We've long seen medical news agree with such urging. And BigPharma (both for Rxs and OTC supplements) has participated profitably, even though
...<big>The relationship of dietary and supplemental calcium or vitamin D with cardiovascular (CV) disease risk and mortality is controversial</big>.10 Yet, in light of published guidelines, the supplemental use of each has notably risen in recent years, particularly among post-menopausal women susceptible to osteoporosis and bone fractures.11 12 Although dysregulated calcium metabolism has long been implicated in aortic valvular calcification, and AS progression is akin to pathways of bone remodelling and formation, data on the valvular effects of supplemental calcium or vitamin D are restricted to animal models or limited subjects.13–16 Studies defining the long-term safety and haemodynamic impact of supplementation are scarce but imperative with an increasing use among an elderly population...
say the authors of the above-linked study published in the British Medical Journal’s Heart. It focuses principally on whether oral calcium supplements increase need for valve replacement in aging patients with mild to moderate aortic stenosis. As we see, however, the researchers’ concerns were far wider,
AND in an accompanying editorial:
Jutta Bergler-Klein, professor of medicine and cardiology at the Medical University of Vienna, Austria, notes that calcification is the cardinal process driving a vicious cycle that propagates aortic valve stiffness and obstruction.
Dysregulated phosphate calcium metabolism is a major determinant in the development of aortic leaflet sclerosis and calcified aortic stenosis, as triggered by impaired renal function, and in primary or secondary hyperparathyroidism, she reports.
"Identifying susceptible risk factors for valve calcification, which might be modified by noninvasive measures, such as targeted medication or dietary changes, instead of the purely mechanical surgical aortic valve replacement approach, is highly desirable," she adds.
and the study (linked at this Medscape article - no paywall) found that
the absolute risk of cardiovascular mortality was 13.7 per 1000 person-years for patients taking calcium with or without vitamin D supplementation; compared with 9.6 per 1000 person-years in those taking vitamin D only, and 5.8 per 1000 person-years in those taking no* supplements....
* In saying “taking no supplements”, the BMJ research report doesn’t appear to address any but calcium and D.
For more reading on some of the issues, here are about 440 PubMedCentral (free full text of scholarly articles from journals globally via the US National LIbrary of Medicine) with “Vitamin K” in the title across the past 5 years, plus about 5680 with “Vitamin D” in the title across that timespan, here’s wik’s article on the family of K vitamers (its references and other sectionss at the end supply more resources in addition to more wik articles linked internally) and for reader-friendly DK diaries/stories:
It appears unlikely that most people can ingest enough vitamin K in food form to protect against adverse effects of excess calcium intake. And not everyone even should eat foods high in vitamin K, let alone take suppl Ks, e.g., patients on “blood thinners” probably, unless their medical team is guiding that usage. But here’s a graphic anyway, as long as it’s part of the discussion: