pathos wrote:
>> In article <38575897.2DB3 at erols.com>, Stuart Dunn <dunns99 at erols.com> wrote:
>> > The amount of calcium in urine had to be increased to maintain the pH
> > level of it and that this had been proven.
>> Calcium has no effect what so ever on pH (of blood or urine).
Yes it does! And you're accusing me of being unscientific!
So what are
> you refering to with the word "it"? Calcium is required to stay in the
> blood/extracellular space at a concentration of about 3 mM and the body
> will catabolize the bone to make it so ( see vitamin D utilization
> pathway). Calcium is needed by the cells for a wide variety of tasks but
> pH is not one of them.
So the pH level of body tissues and fluids doesn't matter?
>> BTW, If excess calcium is appearing in the urine then that is a marked
> sign of a kidney disorder. ~10mg of calcium is removed by glomuelar
> filtration BUT ~9.82mg is readsorbed in the proxiamal and distal tubules.
> Thus about 175mg is all that will appear in the urine on any given day.
And if only a tenth of the calcium eaten is absorbed, this works out to
be 1750 a day that must be eaten. Either you have to megadose on calcium
or use an easily absorbed form.
> The majority of calcium excretion occurs in the gut NOT the kidney. And
> calcium excretion has nothing to do with the ultrafiltration occuring in
> the nephron.
>> Where are you getting your information?
> If you want a good suggestion, get a good physiology book.
>> Peter Pediaditakis
> Dept. of Pathology
> University of Pittsburgh
