BACKGROUND: Calcium absorption efficiency is a more important determinant of calcium balance than calcium intake itself. The sources of variability in absorptive performance are only partly elucidated. PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to explore the relationship between body size and calcium absorption efficiency. DESIGN AND SETTING: Metabolic studies were performed on an inpatient metabolic unit in an academic health sciences center. SUBJECTS: One hundred seventy-eight women, with an average age of 50.2 yr, were studied from one to five times and yielded an aggregate data set containing 633 individual studies. METHODS: Calcium absorption fraction was measured by the dual-tracer method. Observed values were expressed as residuals from predicted values for each woman's actual calcium intake, using the previously published relationship between intake and absorption. RESULTS: Absorption residuals were significantly positively correlated with height, weight, and surface area, and after adjusting for estrogen status, these body size variables accounted for approximately 4% of the total variability. CONCLUSION: The magnitude of the effect is such that a woman 1.8 m in height would absorb 30+% more calcium from a given intake than a woman 1.4 m tall.
BACKGROUND:Calcium absorption efficiency is a more important determinant of calcium balance than calcium intake itself. The sources of variability in absorptive performance are only partly elucidated. PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to explore the relationship between body size and calcium absorption efficiency. DESIGN AND SETTING: Metabolic studies were performed on an inpatient metabolic unit in an academic health sciences center. SUBJECTS: One hundred seventy-eight women, with an average age of 50.2 yr, were studied from one to five times and yielded an aggregate data set containing 633 individual studies. METHODS:Calcium absorption fraction was measured by the dual-tracer method. Observed values were expressed as residuals from predicted values for each woman's actual calcium intake, using the previously published relationship between intake and absorption. RESULTS: Absorption residuals were significantly positively correlated with height, weight, and surface area, and after adjusting for estrogen status, these body size variables accounted for approximately 4% of the total variability. CONCLUSION: The magnitude of the effect is such that a woman 1.8 m in height would absorb 30+% more calcium from a given intake than a woman 1.4 m tall.
Authors: B M Obermayer-Pietsch; M Gugatschka; S Reitter; W Plank; A Strele; D Walter; C Bonelli; W Goessler; H Dobnig; C Högenauer; W Renner; A Fahrleitner-Pammer Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2006-11-14 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Lesley M Butler; Alvin S Wong; Woon-Puay Koh; Renwei Wang; Jian-Min Yuan; Mimi C Yu Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2010-06-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Sue A Shapses; Deeptha Sukumar; Stephen H Schneider; Yvette Schlussel; Robert M Sherrell; M Paul Field; Hasina Ambia-Sobhan Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2013-01-30 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Heike A Bischoff-Ferrari; Douglas P Kiel; Bess Dawson-Hughes; John E Orav; Ruifeng Li; Donna Spiegelman; Thomas Dietrich; Walter C Willett Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Hr Aghaei Meybodi; M Hemmat-Abadi; R Heshmat; M Rezaei Homami; S Madani; M Ebrahimi; H Adibi; B Larijani Journal: Iran J Public Health Date: 2011-06-30 Impact factor: 1.429