LONGECITY

original thread

my suggestion still stands at 120mcg (100%DRI) as 60%k1 and 40%k2-mk7... i wouldnt mind additional mk4 but at what dose? are there any benefits seen in lower dosing?
Edited by ajnast4r, 05 November 2009 - 01:37 AM.

No option for MK4 ?

No option for MK4 ?

fixed

If using a low dose of around 100 mcg I would go för mk7 which has longer bioavailablity and lots of epidemiological evidence at this dose. Human vitamin K1 studies has used at least several hundreds of mcgs and I do not know if there has been any human mk4 study using less than 45 mg.

K1 is useless. I'd go with 2- to 4mg Mk4 and 1- to 2mg Mk7.

K1 is useless. I'd go with 2- to 4mg Mk4 and 1- to 2mg Mk7.

Way high.

As for my views, they're in the original thread that the op thoughtfully linked.

I'd go for something like 45-100 mcg of MK7 or mixed menaquinones.
That's the commonly used dose, and I believe it's pretty expensive compared to MK4.

Atleast 1mg of MK4 would be nice too.

Life extension uses 1000 mcg MK4 and 100 mcg MK7, plus some K1 which is probably not needed if one eats anything green and leafy.

I'd say go by studies. I think Rotterdam found a benefit using around 30-40 mcg of MK-4? Maybe go with something like a mix of both 45mcg MK-4, 45 mcg MK-7?

I wouldn't go into mg ranges for MK-7. Duke, what evidence is there that 1-2 mg of MK-7 is a benefit and not dangerous? Natto studies would be what to look at there, and I think a typical serving of natto is in the 200-400mcg range or so. I recall one study where the participants just consumed a couple of servings a week, they didn't eat multiple packs daily.

I'd say go by studies. I think Rotterdam found a benefit using around 30-40 mcg of MK-4? Maybe go with something like a mix of both 45mcg MK-4, 45 mcg MK-7

i like that idea a lot

I'd say go by studies. I think Rotterdam found a benefit using around 30-40 mcg of MK-4? Maybe go with something like a mix of both 45mcg MK-4, 45 mcg MK-7?

I wouldn't go into mg ranges for MK-7. Duke, what evidence is there that 1-2 mg of MK-7 is a benefit and not dangerous? Natto studies would be what to look at there, and I think a typical serving of natto is in the 200-400mcg range or so. I recall one study where the participants just consumed a couple of servings a week, they didn't eat multiple packs daily.

Natto is gives MK-7, not MK-4. See this:

http://www.imminst.o...o...st&p=353985

These studies suggests that MK-7 is more important than MK-4, at least regarding dietary amounts:
http://ecnis.openrep...dle/10146/36855
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/19179058

Regarding the Rotterdam study, its K2 was mainly MK-7, not MK-4:;

" Intake of menaquinone comprised 10% of the total vitamin K intake, but its bioavailability is probably higher than for phylloquinone that is strongly bound to vegetable fiber (14). Menaquinone in our Dutch population was mainly derived from dairy products, especially cheese (19). Interestingly, in this respect, cheese has not been established as a dietary risk factor for cardiovascular disease in epidemiological studies, despite its high levels of saturated fat and salt. We hypothesize that menaquinones in cheese (MK-8 and MK-9) could exert a beneficial effect in the cardiovascular system and that the high cheese consumption in France and the Mediterranean countries may possibly account for lower prevalences of CHD. Menaquinone is also produced by the intestinal flora, but the absorption seems to be limited (27)"
http://jn.nutrition....lickfind.com.au

In short, all the epidemiological evidence argues for MK-7.

Yep, Rotterdam found MK7-9 important, but I believe MK-4 provided some benefits too. But the doses were small, in mcgs, so I don't think we should veer into mg range.

Not sure if it's possible to get a complete mix of menaquinones though, although it potentially could be helpful -- MK-8, MK-9 etc. I think most MK-7 products contain baby doses of other menaquinones too. Or at least the Now product claimed such.

There is one clinical study I recall where they were testing for the optimal MK-7 dosage --
http://clinicaltrial...8...mk-7&rank=4

Study has been completed, but data isn't out yet (that I know of). Maybe someone could find bits of released data or contact study authors?

There is one clinical study I recall where they were testing for the optimal MK-7 dosage --
http://clinicaltrial...8...mk-7&rank=4

Study has been completed, but data isn't out yet (that I know of). Maybe someone could find bits of released data or contact study authors?

Very interesting to see the results of that one when they arrive. Here is another one. A 3 year study. They are betting on 180 mcg MK-7 so this is likely the best guestimate at this moment:
http://clinicaltrial...how/NCT00642551
Edited by Blue, 05 November 2009 - 07:39 PM.

K1 is useless. I'd go with 2- to 4mg Mk4 and 1- to 2mg Mk7.

Way high.

As for my views, they're in the original thread that the op thoughtfully linked.

Not way high. I take 5mg MK4 each day:
http://www.iherb.com...ules/14812?at=0

I see that is is the same research center. While the results of the first study seems not to have been published, the second study started after the completion of the first, so I think it is very likely that they found 180 mcg to be enough regarding the biomarkers they measured which was optimal "carboxylation reaction of Gla-proteins such as osteocalcin and matrix-gla protein".

K1 is useless. I'd go with 2- to 4mg Mk4 and 1- to 2mg Mk7.

Way high.

As for my views, they're in the original thread that the op thoughtfully linked.

Not way high. I take 5mg MK4 each day:
http://www.iherb.com...ules/14812?at=0

I do hear things about making sure to be cautious about your intake, since they can all (meaning K1 as well) convert to mendione in the liver and increase your risk of cancer... apparantly, though more research is needed, so this may be more of a cautionary view.

^ and that is why. I bet if I asked them to put 40k iu of beta carotene in they'd say it's high for similar reasons, even if there are no obvious side effects from taking that regularly.

I'm liking the amounts listed here so far. Below 1mg should be fine.
Edited by shazam, 05 November 2009 - 08:04 PM.

In short, all the epidemiological evidence argues for MK-7.

Yes, all epidemological evidence I know of proves superiority or non-inferiority of MK-7 (and/or long chain vitamers, or a mix of all MK-ns). I've wanted to post on the issue in MR's regimen thread and try to put the MK-4 myth to rest, but it's not likely to happen any time soon (i.e. this week or weekend). 
Just skimmed *another* study (heidelberg-EPIC cohort), which *again* supports the notion (this one was already posted by Blue, btw): http://www.ajcn.org/...t/full/87/4/985
RRs are not significant for MK-4!

their dose is not surprising considering that it's in the "4-10 times more effective than K1" ballpark.

EDIT:
anything >45mcg MK-7 will need warning for coumarin users (and I'd print a short note of caution IAC, as do all the 45mcg nattopharm MK-7 products).
Edited by kismet, 05 November 2009 - 11:08 PM.

ok so what it boils down to is, is there any evidence that mk4 will do anything at such low doses? as far as i can tell the only evidence for mk4 is from the japanese studies which all used mg amounts, not the mcg amounts suggested for this project.

putting in mk4 in mcg amounts bc it looks good would be a waste... i would rather see 100mcg of mk7 and no mk4 if thats what the evidence suggests is best.

ok so what it boils down to is, is there any evidence that mk4 will do anything at such low doses? as far as i can tell the only evidence for mk4 is from the japanese studies which all used mg amounts, not the mcg amounts suggested for this project.

putting in mk4 in mcg amounts bc it looks good would be a waste... i would rather see 100mcg of mk7 and no mk4 if thats what the evidence suggests is best.

But this thread http://www.imminst.o...&...st&p=355391 led me to believe you need MK-4 as well as MK-7, and probably K1 if you don't eat your kale.

I'd like to see 50 - 100 mcg Mk7 along with 2 - 4 mg Mk4.

ok so what it boils down to is, is there any evidence that mk4 will do anything at such low doses? as far as i can tell the only evidence for mk4 is from the japanese studies which all used mg amounts, not the mcg amounts suggested for this project.

putting in mk4 in mcg amounts bc it looks good would be a waste... i would rather see 100mcg of mk7 and no mk4 if thats what the evidence suggests is best.

If it's one or the other, I'd say go with MK-7. The only reason to include mcg levels of MK-4 is if you want to cover all bases, or if MK-7 is too expensive. On a ingredient by ingredient basis, I expect MK-7 may be one of the more expensive vitamins in the product.

MK-4 at baby doses could have some benefits (Rotterdam), although as Blue mentioned, it probably was primarily from other menquinones.

Interesting if the product included a true mix, MK4-MK10, along with a decent dose of MK-7, although that may be tricky to find a source for. Unless some MK-7 products include extra menaquinones naturally.

As for dosage of MK-7, if the product is in a dry cap, how much will that affect absorption?
Edited by nameless, 06 November 2009 - 07:26 PM.

Interesting if the product included a true mix, MK4-MK10, along with a decent dose of MK-7, although that may be tricky to find a source for. Unless some MK-7 products include extra menaquinones naturally.

IIRC NOW makes a product with mixed menaquinones. MK7 and above.
It's also cheaper than straight MK7.

Interesting if the product included a true mix, MK4-MK10, along with a decent dose of MK-7, although that may be tricky to find a source for. Unless some MK-7 products include extra menaquinones naturally.

IIRC NOW makes a product with mixed menaquinones. MK7 and above.
It's also cheaper than straight MK7.

yea the k2 i take from now is derived from natto and contains mk7 + other menaquinones

Interesting if the product included a true mix, MK4-MK10, along with a decent dose of MK-7, although that may be tricky to find a source for. Unless some MK-7 products include extra menaquinones naturally.

IIRC NOW makes a product with mixed menaquinones. MK7 and above.
It's also cheaper than straight MK7.

yea the k2 i take from now is derived from natto and contains mk7 + other menaquinones

I emailed Now twice about their K2 products, but kept getting different stories from them. One time they told me they weren't sure if it was MK4 or 7, and the product had no soy in it. Yet at the same time they stated it was from a soy derived material (which I assumed was natto). Then next time they said it was primarily MK7, along with a full range of menaquinones, but couldn't give a breakdown.

Did you ever find out what amount of other menaquinones is in their product? How well do you think it absorbs if taken with fats, seeing as it's in a veggie cap?

Stevenson et al. from Sheffield have just published a huge report on vitamin K and its use to prevent fractures. The full text is here. It's a meta analysis of the ECKO trial of 5mg K1 against placebo and 4 MK4 studies. It discusses some epidemiology in Japanese women; in one part of Japan where natto consumption is high, the blood levels of MK7 are a lot higher than in the Hiroshima area, and the women with higher levels of MK7 have less fractures. Stephan at WholeHealthSource has a post titled Are the MK-4 and MK-7 Forms of Vitamin K2 Equivalent?. It's worth looking at, as he lays out the case against MK7 in favor of MK4. LEF sells a vitamin K supplement with 1mg K1, 1mg MK-4, and 100mcg MK-7. It is surprisingly cheap for LEF.

Stevenson et al. from Sheffield have just published a huge report on vitamin K and its use to prevent fractures. The full text is here. It's a meta analysis of the ECKO trial of 5mg K1 against placebo and 4 MK4 studies. It discusses some epidemiology in Japanese women; in one part of Japan where natto consumption is high, the blood levels of MK7 are a lot higher than in the Hiroshima area, and the women with higher levels of MK7 have less fractures. Stephan at WholeHealthSource has a post titled Are the MK-4 and MK-7 Forms of Vitamin K2 Equivalent?.

It's worth looking at, as he lays out the case against MK7 in favor of MK4. LEF sells a vitamin K supplement with 1mg K1, 1mg MK-4, and 100mcg MK-7. It is surprisingly cheap for LEF.

Interesting. I think I've read that before. I've heard testimonials of MK4 dosages stopping bleeding extremely fast at 5mg before. Still worth looking into the potential negative ramifications of supplementing that high, but very interesting. It's entirely possible that it does that at lower dosages. Does anyone know why they dose so high? Is it because MK4 is typically syntethic/less bioavailable or something?

Also, you want a surefire way to reduce fractures, get a standalone strontium supplement and be sure to at least meet the RDA of calcium and get enough vitamin D and K. Take the strontium in the morning, away from everything else. Apparantly there's documented positive effects on bone density. Make sure there's alot of it. Doctor's best makes a good one.
Edited by shazam, 07 November 2009 - 08:12 AM.

Stephan's mechanistic and ecological speculation is purely academic, thus irrelevant. If anything I'd agree via the epidemiology, which, although, it shows MK-7 and long chain vitamers edging out MK-4, argues for benefits from all menaquinones (just to varying degrees).
LEF is a great model example of how not to design supplements.
Edited by kismet, 07 November 2009 - 07:03 PM.

The Linus Pauling Institute's Vitamin K site has a good overview of current vit K research and benefits. I see some studies here that are mentioned at this page. Seems like all info needed is centralized in one page.

http://lpi.oregonsta...amins/vitaminK/
Edited by drmz, 17 November 2009 - 07:16 PM.

Michael comes down on the side of MK4 for bone strength.

http://www.imminst.o...showtopic=34416