Vitamin K2 supplements fail to slow calcium buildup in heart(heart.org)
heart.org
Vitamin K2 supplements fail to slow calcium buildup in heart
https://www.heart.org/en/news/2022/04/25/despite-hopes-vitamin-k2-supplements-fail-to-slow-calcium-buildup-in-heart-valve
40 comments
This could be a misunderstanding of the mechanisms involved. Research started with the knowledge that diets with plenty of K2 have positive health effects including a reduction in cancer. However, the usual way of increasing K2 in the diet is to eat more fermented foods. Fermented foods are also associated with healthy gut flora. It is quite possible that the K2 is not the key but rather what is going on is eating fermented foods helps maintain a healthy gut which then in turn leads to positive health effects. Just some speculation.
Which vitamin K2? There are distinct:
– short-chain menaquinone or menatetrenone: MK-4 – long-chain menaquinones: MK-5, MK-6, MK-7 (found in natto) and poorly studied MK-8 and MK-9.
The study does not mention which one of them was used in the study, it only cites the amount used being 720 mcg. Since the supplementation with long-chain menaquinones in dosages larger than 200 mcg per day is considered dangerous due to excessive blood thinning effects, it is reasoanble to presume that the MK-4 form was used. But MK-4 has been studided for its calcium redistribution effects in the body in clinical dosages of 45 mgs, which is two orders of magnitude larger than that of used in the study.
The article also conflates natto as being a source of K2 with being a source of the menaquinone (mostly MK-7 but also other long-chain menaquinones) but not menatetrenone. Truth to be told, there are better studies out there.
– short-chain menaquinone or menatetrenone: MK-4 – long-chain menaquinones: MK-5, MK-6, MK-7 (found in natto) and poorly studied MK-8 and MK-9.
The study does not mention which one of them was used in the study, it only cites the amount used being 720 mcg. Since the supplementation with long-chain menaquinones in dosages larger than 200 mcg per day is considered dangerous due to excessive blood thinning effects, it is reasoanble to presume that the MK-4 form was used. But MK-4 has been studided for its calcium redistribution effects in the body in clinical dosages of 45 mgs, which is two orders of magnitude larger than that of used in the study.
The article also conflates natto as being a source of K2 with being a source of the menaquinone (mostly MK-7 but also other long-chain menaquinones) but not menatetrenone. Truth to be told, there are better studies out there.
That's sad, I was hoping to soften the impact by taking K2 supplements now before I get old. What else beside K2 would you recommend for a healthy cardiovascular system?
- Diosmin:Hesperidin 9:1?
- Rutin?
- Arginine?
- Curcumin?
- Ginkgo?
- Nattokinase?
- Serrapeptase?
- Lumbrokinase?
- Omega 3?
- Pycnogenol/OPC?
- Hawthorn berry?
- Kyolic?
- Diosmin:Hesperidin 9:1?
- Rutin?
- Arginine?
- Curcumin?
- Ginkgo?
- Nattokinase?
- Serrapeptase?
- Lumbrokinase?
- Omega 3?
- Pycnogenol/OPC?
- Hawthorn berry?
- Kyolic?
Before you randomly start popping supplements the first thing you should be doing if you care about maintaining a healthy cardiovascular system is getting regular blood tests, ideally at least one a year.
Not managing high triglycerides or high LDL cholesterol will put you at a much higher risk than not taking any specific supplement. Some people are genetically prone to heart disease in which case monitoring your cholesterol and taking pharmaceuticals to manage it (if needed) can significantly reduce your risk.
The other thing you should do before you start popping supplements is get your diet right. Reducing sugar, eating less processed foods, consuming healthy fats (especially EPA), and intermittent fasting – these will all help dramatically more than taking any supplement.
Then there is exercise. Doing a 20-30 mins of high intensity exercise a few days a week will help reduce your resting heart rate, improve your metabolism and help maintain a healthy cardiovascular system.
The only supplement I think there is currently good evidence to take for heart health is high dose EPA, but it's pretty expensive... I use Pharmepa Restore personally which I take due to a family history of heart disease. High quality fish oil supplements with DHA and EPA probably have a minor benefit, while cheap fish oil supplements are probably mostly useless for several reasons. If you're going to take fish oil for heart health take one that's pharma-grade and high in EPA.
Not managing high triglycerides or high LDL cholesterol will put you at a much higher risk than not taking any specific supplement. Some people are genetically prone to heart disease in which case monitoring your cholesterol and taking pharmaceuticals to manage it (if needed) can significantly reduce your risk.
The other thing you should do before you start popping supplements is get your diet right. Reducing sugar, eating less processed foods, consuming healthy fats (especially EPA), and intermittent fasting – these will all help dramatically more than taking any supplement.
Then there is exercise. Doing a 20-30 mins of high intensity exercise a few days a week will help reduce your resting heart rate, improve your metabolism and help maintain a healthy cardiovascular system.
The only supplement I think there is currently good evidence to take for heart health is high dose EPA, but it's pretty expensive... I use Pharmepa Restore personally which I take due to a family history of heart disease. High quality fish oil supplements with DHA and EPA probably have a minor benefit, while cheap fish oil supplements are probably mostly useless for several reasons. If you're going to take fish oil for heart health take one that's pharma-grade and high in EPA.
Gonna add in here for those of y'all US-based: get tested for apoB levels regularly, and once in your life (the sooner the better) for lp(a). They are not part of the typical panel ordered by most primary care/internists. If these are high and your doctor doesn't know what to do about it, talk to a cardiologist.
Unfortunately, plasma levels of many elements don't tell you if you aren't deficient already. For many tissue deficiencies you need to do e.g. radioactive scans which nobody will do for you. You can be vitamin deficient, potassium deficient etc. and plasma deficiency will show up only when you are really at the edge of something chronic or death.
See e.g.:
https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(18)...
See e.g.:
https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(18)...
[deleted]
If you do the 8 things the CDC says to do, you're already in the top 1% of the US population for cardiovascular health. Just doing those things is going to be a lot more effective than taking any supplements.
Cardiovascular exercise at various intensities, done almost every day, and high quality sleep.
Supplement and nutrition research as a disease prophylactic (aside from avoiding the usual suspects) is nowhere near as solid what we know about exercise and rest.
Supplement and nutrition research as a disease prophylactic (aside from avoiding the usual suspects) is nowhere near as solid what we know about exercise and rest.
OK, good point. Assuming 60 minutes of on average moderate cardio a day, which supplements would you recommend?
I don't think you'll go wrong with omega3. I take it, it seems to have a low adverse risk profile.
I would supplement with swiss chard. Really good as the "green" in bacon and scrambled eggs but if kale or collard greens are more your thing I would supplement that to your favorite dish instead.
I almost started taking natto/serra supplements but there's too many reports of it causing bleeding. Seems like natto as a food (fermented soy) is better, but I can't source it locally.
If you have asians in your city you probably can, you just have to find their markets and look for the frozen natto in little styrofoam containers
Yeah, I have heard of that. But natto is supposed to be rich in K2, some K2 supplements are made out of natto.
Capsaicin is supposed to be good as per a news article I can't seem to find but agree with sibling comment that exercise and sleep as well as low cholesterol diet are all good.
(Edited phrasing)
(Edited phrasing)
I don’t recommend it per se, but Dr William Davis’ HeartScan blog makes the testable claim that there is a relatively cheap noninvasive scan which gives a good proxy measure of calcium buildup in the heart, and that using it he has interventions which measurably reduce such buildup, and they overlap with common alternate diets like reduced wheat, carbs, I forget what else.
I’m not claiming this is right, but if it is both testable and measurable and not just unsupported claims, it seems it should get more attention. He’s also a cardiologist not an internet tree doctor. I don’t know if he’s a quack.
[Edit: https://drdavisinfinitehealth.com/2019/03/why-you-should-get... saying "When you get a CT heart scan [...] you’re given a score. What that score is, is the volume of calcium in your heart’s arteries. People go “Why are we measuring calcium?” One, it’s easy to see on a CT scan, so is thereby easy to quantify. [...] Calcium occupies 20% of total atherosclerotic plaque volume. So it’s a gauge, a dipstick, for the amount of plaque you have in your arteries. It doesn’t tell you about blockage [...] A heart catheterization would tell you stuff like: there’s a blockage halfway down, that’s blocking 70 percent of flow. [...] A heart scan tells you something like this: in this 1 foot long piece of iron pipe, there’s 273.85 cubic millimeters of rust — two different perspectives on the same disease. A heart scan gives you a score, a calcium score. Normal is zero. The higher the score, the more plaque you have, and the more likely it is that can lead to heart attack and abnormal symptoms. There’s no specific cutoff. You can’t say “at a score of 500 you likely have a 70% block”. You can’t say things like that. Though, the higher it does go, it does indeed suggest greater potential for a blockage, that blocks flow."
"Let’s say you have a score of 500, what now? Well, those of you who have been following along my programs, know that all the things that I do: the Wheat Belly Total Health program, the Undoctored Wild-Naked-Unwashed program — all those programs, the prescriptive part of the programs, came from my efforts to reduce heart scan scores, or at least stop them from increasing. If we do nothing, if you have a heart scan score, say, of 500, and you do nothing, the score goes up 25% per year. What if you take a statin drug, an aspirin, and cut the fat in your diet — cut the saturated fat, and exercise? How fast does your heart scan score go up? 25% per yearThose conventional solutions do nothing to prevent plaque from growing. [...] Those strategies that I put together over the years, and we showed that you could reduce heart scan scores, or at least put a stop to the continual rise. [...] You can actually see on the heart scan images, you see can see the plaque has shrunk (at least the calcium part of it has shrunk)." ]
Where else have you seen claims of lifestyle interventions that will stop the growth of calcium buildup/atherosclerotic plaque, or even reduce it, that aren't just backed by argument but by a $150 common proper hospital non-woo test that can show whether it's working or not?
I’m not claiming this is right, but if it is both testable and measurable and not just unsupported claims, it seems it should get more attention. He’s also a cardiologist not an internet tree doctor. I don’t know if he’s a quack.
[Edit: https://drdavisinfinitehealth.com/2019/03/why-you-should-get... saying "When you get a CT heart scan [...] you’re given a score. What that score is, is the volume of calcium in your heart’s arteries. People go “Why are we measuring calcium?” One, it’s easy to see on a CT scan, so is thereby easy to quantify. [...] Calcium occupies 20% of total atherosclerotic plaque volume. So it’s a gauge, a dipstick, for the amount of plaque you have in your arteries. It doesn’t tell you about blockage [...] A heart catheterization would tell you stuff like: there’s a blockage halfway down, that’s blocking 70 percent of flow. [...] A heart scan tells you something like this: in this 1 foot long piece of iron pipe, there’s 273.85 cubic millimeters of rust — two different perspectives on the same disease. A heart scan gives you a score, a calcium score. Normal is zero. The higher the score, the more plaque you have, and the more likely it is that can lead to heart attack and abnormal symptoms. There’s no specific cutoff. You can’t say “at a score of 500 you likely have a 70% block”. You can’t say things like that. Though, the higher it does go, it does indeed suggest greater potential for a blockage, that blocks flow."
"Let’s say you have a score of 500, what now? Well, those of you who have been following along my programs, know that all the things that I do: the Wheat Belly Total Health program, the Undoctored Wild-Naked-Unwashed program — all those programs, the prescriptive part of the programs, came from my efforts to reduce heart scan scores, or at least stop them from increasing. If we do nothing, if you have a heart scan score, say, of 500, and you do nothing, the score goes up 25% per year. What if you take a statin drug, an aspirin, and cut the fat in your diet — cut the saturated fat, and exercise? How fast does your heart scan score go up? 25% per yearThose conventional solutions do nothing to prevent plaque from growing. [...] Those strategies that I put together over the years, and we showed that you could reduce heart scan scores, or at least put a stop to the continual rise. [...] You can actually see on the heart scan images, you see can see the plaque has shrunk (at least the calcium part of it has shrunk)." ]
Where else have you seen claims of lifestyle interventions that will stop the growth of calcium buildup/atherosclerotic plaque, or even reduce it, that aren't just backed by argument but by a $150 common proper hospital non-woo test that can show whether it's working or not?
> But Diederichsen said most foods contain insufficient levels of vitamin K2 to make an impact on heart health – with one exception. Natto, a traditional Japanese food made from fermented soybeans, is high in vitamin K2.
Vitamin K2 is very common in meat. A single egg yolk can contain up to 240 micrograms, almost 3x the daily recommended value:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02715...
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02715...
Meh, one of its cofactors is magnesium, unless they controlled for that, this is meaningless.
This is a randomized trial with hundreds of subjects. The two groups should be statistically similar to each other in their magnesium levels (and other attributes). That's the purpose of randomization: so you don't have to find and control for confounders afterwards like you do in a non-randomized trial. It's easy to obscure or reverse a result by controlling for the wrong variables, for some examples see https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/06/24/you-need-more-confound...
On closer, look it is a randomized trial with 3 hundreds of fat, hypertense patients, most of which are on some kind of drug or platelet treatment. That 70% hypertense bit pointing towards most of them being magnesium deficient to begin with.
The quantities involved are so small that they might as well not have bothered. In Asia, people have consumed +10mg of K2 for extended periods of time. 720 µg MK-7 plus 25 µg vitamin D or matching placebo for 24 months are laughably small. So small one can only wonder if they were trying the homeopathy where they keep diluting some concoction and claim it still has some effect.
Not even getting into the issue of whether D supplements are an adequate replacement from sunlight.
So, yeah, no conclusion...
The quantities involved are so small that they might as well not have bothered. In Asia, people have consumed +10mg of K2 for extended periods of time. 720 µg MK-7 plus 25 µg vitamin D or matching placebo for 24 months are laughably small. So small one can only wonder if they were trying the homeopathy where they keep diluting some concoction and claim it still has some effect.
Not even getting into the issue of whether D supplements are an adequate replacement from sunlight.
So, yeah, no conclusion...
Calcium is critical to start the chemical cascade of the clotting process.
Vitamin K also helps you clot.
I can't fathom what the line of thinking is here.
Vitamin K also helps you clot.
I can't fathom what the line of thinking is here.
K2 was supposed to help endothelium as well and was known for enabling calcium to move from blood to bones.
Magnesium seems like a better guess and seems to not have been studied for aortic stenosis though it does help with vascular calcification.
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/ATVBAHA.117.309182
Especially since heart murmur is a symptom of aortic stenosis and magnesium is critical to regulation of the heartbeat.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/aortic-stenos...
https://health.clevelandclinic.org/magnesium-for-heart-palpi...
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/ATVBAHA.117.309182
Especially since heart murmur is a symptom of aortic stenosis and magnesium is critical to regulation of the heartbeat.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/aortic-stenos...
https://health.clevelandclinic.org/magnesium-for-heart-palpi...
I was taking reasonable amounts of Magnesium (SlowMag) daily, however it seemed to trigger muscle twitches and fasculations after a while. YMMV
I don't know what you mean by reasonable amounts daily.
Which magnesium type? Oxide, glycinate, threonate...?
My recollection is citrate and glycinate are bioavailable.
vitamins tested, both at baseline and at intervention, or just give the subjects the pills and image the arteries? I'm guessing the latter, as is almost always done. And we call this "science"....
If the proposed intervention is giving a pill, it seems fair to test that instead of a proxy. The study had hundreds of people; if the effect were big enough to be clinically significant they hopefully would have detected it, even with some patients failing to take the pills.
I'm talking about assaying the subjects' blood for prior and subsequent levels of the vitamin under test. Inasmuch as we have no way to tell whether they took the pills, we don't know whether the groups were properly randomized for their pre-intervention levels, diets, or effectiveness at metabolizing the supplement. It may even be the case that people with high CAC scores in the first place (the test population) already suffers from one or more of these problems across the board.
It isn't that hard to test people's blood, and yet the researchers prefer us to take it on faith that their sorting of control and intervention groups ironed all of this out? If I sound unreasonable, I don't apologize for it: public health decisions are important.
It isn't that hard to test people's blood, and yet the researchers prefer us to take it on faith that their sorting of control and intervention groups ironed all of this out? If I sound unreasonable, I don't apologize for it: public health decisions are important.
The question in this trial was: Will people in this at-risk population have less calcium buildup in the heart if we give them vitamin K2? The answer was, on average, no. That's the key piece of information for public health.
Blood tests would tell us if the randomization ended with the two groups being very different, but the prior probability of that is small. Blood tests would also tell us if there is some subgroup that benefits more from the treatment, but with an increased risk of getting the answer wrong due to smaller sample sizes, which would lead to worse public health decisions.
Blood tests would tell us if the randomization ended with the two groups being very different, but the prior probability of that is small. Blood tests would also tell us if there is some subgroup that benefits more from the treatment, but with an increased risk of getting the answer wrong due to smaller sample sizes, which would lead to worse public health decisions.
[deleted]
[deleted]