Testing Amplify 02

[Phate]

I did detail the mechanism of injury Jimmy referred to. Read the posts before you criticize.

I don't ask people to believe me based on my authority or education. You know I don't as I rarely bring my eduction up. It become relevant when this yahoo cooks up a theory about Phosphate based on a simple google search and then demands that it is intolerable on my part not to be "open minded" to his opinions. It is moronic, and after tolerating this guys incessant personal attacks in each post he makes he has some of his own medicine coming. I could not care less if you feel that a moderator should intervene. Be my guest. Here, let me provoke you...Let the difference between a period and a comma. "Vagrant" means unemployed and homeless. "Flagrant" is the word you are looking for.

Lol, well you got me on the word use, sorry, it's way past my bedtime, but i would like a more detailed description of the mechanism, this could be typed by any freshman chemistry minor

The specific amount needed to cause harm, and the mechanism of that harm is specific to the ion and your health. For instance your ability to manage an excessive injection of calcium is going to depend on your body's ability to sequester that calcium into your bones and excrete it in your urine. If you are dehydrated the concentration of calcium in your urine is going to be quite large. This promotes the formation of kidney stones, possibly leading to kidney failure via obstruction. Phosphate is no different. When you ingest a massive amount of it, or your body cannot regulate it the concentration becomes high enough that it falls out of solution and precipitates inside the kidney causing damage. It poor kidney function in combination with the sheer *amount* of the ion that is the problem.

some in depth knowledge would be nice

[BrokenBricks]

Lol, well you got me on the word use, sorry, it's way past my bedtime, but i would like a more detailed description of the mechanism, this could be typed by any freshman chemistry minor

The specific amount needed to cause harm, and the mechanism of that harm is specific to the ion and your health. For instance your ability to manage an excessive injection of calcium is going to depend on your body's ability to sequester that calcium into your bones and excrete it in your urine. If you are dehydrated the concentration of calcium in your urine is going to be quite large. This promotes the formation of kidney stones, possibly leading to kidney failure via obstruction. Phosphate is no different. When you ingest a massive amount of it, or your body cannot regulate it the concentration becomes high enough that it falls out of solution and precipitates inside the kidney causing damage. It poor kidney function in combination with the sheer *amount* of the ion that is the problem.

some in depth knowledge would be nice

The mechanism that phosphate injures kidneys is really that simple. It is identical to dumping sugar in water, seeing it dissolve, then letting the water evaporate and watching sugar crystals form as the concentration of sugar rises above the solubility maximum. It is a purely physical process and does not depend on hormones or biochemical processes. The only complication is that for a charged chemical like phosphate to precipitate it needs an oppositely charged cation to balance it electrically. Calcium is the cation in this case.

Let us say for instance the concentration of phosphate in the blood is 2.5 to 4.5 milligrams per deciliter in a normal subject. The amount in the bones is hundreds of times this, but in the blood that is the amount. When the level exceeds this many things happen, but two are relevant here, first is parathyriod hormone is released which then inhibits the kidneys from reabsorbing the phosphate in the urine. This allows you to excrete the excess. You reabsorb the vast vast majority of all phosphate that enters the kidneys. This give you wide latitude in your consumption of phosphate becuase at any moment your kidneys can simply elect to stop reabsorbing it and you will urinate it out without difficulty.

Now there is a certain magic concentration at which the phosphate concentration in the urine is too high to remain dissolved. When that happens it crystallizes inside the renal tubules and blocks them. What does that mean for us? Surely we can do better than "Phosphate = badness" Imagine pouring that sugar or salt into warm water again....it is not simply that if you add one tablespoon of salt to a pot of water 10% stays solid and 90% dissolves and adding another tablespoon gives you again 10% more solid salt and 90% dissolved....it doesn't work that way. ALL of it dissolves with a little stirring until you come to a certain point when everything changes and NOTHING dissolves afterwords. Dissolved phosphate is completely harmless and is simply carried out in the urine...the kidney has no problem with the chemical...what it has a problem with is the physical microtrauma of crystals of any sort, phosphate or otherwise. But as our salt analogy describes, the process is not linear...you go from zero effect to rapid and immediate effect. The question is, when is that line crossed? How much is too much. Well it turns out that you need to take vast amounts of phosphorus in to run any risk of that happening. You also need damaged kidneys. The bowel prep was near completely phosphorus, you took 40 horse pills in quick succession, and still there were only a handful of reported cases and only in people with documented renal insufficiency.

I can do this all over again to explain how NSAIDS are not a cause of renal insufficiency (with the exception of AIN, which, if you had it you would know it). NSAIDS limit a mechanisms your kidneys have to compensate for *existing* damage. My kidney function is no worse after taking an NSAID for a month that if I had not taken it at all. It is only when I become dependent on the vasodilatory effect of prostaglandin that NSAIDS become an issue.

This haphazard collection of words google will spit out at you when you search for renal failure simply does not constitute an argument. Without an understanding of the biology involved interpreting that data becomes impossible.