A complete 180 thought - AF vitamin D and Calcium

So bear with me and all respect to Steve Carr and his work and helpings others with AF and his D, calcium, PUFA 3 and cranberry extract protocol.

To be very clear, I am super appreciative of the time and detail that Steve spent with me offline in coaching me on my AF but after going back into AF again, I am pretty certain that for me this is not the right track. There is something I am doing that makes my heart want to be in AF. What is it?

(In another thread Carey pointed out that I shouldn't have been taking metsuc along with MulTaq and I believe that may also be a factor in popping out of NSR. At this time I am so frustrated with AF, I can't take the time to isolate one intervention at a time for 'science' - I want out and I'm going both belt and suspenders to cover my ass. For a long time I described my AF as chihuahua and not pit bull AF. But 4 months in AF is like 4 months of a little POS yiping dog biting at your ankles. And now that I had 3 days in NSR I now remember how good it feels and how efficient the heart is in NSR. It is pitbull AF afterall.)

I just had my first ECV and was in NSR for about 90 hours while taking MulTaq and MetSuc. Last night between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM I went back into AF.

So the concepts of 'prime mover' 'root cause' and the engineer motto "what changed?" came to the forefront of my thoughts.

When we started son on solid food we had the idea to introduce one new food at a time, only on Monday mornings, for a full week, only that new food as an addition. With all of those precautions we could identify an allergic reaction and take him to the pediatrician should things go south. So I get the concept of one intervention and RCTs.

But being older and wiser (not so much) I made the mistake of starting two supplements at the same time, the benign Vitamin D and an adrenal support concoction.

Within a few days of taking these, my first AF event. Surely it was the adrenal support (and or the phenteremine, my caffeine addiction and some other bad habits I had at the time.) But never the vitamin D.

All of those things stopped a long time ago and I've done flecainide, MulTaq and many of the drugs and combos people in this forum have in their cabinet. I also did acupuncture as found in a research paper with convincing %s. But never stopped taking the D.

My D needs were great, my DNA SNP analysis showed I had 5 SNPs that block the absorption of vitamin, my labs had me at the very low end of the normal range. Advice came in to take 5000, 10000, even 20000 a day to address this. Eventually I settled on 10,000 - overshot briefly to 74ng/ml and now consistent at 64. The 'sweet spot'.

But here's the thing, maybe mother nature ain't so dumb after all. Sure the meta research shows no connection for high D (vitamin D hypervitaminosis up to 100) but maybe in my case my body (and heart!) were getting along just fine at 34 and 39 ng/ml.

Something I am doing wants my heart to be in AF and after this ECV, I believe it is my desire to optimize my vitamin D levels according to statistics and not according to what my DNA and mother nature worked perfectly fine on.

So tonight, I am cleaning out D from my supplements and even looking deeper into what else I can eliminate but definitely high doses of D precede my first AF event and have been the one consistent factor as the unstoppable force in my unstoppable AFIB.

Has anyone else ever noticed that for them D supplementation caused AF?

[www.eurekalert.org]

[www.lifeextension.com]

Did you know that high D levels also cause high calcium?

"Too much vitamin D can cause abnormally high levels of calcium in the blood."

[www.medicalnewstoday.com]

"Since vitamin D increases calcium absorption in the gastrointestinal tract"

[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

It's very possible than in optimizing D I created a multiplier effect for what little calcium I was consuming in dairy.

My long term plan, off as many supplements as possible - all meds but the Eliquis and after my D levels get back down to natural levels for me. (might take a month or two (Help Steve!???) then back on MulTaq and MetSuc, one more ECV and see if that one sticks.

I know this describes more than 1 intervention at a time but primarily focused on the vitamin D and really frustrated and disgusted with AF. I feel like a prisoner now and just three days of NSR normalcy reminds me how big the difference is between NSR and AF.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/01/2020 08:02AM by NotLyingAboutMyAfib.

Very frustrating for you and best of luck with your changes!
How do you establish what your natural vitamin D levels are? No supplementation and spending a lot of your skin exposed to sunshine for extended periods every day???

I have to go back and look at my Amazon history to calculate what they would have been. First D3 5000 IU delivery was about 10 days before first AF event.

60 days later, I ordered a 2nd bottle so I was taking 10000 IU daily for 60 days.

In August I was at 39 ng/ml. First D test.

Continued taking 10,000 IU until went as high as 74. Abstained for 10 days, got to 64, took 5000 a day to stay at 64.

Thinking my sweet spot is maybe around 30 or less and it will take 5 weeks of no D and low calcium to get there.

I'll restart the MulTaq in week 4 and try one more ECV in week 6.

I totally agree that increasing one's serum VitD levels, even from levels which begin at unsatisfactorily low levels in terms of many other health risks, can send someone who has a too-high Ca intake (eg by consuming any dairy Ca, but several other ways as well) into afib.

Although I was previously unaware (and you seem to have only just realized it yourself) that your afib first ever began, mid last year, after increasing your serum VitD while then on a typical Western-world dietary Ca intake, that makes perfect sense. It is further confirmation of the intimate connection between many people's afib and the total amount of Ca absorbed, like the many occurrences of "Holiday Heart" -- where people suffer afib during or immediately after a sunny holiday (while being on typical Ca-rich Western diets). Indeed, without me realizing it at the time, this is essentially what happened to me : while on a typical high-Ca US/Australian diet, I moved to a much sunnier part of the country, and after the four sunniest months of the year was hit by my first ever afib attack. So I don't favour raising serum VitD levels for anyone without reducing Western levels of Ca intake.

As you know, what works in my family to eliminate afib and/or ectopics is to maintain serum VitD near the natural solar-saturation level and to maintain Ca intake at typical pre-dairying levels (much lower than typical modern Western intakes, and similar to that consumed in most of the world's population even now -- vast numbers of people who also have much lower rates of both osteoporosis and vascular calcification). There are also others who have success with high serum VitD and restrained Ca intake (although each may also undertake other individualized dietary or lifestyle variations). Most recently this has included "T", whom I am still waiting to post on this site, and who has had stunning success by getting his serum VitD close to 64 ng/ml and a daily Ca intake of approx 300mg. I understand that he is awaiting some blood tests before posting but that getting these has been delayed by Covid19-related issues.

(For the benefit of other readers), if I was in a situation similar to yours, I would firstly ensure that my Ca-intake was as low as I could get it, while maintaining my solar-saturation serum VitD level, and see if that worked (because, as you know, it is a bit of a saga to raise one's serum VitD levels again should one wish to trial the natural solar-saturation levels again later, for whatever reason), and only if that failed would I then allow my serum VitD levels to fall. During the period of falling serum VitD levels I would then still maintain my Ca intake as low as possible, to ascertain whether there was a particular "sweet spot" for me at which the low Ca-intake and some particular serum VitD level combined to eliminate my AF.

In answer to your question re the rate at which serum VitD might fall when zero supplementation, and presumably zero solar exposure, is occurring : I have previously used as a rough rule of thumb for myself a rate of 5 nmol/L per day. This was not some exact calculation, but just roughly what I had observed when allowing my serum VitD to fall during numerous past experiments. The sort of range over which I was using that number as a guide was mainly, say, in relation to serum VitD levels varying between, say, 125nmol/L and 200nmol/L (so between 50ng/ml and 80ng/ml); I think serum VitD levels would fall more slowly, per day, at serum VitD levels lower in the spectrum.

My wife (who, like everyone in my nearby family, having seen the results with afib, had long ago raised her serum VitD substantially -- but not to my level or that of my father or son, cos she doesn't suffer from any obvious VitD-related ailment), decided she would raise her serum VitD to the solar-saturation level (~64ng/ml, 160nmol/L) once we first heard that Covid-19 was coming. She did that by temporarily dosing with 20,000iu/day. Unfortunately she overshot. So she temporarily stopped all VitD dosing. I was monitoring this recent incident carefully, so am able to say exactly that her serum VitD fell at 6.4nmol/L per day when she was not dosing.

5nmol/L is 2ng/ml, and 6.4nmol/L is ~2.6ng/ml. So those are the best guides I can give for how much your serum VitD might drop, per day, when not dosing and not solar-exposing. (At least initially, from your current solar-saturation type levels). But no doubt this could vary depending upon body weight, and perhaps particularly upon adipose-tissue VitD reserves, and other factors. And as I say, I'd expect the rate of decline to slow significantly as your serum level moved lower.

Finally, I should clarify for others that your references to PUFA3 and cranberry extract in my protocol, actually refer to my consumption of whole (frozen in my case, but fresh would be equivalent) cranberries every day, and to the following two references from my website carrafibdietinfo.com which make it pretty clear that a total daily PUFA3 (Omega-3) fat intake of 0.6 gms/day is optimum for afibbers and/or ex-afibbers, and that intakes either above or below that level may be playing with fire -- the steeply U-shaped graph in one of the references is scary re afib! As a result, I keep my total Omega3 intake from all sources -- in Australia, there is a fair bit just in meat and eggs -- close to 0.6 gms/day.

Rix, T.A., Joensen, A.M., Lundbye-Christensen, S., Riahi, S., Schmidt, E.B., Overvad, K. (2013). Moderate consumption of marine n-3 fatty acids is associated with a lower risk of atrial fibrillation—a cohort study (Abstract). Europace 2013; 15 (S2), S84.​

Metcalf, R.G., Skuladottir, G.V., Indridason, O.S., Sullivan, T.R., Bjorgvinsdottir, L., Sanders, P., Arnar, D.O., Gibson, R.A., Heidarsdottir, R., Cleland, L.G., et al. U-shaped relationship between tissue docosahexaenoic acid and atrial fibrillation following cardiac surgery. Metaanal. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2014, 68, 114–118.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/03/2020 10:43PM by SteveCarr.

Steven as always, thank you. You're dedication and thoroughness to helping others beat AF are extraordinary.

Your schedule and basis for D levels descending gives me great hope that this N=1 could be sooner rather than later. I agree that initial declines could be > 1ng/ml daily as I saw about that when readjusting from my overshoot and I agree that this works more than likely in percents (like weight loss) and it's easier to get large numbers initially but not as one gets closer to ideal weights/levels.

The PUFA3 is absolutely convincing and I intend to stay on that course as well as the cranberry extract, or even better, the consumption as you've indicated (I'll have to revisit that and clarify for my own understanding).

I will definitely keep this forum posted on my progress and the overall intervention (what else I cut out above and beyond vitamin D). My hopes are such that I might revisit acupuncture in week 5 to see if that will work again because I did have some success with that during my 'event only stage' and before AF went persistent.

Here is the paper that had me try acupuncture in the first place (1st time in life). The intervention to stop an ongoing AF attack includes:

Neiguan (PC6)
Shenmen (HT7)
Danzhong (CV17)

This set worked (or seemed to work for me) with ending AF either during the session or within the next 12 hours after the session. As there were other interventions also present (prescribed meds) I can't state that the cessation of AF wasn't psychosomatic, associated or causal.

There is a different set used for long term avoidance of attacks once out of AF. This set did not work for me but again, my prime mover (possibly excess D for me) was too much to overcome.

[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

I think your focusing too exclusively on your Vit D levels in relation to your AFIB. Just because you had 1 episode with higher D3 levels doesn't establish cause and effect. Other factors are at play.

Anti-Fib - first AF event ~ 10 days after starting D. 5 more events then into persistent AF from Oct 13 until ECV. 90 hours into NSR and back into AF.

There's a dead body in the room and five people standing there. A mild mannered librarian, Charlie Manson, Son of Sam, Jeff Dahmer and Pol Pot.

I've removed all of the likely suspects and only vitamin D remains. Definition of insanity or N=1 ?

Dear Sir,

I am 67, a retired paramedic, and have had LAF for 15 years. I have been methodical about documenting my triggers over the years. I have tried trials of Vit D many times, as I know it is needed. Each and every time I have gone into afib soon after, with all other variables remaining fixed.

I have only recently seen Steve's work and find it compelling. Six weeks ago I drastically reduced my calcium intake (mainly cheese, 7 0z/day) and have been afib and ectopy free since. That is good success for my afib frequency pattern - although 6 weeks does not mean 'healed', I am encouraged so far. If this pattern of decreased afib continues I will very slowly begin to raise my levels of D by taking initially only 100 mcg per day and titrate it to ectopy per Steve's advice. Vitamin D is important, but staying out of afib, for me, is more important.

So yes, vitamin D is an acute trigger for my afib and maybe that will change now that I have reduced my calcium - I am hopeful.

On a more philosophical note that might be helpful to others, it is always important to remember that we all have different bodies, lifestyles, temperaments and biological sensitivities. But our bodies are wise and we should learn to trust them and listen to them. After trying everything and learning all my triggers, I now strive to give mine pure, sensible, organic food; lower the autonomic nervous system stress; and don't overdo. Playing the amateur chemist/vitamin game over the years has been absolutely crazy making for me, but I believe necessary for me to better find 'my way'. I now let my body work out the fine details of what it needs, stay open to the conversations in the afib community and not 'force feed' my body with mega dosing of vitamins or minerals in an attempt to 'fix it'.

Finally, it is said, "If you can't share it, you can't bear it". Afib, for many of us, can be extremely maddening, distressing and defeating. But we are not alone on this journey; and how I want to thank so many of you, including, Steve, Carey, Shannon and especially Lars for your great efforts and contributions to the 'pool of knowledge' we can all access as we see fit, and what fits.

I wish us all peace, patience and success on our journey.

Sincerely,

Jeff Walkup
Bend, Oregon

Thank you Jeff! Very encouraging. Do you have a recent D lab result # you can share?

I may also try to slowly raise D levels in the absence of any exo calcium but probably like many others in this forum I also have CAC # that needs regressing and now on this track of 'D as possible harmful', my friends are supplying me with links to research they have.

This one will also make one rethink D on top of afib.

[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

Hello - NotLying... and welcome.

Just a couple of comments about increasing the vitamin D levels... I'm slammed for time so will try to elaborate more later if you are interested or send me a PM. The caveat is and has been that when increasing vitamin D... as in the form of Vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol supplement, it's also very important to take Menaquinone 7 aka K2 MK7. This helps direct the resultant liberated, circulating calcium in your blood to bones tissue and helps avoid arterial stiffness or other soft tissue calcifications and as noted, also the arrhythmia issue.

There are many reports about this precaution and they typically describe the reason for the caveat as this...

When it comes to calcium metabolism, vitamins D and K work together. Both play important roles. Vitamin D gets calcium into your blood and Vitamin K gets it to the bones and prevents the calcium from accumulating in your arteries, kidneys or heart. You don't want rogue calcium going to the wrong places, causing joint stiffness or arterial plaque. Vitamin K2 ensures that your body uses calcium properly.

On a formal level, there are many studies offered by vitamin K PhD researchers... specifically Leon Schurgers and Cees Vermeer, (University of Maastricht, Netherlands) that detail the specifics of why the K2 MK7 needs to be addressed.

Examples: [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

Hopefully, you have had formal Lab evaluations of your baseline Vitamin D (25 hydroxy vitamin D)... and you will keep up with periodic monitoring so you can evaluate your progress and also reflect on symptom observations.

My history includes a severe Vit. D deficiency that was not diagnosed for a very long time until I found an enlightened physician who ordered testing based on my typical symptoms that included muscle pain and fatigue. As the repletion continued and periodic testing indicated levels rising, the symptoms resolved. It wasn't until many years later that I developed AF so I wasn't unable to make a direct connection to the Vit. D deficiency, but (later) I was also found to be very low in intracellular magnesium (ExaTest). I didn't know about or use the MK7 right away and while I was able to control periodic AF events in the early years, it did progress. Perhaps my saga would have turned out differently.

I wish you success with your experimenting.

Best to you,
Jackie

Quote
NotLyingAboutMyAfib
Thank you Jeff! Very encouraging. Do you have a recent D lab result # you can share?

I may also try to slowly raise D levels in the absence of any exo calcium but probably like many others in this forum I also have CAC # that needs regressing and now on this track of 'D as possible harmful', my friends are supplying me with links to research they have.

This one will also make one rethink D on top of afib.

[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

Interesting link! Isn't calcification of atrial tissue a repair mechanism? I may have missed it but have they accounted for inflammation, small dense lipoproteins, oxydised ones, Lp (a) etc?

Jackie, I take probably more K2 MK7 than anyone out there. I eat natto on a regular basis, take Patrick's KonK 2 x daily, and used to eat a lot of aged gouda prior to Steve's calcium intervention.

Natto - [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

(btw) EVOO significantly increases absorption of MK7

Study - [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

Which always leads one to ask - what about other fats and oils - in short - not so much.

I take all K2 MK7 and natto with about 15 grams of EVOO.

Some additional research shows that MK4 never even makes an appearance in blood serum and that Mk7 peaks at about 4-6 hours then slowly tails off over next 36 hours ( can't find that paper right now)

I have an MK7 schedule that creates a high blood serum level of MK7 interrupted by occasional spikes of 2x and then nothing until clear - back to steady state and then spike and cycle again.

I had a recent undercarboxolated osteocalcin (ucOC) labs done and am getting near the target where fetuin A and matrix GLA protein are very active/effective.

Joe - in a word 'yes'

I am in the 'response to injury' camp. I believe the hypothesis that intestinal permeability allowing endotoxins to enter the bloodstream, coupled with hyperinsulinemia, hyperglycemia and other inflammatory processes damage the glycocalyx, endothelial and as a result, clotting factors, foam cells, macrophages etc come to the rescue and the result is atherosclerosis. Bone marrow then sends out new endothelial cells to repair/cover the damage and lead to the tree ring like appearance of plaque structures over time. At the same time, I see the merit in Subotin's vaso vasorum hypothesis and in fact rely on it for fetuin-a and matrix GLA do their shuttling from, due to the tight junction characteristic of endothelial cells.

Jeff -

I came back on line tonight to ask if you know your haplogroup and/or do your ancestors come from Doggerland?

[www.chinesearchaeology.net.cn]

I'm encouraged by 1Jwalkup3836's report, above, of 6 weeks afib-free and ectopics-free after slashing his Ca intake. This is probably yet more confirmation of the great gains that are available by careful attention to the Ca and VitD interaction -- albeit that 6 weeks can still be considered early days (hence I use the word "probably").

We need far more of this -- people experimenting with immediately slashing their calcium intake (which isn't gonna hurt anyone over a period of weeks or months, and not ever if their Ca-intake doesn't go below pre-dairying, "Paleo", or Third-World levels and is combined with adequate vitamin D levels) and finding out what serum VitD level suits them best.

I agree with the statement: "That is good success for my afib frequency pattern - although 6 weeks does not mean 'healed', I am encouraged so far."

I also agree with the approach of slashing Ca-intake as far as necessary to stay free of afib/ectopics and then gradually increasing serum VitD level to see at what serum VitD level ectopics reappear. That is definitely one thoroughly valid approach to finding the key for each individual. In my case, repeated attempts to achieve afib/ectopics remission by employing solely low Ca-intake failed (ie while having typical, Western, low levels of serum VitD) ; and, during such experiments, blood tests revealed that my parathyroid hormone (PTH) level was somewhat elevated above the normal range, indicating that my system was struggling to soak up adequate Ca at that low Ca-intake and low serum VitD level. It was only when I raised my serum VitD level to near the natural solar-saturation level around 64ng/ml (160nmol/L), either by large, daily solar exposure or by oral supplement, that my PTH was suppressed back into the normal range (indicating that I was then soaking up sufficient Ca from the same, greatly-reduced Ca-intake) and that long-term success with afib/ectopics elimination was achieved. So that is the reason that I have mainly advocated a kind-of "package deal" approach of going straight for the solar-saturation type VitD serum levels (by using "loading doses" of oral VitD to get there if required) plus greatly reduced Ca-intake, both at the same time -- I needed to explain clearly what worked for me (and family members); to offer to people a potential relatively quick package to test; and to keep it simple in the first instance! But I am open to the idea that serum VitD levels somewhat below the solar-saturation natural limit may work for some, if their Ca-intake is low enough!!

Ghost is another poster on this forum who slashed his Ca-intake with initially promising results (but not full success) and who is (or was?) slowly increasing his serum VitD level by taking 5,000iu/day (from an initially very low serum level), so it will be very interesting to hear whether he is still continuing with that serum-VitD raising process and what the outcome is.

If people can find the low-Ca-intake and raised-serum-VitD-level combination which works for them, then they can obtain a serum PTH level to check that they are indeed soaking up sufficient Ca (very unlikely they won't be, otherwise they'll still be seeing at least ectopics in my opinion), or even a Fasting Metabolic Bone Study ("FMBS" -- a blood and urine test) which will test approx 14 Ca-metabolism related markers to check that absolutely everything is working properly Ca-wise and to completely set their minds at ease re, for example, osteoporosis at what may otherwise seem surprisingly low Ca intake.

100 mcg of oral VitD3 daily, as mentioned by 1Jwalkup3836 above, is 4,000iu. So that daily dose would provide a slow test of gradually rising serum VitD level, taking probably 3 or 4 months to plateau somewhere around the natural solar-saturation level (around 64ng/ml, 160nmol/L) in a ~50Kg individual, but plateauing somewhere significantly below the solar-saturation level in a 70Kg individual, and far below it in a heavier individual. During the slow increase of serum VitD, ectopics can be monitored to see if there is a sweet-spot which is reached, but only if Ca-intake is constantly maintained at what seems like a very low level to most people. So it is a bit of a chore, but of course seems not so at all if afib/ectopics are eliminated! It then seems miraculous, and the easiest thing in the world to maintain if it will keep one away from the beast!

1Jwalkup3836 indicates that he is a paroxysmal afibber, with significant intervals between attacks, and that is the "world" of afib in which I am certain that my protocol is relevant, as he appears to be experiencing -- presumably a world in which underlying pathology (I believe strongly, if not entirely, related to deranged Ca-metabolism over many decades, due to excess Ca intake and unnaturally low serum VitD levels) is not too far progressed to be halted (or hopefully reversed?). NotLyingAboutMyAfib, in contrast, with persistent AF and a high CAC score (large amounts of coronary artery calcium deposits) presumably has a harder road to travel, with large excess Ca reserves readily available to offset even major Ca-intake reductions (at least initially), so no doubt blood thinners are highly warranted and it is just as well to be under close, expert medical supervision and to be following their guidance as to recommended treatments.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2020 09:36PM by SteveCarr.

Quote
SteveCarr
We need far more of this -- people experimenting with immediately slashing their calcium intake (which isn't gonna hurt anyone over a period of weeks or months, and not ever if their Ca-intake doesn't go below pre-dairying, "Paleo", or Third-World levels and is combined with adequate vitamin D levels) and finding out what serum VitD level suits them best.

What do you base this declaration on? You realize that calcium intake can be a major issue for post-menopausal women and that osteoporosis can be a life-threatening problem, right?

I actually don't know any of my genetic ancestry. As far as vit D, I run in the high 30's in Fall and the high 20's in Spring. I seem to feel fine at these levels for 67yo. I would like to get more but it quickly provokes afib. Maybe Steve's new ideas will endure and I can get the D up slowly and staqy out of very symptomatic afib for me.
I will try to post in a month with my progress.

Good luck to you!

Jeff

Carey,

I don't want to get deep into a calcium argument but from what I've seen peripherally exo-calcium and drugs like Fosamax are as worthless as statins and trying to have basement low LDL. It's large healthy buoyant LDL (>21 nm) that provides energy delivery and immunity in times like this (C19).

The establishment guidance we get from ADA, AHA, USDA, etc is worthless at best and often harmful.

Not sure what hormones and calcium you're taking but often 1 intervention leads to other effects. Everyone has to make a choice.

This thread is about Vit D it's effect on calcium levels and AF. I may be making a choice between lower pro hormone benefits of D vs no afib. That's a choice and N=1 I am willing to see that may work for me. If it does not, I'll be the first in line at Natale's clinic this summer.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/30/2020 09:35AM by NotLyingAboutMyAfib.

NotLying - That's great that you are doing the natto! Sorry if I missed that detail if you mentioned it previously.

I can't consume soy, and fortunately the K2MK7 works very well for me especially since I had significantly reduced calcium intake years ago to avoid the 'excitatory heart effects' and just rely on optimizing D3 with the K2MK7. My routine bone density evaluations remain optimal...so much so, that that my doctor sees no need to have regular scans since I was so stable.... no signs of osteoporosis. Good news for sure.

For those who are concerned about reducing calcium intake, the book by board-certified cardiologist, Thomas E. Levy, MD, JD...Death by Calcium (2013) is loaded with scientific study evidence showing the detrimental effects of unbalanced calcium in the body and especially notable for afibbers ... that related to the magnesium/calcium effect on the heart.

Good to see you are acknowledging the intestinal permeability potential. Many years ago when I first became a patient of my Functional Medicine MD, I tested positive for that and with time, it was totally resolved. Made a huge difference in my overall feeling of 'well being.'

I certainly hope you continue to have important, positive results.

Jackie

Thanks Jackie. I don't take strong notice of the calcium arguments outside of AF but may in the future. I have big strong neanderthal bones and weight lift to keep them more so.

The whole permeability thing sounded like hot crap when I first heard but now that I get it - no sugar, no grains, no omega 6 oils and 48 hour l. reuteri daily (this is 100% of my calcium allowance). No other way to get the levels needed.

My overall goal - zero pharma, very low supplements and zero AF.

Quote
NotLyingAboutMyAfib
Carey,

I don't want to get deep into a calcium argument but from what I've seen peripherally exo-calcium and drugs like Fosamax are as worthless as statins and trying to have basement low LDL. It's large healthy buoyant LDL (>20 nm) that provides energy delivery and immunity in times like this (C19).

The establishment guidance we get from ADA, AHA, USDA, etc is worthless at best and often harmful.

Not sure what hormones and calcium you're taking but often 1 intervention leads to other effects. Everyone has to make a choice.

I'm not a woman and not taking any hormones or calcium supplements. The rest of your comments I'm just going to leave as unsupported opinion. I think you should make it clear when you post opinions that run contrary to accepted science that you make it clear that's what it is.

NotLying,

Sounds like you have tried a lot things.
Just wondering if you are taking vitamin C?
Why I ask is because since covid19 I have started taking 1500mg liposomal vitamin C (Dr Mercola brand) daily and I think my heart is a lot stronger, touch wood. Maybe there is some science about this.

I to am a bit shy of taking too much vitamin D, because after taking just 10000 IU and sun exposure I had a very unusual 20 minute afib event at 6am one morning, and that was after I avoided calcium the best I could. That was the only afib event I have had in 5 months.

I also take 50gms of Natto every 2nd day, and try to keep my carbs as low as I can and drink almost no alcohol.

Carey,

I see you're an admin but you'd need to help me a little with anything in my post that suggests you're a woman or anything I wrote that you deem as an opinion vs established research.

You do know that osteoporosis also affects men and with an underlying hormonal cause?

We can debate this or LDL or the ADA's advocacy of 50% carb based diets, the AHA's "heart healthy" recommendation of grains and vegetable oils, the USDA's mission statement and denial of science in food recommendations, etc., in a separate thread in the health section or where ever you prefer.

Again, it's only a peripheral issue for me but Jackie's book recommendation (Death by Calcium) sounds like it's worth a look.

You asked me what hormones I'm taking, and my name can be ambiguous, so that led me to believe you thought I was a woman. Yes, I'm aware osteoporosis affects men as well.

I'm really, really not interested in debating diet and nutrition issues. But when I see people dispute accepted science and declare entire agencies wrong (not to mention "worthless and often harmful"), I expect to see some supporting references. Exceptional claims need exceptional evidence and all that.

Colindo.

Yes. I have been taking increased C since covid-19 began. Many people also taking increased C and D for C19.

I am putting most of my hopes into the research (and practice of) I found on quercetin as a zinc ionophore (posted in other forum here) .

I don't know if getting off D will help but it's my last shot before ablation. Carey added in another thread that I shouldn't have taken MetSuc with MulTaq and now that I've looked closer it appear Carey is correct. So thank you Carey.

Don't know why two cardiologists told me to take MetSuc with MulTaq but these are the same boneheads that want to argue statins for my beautiful large immunity and energy delivery LDL. I love my LDL.

Carey - fair enough.

As simple as I wrote before and to my knowledge these are so well known that I haven't even seen these things debated any more and even have seen some evidence of the ADA now embracing low carb after decades of following and embracing the USDA guidelines.

That said: All of these association guidelines are not only useless but proven harmful.

The AHA's "Heart Healthy" program which endorses foods known and backed by research to cause heart disease. Namely all vegetable oils, any grain or seeds of grass food products, and many high sugar low fat, as well as their stance against saturated fat and support of the use of statins. The lies and hypocrisy propagated by Ancel Keys that have led to the premature deaths of hundreds of millions throughout the world all because of one fraudulent based LDL hypothesis (still unproven) and the $1T in 2020 statin industry.

If people don't know about this then welcome to earth...

While better now, the ADA has endorsed diets that have between 45-55% of their calories coming from carbohydrates when it is well documented and proven low carb diets like keto/paleo/carnivore. (myself included who reversed T2 in less than 2 weeks following a < 20 grams of carbs a day diet)

Might not want to eat 10x that amount in one day to avoid viruses like C19? Sadly - even right now, Krispy Kreme is giving donuts to US health workers which is making them all more vulnerable to C19.

"We observed that higher glucose levels led to an increase in viral protein accumulation within infected cells, as judged by HA protein levels, as well as an increase in the percentage of infected cells."

[www.sciencedirect.com]

The USDA, currently reviewing and renewing their 2020 guidelines for diets and ignoring the research and science available. This will continue to make our obesity rates and healthcare costs continue to soar to unsustainable levels as well as hamper our ability to have a viable workforce or military.

[www.nutritioncoalition.us]

[www.nutritioncoalition.us]

deleted



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/21/2020 04:10PM by safib.

Joe:

I can only roughly estimate and Steven may be the expert in regressing my 'natural D level' based on what it took to get to 39 (60 days of 10000 IU) . My thought is below 30 and maybe as low as 20. I will test later and post.

BTW - to my best understanding - if over 40 and unless you spend the entire day in a speedo outside in equatorial sun you're very unlikely to meet your D needs (at least for these higher 'optimum' levels) without supplementing.

But as a reminder, right now, I am convinced that my SNPs were actually doing what is right for me and keeping my D levels low.

For grins here are a few of them. Maybe mother nature knows best.

rs7041(G;T)

rs2060793(A;G)

rs2282679(A;C)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/01/2020 10:17AM by NotLyingAboutMyAfib.

Moved to health forum.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 04/04/2020 11:50AM by NotLyingAboutMyAfib.

Moved to health forum



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/04/2020 11:52AM by NotLyingAboutMyAfib.

Deleted by OP



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/04/2020 11:55AM by NotLyingAboutMyAfib.

Steve, Jeff et al,

Do you think there is a possibility that making the sudden leap from the amount of D in a Centrum (1000 IU) to 10,000 IU would be more likely to cause AF than to slowly increase it over time?

If it turns out D is my issue, I will want to stay in NSR for a while to focus on other 'usual suspects' and already being addressed

hsCRP levels coming down

no longer any issues with glucose or insulin

reduction of visceral and periocardial fat

But consider raising D levels after heart has been normal for some time (months)

deleted



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/21/2020 04:11PM by safib.

On a different note, I successfully reduced my paroxysmal afib to < 0.1 % burden over the last two years, by maintaining a dairy-free diet along with reduction in exercise intensity and duration. The episodes that I had were short and lasted only a few minutes. In the past I have repeatedly found that dairy or fish oil supplementation at any level or D3 supplementation beyond the 1000 IU in a multivitamin precipitated PACs which often lead to afib. Based on some of the postings here, I recently tried (twice) D3 supplementation to 2000 IU while holding my calcium intake to about 500 mg. My motivation for this was to boost my D3 level and perhaps improve my immune response. My current D3 is a fairly low end 32 ng/ml. Unfortunately, this again led to PACs and short afib runs. I am going to try some more experimenting, but it seems I just can't tolerate even these moderate levels of D3 supplements even with low calcium intake.

Quote
safib
I will respond briefly and then you can have the last word if you like.

Your rant against the AHA and ADA and I guess also the USDA is without merit. The investigators (clinicians, statisticians) involved in the studies behind their recommendations are overwhelmingly highly qualified and dedicated professionals who are subject to rigorous peer review. They are not part of some large conspiracy to defraud the public. They are fully aware of how the studies were designed and how the results were analyzed and reported. The vast majority of them are in academia and are not well paid, and wouldn't risk their tenure to fatten someone elses pocket. A few quotes or citations from some contrary individuals and studies doesn't negate the overwhelming statistical evidence of the benefit of statins for reducing serious cardiovascular events, particularly in certain demographics, and through the reduction of LDL and other mechanisms as well.

Now if you read my comment closely, although I am disputing your viewpoint my statement about "wild accusations" concerns your attempt to stigmatize the AHA and ADA and USDA, organizations which support the public health. I did not mean to suggest that you are against vaccines. Rather, I was pointing out that the same type of language is used by the anti-vaxers, and there is great risk in using that kind of language to shape public opinion, especially right now.

This site doesn't have "likes" or upvotes and downvotes, but if it did this would get a thumbs up from me. This is a well-written explanation of why I also disliked those comments.

Deleted by OP



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/04/2020 11:58AM by NotLyingAboutMyAfib.

Quote
NotLyingAboutMyAfib
Carey - fair enough. I'm here to be helped and help if I can others with afib.

Not to debate the results of AHA, ADA, and USDA guidelines as one only needs to look at a photo of typical beach scene of Americans in 1970 and one today. If the guidelines and experts are as outstanding as Safire believes then why do all of the metrics diabetes, heart disease, obesity, high blood pressure show exponential increases and inflection points since McGovern and the USDA issued the first set of guidelines?

I think it's great you're here to help those with AF and help yourself as well, but I think you're veering way off the AF course and focusing on general diet and nutrition issues that are only tangentially related to AF, at best.

As for the dramatic rise in obesity we've seen since 1980-ish, if you can prove a cause for that then I recommend that you publish immediately and collect your Nobel prize (and million dollars). I have my own theories about that, and they might not be too far from yours, but blaming the AHA, ADA, and USDA aren't among them. Those people are mainly dedicated scientists who follow the information available to them at the time. They're not incompetent or corrupt. Do politics and money get involved at times? Sure, anyone who thinks otherwise would be naive, but all in all I think they're the most trustworthy sources we have. Are they overly conservative? Oh, sure, absolutely. But if you were giving advice to 300 million people would you be otherwise?

Moved to Health forum



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/04/2020 12:00PM by NotLyingAboutMyAfib.

If we start a likes fan club my vote goes to NLAMA The agencies are in many ways behind the 8 ball for whatever reason. This isn't saying that all pharma products are unhelpful (x numbers of them definitely are), quite the opposite. It's just that in many cases they are over prescribed, again for various reasons.

Thanks Joe.

I wouldn't be writing such things if I didn't think they might help others. The important thing is to at least open up and consider the information. The short period I was on a statin, I tolerated well with one exception. It raised my CAC score exponentially and as often the case. When I finally realized it by reading the research, watching the videos, and questioning my own belief in MDs and especially cardis - almost all statin pushers and with good reason.

Feel free to look up your MD here or a statin advocate and see how much $$ they get from pharma.

Steve Nissen famous Cleveland Clinic pro-statin advocate took in $111,968 in 2018.

[projects.propublica.org]

Quote
NotLyingAboutMyAfib
Carey - there would be no Nobel prize for it because it's so widely known already.

It most certainly is not. You might be convinced about certain theories, but the scientific community is not. The number of views on youtube videos has no scientific value.

Anyway, my point was if you want to talk about obesity, diet, etc unrelated to AF then please take it to the general health forum.

Moved all not relevant to AF to new post in health forum



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/04/2020 12:00PM by NotLyingAboutMyAfib.

NLAMAL

I also believe that AF is in our DNA, my mother had AF, also my grandmother, I had AF for 20 years, it was only a few times a year then I got it a little more frequently. The first AF was because I became hyper thyroid, then in October of last year (2019) I again went into having a hyper thyroid episode that put me into Persistent AF, I was to go into the hospital this past March to see how I responded to Tikosyn then if it didn't cardiovert me the hospital would do it, but it is an elective procedure so it has been canceled.

I agree with a lot of what you say, but I believe that in some of us no matter what we do we get AF. I have never been fat, I have always worked hard raising a large garden from which I also can and freeze the produce. I also have all kinds of berries and fruit trees, I take care of everything, cut my lawn and I am now in my Eightes. The only meds I ever took was a thyroid med, now since I am in persistence AF I have to take a blood thinner (never took it until now). So, I am not fat, work physically hard, I don't eat in Resturants, or buy canned foods, I cook everything myself. I have tried many things, take supplements etc.
.
My point is AF is a strange malady, some things might help some people or they will not. The whole point of my story is I believe DNA is what has caused my AF, not any of the other things you have written about. Also, my Graves disease (hyper thyroid) is from Dad, he had that.

Liz

Liz,

I am 57 with a 4 yr old boy. If you could promise me 80, I'd take it in a heartbeat.

You have 23 years on me and that might mean you had 23 more years to form some solid habits more like your ancestors and less what the Standard American Diet (SAD) resembles for my adulthood. Surely, you must be shocked when you see what the kids eat today.

Of course some things are hereditary but that doesn't always equate to destiny. What science has shown that much of what we do ends up activating SNPs like switches and turns them on or off and that then creates an ailment for us.

I think AF causality is probably in having those SNPs and having done something (maybe not known or documented) that turned AF on for you and your family. Mother nature is a mad scientist.

I never wrote that all of us are here because of obesity or laziness. I wrote many (not all):

While AF has many causes - many of us are here in this forum, seeking help as a result of obesity linked OSA, resultant hsCRP and/or glycated heart tissue caused by repeated chronic insulin and glucose spikes...

Let's also bring up the concept of TOFI (thin outside, fat inside) where people have a normal appearance but large amounts of visceral fat, high inflammation as a result of eating too much fructose. These people can be metabolically ill but because most MDs don't order labs for insulin (even better, Kraft pre-diabetes protocol) or IL6, hsCRP etc. their true condition isn't known.

Bottom line 80 is good and you sound like you're making the best of it with a high quality of life. Cheers to you.

I'll take 80 any day.

I am sure you will make 80, as you are knowledgeable about your health, but once you get there you will think, gee I want more time. I hope you find a solution to your AF.

Liz

Thanks Elizabeth,

Baby steps - no guarantees but doing everything I can to stay healthy and alive now.

Quote
safib
On a different note, I successfully reduced my paroxysmal afib to < 0.1 % burden over the last two years, by maintaining a dairy-free diet along with reduction in exercise intensity and duration. The episodes that I had were short and lasted only a few minutes. In the past I have repeatedly found that dairy or fish oil supplementation at any level or D3 supplementation beyond the 1000 IU in a multivitamin precipitated PACs which often lead to afib. Based on some of the postings here, I recently tried (twice) D3 supplementation to 2000 IU while holding my calcium intake to about 500 mg. My motivation for this was to boost my D3 level and perhaps improve my immune response. My current D3 is a fairly low end 32 ng/ml. Unfortunately, this again led to PACs and short afib runs. I am going to try some more experimenting, but it seems I just can't tolerate even these moderate levels of D3 supplements even with low calcium intake.

Once again, the overwhelming connection to Ca metabolism (with modulations by vitamin D)! It sounds as though you are interested in the details and intending to experiment, so possibly you will be interested in the following. If not, no matter.

I had experience like you describe with Ca and VitD when I first started to sleuth this stuff out. And, of course, it can be mystifying and frustrating to try to guess the optimum Ca/VitD combo.

But in your situation I would have tried something like this: after a fortnight on a fixed daily total intake of Ca (eg the 500 mg/day of Ca you mention), and assuming my VitD intake had been stable for some time, I would get my PTH and VitD tested.

A possibility is then to lower Ca intake to 300mg/day, raise serum VitD to a new plateau level, and retest for PTH and VitD. If one’s remaining afib burden disappears, and one’s PTH level has fallen, and one’s serum VitD is now much higher, one has achieved a massive WIN-WIN-WIN! That is what happened to me.

VitD suppresses the need for the body's PTH to be as high because it has some similar effects on Ca metabolism: increasing absorption from the same amount of Ca intake and reducing secretion.

It takes a bit of effort to find out – mainly ‘cos it takes a while to plateau one’s serum VitD at any new level (eg just doubling VitD dose from 1000iu/day to 2000/day would take ~3 months to plateau at the new serum level, unless some “loading dosing” was undertaken to speed the process). But, believe me, if one can achieve the magic combination it is well worth it! Amongst other things, if one achieves a serum-VitD/Ca-intake combo that has lowered one's PTH, one is even more secure re any osteoporosis concerns. And, at that point, one can obtain a full Fasting Metabolic Bone Study (blood and urine test) to set one’s mind even further at ease.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/05/2020 05:50AM by SteveCarr.

Quote
SteveCarr

I had experience like you describe with Ca and VitD when I first started to sleuth this stuff out. And, of course, it can be mystifying and frustrating to try to guess the optimum Ca/VitD combo.

But in your situation I would have tried something like this: after a fortnight on a fixed daily total intake of Ca (eg the 500 mg/day of Ca you mention), and assuming my VitD intake had been stable for some time, I would get my PTH and VitD tested.

A possibility is then to lower Ca intake to 300mg/day, raise serum VitD to a new plateau level, and retest for PTH and VitD..

I think the PTH and VitD testing is reasonable, although at the moment I am not going anywheres near a medical testing facility. I don't think I would attempt to lower Ca intake to 300 mg due to the difficulty of sustaining it.

I see that the relationship between Ca and afib is complex and an active area of research, and well beyond my ability to understand. I take a somewhat simpler view: both VitD or fish oil increase the absorption of Ca, and in particular increase ionized Ca, which then appears to have a sympathetic effect which induces PACs and eventually afib. Whether this mechanistic description is correct or not is conjecture and I have no idea whether available testing would support it However, since my afib burden is very low and I don't have issues with immune response, I am probably content to not try to change my VitD level. It is a striking thing though that I have significantly changed my afib burden over 2 years apparently by reducing Ca intake, and at the same time supplementing with VitD and fish oil apparently cause me to relapse. It will be interesting to see how things progress with age, and whether further restriction of Ca is required.

I may be one of those that higher D doesn't work for and maybe my SNPs were trying to protect me from high D?

It makes sense - my people in Doggerland probably didn't have herd cattle for dairy but tracked the occasional wandering deer across the frozen ice.

[www.sciencedirect.com]

[www.chinesearchaeology.net.cn]

I really appreciate the time and science Steve has put into his intervention and took it on with the fervor of a true believer knowing the power of positive thinking.

But as the levels were reached and confirmed with lab tests with no change I began to have skepticism about needing to have multiple biomarkers at precise levels and began to lean towards D as a suspect because of interactions with calcium.

I'm thinking now (here comes Carey) that calcium may be the heart of the problem for not only afib but in slowing down a calcium regression strategy.

Right now I want to remove as much calcium as possible from my tissues and arteries by avoiding calcium, D and excess O3 PUFA. I'll worry about bones later but even then it may not be a problem. Fetuin-a, matrix GLA protein and BMP2 work together to shuttle calcium from where it doesn't belong (heart tissue and arteries) to where it does belong (bones).

Quote
NotLyingAboutMyAfib

Right now I want to remove as much calcium as possible from my tissues and arteries by avoiding calcium, D and excess O3 PUFA. I'll worry about bones later but even then it may not be a problem. Fetuin-a, matrix GLA protein and BMP2 work together to shuttle calcium from where it doesn't belong (heart tissue and arteries) to where it does belong (bones).

Vitamin K2 is what you need and guess what, statins interfere with its production.