From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Subject: Re: More on iodide deficiency
Date: 13 Apr 1997
Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative

In <3350b1f6.80826767@news.pressenter.com> amcleran@pressenter.com
(AMcLeran) writes:

>NaCl (Sodium Chloride) is only one of quite a few edible styles of
>table salt. There is also something they sell as "Lite Salt", which is
>nothing more than KCl (Potassium Chloride). This one touted to be
>easier on the body because Potassium is not as much of a problem as
>sodium. I won't go into the long and boring reasons why this is not so
>true, but one thing that some of you Lite Salt users may or may not be
>aware of is that Lite Salt is radioactive. One of potassium's isotopes
>is naturally radioactive in nature and since it would be too expensive
>to separate it out, you get to be exposed to low level gamma and beta
>radiation.


Comment:

True enough, but so what?  It's also true for any potassium in
your diet, no matter the source.  If you are implying that the
radiation from K-40 is reason enough to cut down on salt
substitutes, then you must also be implying that it's enough to
make you want to cut down on the potassium from fruits and
vegetables.  And if not, why mention it?

The total body burden of potassium is a function of dietary
intake, only for rather low potassium intakes.  At higher intakes
(certainly anything you'd get in a diet containing 5 servings of
fruits and vegetables a day), there's no longer much of a
relationship.  For those higher intake ranges, blood levels of
potassium, and body burden of potassium (which is more or less
reflected by blood levels, even though most of the potassium in
the body is inside cells) is constant, and is maintained by renal
threshold (very much like total body vitamin C at higher intake
ranges).  Thus, if you're eating a good diet in the first place
and have normal kidneys, extra potassium doesn't increase your
body load-- it's just excreted in the urine as fast as you eat it
(some medications and diseases modify that, but the above is true
for the average healthy person).



                                       Steve Harris, M.D.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Subject: Re: Potassium levels
Date: 05 Jun 1997
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition

In <01bc7158$df93d700$253f44cf@default> "David Sprouse"
<Daven8r@bellatlantic.net> writes:

>>    It's roughly 16 bananas, or glasses of OJ or milk.  Or 13 of those
>> little boxes of raisins.  Or 40 potassium pills from a health food
>> store.  Or 5 high strength prescription pills.
>>
>>                                          Steve Harris, M.D.
>
>Steve:
>
>I've been wondering about this lately....why exactly is it that health
>food stores only sell K+ tablets containing a miniscule 99mg, and how do
>they fit 800 mg into a prescription pill?  And why would it be by
>prescription since it's a "natural" substance?  Thanks,
>--
>David Sprouse, BS, HFI
>ACSM Health/Fitness Instructor
>Virginia Beach, VA



   For the same reason that testosterone is by prescription, even
though it's a natural substance.  And morphine.  Basically, your
neighbors don't trust you with these things, and we live in a
democracy.

    The potassium in health food store pills is limited to less than
100 mg by law.  The basic reason is that high concentrations of
potassium, such as might be present in a bigger rapid release pill, can
kill cells and cause tissue necrosis.  Part of the intestine then gets
a hole in it, and that causes big problems.  The prescription drugs are
rigorously formulated to be slow release, so that doesn't happen.
Raisins are slow release, too <g>.  It takes about a dozen of them to
equal a health food store potassium pill.   I'd rather have the
raisins.

                                           Steve Harris, M.D.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative
Subject: Re: potassium protects humans from fatal strokes
Date: 26 Apr 1998 10:04:06 GMT

In <6husrv$n86@milo.vcn.bc.ca> oberon@vcn.bc.ca (Doug Skrecky) writes:

>Authors
>  Khaw KT.  Barrett-Connor E.
>Title
>  Dietary potassium and stroke-associated
>  mortality. A 12-year prospective population study.
>Source
>  New England Journal of Medicine.  316(5):235-40, 1987 Jan 29.
>Abstract
>  Hypertension is the most important known risk factor for stroke.
>  Clinical, experimental, and epidemiologic evidence suggests that a high
>  dietary intake of potassium is associated with lower blood pressure. In
>  hypertensive rats, a high intake of potassium is reported to protect
>  against stroke, even though blood pressure is not affected. We examined
>  the relation between the 24-hour dietary potassium intake at base line
>  and subsequent stroke-associated mortality in a population-based cohort
>  of 859 men and women (aged 50 to 79 years) in Southern California.
>  After 12 years, 24 stroke-associated deaths had occurred. The relative
>  risks of stroke-associated mortality in the lowest tertile of potassium
>  intake, as compared with that in the top two tertiles combined, were
>  2.6 (P = 0.16) in men and 4.8 (P = 0.01) in women. In multivariate
>  analyses, a 10-mmol increase in daily potassium intake was associated
>  with a 40 percent reduction in the risk of stroke-associated mortality
>  (P less than 0.001). This effect was independent of other dietary
>  variables, including the intake of calories, fat, protein, fiber,
>  calcium, magnesium, and alcohol. The effect was also apparently
>  independent of known cardiovascular risk factors, including age, sex,
>  blood pressure, blood cholesterol level, obesity, fasting blood glucose
>  level, and cigarette smoking. These findings support the hypothesis
>  that a high intake of potassium from food sources may protect against
>  stroke-associated death.



   This study has a rather interesting history.  It had been recently
discovered in the Dahl salt sensitive (hypertensive rat) that potassium
had a protective effect against stroke independent of its effect on
blood pressure.  So they looked to see if there was an effect in
humans, and -- lo-- saw a 40% reduction on just 10 meq a day.  About a
glass of orange juice, or milk.  Or one of those dinky Sunmaid raisin
boxes (30 raisins or something).  Alas, this was the era when all
hypertension (primary risk factor for stroke) was being treated before
anything with a diuretic.  Order was being imposed on all to follow a
stepped care plan, starting with a thiazide, which was likely to make
your potassium go DOWN.  Nobody wanted to hear about the above
epidemiologic study in THAT climate.

   The problem is those darned Dahl rats-- they keep reminding us.  In
1991, they discovered that ACE inhibitors inhibit strokes in these rats
indendent of their BP effect.  But they did spare potassium.  And this
year, somebody or other rediscovered the potassium effect in the rats,
and have had people going on and on about it again.  Duh.  Maybe we'll
do another population study.  It'll probably be a cold day in hell
before anybody runs a big study, randomizing stroke risk people to
potassium or placebo at 20 to 40 meq a day.  Who'd fund THAT?  There
are plenty of generic Rx potassium supplements around.  Though the ones
you find in the health food stores OTC are only 2.5 meq (pitiful), and
you'd have to take 4 per day to get the 10 meq effect.

                                         Steve Harris, M.D.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative,sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: potassium protects against kidney and brain damage
Date: 29 Apr 1998 00:27:14 GMT

In <6i4ou5$aph@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> tonnyb@worldnet.att.net
(Anthony Brea D.C.) writes:

>Steve,
>
>Who or what is JNC?

   The Joint National Committee on hypertension, a group of experts
from the American Heart Association and the National Heart Lung and
Blood Institute of the NIH.  They publish guidelines on "concensus"
treatment of hypertension of various flavors, every few years.  The
last report was in late 1996 (JNC VI).   JNC recommendations aren't
without problems, of course.  They are drug-heavy and nutrition-light,
due to the nature of most of the good research done out there.  That is
changing slowly.  Way too slowly.

>Any ideas on the mechanism by which potassium protects against stokes?

  It suppresses renin and angiotensin levels, which are hormones which
both do bad things to blood vessels, independently of what they do to
blood pressure (which also, of course, does bad things to vessels).
Just what, I don't really know.  Some of it is a smooth muscle
proliferation effect, something like that of insulin.  But it's
extraordiarily complicated, and is maybe the hottest topic in
cardiovascular research right now.  It's literally Syndrome X!  When we
find out how it works, we'll know basically why blood vessels age.

>Do you know whether the protection afforded was against hemmorhagic or
>thrombolytic strokes?

Both.  But mainly against thrombotic strokes.  The inside of vessels
goes bad, and clot is what happens next.  HTN is more straightforwardly
related to hemorrhagic strokes, as expected from just simple mechanisms
(like your radiator hoses going if the pressure there gets too high).
But, as with radiator hoses, that isn't the whole story behind
hemorrhagic strokes, either!  New and flexible hoses hold up better.


>Since strokes and kidneys involve blood vessels do you thing there
>might be some connection between these two and coronary vessel
>disease?

    Without question, but it's the scale of circulation that makes
potassium show up better for brain problems.  Potassium seems to have
its best effect on vessels too small to be of major importance in
cardiac disease.  Lose a gram of heart tissue and you might not even
know it.  Lose the same gram to a small infarct in the brain, and it's
likely to be a much more serious problem.

>In case you didn't know the same phenomenon was reported by nutrtion
>researchers back in the 40's.
>Anthony B

   I didn't know it.  You mean they knew that potassium's good effect
was INDEPENDENT of the blood pressure effect?

                                      Steve Harris, M.D.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: Reply to Dr. Steve Harris, Part I
Date: 23 May 1998 10:24:40 GMT

In <35665f4f.85265360@news.mindspring.com> ragoodman@mindspring.com
(Richard A. Goodman) writes:

> A serum potassium test is an unreliable test of body potassium stores
>because of the homeostatic balance.  If you were to wait for a patient
>to show a "deficient" level of potassium in his or her serum, you
>might very well be trying to treat a cadaver.

Comment:

    Nonsense.  Only in few cases of severely deranged pH is this so, an
we physicians are aware of them quite well enough to avoid treating
cadavers.  Otherwise "The serum K+ concentration (normally 3.8-5.0
mEq/liter) generally reflects total body potassium content, even though
only 2% of body potassium is extracellular."  That's a quote.  There's
also a nice graph of the relationship, with pH error lines, on page 31
of the 23rd edition of the Manual of Medical Therapeutics (the
Washington Manual, used as bible by many an intern).  If you persist on
arguing the point, I'll be glad to pull up the original studies, which
looked at serum potassium by standard methods, and total body potassium
by K-40 body counting.


>>A much better early
>>indicator of portassium body stores can be found red blood cells.

  This I doubt, but you're free to cite your sources.  Red cells are
notoriously fickle in their mineral balance.  In studies where
erythrocyte potassium works, serum does as well.  And there are many
indications that in many situations erythrocyte mineral levels are
lousy at predicting body levels of potassium (and also other a few
other minerals). Here are sources for MY views on the subject:


Clin Chim Acta 1988 Oct 14;177(2):157-166
Correlation between concentrations of magnesium, zinc, and potassium in
plasma, erythrocytes and muscles.

Ladefoged K, Hagen K

Medical Department P, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.

In 93 patients, consecutively subjected to laparotomy, we studied the
correlation between concentrations of magnesium, zinc and potassium in
plasma, erythrocytes and muscle tissue. Sixteen percent had
hypomagnesemia, 27% hypozincemia, and 53% hypokalemia. There was no
difference with regard to the concentration of magnesium and zinc in
erythrocytes or in muscle tissue between patients with low and patients
with normal/high plasma concentrations of these minerals. Potassium
concentration per liter erythrocytes was slightly but significantly
higher in patients with hypokalemia than in patients with normal
plasma potassium. When expressed per mmol haemoglobin there was,
however, no difference in erythrocyte potassium between these two
groups. Neither did they differ with regard to potassium concentration
in muscles. There was a highly significant correlation between the
concentrations of magnesium, zinc and potassium in erythrocytes as well
as in muscle tissue, and a significant correlation between magnesium
and potassium in plasma. However, no correlation was found between the
mineral concentrations in plasma, erythrocytes and muscles, neither for
magnesium, nor for zinc or potassium. *** We therefore conclude that a
valid test to estimate total body stores of these minerals
cannot be based on analysis of erythrocytes.***

PMID: 2976618, UI: 89168776

----------

Acta Med Scand 1981;209(6):439-444
Erythrocyte and total body potassium in untreated primary hypertension.

Ericsson F, Carlmark B, Eliasson K

In a study of total body and erythrocyte potassium in mild hypertension
we found decreased intracellular potassium concentrations in 41
hypertensives compared to controls but no correlation between
intracellular potassium, measured by whole body counting, and
erythrocyte potassium.**  A total body potassium corresponding to an
intracellular potassium of 85% or less of the expected value was found
in females. In the hypertensives, a negative correlation existed
between serum and erythrocyte potassium. No correlation was found
between potassium decrease and urinary aldosterone or plasma renin
level. An inhibition of the active sodium-potassium exchange at the
cellular level is proposed as an explanation of these findings.

PMID: 7020346, UI: 81252257

----------

Note: in the above two studies, serum is BETTER than RBC potassium at
predicting total body potassium.  In the following study, it does as
well.



Clin Sci Mol Med 1976 Jun;50(6):455-461
The relation between potassium in body fluids and total body potassium
in healthy and diabetic subjects.

Boddy K, Hume R, White C, Pack A, King PC, Weyers E, Rowan T, Mills E

1. The concentration of potassium in the erythrocytes and the plasma of
forty-one normal subjects and twenty-five diabetic patients was
measured and the results were used to calculate the total amount of
potassium in the erythrocyte mass and the total amount of potassium in
the plasma. The total body potassium was measured in a whole-body
monitor. 2. In normal subjects a close correlation was found between
total erythrocyte potassium and total body potassium and also between
total plasma potassium and total body potassium. 3. The regression
relation between total body potassium and total erythrocyte potassium
in normal subjects was used to predict the total body potassium in
diabetic patients. There was reasonable agreement between the measured
and predicted total body potassium but there was poor agreement between
the measured total body potassium and that predicted from the patient's
height and age or height and age or height, weight and age.

PMID: 1277754, UI: 76209196

----------






                                             Steve Harris, M.D.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: High blood pressure - any ideas?
Date: 22 Aug 1998 05:35:52 GMT

In <35DDEC6F.699D@netcom.ca> Tom Matthews <tmatth@netcom.ca> writes:

>Marc Giller wrote:
>
>> Tom Matthews (tmatth@netcom.ca) writes:
>>
>> > The fact that potassium injections can stop the heart has very
>> > little, if anything to do with any limitation on digestive system
>> > dosage. The 99mg is a ridiculous limitation. It prevents anyone from
>> > being able to supplement this often lacking and generally safe
>> > mineral without a prescription.
>> > 
>> > By that reasoning, the FDA should also place a ban on being able to
>> > buy more than one banana per day for fear that you might actually eat
>> > two of them!
>
>> Hmm.
>> *IS* there a danger in eating 2 [or more] per day?
>> I know someone who practically lives on them.
>
>No, not at all.
>The example was intended as something which was clearly false which
>should how stupid was the FDA's reasoning if indeed that was their
>reason (if indeed they even *had* a reason other than to increase their
>power!).


   Now, now.  In this ONE case, the FDA here isn't being quite as dumb
as they look.  If you make a potassium pill badly, out of the pure
salt, as the pill sits up against the bowel wall it can release enough
potassium to raise the concentration in that small area enough to kill
tissue.  So you get a bowel wall infarction, rupture, and hell to pay.
The FDA doesn't let people sell potassium pills of high strength willy
nilly precisely because it takes a pretty high tech system to make sure
potassium leaches out of some matrix slowly enough to ensure this
concentration tissue killing doesn't happen--- and the FDA can't police
every supplement manufacturer making these things on a non-presciption
basis.  I surely know a few supplement makers I wouldn't trust to make
an 800 mg potassium pill.

   Needless to say, the problem doesn't arise with potassium disolved
in water, or in juices, or with potassium in fruit (which has its own
complex slow-K delivery system all in place already).

                                      Steve Harris, M.D.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: How much potassium?
Date: 12 Feb 1999 09:44:07 GMT

In <36C12C25.2548@netcom.ca> Tom Matthews <tmatth@netcom.ca> writes:

>KeSWReS wrote:
>>
>> Can you have too much potassium?
>
>Yes, if you inject it, however, only with very great difficulty (if at
>all) if you eat it.
>
>Your system is well setup to eliminate any excess.


   If you have good kidneys and aren't taking ACE inhibitors (blood
pressure drugs ending with "-pril"), potassium sparing diruretics
(spironoloctone, amiloride, triamterine, eg Aldactazide, Aldactone,
Moduretic, Midamore, Dyrenium, Dyazide, HCTZ/triampterine generic,
etc), and so on.   And even then, I would suggest you keep your total
intake below what you'd get on a purely vegan/fruit diet, which is
around 200 meq (8 grams) a day.  Medical (pill) supplementation on the
order of 40-80 meq/day (10 meq is a glass of juice or milk, or a
banana, or small handful of raisins) appears to be safe for all but the
above people.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: How much potassium?
Date: 12 Feb 1999 09:49:19 GMT

In <36C2F641.6D47701B@iwl.net> Willy Wouters <wwouters@iwl.net> writes:

>You probably *can* ingest too much ..
>Mostly hearsya, but apparantly one year during the marathon in Houston a
>runner decided to use "special fortified formula" as a replenshment drink
>during the run. He had family/friends all along the route ready to hand
>him the special preparations. He collapsed near (or at?) the finish line,
>and promptly died of cardiac arrest. Upon autopsy, the very high level of
>KCl was sited.

   If true, the pathologist or coroner was an idiot.  When you die, the
potassium leaks out of your cells, and the levels go WAY up, completely
swamping any toxic amounts in the blood that may have been there
initially.  That's one of the things that makes potassium injection the
perfect poison, in somebody who already has an IV.  As every medical
mystery writer knows by now.




>Note:  this story is retold as I remember hearing it.  No first hand
>information.
>Cheers,
>WW


    Well, be of good cheer.  They guy probably had a plain old heart
attack, and the special drink makers weren't at fault.

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: sci.med.cardiology,sci.med
Subject: Re: My Strange Syndrome.  HELP.
Date: 11 Aug 2000 21:44:01 GMT

In <39946BF2.7F7E6431@apex.net> Alvena Ferreira <thehydes@apex.net>
writes:
>>>
>By the way, just a point of interest:  even though the SERUM potassium
>is NORMAL, the likelihood is that the INTRAcellular potassium is being
>sacrificed in order to maintain the SERUM at a decent level.


  Wrong. This may happen to some extent with magnesium, but at any
given pH, your serum potassium will be fairly proportional to your
total body stores (which are, of course, 98% intracellular). I know of
an odd genetic diseases of potassium distribution (familial hypokalemic
periodic paralysis, etc), but otherwise the proportionate distribution
of potassium between cells and serum is more or less the general rule
in the absense of certain drugs, or severe tissue injury causing it to
leak out. These are apparent from history. Similarly, the large
acid-base changes as it would take to cause major potassium store
shifts of the sort you suggest, would also be apparent in other ways.

From: "Steve Harris" <SBHarris123@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: sources of potassium
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 23:23:10 -0600

> "Lucich" <oxbow_lebach@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:9cvg2g$fn6ld$1@ID-30297.news.dfncis.de...
> > Can anyone here tell me if potassium chloride or potassium bitartrate
> > useable by the body as sources of potassium?  They are the main
> > ingredients in "NoSalt", a sodium chloride substitute.  I use that
> > occasionally and have always wondered if it supplemented my potassium
> > intake.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kirby Lucich


They are usable, but you probably don't eat enough to make much difference
in your potassium intake, which will be on the order of 2 or 3 grams a day
on an average diet, and even higher on a vegetarian one.

From: "Steve Harris" <SBHarris123@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: bananas - another question...
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 23:09:15 -0600

"iailwa" <iailwa@dingoblue.net.au> wrote in message
news:3b1d8bdc$0$30979$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Jean P Nance" <jpnan@bluestem.prairienet.org> wrote
>
> > "Where does the potassium in  a banana
> > go, when the banana is ripening on our kitchen shelf? Does it grow wings
> > and fly off into the air?" That would be a scientific marvel indeed.
>
> Well, as a plant physilogist from some time ago, can you say why
> salicylate levels decrease as a fruit ripens, or why amine levels
> increase? If you can't explain these then maybe you shouldn't be so
> sarcastic about the fate of potassium......

As several of us have pointed out, it's easy to get rid of organics, not so
easy to get rid of minerals. It's the difference between chemistry and a
nuclear reactor.

From: "Steve Harris" <SBHarris123@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: bananas - another question...
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 15:31:57 -0600

"Alex Brands" <abbrands@artsci.wustl.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.31.0106061055350.8579-100000@ascc.artsci.wustl.edu...
> Steve,
>
> Is it possible that the potassium becomes part of a volitile compound that
> can evaporate away?


Basically, no. Potassium is an alkali metal with no volatile compounds. At
least, nothing that any water-containing living critter could make.

From: "Steve Harris" <SBHarris123@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: bananas - another question...
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 15:34:09 -0600

"Alex Brands" <abbrands@artsci.wustl.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.31.0106061028380.8579-100000@ascc.artsci.wustl.edu...
> As I mentioned before, it's possible that it could be transported into the
> peel, which most people don't eat

Possible in theory, but why in the world would a banana go to all the work
and the trouble to do that? The potassium in fruits is there because it's a
natural cell component. It takes work for the plant to move it around. That
work is not going to get done unless the plant has a darn good reason for
doing it.

From: "Steve Harris" <SBHarris123@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: bananas - another question...
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 18:24:01 -0600

"iailwa" <iailwa@dingoblue.net.au> wrote in message
news:3b1ea837$0$25521$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au...
> In our bodies potassium shifts due to gradients, why not in a banana - ie
> into the skin.

The gradient you're talking about is inside to outside cells-- a few
microns. It's not a gross distance like millimeters from banana to peel.

Look, the bottom line is that the idea that a banana gets more potassium as
it ripens is unlikely and silly, from the view of basic chemistry and
biology. If you believe it, we want to see your evidence. It's up to YOU to
prove something bizarre like this happens, not up to us to prove it doesn't.

From: "Steve Harris" <sbharris@ix.RETICULATEDOBJECTcom.com>
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: Problems with *elevated* potassium?
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 12:18:56 -0600
Message-ID: <aevr4v$igt$1@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>

"pbeyer" <pbeyer@kumc.edu> wrote in message
news:3D136591.5C9FA7BD@kumc.edu...
>
>
> charles silver wrote:
>
> >     A friend of mine has just been informed by her GP that her potassium
> > level is "slightly elevated" and therefore she should not take potassium
> > supplements or eat lots of bananas.   Her potassium level is 5.8 mEq/L,
> > which is above his lab's recommended range of 3.6 to 5.3 mEq/L.  (What
> > does 'mEq/L' stand for?)
> >
> >     I know that *low* potassium levels can cause problems, but I've
> > never heard that *high* potassium levels can also indicate some
> > problem. What kind of problems might be correlated with *high*
> > potassium?  Note that hers is 0.5 higher than the recommended high of
> > 5.3 mEq/L.  Is this something to be concerned about?  Why or why not?
> >
> >     Thank you very much for any informative reply.
> >
> > Charlie Silver
> >
> >   (P.S. I found the following in _The Vitamin Bible_:"No dietary allowance
> > [for potassium] has been set, but 1,875 to 5,625 mg. is considered a
> > healthy daily intake." Is this relevant to anything?  They say nothing
> > about problems associated with *high* potassium levels.)
>
> High potassium levels could certainly be of concern.  The degree of
> concern and the treatment depends on the reason for the elevation-- eg
> could be related to meds, renal function, etc.  I think she should ask
> for a recomended dietary potassium level (rather than don't eat bananas)
> since many other foods are high in potassium.  The *L* refers to liter.
> My opinion  Pete

COMMENT:

Okay, here's mine: she needs to have the lab repeated several times before
she even knows if it's true. Red cells are full of potassium, so blood badly
drawn or let sit around is bound to have a higher level in the plasma.

It's very rare for adults with normal renal function (which can be seen on
her other standard labs) to have too high potassium levels. And when they're
marginally high as this one is, in the setting of normal kidneys and no
symptoms, they are usually ignorable.

Look, tell yer GP that the average human body is smarter than to kill you if
you eat too many bananas. Remember where we humans all came from, after all.

SBH

From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com (Steve Harris  sbharris@ROMAN9.netcom.com)
Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative
Subject: Re: Question on Potassium Supplements
Date: 20 Jan 2004 14:29:44 -0800
Message-ID: <79cf0a8.0401201429.ba663fe@posting.google.com>

Bronsing <rbronsing@NOSPAMplanet.nl> wrote in message
news:<ferp0057qggagh3fu42sc2rnba4idive0p@4ax.com>...

> Op Tue, 20 Jan 2004 04:40:39 GMT schreef Steven O.
> <Steven@OpZZREMOVE_ALL_Zs_AND_ALL_BETWEEN_ZZComm.com>:
>
> >For a while recently I was on a duirectic for high blood pressure.
> >(Am off that now, and onto different meds, but that's another story.)
> >Anyway, while on the diuretic, I was advised to eat foods to
> >supplement my potassium intake.
> >
> >I went to a vitamin store to look for potassium supplements.  I was
> >surprised to discover that they all had dosages which were listed as
> >being around 3% of the daily recommended dose.  This surprised me --
> >most dietary supplements have anywhere's from 50% to 100% of the
> >recommended daily allowance.
> >
> >Why are the supplements so low on potassium?
> >
> >Thanks in advance for all replies.
> >
>
> Since there's plenty of potassium in what you would normally eat,
> there's little point in taking potassium as a supplement. Also know
> that overdosing on potassium can cause cardiac arrythmia's so be
> careful not to take too much.
>
> Robert Bronsing

COMMENT:

So there's plenty of potassium in food, but you should take too much
due to the danger of cardiac arrythmias? Sorry, can't have it both
ways.

The truth is the normal diet has about 80 meq of K in it, which is
2400 mg. Medical potassium supplements tend to be from 10 to 40 meq,
which is 400 to 1600 mg.  There's about 300 mg in a glass of milk or
juice.

The ONLY reason why health food stores can't sell pills with more than
99 mg is that when KCl as a solid contacts tissue, it can raise K
levels high enough to cause tissue death, and people have gotten holes
in their intestines from pills which just contained a slug of KCl. So
solutions of hundreds of milligrams of K are safe (indeed as safe as
milk or juice) but pills containing that much aren't safe unless they
have a fairly complicated slow release system to keep the K levels
next to your gut tissue down. A raisin can be thought of as such a
system. As can any of the prescription pills with hundred so
milligrams.  But not any of the pills you can buy without
prescription.

I expect all this to change in coming years, as slow release K pills
become available OTC.  And people will pay a lot more money for them
than raisins, too <g>.  There's nothing to make some people feel good
like taking a pill.

SBH