You are here

Responses

Article menu
Valvular heart disease
Original research
Supplemental calcium and vitamin D and long-term mortality in aortic stenosis
Free
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Mark Diehl
    Published on: 27 April 2022
  • Published on: 27 April 2022
    Physician

    I take great concern in regards to the conclusions that this and multiple other previous cardiology articles have laid claim to in regards to calcium supplementation. Many providers read these articles and tell patients to stop taking calcium, this then results in osteoporosis and fractures which also has a high mortality rate. There must be significant caution in making the conclusions that this article makes. The amount of calcium the patients were taking was quite varied between 500-2,000 mg a day, patients with bone disease need 1200 mg a day in order to maintain normal bone turnover and rebuilding by the osteoblast. There needs to be data from this study showing the poor outcome patient’s calcium supplement amounts. To insinuate that all calcium supplements are bad is not only a disservice but a detriment to our patients. Patients now have access to articles more than ever and will read this and now won’t take their calcium supplements, this means that anyone treating osteoporosis will now have to explain this and other articles. Patients are more likely to believe bad data than good data. The truth is that calcium is needed for good bone health and there is a safe amount that is not a risk to cardiac health. This article amongst others does not bring in that side of the story.

    Conflict of Interest:
    This article is claiming that calcium is detrimental when it is necessary to treat bone disease. Rheumatology amongst many other specialties treat bone disease. I also speak for Amgen products that treat osteoporosis.