Subject: Re: calcium

From: [email-masked] (Paul King)
Date: 22 Jun 96 20:06:20 UTC

[email-masked] wrote:

|I would like to get some answers on calcium?

|1. The RDA for calcium is 800-1200 mg (depending on age). This should be enough 
|to keep healthy bones and avoiding deficiency. But recently there is evidence 
|that calcium plays a role in preventing colon cancer and suppressing 
|hypertension. Is the RDA still enough for these effects or would you need more 
|in this case ?(similar to the so called anti-oxidant vitamins). 

We all have individual tolerances. I am not sure what the American RDA is set
at. If it is anyting like Canada's RNI guidelines, it is set at the minimum
average allowance plus two standard deviations above the population mean. That
is, the RNI is set as the minimum amount of nutrient that would satisfy 98% of
the population. Some people will get full benefit, while a minority would get
partial benefit, and would need more. To others, the RNI amount would be
excessive and toxic. Your doctor or dietician would give you the best advice.

|2. What is the chance of getting an overdose on calcium, what is the maximum 
|level?

Again, those concerns depend on the individual, and how well they can absorb and
use calcium.

|3. Should the RDA for girls and young women be adjusted ( raised) now that we 
|know that osteoperosis can be prevented if taking enough calcium before the age 
|of 35?

Definitely. The recommended calcium intake for both menstruating and pregnant
women must be higher. Women are particularly suceptible to osteoporosis when
they get older - caused by not consuming enough calcium.

|Anyone who can help me out on these questions, would be of great help.

|Thanks for your time,

|Frida