"Calcium Supplements Linked To Heart Attacks"

That is the headline on this article in the L.A. Times. Researchers in New Zealand say the results of a  study done by them in  2008 indicate that calcium supplements cause a 31%*  increase in heart attacks for women who take them, do not lessen the chance of getting osteoporosis,  and do not lessen the the risk of bone fractures.  Scary news, isn't it?  But..

But the study did not test calcium supplements that contain Vitamin D,  the results do not apply to calcium that is found in food,  calcium supplement do increase bone density,  and , well , let's see what the researchers say in their conclusions (italics mine).

Conclusions Calcium supplements (without coadministered vitamin D) are associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction. As calcium supplements are widely used these modest* increases in risk of cardiovascular disease might translate into a large burden of disease in the population. A reassessment of the role of calcium supplements in the management of osteoporosis is warranted.

 I don't think too many people take calcium supplements without also taking vitamin D (I know I  don't) so that makes this study and the fact that calcium supplements do increase bone density  less meaningful for me.  I've also heard that calcium can be toxic and should be taken with Magnesium.  I also know that Magnesium is in the multivitamin that I take now so, again, I don't find this study that meaningful.  Another example of the media hyping something that is not really newsworthy.


* How does 31% equal a modest increase?  Does a 31% increase become smaller the larger the numbers are?  Anyone out there from Mathnet?