Apple
Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2015
- Messages
- 1,267
Takuo Fujita, MD, PhD (February 10, 1929 to November 8, 2022)
link.springer.com
Ray Peat cited T. Fujita in some of his articles regarding calcium and PTH.
He developed a theory which he called the ‘Calcium Paradox’, that is, the contradiction between the essential and toxic actions of calcium, it was the starting point of his research.
Good-Bye to Calcium Paradox
In order to escape from the threat of calcium Paradox, we should fight with a two-edged sword. One is re-mobilization of the excessively mobilized Ca back to the bone though exercise, and the other Ca supplementation by providing a new source to disrupt the vicious cycle. AAACa, active absorbable algal calcium, is the most effective supplement shown to increase bone mineral density reduce fractureand to meet this requirement [7,8]. Extremely low Ca intake in Japan and other East Asian countries, 600 mg/day or less, should be doubled by effective Ca supplementation. Addition of vitamin D derivatives also helps. We have then nothing to worry about our bone health to continue a healthy and constructive life.
You have developed a theory which you call the ‘Calcium Paradox’ What exactly does it say?
It’s a paradox because we see the opposite of what we would expect. All of us are calcium deficient. I think everybody agrees with that. Everybody also agrees that when we are deficient in blood calcium, the bone will lose its calcium. Whole body calcium deficiency runs parallel to bone calcium deficiency. Calcium deficiency is a cause of [bone loss], though others may cite other causes-for example estrogen deficiency also contributes to calcium deficiency. We summarize by saying the cause of [bone loss] is calcium deficiency. But the paradoxical part occurs when the parathyroid hormone secretion increases in response to the blood calcium deficiency. The first important thing about calcium is that we should have an abundant supply to keep our bones strong. The next most important is its function in heart and brain action, and muscles. All these vital body functions are maintained by a constant abundance of calcium in the body. If we don’t keep calcium levels in the blood constant, the heart stops. Dr. Ringer of England demonstrated this many years ago and we still us Ringer’s calcium solutions. If you add calcium chloride to a saline (sodium chloride) solution, the heart will beat. Dr. Ringer demonstrated this with a frog’s heart. He removed the heart, put it in saline solution and the heart stopped. When he added calcium to the solution, the heart began to move. The fact that we need a constant amount of calcium is the beginning of the calcium paradox theory. We must keep our blood calcium constant but we don’t eat enough calcium. If this calcium deficiency were to bring down blood calcium, your heart would stop. That’s a terrible thing. Fortunately, it doesn’t stop because in response to even a very slight fall of blood calcium, the parathyroid hormone takes calcium out of the bone. Compared with the modest needs of the rest of the body, bone is an almost endless supply of calcium. It’s like a bank with a large amount of money. If you have a problem, you go to the bank and borrow. The parathyroid hormone is like a cash card. But if you use your cash card enough times, your bank account will become exhausted. That’s [bone loss]. And now the paradox begins. Calcium coming out of the bone enters other tissues where there shouldn’t be any calcium to begin with. For example, in the blood vessels. Blood vessels should be soft and elastic. Bones should be hard and strong. There shouldn’t be too much calcium in the blood vessels. They become hardened. […] This is the first calcium paradox [condition] which came to our attention. Deficiency of calcium results in flooding of calcium in the blood vessels. […]There are many other calcium paradox diseases[…].
So you’re saying that the parathyroid gland removes calcium from the bone at such a rate that our health is compromised?
Our body should be very wise. It shouldn’t make any mistakes. But in this instance I don’t know. Sometimes, it does strange things. Why does the parathyroid hormone take an excessive amount of calcium? Because there is so much calcium in the bones-ten thousand times more than we eat or have in our blood or soft tissue, so even our wise body doesn’t exactly do the best thing. That is one thing I don’t understand. But we have all the facts and the calcium paradox is only one attempt to explain all these facts. I don’t really have an answer.
All your studies so far have been done in Japan, but some people may be concerned that the Japanese diet is different from the North American diet. Would you expect to see similar results in a North American study group?
Well, the Japanese live very long. They have the highest longevity in the world. They say that fish and seaweed is good for them. The sushi bar is quite popular in this country. But the only trouble with the Japanese diet is that is is very low in calcium content. You are taking more calcium here in this country and in the Western world than in Japan. Other countries in Asia like Korea and China also have a very low calcium intake, so that may be one reason why calcium is so effective in Japan. But I think we can expect similar effects-maybe not the same but similar-in the United States, because many investigators in the United States also point out that even Americans are not taking enough calcium. In addition to the intake of calcium we have also to think of the loss of calcium. If you take large amounts of protein or phosphates-if you eat meat and all kinds of delicious foods you’re already taking a lot of phosphates and protein-and that will accelerate the loss of calcium in the urine. So we have to consider both sides-what you are taking and what you are losing. I’m afraid that although Americans are taking more calcium, they’re also losing more calcium. So I think we are almost equal. We are taking less calcium, but our calcium loss may also be lower, so i’d expect similar effects.
It’s important to note that you were giving your patients about 600mg of calcium a day with food. According to U.S, figures I’ve read, that’s about what the typical American receives.
That’s right. Actually calcium intake varies widely among different countries. Some people take enough calcium-mainly health-conscious people-but elderly people in most countries are not taking enough. Their appetite diminishes and they don’t feel right. And of course the problem of sunshine exposure is very important. Without sufficient exposure to sunlight, you can’t make enough Vitamin D to stimulate calcium absorption. Some people in the United States are also calcium deficient, like many Japanese, and I don’t think there’s too much difference in calcium intake.
In the United States, a calcium and magnesium complex is quite popular. How would you compare that compound with AAACa (AdvaCAL)?
Well, calcium and magnesium are both important but we don’t have to combine them. The ratio of calcium to magnesium is not important, as long as we are taking enough of both. Too much calcium intake is never dangerous, but too much magnesium can be. So I think calcium is the only one of which you can take as much as you want and get away with it, but you shouldn’t take too much magnesium. I don’t think we have to combine these two. You may take magnesium if it’s necessary. Too much calcium may constipate you-it’s one of the unavoidable effects of calcium because calcium takes water away from food and makes the stool harder. Magnesium doesn’t do that, so that’s why magnesium is used against constipation. I already use magnesium along with calcium, but not as a fixed preparation.
AAACa is comprised of calcium hydroxide and calcium oxide, which you have mentioned are highly soluble in water. Can their high solubility produce any side effects or other problems?
Strangely, I encountered no side effects except maybe some constipation in some people. You may feel a little full in your stomach if you take large amount of calcium but it doesn’t mean that calcium decreases the appetite. Hyper-acidic people-who secrete more acid in the stomach-may tend to have ulcers, and calcium neutralizes gastric acid. But when calcium disappears from the stomach there may be a rebound of gastric acid secretion. It doesn’t happen in healthy people, only hyper-acidic people have this problem.
If the parathyroid gland is clever enough to extract calcium from bone when it’s necessary, why doesn’t it regulate the amount it selects?
That’s a very good question, but I don’t really have an answer.
Are other factors involved, or is this purely the responsibility of the parathyroid?
The parathyroid is a very strange hormone. To begin with, there is no parathyroid in fish, but they live easily without it. They are continually inhaling calcium-rich water and have a non-stop supply of calcium. It only develops in creatures living on land, like ourselves. There might be some difference between constant increase in parathyroid hormone and occasional (periodic) increase. Now, is parathyroid hormone good or bad? It must be good because we need parathyroid hormone. But constantly high parathyroid hormone levels are not good. We have statistics showing that people with lower parathyroid hormone live longer and those with higher parathyroid hormone levels die earlier. […]
Is it possible that vitamin D is more helpful when taken with some calcium preparations than with others?
Yes. It all depends on the solubility of the product in question. It must be soluble and iodized. Otherwise it just goes through the gut. According to some figure, it is more soluble than others, even calcitonin-five to ten times more soluble. Solubility is very easy to measure by electrical conductivity. Soluble ions conduct electrical current. AAACa is amazingly soluble.
What is the effect of exercise on [bone loss]?
Exercise will activate the bone cells to prevent calcium loss from bone. And if you stop exercise, the reverse process occurs. You lose bone. So by exercising, you are preventing bone loss. Both exercise and calcium intake are important-we can’t substitute exercise for calcium. But if Both exercise and calcium intake are important-we can’t substitute exercise for calcium. But if we exercise more, we also stimulate calcium absorption. It increases appetite, so you can eat more. and an elevated metabolism stimulates calcium absorption. So all these things aid calcium absorption.
Is weight-bearing exercise more useful?
Yes. It is physical pressure on bone that stimulates bone cells. But all exercise, weight-bearing or not, stimulates calcium absorption. Swimming, for example, is non weight-bearing. Walking is weight-bearing. Calcium absorption is also affected by emotional factors. Exercise is good relaxation that makes you feel happier and stronger. This is important because you have to be happy. You have to be out of distress to absorb enough calcium. Stress and unhappiness decrease calcium absorption. Adrenaline and cortico-steroid hormones are secreted during stress. They facilitate calcium loss and prevent gut absorption. You can eat a lot of calcium, but if it’s taken in a state of harmony, while chatting with friends, for example, then more calcium is absorbed. So what we need are three things: calcium, exercise and happiness. And of course calcium makes you happy. So calcium is everything!
What about dietary sources of calcium?
Milk is a very common source of calcium, but it also contains a lot of phosphorus, which combines with calcium and prevents it from being absorbed. Tofu is good, but not many North Americans eat it. You can eat small fish with bones, like sardines-even canned sardines. But bone calcium is also rich in phosphorus. The ideal dietary source should be low in phosphorus and high in calcium. For Americans milk is alright. It is readily absorbed. They say that broccoli and kale are better than milk, but they don’t contain much calcium and you have to eat such large quantities that it’s not practical. In general, milk is alright. If you are high in cholesterol then low-fat milk is all right. But I would recommend AAACa over any dietary source, because it has no phosphorus. It’s superior to any calcium found in foods.
What about people who are not suffering from serious [bone loss] but just want to prevent it. We don’t want to tell everybody to go on calcium therapy…or do we?
Oh sure-everybody should take calcium. I’m not osteoporotic, but I take it regularly. As a result my EKG went down. Another thing-calcium makes you happy. It works against stress. […] Calcium has a tranquilizing effect. So kids watching television should take calcium first. It keeps you happy and peaceful. That’s why everybody needs calcium […].
So perhaps we could use calcium to promote world peace.
Well, it’s strange. You may find me overenthusiastic about calcium, but as the years go by I have no reason to reverse myself, because I don’t find anything against it. All the facts go along with my theory.
The only thing against it is constipation?
Not against it, but we expect it. America has a stressful society like Japan and we you calcium to make you less stressful, so there will be less crime and less juvenile delinquency and all these things. You need calcium in the schools.
What is the physiological basis for happiness?
Any minor decrease in blood ionized calcium will make you unhappy. The brain or muscles become excited when there’s even a slight fall in blood calcium levels, especially ionized calcium. There are two types of calcium-protein-bound and ionized. Although we’re talking about ionized calcium, we just say calcium. If there is a slight decrease in calcium then you are more excited and irritable. A readily absorbable calcium will correct the slight decrease of blood calcium promptly. A slight decrease of blood calcium makes everybody uneasy and irritable. […]
As opposed to protein-bound?
Yes, because calcium is associated with protein very easily, according to stress or other conditions. The ionized fraction act directly on the brain, and protein acts as a kind of buffer. Usually, we measure total calcium, which doesn’t change very easily, but if we measure ionized calcium we can show these effects. Calcium is a kind of hormone, in the same way as vitamin D. Simple minerals like potassium, sodium and all other salts don’t have receptors. Receptors are very important. Receptionists in offices who screen everybody coming in are like hormonal receptors. Calcium has a receptor, too. No other mineral have receptors. We call it a calcium sensor, or calcium receptor. It is a treatment for VIPs. Not like ordinary minerals. Some people may think calcium’s dangerous because we call it a hormone, but that’s not the case. We think of it as like a hormone-as important as a hormone, as specific as hormones to accomplish certain functions. So calcium is very special.
Takuo Fujita, MD, PhD - Journal of Bone and Mineral Metabolism
link.springer.com
Ray Peat cited T. Fujita in some of his articles regarding calcium and PTH.
He developed a theory which he called the ‘Calcium Paradox’, that is, the contradiction between the essential and toxic actions of calcium, it was the starting point of his research.
Good-Bye to Calcium Paradox
In order to escape from the threat of calcium Paradox, we should fight with a two-edged sword. One is re-mobilization of the excessively mobilized Ca back to the bone though exercise, and the other Ca supplementation by providing a new source to disrupt the vicious cycle. AAACa, active absorbable algal calcium, is the most effective supplement shown to increase bone mineral density reduce fractureand to meet this requirement [7,8]. Extremely low Ca intake in Japan and other East Asian countries, 600 mg/day or less, should be doubled by effective Ca supplementation. Addition of vitamin D derivatives also helps. We have then nothing to worry about our bone health to continue a healthy and constructive life.
Fujita - LaneInnovative
www.laneinnovative.com
You have developed a theory which you call the ‘Calcium Paradox’ What exactly does it say?
It’s a paradox because we see the opposite of what we would expect. All of us are calcium deficient. I think everybody agrees with that. Everybody also agrees that when we are deficient in blood calcium, the bone will lose its calcium. Whole body calcium deficiency runs parallel to bone calcium deficiency. Calcium deficiency is a cause of [bone loss], though others may cite other causes-for example estrogen deficiency also contributes to calcium deficiency. We summarize by saying the cause of [bone loss] is calcium deficiency. But the paradoxical part occurs when the parathyroid hormone secretion increases in response to the blood calcium deficiency. The first important thing about calcium is that we should have an abundant supply to keep our bones strong. The next most important is its function in heart and brain action, and muscles. All these vital body functions are maintained by a constant abundance of calcium in the body. If we don’t keep calcium levels in the blood constant, the heart stops. Dr. Ringer of England demonstrated this many years ago and we still us Ringer’s calcium solutions. If you add calcium chloride to a saline (sodium chloride) solution, the heart will beat. Dr. Ringer demonstrated this with a frog’s heart. He removed the heart, put it in saline solution and the heart stopped. When he added calcium to the solution, the heart began to move. The fact that we need a constant amount of calcium is the beginning of the calcium paradox theory. We must keep our blood calcium constant but we don’t eat enough calcium. If this calcium deficiency were to bring down blood calcium, your heart would stop. That’s a terrible thing. Fortunately, it doesn’t stop because in response to even a very slight fall of blood calcium, the parathyroid hormone takes calcium out of the bone. Compared with the modest needs of the rest of the body, bone is an almost endless supply of calcium. It’s like a bank with a large amount of money. If you have a problem, you go to the bank and borrow. The parathyroid hormone is like a cash card. But if you use your cash card enough times, your bank account will become exhausted. That’s [bone loss]. And now the paradox begins. Calcium coming out of the bone enters other tissues where there shouldn’t be any calcium to begin with. For example, in the blood vessels. Blood vessels should be soft and elastic. Bones should be hard and strong. There shouldn’t be too much calcium in the blood vessels. They become hardened. […] This is the first calcium paradox [condition] which came to our attention. Deficiency of calcium results in flooding of calcium in the blood vessels. […]There are many other calcium paradox diseases[…].
So you’re saying that the parathyroid gland removes calcium from the bone at such a rate that our health is compromised?
Our body should be very wise. It shouldn’t make any mistakes. But in this instance I don’t know. Sometimes, it does strange things. Why does the parathyroid hormone take an excessive amount of calcium? Because there is so much calcium in the bones-ten thousand times more than we eat or have in our blood or soft tissue, so even our wise body doesn’t exactly do the best thing. That is one thing I don’t understand. But we have all the facts and the calcium paradox is only one attempt to explain all these facts. I don’t really have an answer.
All your studies so far have been done in Japan, but some people may be concerned that the Japanese diet is different from the North American diet. Would you expect to see similar results in a North American study group?
Well, the Japanese live very long. They have the highest longevity in the world. They say that fish and seaweed is good for them. The sushi bar is quite popular in this country. But the only trouble with the Japanese diet is that is is very low in calcium content. You are taking more calcium here in this country and in the Western world than in Japan. Other countries in Asia like Korea and China also have a very low calcium intake, so that may be one reason why calcium is so effective in Japan. But I think we can expect similar effects-maybe not the same but similar-in the United States, because many investigators in the United States also point out that even Americans are not taking enough calcium. In addition to the intake of calcium we have also to think of the loss of calcium. If you take large amounts of protein or phosphates-if you eat meat and all kinds of delicious foods you’re already taking a lot of phosphates and protein-and that will accelerate the loss of calcium in the urine. So we have to consider both sides-what you are taking and what you are losing. I’m afraid that although Americans are taking more calcium, they’re also losing more calcium. So I think we are almost equal. We are taking less calcium, but our calcium loss may also be lower, so i’d expect similar effects.
It’s important to note that you were giving your patients about 600mg of calcium a day with food. According to U.S, figures I’ve read, that’s about what the typical American receives.
That’s right. Actually calcium intake varies widely among different countries. Some people take enough calcium-mainly health-conscious people-but elderly people in most countries are not taking enough. Their appetite diminishes and they don’t feel right. And of course the problem of sunshine exposure is very important. Without sufficient exposure to sunlight, you can’t make enough Vitamin D to stimulate calcium absorption. Some people in the United States are also calcium deficient, like many Japanese, and I don’t think there’s too much difference in calcium intake.
In the United States, a calcium and magnesium complex is quite popular. How would you compare that compound with AAACa (AdvaCAL)?
Well, calcium and magnesium are both important but we don’t have to combine them. The ratio of calcium to magnesium is not important, as long as we are taking enough of both. Too much calcium intake is never dangerous, but too much magnesium can be. So I think calcium is the only one of which you can take as much as you want and get away with it, but you shouldn’t take too much magnesium. I don’t think we have to combine these two. You may take magnesium if it’s necessary. Too much calcium may constipate you-it’s one of the unavoidable effects of calcium because calcium takes water away from food and makes the stool harder. Magnesium doesn’t do that, so that’s why magnesium is used against constipation. I already use magnesium along with calcium, but not as a fixed preparation.
AAACa is comprised of calcium hydroxide and calcium oxide, which you have mentioned are highly soluble in water. Can their high solubility produce any side effects or other problems?
Strangely, I encountered no side effects except maybe some constipation in some people. You may feel a little full in your stomach if you take large amount of calcium but it doesn’t mean that calcium decreases the appetite. Hyper-acidic people-who secrete more acid in the stomach-may tend to have ulcers, and calcium neutralizes gastric acid. But when calcium disappears from the stomach there may be a rebound of gastric acid secretion. It doesn’t happen in healthy people, only hyper-acidic people have this problem.
If the parathyroid gland is clever enough to extract calcium from bone when it’s necessary, why doesn’t it regulate the amount it selects?
That’s a very good question, but I don’t really have an answer.
Are other factors involved, or is this purely the responsibility of the parathyroid?
The parathyroid is a very strange hormone. To begin with, there is no parathyroid in fish, but they live easily without it. They are continually inhaling calcium-rich water and have a non-stop supply of calcium. It only develops in creatures living on land, like ourselves. There might be some difference between constant increase in parathyroid hormone and occasional (periodic) increase. Now, is parathyroid hormone good or bad? It must be good because we need parathyroid hormone. But constantly high parathyroid hormone levels are not good. We have statistics showing that people with lower parathyroid hormone live longer and those with higher parathyroid hormone levels die earlier. […]
Is it possible that vitamin D is more helpful when taken with some calcium preparations than with others?
Yes. It all depends on the solubility of the product in question. It must be soluble and iodized. Otherwise it just goes through the gut. According to some figure, it is more soluble than others, even calcitonin-five to ten times more soluble. Solubility is very easy to measure by electrical conductivity. Soluble ions conduct electrical current. AAACa is amazingly soluble.
What is the effect of exercise on [bone loss]?
Exercise will activate the bone cells to prevent calcium loss from bone. And if you stop exercise, the reverse process occurs. You lose bone. So by exercising, you are preventing bone loss. Both exercise and calcium intake are important-we can’t substitute exercise for calcium. But if Both exercise and calcium intake are important-we can’t substitute exercise for calcium. But if we exercise more, we also stimulate calcium absorption. It increases appetite, so you can eat more. and an elevated metabolism stimulates calcium absorption. So all these things aid calcium absorption.
Is weight-bearing exercise more useful?
Yes. It is physical pressure on bone that stimulates bone cells. But all exercise, weight-bearing or not, stimulates calcium absorption. Swimming, for example, is non weight-bearing. Walking is weight-bearing. Calcium absorption is also affected by emotional factors. Exercise is good relaxation that makes you feel happier and stronger. This is important because you have to be happy. You have to be out of distress to absorb enough calcium. Stress and unhappiness decrease calcium absorption. Adrenaline and cortico-steroid hormones are secreted during stress. They facilitate calcium loss and prevent gut absorption. You can eat a lot of calcium, but if it’s taken in a state of harmony, while chatting with friends, for example, then more calcium is absorbed. So what we need are three things: calcium, exercise and happiness. And of course calcium makes you happy. So calcium is everything!
What about dietary sources of calcium?
Milk is a very common source of calcium, but it also contains a lot of phosphorus, which combines with calcium and prevents it from being absorbed. Tofu is good, but not many North Americans eat it. You can eat small fish with bones, like sardines-even canned sardines. But bone calcium is also rich in phosphorus. The ideal dietary source should be low in phosphorus and high in calcium. For Americans milk is alright. It is readily absorbed. They say that broccoli and kale are better than milk, but they don’t contain much calcium and you have to eat such large quantities that it’s not practical. In general, milk is alright. If you are high in cholesterol then low-fat milk is all right. But I would recommend AAACa over any dietary source, because it has no phosphorus. It’s superior to any calcium found in foods.
What about people who are not suffering from serious [bone loss] but just want to prevent it. We don’t want to tell everybody to go on calcium therapy…or do we?
Oh sure-everybody should take calcium. I’m not osteoporotic, but I take it regularly. As a result my EKG went down. Another thing-calcium makes you happy. It works against stress. […] Calcium has a tranquilizing effect. So kids watching television should take calcium first. It keeps you happy and peaceful. That’s why everybody needs calcium […].
So perhaps we could use calcium to promote world peace.
Well, it’s strange. You may find me overenthusiastic about calcium, but as the years go by I have no reason to reverse myself, because I don’t find anything against it. All the facts go along with my theory.
The only thing against it is constipation?
Not against it, but we expect it. America has a stressful society like Japan and we you calcium to make you less stressful, so there will be less crime and less juvenile delinquency and all these things. You need calcium in the schools.
What is the physiological basis for happiness?
Any minor decrease in blood ionized calcium will make you unhappy. The brain or muscles become excited when there’s even a slight fall in blood calcium levels, especially ionized calcium. There are two types of calcium-protein-bound and ionized. Although we’re talking about ionized calcium, we just say calcium. If there is a slight decrease in calcium then you are more excited and irritable. A readily absorbable calcium will correct the slight decrease of blood calcium promptly. A slight decrease of blood calcium makes everybody uneasy and irritable. […]
As opposed to protein-bound?
Yes, because calcium is associated with protein very easily, according to stress or other conditions. The ionized fraction act directly on the brain, and protein acts as a kind of buffer. Usually, we measure total calcium, which doesn’t change very easily, but if we measure ionized calcium we can show these effects. Calcium is a kind of hormone, in the same way as vitamin D. Simple minerals like potassium, sodium and all other salts don’t have receptors. Receptors are very important. Receptionists in offices who screen everybody coming in are like hormonal receptors. Calcium has a receptor, too. No other mineral have receptors. We call it a calcium sensor, or calcium receptor. It is a treatment for VIPs. Not like ordinary minerals. Some people may think calcium’s dangerous because we call it a hormone, but that’s not the case. We think of it as like a hormone-as important as a hormone, as specific as hormones to accomplish certain functions. So calcium is very special.
Last edited:
