT issue, but not often in issues
related to crystals, except perhaps when "dumping" when there may be urinary
pain, or perhaps accounting for a lot of stiffness in some people that tends to
go away on LOD.

Have you read everything in the "A resource for beginners" folder in the files
section? That is really where to start.

I never recommend someone who has been doing a high dose of anything to stop
cold turkey, but you work with your child's doctor in easing off the vitamin K
and maybe sticking to the RDA or close to that. If your child has coagulation
problems, then definitely talk to your doctor about what dose is appropriate for
that problem. Problems in coagulation are supposed to be the first place you
see a sign of vitamin K deficiency.

What is in your electolyte formula? If it contains calcium and magnesium, that
would probably be fine to continue. You do need extra electrolytes when you are
absorbing a great deal of oxalate, as the oxalate can tie up those ions so they
cannot be used for their ordinary purposes.

If you want to get a better feel for "dumping" which is when the body throws off
oxalate that has accumulated in cells, then you can look in the files section
under "case histories" and you will find files about dumping, testimonials, and
sandy stools.

But it is very common when a child (or adult) is dumping for him to feel
disagreeable!

I hope this helps and welcome to our list!

Susan

Another post from the yahoo forum regarding Catherine's paper in the link above




There is not a single article that I could find in medline on calcium, diet and
excitotoxicity that suggested calcium restriction to the diet had any relevance
or reasonableness at all! An article on Alzheimer's (see below)that I found in
that search explained that "Age-related increases in cellular oxidative stress,
and impairment of energy metabolism, result in disruption of neuronal calcium
homeostasis and increased vulnerability of neurons to excitotoxicity and
apoptosis."

Oxalate is known to create cellular oxidative stress and impairment of the the
energy metabolism and results in disruption of neuronal calcium homeostasis, and
yes, leads to excitotoxicity and cell death!

The science is clear: Restricting calcium may make this issue with oxalate much
worse!

Why blame calcium in the diet? (I hesitate to ask this, but isn't this another
of Catherine Tamaro's ideas? It seems I have heard that she is against calcium
supplements, but could she be the one who is interpreting the science of
calcium's use for Dr. Usman's staff? Will you ask this doctor where he got this
idea?)

If a doctor is used to seeing patients who only have a high oxalate diet, he may
have a completely different impression about how a lot of things work or don't
work!

Calcium does a thousand things biologically and there is no cheating on calcium
regulation. If your blood levels get low, the body will respond by giving
signals to break down bone to release more calcium. If the levels are too high,
there are signals to rectify that.

Does someone blame the city for putting water in your water pipes if you have a
leak? No the problem is what caused the leak!

Calcium in the gut is needed in limited ways for absorption but mostly for
binding the oxalate in your food. If the calcium levels are too low, doubtless
the hormonal environment will change and calcium absorption will be stepped up
as well as the breakdown of bones to release calcium. The body certainly
doesn't interpret calcium as an enemy since every cell needs calcium to regulate
absorption and secretion at the cellular level.

Our bodies have been designed to leave 80% of the calcium in our diet in the
stool. It is there to bind the oxalate and that protects us from one of the
most potentially toxic compounds found in plant food!

Cells regulate signalling through measuring differences in ion concentration
across a membrane. It is changes in the ratio of inside to outside values that
builds up the situation that can lead to a neuron firing. It is NOT absolute
values, but is more like the ratio of inside to outside levels. This is not an
issue of excess supply.

Kidney doctors thought for years that restricting calcium would lead to a
reduction of calcium oxalate stones. They thought, since the stones were made
from calcium, that this seemed logical. What everyone found out when scientists
actually tested real patients is that those who restricted calcium had WORSE
problems with kidney stones, and that those who took extra calcium had fewer
problems. This doesn't make sense unless you understand compartmentation, but
once you do understand the differences in calcium's regulation in the body and
specifically in the gut, then it makes perfect sense why restricting calcium
backfired. Where oxalate is at all in the picture, restricting calcium will
backfire as a "treatment" for excitotoxicity!

I don't know that Dr. Usman and her staff have much experience with LOD. Do you
know differently?

They may not know that oxalate destroys feedback mechanisms within the cell that
are supposed to be measuring the levels of calcium within the compartments of
the cell and making adjustments to intracellular calcium regulation. When
oxalate is absorbed into a cell, it ties up intracellular calcium both in the
cytosol and in compartments like the endoplasmic reticulum, the mitochondrion
and even the nucleus of cells. This throws off the ability of the calcium pumps
to perceive and regulate the relative concentrations within and without these
compartments, and that is a huge dysregulation which may lead to cell death by
necrosis or apoptosis.

Those concerned with excitotoxicity are worried about cell death, but leaving
free oxalate to be absorbed into cells is also a distinctive way to kill cells.

The Gamelins studied the effect of oxalate on neurons and discovered that it
dysregulated calcium-regulated sodium channels. That led to neuronal
excitotoxicity in a way that was ALLEVIATED by giving their patients calcium and
magnesium infusions. See the study below.

It was not a surprise when our listmate Rachelle who has myontonic dystrophy
found that reducing oxalate (much to her complete surprise) reduced her symptoms
of this form of muscular dystrophy. The gene defect in this condition affects
the operation of the calcium pump in the endoplasmic reticulum that is known to
be disrupted by oxalate.

but, you can look at myotonic dystrophy and find literature implicating calcium
in the condition, but that doesn't mean calcium is evil, it means that it is
dysregulated in the disease and apparently oxalate could be a big part of that
dysregulation.

another post


Catherine Tamaro thinks calcium is the bad guy! It was very difficult to
know how to address this view she started promotinng when it was obvious
that her exposure to how calcium functions biologically was so limited and
shaped by only studying one tiny area of calcium regulation, only one view
of the "elephant". Of course, in graduate school I had to study the whole
elephant and from my own studies I knew quite a lot of obscure things about
calcium independent of oxalate and obscure enough to be unknown to my
professors, as I discovered by asking them.

Peer review is supposed to provide that people who know as much or more on
your topic can read new information and evaluate and critique
it....something I offered Catherine before she "published" her paper, but
she declined, and sent the paper instead to the "masses" who would not have
the background to evaluate it and put it in context. Catherine's
paper came out during a serious family health crisis and at the time I
could not take the time to write a critique, but I did later. I think it
is in the archives and you should probably read it.

Oxalate is toxic itself....not only because it binds calcium. It binds and
interferes in the metabolism in dozens of ways that have nothing to do with
calcium, but Catherie was not aware of this and made calcium the "bad
guy". Oxalate does interfere seriously with calcium metabolism in a way
similar to the experimental chemical BAPTA because it is a chelator of
calcium, but unfortunately, it tends to crystallize under certain
circumstances once it finds a sufficient concentration of calcium that is
abnormal, and that can happen all over the body, but it is not the
exclusive evidence of the presence of oxalate. The calcium itself is not
evil. Like anything, if it is taken where it doesn't belong, it can be a
problem, especially if it cannot get out.

But yes, as far as this diet is concerned, you have named the key benefits
to taking oral calcium, and these are in and from the medical literature.

I had a long talk with Dr. Maria Jesus Clavera who does LOD with all her
patients in Spain and Europe with ASDs. She is finding that magnesium
works just as well clinically in her opinion. The literature about this
area is written about calcium not magnesium which is why I went with
standard protocols. I did learn that magnesium had a bit of a downside in
that literature, in possibly making the gut leakier, if I am remembering
correctly. I will try and find some time to look that over again so you
can consider the evidence. Dr. Clavera was trying to find a way to reduce
some of the symptoms of dumping, and this helped, in her opinion.

But, magnesium itself can bind oxalate and it stays more soluble for
longer. For that reason, and because a lot of children seem to have
magnesium defciency problems which may have been brought on by the oxalate
they had been consuming, I certainly think it is OK to make your own
comparisons and go with what seems to work best: calcium, magnesium or both.

I noticed the Gamelins in their study of the neurotoxicity of oxalate in
cancer patients given oxaliplatin opted for using both calcium and
magnesium in an IV to protect against oxalate damage to the nervous
system. This was a completely different compartment and told us that these
cations IN THE BLOOD protect us from neurotoxicity from oxalate: an issue
separate from its role in preventing absorption of oxalate from food. This
was in a population with no particular risks for kidney disease, and the
oxalate didn't produce kidney problems but it did produce neurotoxicity.
For this reason, restricting calcium seems SCARY if you are at the same
time permitting high exposure to oxalate. If calcium oxalate were
obviously involved in the brain in autism it would have been discovered
long ago. Whatever role oxalate plays in the brain in autism, it is at
this point insidious and hidden, and probably NOT very likely to involve
visible calcium oxalate crystals.

But there is no evidence that vitamin K dependent proteins dissolve
crystals. There is evidence that some vitamin K dependent protein helps to
prevent crystals forming when also in the urine and when the concentration
of calcium and oxalate in urine are sufficient for crystalization to start,
but there is no evidence that this has ANY relevance to autism since
autistic children don't tend to have kidney stones. In fact, the evidence
from a study now in peer review is that there are reasons that their risk
of forming stones may be reduced.

Catherine was targetting the wrong enemy!

The body will not compromise on the regulation of key elements in the
body. If you restrict calcium, it will draw the calcium from the bones to
compensate and run the rest of the body's metabolism. Calcium is key for
the ability of cells to take in and get rid of things, and this cannot be
compromised.

This is why there have been several experiments done in rats where the RDA
for rat calcium given in the experiment came from spinach, which is high
oxalate. Because of the oxalate in the spinach, not only did the animals
die, but you could take their bones and bend them like plastic, because
they were not calcified. So also were their teeth uncalcified. You can
borrow from the bones for just so long, and then you have to pay the
piper. To tell someone eating high levels of oxalate to restrict calcium
is unbelievably unwise. Where is her dietary source of calcium? Are these
kids off dairy? Is she having people doing bone density tests to make sure
they are not pulling calcium from their bones?

If Catherine thinks high dose vitamin K can keep this depletion of bone
calcium from happening when layered with a high intake of oxalate, then
she should get a paper published using experimental ANIMALS using these
procedures to prove her theories, and not suggest that people experiment
with this first in their young children.

Please read the following papers to understand the limitations of absorbing
calcium from vegetables if those veggies or anything in the diet is high
oxalate:

http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/reprint/117/11/1903

http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/reprint/18/3/233.pdf

Also note the VERY HIGH LEVELS OF VITAMIN K that was given to these animals
IN their spinach! Did it help mineralize their bones WHEN they were
getting the RDA of calcium but eating high amounts of
oxalate? NO!! Emphatically, NO!

I've never suggested megadosing calcium, but the issue with the calcium is
TIMING....giving the calcium before meals. It is NORMAL for 80% to go
unabsorbed, for its real role in the gut is more for prevention of
absorption of oxalate than it is in enhancing bone calcium. But that 20%
that we do absorb is needed so that we can make up for the calcium lost in
urine and feces and sweat, and of course, in children, for growth.

So why do you recommend high does of Vit K. After reading those it seems like it is a bad thing

1..... - I believe that 1 to 5 mg of K2 or more is good. Note that vegetable based (planet based) vitamin K is K1, and it does not appear to affect bone metabolism to any significant degree (if at all). K2 on the other hand does.

Calcium intake should be from food preferably and note that osteporosis is generally lowest in countries that have a low calcium intake. The Parathyroid takes care of the calcium uptake.

Dietary calcium appears to be beneficial for men, yet in in cases of supplementation, it is usually not advisable except in special circumstances.

I have a nose bleeding problem... do you think this is because of a vitamin K deficiency?

1..... - Nose bleeds can be caused from a variety of things, vitamin K deficiency is very unlikely and only occurs to this magnitude for coumadin/warfarin 'therapy' patients.

CausticSymmetry wrote:
Dietary calcium appears to be beneficial for men, yet in in cases of supplementation, it is usually not advisable except in special circumstances.

CS,

What are those circumstances? Is there a specific lab test?

I take 400-700mg magnesium/day with no calcium supplementation, and no calcium fortified foods.