Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vit. B link to diabetic kidney malfunction: study
AFP ^ | Apr 27, 2010 | Unknown

Posted on 04/28/2010 6:35:01 PM PDT by decimon

Patients with diabetic nephropathy, kidney disease caused by diabetes and treated with high doses of vitamin B, suffered rapid deterioration of the kidneys, a recent study has found.

Diabetics in addition to kidney function loss also were affected by higher rates of heart attack and stroke than those who took a placebo, according to the clinical research in the April 28 edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

Diabetic nephropathy affects the network of tiny blood vessels in the glomerulus, a structure in the kidney made of capillary blood vessels, which is needed to filter blood.

Despite a range of treatments to curb the progression of the disease, about 40 percent of the 21 million Americans who have diabetes develop diabetic nephropathy so a new approach to treatment is needed, the authors of the study said.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Health/Medicine
KEYWORDS: diabetes; diabeticnephropathy; type1diabetes; type2diabetes

1 posted on 04/28/2010 6:35:02 PM PDT by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem; DvdMom; grey_whiskers

To B or not ping.


2 posted on 04/28/2010 6:36:05 PM PDT by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: decimon

I stopped taking a multi-vitamin pack that I have taken intermittently for years. It took me a long time to narrow it down: I think that the vitamin B was causing problems. Supposedly, high levels of vitamin B can be as hard on your system, esp. liver and kidneys, as alcohol.


3 posted on 04/28/2010 7:09:50 PM PDT by jjsheridan5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: decimon

Hmmm.

Only 238 patients, both Type I and Type II, for less than three years.

Pretty weak. I would like to keep the Type II’s separate since their diabetes is caused in such a different way than Type I.

This really doesn’t tell your average person much of anything.


4 posted on 04/28/2010 7:19:29 PM PDT by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publicae scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: decimon; austinmark; FreedomCalls; IslandJeff; JRochelle; MarMema; Txsleuth; Newtoidaho; ...
Effect of B-Vitamin Therapy on Progression of Diabetic Nephropathy

FReepmail me if you want on or off the diabetes ping list. FReebie of unfortunate results. When I saw the AFP title, I was expecting something about lower thiamin, B1.

5 posted on 04/28/2010 7:26:13 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jjsheridan5

Wow, I take B100 or 150 everyday.


6 posted on 04/28/2010 7:29:25 PM PDT by peggybac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Steve0113

ping


7 posted on 04/28/2010 7:36:46 PM PDT by nina0113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers
This really doesn’t tell your average person much of anything.

No, but it does tell folks with diabetic nephropathy not to buy any snake oil with pharmacologic doses of folic acid, B6 and B12.

8 posted on 04/28/2010 7:43:31 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: decimon; peggybac

They used 2.5 mg of folic acid! That’s way too much.

Use maybe 400 mcg of folic acid, or preferable 5-mthf.


9 posted on 04/28/2010 7:45:43 PM PDT by MetaThought
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: decimon

Interesting. I have been taking MEGADOSES of B vitamins in the form of “5 Hour Energy” and I haven’t seen any issues from it. I am Type 2.


10 posted on 04/28/2010 7:50:12 PM PDT by irishtenor (Tag line is on vacation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: peggybac; jjsheridan5
Wow, I take B100 or 150 everyday.

What's that? There are a bunch of different B vitamins.

11 posted on 04/28/2010 7:51:17 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Not really.

I have family history with diabetes, but it is all Type II.

Was it the Type I or Type II or both that this happened to? Was it evenly divided? How many Type I with kidney problems? How many Type II? Or was there only one Type II?

Doesn’t say. The Types aren’t interchangeable. Different conditions cause them to exist. It matters, as far as I know and understand.

That is the problem with studies like this. Scare people out of vitamins, with not a lot of science behind it. This is a VERY SMALL case study.

I find it inconclusive. And with the broadness of their pronouncement, it concerns me this is done with such little evidence. It is not good science.


12 posted on 04/28/2010 7:51:41 PM PDT by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publicae scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Remember that the AMA pushed for Obamacare.


13 posted on 04/28/2010 8:26:03 PM PDT by webboy45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I forget which ones cause problems. My brother-in-law first told me this (he’s a doctor, and also researches these kinds of issues — unlike most doctors!), but I forget the details. His rule of thumb was that if you don’t get any side effects, don’t worry about it. But apparently some people are just much more sensitive than others.

Personally, I would get chronic nausea, coupled with lethargy and other mild symptoms. Nothing too major, but enough to make me feel not quite right (and also easy to blame on other things). Plus, I had elevated liver enzyme levels that have since gone away.

He said its not at all uncommon, and usually not serious. Just common sense. I switched to a different multi-vitamin and everything is fine.

Going back to the article, it does make me wonder if they test for vitamin b sensitivity (if there is such a test), before making these blanket statements.


14 posted on 04/28/2010 8:32:17 PM PDT by jjsheridan5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers

Type II can drift over into Type I ~ not going to happen to everybody, but for some folks they are not really different diseases.


15 posted on 04/28/2010 8:53:20 PM PDT by muawiyah ("Git Out The Way")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

The damage that diabetes does is the same, but their underlying causes are different. Type II is more insulin resistance, than lack of insulin at all. That is very different. Type II can have too much insulin running around and it NOT being picked up by it’s receptors. Type I does not have that problem.


16 posted on 04/28/2010 8:57:14 PM PDT by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publicae scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

B-Complex 100


17 posted on 04/28/2010 9:11:35 PM PDT by peggybac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers
Comment# 5 links the original JAMA articlce.

Was it the Type I or Type II or both that this happened to? Was it evenly divided? How many Type I with kidney problems? How many Type II? Or was there only one Type II?

"Participants were predominantly men (178 [74.8%]) and white (198 [83.2%]), with type 2 diabetes (195 [81.9%])."

Doesn’t say. The Types aren’t interchangeable. Different conditions cause them to exist. It matters, as far as I know and understand.

The complications of both types of diabetes are very similar. Have you heard nephrologists say that there are significant differences in diabetic nephropathy between the two types?

That is the problem with studies like this. Scare people out of vitamins, with not a lot of science behind it. This is a VERY SMALL case study.

This is, "a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial."

I find it inconclusive. And with the broadness of their pronouncement, it concerns me this is done with such little evidence. It is not good science.

Results are results. They failed to validate the homocysteine hypothesis of atherosclerosis despite lowering homocysteine levels and got a, "greater decrease in GFR," i.e. worse kidney function, and "an increase in vascular events."

18 posted on 04/28/2010 9:11:45 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“The complications of both types of diabetes are very similar.”

I believe I said something similar in this thread.

“This is, “a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.””

I am a lay person. 238 is a small number for a study of this kind.

“...failed to validate the homocysteine hypothesis ..”

Ah, ok. That is not what is important to me as a female with Type II history in my mom’s family. Besides, there is already a history in her family of an increase in “vascular events”. Most of them have had heart surgery without taking B vitamins. That would be nothing new for my families history. The only sibling who hasn’t had heart surgery gave blood most of her life to help others with RH negative blood. Maybe there was something to all that blood letting thing after all.


19 posted on 04/28/2010 9:36:04 PM PDT by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publicae scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers
I am a lay person. 238 is a small number for a study of this kind.

Don't think like you should expect sample sizes similar to the sizes used in political polls. It's apples and oranges to compare political and scientific sample sizes. These results are also expressed in terms of probability using the term 'P'. Here's the results:

"Results The mean (SD) follow-up during the trial was 31.9 (14.4) months. At 36 months, radionuclide GFR decreased by a mean (SE) of 16.5 (1.7) mL/min/1.73 m2 in the B-vitamin group compared with 10.7 (1.7) mL/min/1.73 m2 in the placebo group (mean difference, –5.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], –10.6 to –1.1; P = .02). There was no difference in requirement of dialysis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.1; 95% CI, 0.4-2.6; P = .88). The composite outcome occurred more often in the B-vitamin group (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.0-4.0; P = .04). Plasma total homocysteine decreased by a mean (SE) of 2.2 (0.4) µmol/L at 36 months in the B-vitamin group compared with a mean (SE) increase of 2.6 (0.4) µmol/L in the placebo group (mean difference, –4.8; 95% CI, –6.1 to –3.7; P < .001, in favor of B vitamins)."

P = .02 means that you expect that result 2 times out of 100 just by chance
P = .88 means that you expect that result 88 times out of 100 just by chance
P = .04 means that you expect that result 4 times out of 100 just by chance
P < .001 means that you expect that result less than 1 time out of 1000 just by chance.

At most these mega doses of B Vitamins didn't help. The numbers scream obvious harm. Check out the null hypothesis in any search engine.

20 posted on 04/28/2010 10:47:48 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: decimon
I've been taking a B complex for years as a metabolic enhancer, and I haven't seen any drop in urinary output. In fact, my doc put me on Lasix for fluid retention that my Lisinopril doesn't quite fully handle, and I pee like a baby racehorse now.

"But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: for men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away, for his name is Obama."

21 posted on 04/29/2010 4:10:40 PM PDT by Viking2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: decimon

“Patients received single tablet of B vitamins with folic acid (2.5 mg/d), vitamin B6 (25 mg/d), and vitamin B12 (1 mg/d), or matching placebo.”

Oh, that makes me furious! Diabetics are known to be low in vitamin B ONE, not B6 and B12!

Study after study has proven the benefits of B1 supplements for diabetics, but this one leaves the impression that ALL B’s are bad.


22 posted on 05/01/2010 2:54:58 PM PDT by Marie (Obama seems to think that Jerusalem has been the capital of Israel since Camp David, not King David)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theKid51; Apple Blossom

ping


23 posted on 05/01/2010 2:56:58 PM PDT by bmwcyle (Free the last Navy Seal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: decimon

Generally, water-soluble vitamins are non-toxic, even at “megadose” levels - the excess is just eliminated by the kidneys. Vitamin “C” is the classic example. I suppose some variants might have a toxic effect on the kidneys, but I am not aware of any such thing.

Vitamins B6 (pyridoxine) and B1 (Thiamine) are both water soluble, and in their common forms are harmless in large doses.

The common B6 supplements might contain as much as 50 times the MDR as the hydrocloride. The hydrocloride must be converted by the liver into pyridoxal 5’-phosphate, which is the active form. This is also available as a supplement.

The most common B1 supplement is Thiamine Hydrocloride, which is generally non-toxic at 30+ times the MDR. But it is absorbed slowly from the gut, and cleared from the blood in just a few hours, so it does not maintain continuous increased B1 levels.

This was my problem with diabetic (T2) neuropathy. My B1 level was just below the minimum, although I was taking both a multivitamin containing B1 and an additional “B-complex” supplement, 12 hours apart.

Then I learned about a supplement called “Benfotiamine” from someone on the FR Diabetes ping list. My neurologist had never heard of it, but a little research answered my questions (and his) about it, and I decided to try it, at 150mg twice a day. I kept taking the multivitamin, but dropped the separate B-complex.

Benfotiamine was invented in Japan as a treatment for alcoholic B1 deficiency, and it IS effective at raising and maintaining B1 blood level. I know this because my neurologist tested my B1 level twice more while I was taking it.

After 90 days, the test showed that my B1 was about 50% ABOVE the top of the recommended range, so I dropped the second dose. The next test, 6 months later, showed it to be just below the top of the normal range.

I have been taking this for about 2 years now, but neuropathy consists of damaged nerves, so full recovery - if it EVER happens, and many say it CANNOT - is likely years away. Meanwhile, I celebrate the occasional odd sensation in my feet, hoping that it is a precursor of things to come. But at age 70, I wish things would hurry up!


24 posted on 05/02/2010 1:40:07 PM PDT by MainFrame65 (The US Senate: World's greatest PREVARICATIVE body!.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson