Vitamin D Supplementation and Cardiovascular Disease Risks in More Than 83,000 Individuals in 21 Randomized Clinical Trials A Meta-analysis

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
69,936
49,883
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#24
what about products for male sexual enhancement, like low-T? Are they worth it?

(I'm asking for a friend.)
If your T is actually low, then yeah. The problem is we don't really know what "low-T" actually is based on measurements. We can only really define it based on symptoms, and if you don't have symptoms then you don't have low-T regardless of what the numbers are. Still, the low-T clinics will be happy to check your numbers and tell you that you have low-T and prescribe you stuff, for a fee.

The other thing is, taking testosterone increases the risk of heart disease and stroke. If you're looking to treat erectile dysfunction the PPE5 inhibitors (ie Viagra) are a much better option.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,082
2,544
1,743
So Cal
#25
If your T is actually low, then yeah. The problem is we don't really know what "low-T" actually is based on measurements. We can only really define it based on symptoms, and if you don't have symptoms then you don't have low-T regardless of what the numbers are. Still, the low-T clinics will be happy to check your numbers and tell you that you have low-T and prescribe you stuff, for a fee.

The other thing is, taking testosterone increases the risk of heart disease and stroke. If you're looking to treat erectile dysfunction the PPE5 inhibitors (ie Viagra) are a much better option.
no, no, no, no, no, no... not me.... my friend.... I think he was wondering about the supplements that claim to boost testosterone.... whether those were worth it
 

SLVRBK

Johnny 8ball's PR Manager
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Oct 16, 2003
14,135
5,146
1,743
Katy, TX
#26
If your T is actually low, then yeah. The problem is we don't really know what "low-T" actually is based on measurements. We can only really define it based on symptoms, and if you don't have symptoms then you don't have low-T regardless of what the numbers are. Still, the low-T clinics will be happy to check your numbers and tell you that you have low-T and prescribe you stuff, for a fee.

The other thing is, taking testosterone increases the risk of heart disease and stroke. If you're looking to treat erectile dysfunction the PPE5 inhibitors (ie Viagra) are a much better option.
A buddy of mine went through testing at low t center then a internist and then a urologist...think they started with Clomid, then pellets and finally injections which he now self administers. Another is on Clomid only.
 

NotOnTV

BRB -- Taking an okie leak
Sep 14, 2010
8,183
6,249
743
Gondor
#27
If your T is actually low, then yeah. The problem is we don't really know what "low-T" actually is based on measurements. We can only really define it based on symptoms, and if you don't have symptoms then you don't have low-T regardless of what the numbers are. Still, the low-T clinics will be happy to check your numbers and tell you that you have low-T and prescribe you stuff, for a fee.

The other thing is, taking testosterone increases the risk of heart disease and stroke. If you're looking to treat erectile dysfunction the PPE5 inhibitors (ie Viagra) are a much better option.
I thought the risk of heart attack and stroke is actually higher in men with low testosterone.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
69,936
49,883
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#28
I thought the risk of heart attack and stroke is actually higher in men with low testosterone.
I'm not talking about naturally high or low testosterone, I'm talking about testosterone supplementation. We know that it increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and thromboembolic disorders.

Which, btw, we're giving massive doses to "trans" children.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,454
31,914
1,743
oklahoma city
#29
I'm not talking about naturally high or low testosterone, I'm talking about testosterone supplementation. We know that it increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and thromboembolic disorders.

Which, btw, we're giving massive doses to "trans" children.
Can't say I agree with this. It appears to be a big unknown:


http://www.onlinejacc.org/content/67/5/545

Whereas most epidemiological studies have suggested that low T is associated with increased atherosclerotic disease (68), there is a raging controversy about the effects of TRT on CV events and mortality. Meta-analyses published between 2005 and 2010 (69–71) show that TRT, in general, had neutral effects on the occurrence of major, adverse CV events; T did increase hematocrit and hemoglobin, and had various small effects on lipid levels.
..........................
Despite these recent studies showing an association of adverse CV outcomes to exogenous T use, there are an equal number of studies showing just the opposite.
............................
Results of recent meta-analyses on the effects of TRT on CV risk have been contradictory, with one suggesting that TRT increases adverse CV events in studies not funded by pharmaceutical companies (88), and another showing that T was not associated with major adverse CV events and was actually protective in men with metabolic syndrome (89).
 
Last edited:

NotOnTV

BRB -- Taking an okie leak
Sep 14, 2010
8,183
6,249
743
Gondor
#30
Can't say I agree with this. It appears to be a big unknown:


http://www.onlinejacc.org/content/67/5/545

Whereas most epidemiological studies have suggested that low T is associated with increased atherosclerotic disease (68), there is a raging controversy about the effects of TRT on CV events and mortality. Meta-analyses published between 2005 and 2010 (69–71) show that TRT, in general, had neutral effects on the occurrence of major, adverse CV events; T did increase hematocrit and hemoglobin, and had various small effects on lipid levels.
..........................
Despite these recent studies showing an association of adverse CV outcomes to exogenous T use, there are an equal number of studies showing just the opposite.
............................
Results of recent meta-analyses on the effects of TRT on CV risk have been contradictory, with one suggesting that TRT increases adverse CV events in studies not funded by pharmaceutical companies (88), and another showing that T was not associated with major adverse CV events and was actually protective in men with metabolic syndrome (89).
Pretty much what I read when I was researching supplemental testosterone...for a friend.
 
Feb 11, 2007
4,148
1,901
1,743
Oklahoma City
#31
There are doggone few things, outside of vitamin deficiencies, that there is actual evidence that vitamins treat or prevent. From Jama Cardiology:

Vitamin D Supplementation and Cardiovascular Disease Risks in More Than 83,000 Individuals in 21 Randomized Clinical Trials: A Meta-analysis
Mahmoud Barbarawi, MD; Babikir Kheiri, MD, MRCP, PGDip; Yazan Zayed, MD; et al

JAMA Cardiol. Published online June 19, 2019. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2019.1870

Key Points
Question Does vitamin D supplementation have any association with cardiovascular disease risk?

Findings In this meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that included more than 83?000 participants, vitamin D supplementation was not associated with reduced risks of major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular disease mortality, or all-cause mortality compared with placebo.

Meaning These results suggest that vitamin D supplementation may not confer cardiovascular protection and may not be indicated for this purpose.

Abstract
Importance Observational studies have reported an association between low serum vitamin D levels and elevated risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events, but such studies cannot prove causation because of possible unmeasured confounding.

Objective We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that tested the association of vitamin D supplementation with reduced CVD events and all-cause mortality.

Data Sources Literature search through PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase was completed by 2 reviewers from each database’s inception to December 15, 2018.

Study Selection Inclusion criteria were randomized clinical trials that reported the effect of long-term (=1 year) vitamin D supplementation on CVD events and all-cause mortality. Studies that did not include cardiovascular outcomes were excluded.

Data Extraction and Synthesis Data were abstracted independently by 2 authors. Random-effects models were used to report the risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs.

Main Outcomes and Measures Major adverse cardiovascular events was the primary outcome, and rates of myocardial infarction, stroke or cerebrovascular accident, CVD mortality, and all-cause mortality were the secondary end points.

Results Twenty-one randomized clinical trials were included (including 83?291 patients, of whom 41?669 received vitamin D and 41?622 received placebos). The mean (SD) age of trial participants was 65.8 (8.4) years; 61?943 (74.4%) were female. Only 4 trials had prespecified CVD as a primary end point. Vitamin D supplementation compared with placebo was not associated with reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.95-1.06]; P=.85) nor the secondary end points of myocardial infarction (RR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.93-1.08]; P=.92), stroke (RR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.98-1.15]; P=.16), CVD mortality (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.90-1.07]; P=.68), or all-cause mortality (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.93-1.02]; P=.23). Results were generally consistent by sex, baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin D level, vitamin D dosage, formulation (daily vs bolus dosing), and presence or absence of concurrent calcium administration.

Conclusions and Relevance In this updated meta-analysis, vitamin D supplementation was not associated with reduced major adverse cardiovascular events, individual CVD end points (myocardial infarction, stroke, CVD mortality), or all-cause mortality. The findings suggest that vitamin D supplementation does not confer cardiovascular protection and is not indicated for this purpose.
Nutritional studies are extremely difficult to do and the evidence gathered is extremely thin compared to most
better controlled medical studies. Men, unlike rats, can not be put in cages and studied. I take selected vitamins myself knowing that there is very thin scientific evidence to do so, but I will be dead before my decision to take selected vitamins can be proven one way or another.