I am looking to buy some Mg Glycinate. Some folks who post on this BB seem to think highly of Carlson. Another BB I visited had a low opinion of Kal. Since it costs significantly less than any other brand, it is difficult to ignore it. Has anyone here had experience, good or bad, with Kal brand?

I buy metagenics brand. It cost me around 21 dollars for 120 pills.

Do you remember what they found wrong with KAL brand?

I have been using it and have not had any problems that I know of.

Thanks, Carol

Carol,

They gave no reason. I'm glad to hear that it has been helpful for you. I'll try some along with perhaps one or two other brands.

Thanks

I've used Solgar's mag glycinate. I've used Metagenics mag glycinate. And I've recently used Carlson's mag glycinate. Solgar recently added an enteric coating to its tablets, and I didn't like the result. Carlson's comes in 200 mg tablets at a reasonable price, but I've noticed a distinct difference in absorbability, compared to Metagenics.

While I hate to spend all that extra money on Metagenics, I can say without hesitation that it is the most effective form of mag glycinate I've ever tried.

I wouldn't bother to try the cheaper brands. It isn't about the money, it's about health.

Jerry

John - I'm sold on the Metagenics brand of magnesium glycinate called Mag Glycinate.

It is patented and is specifically formulated to produce the bioavailability needed by a mechanism similar to that used by amino acids and is not dependent on stomach acid for absorption (as are other magnesium products and other minerals.)

The label says it is a fully reacted magnesium amino acid chelate USPatent #4,830,716 - Albion.


The other form I continue to be impressed with is magnesium taurate capsules - not tablets - from Cardiovascular Research.

Additionally, several other posters here have indicated that Pure Encapsulations has a capsule of magnesium glycinate and I am considering trying that when my other stash gets low.

I realize there are cost considerations for all of us, but I don't think all magnesium is created equal. KAL may work for some people, but if you are still having afib with KAL, then consider switching to a higher quality brand and one with the credentials that Mag Glycinate enjoys. Otherwise, the money you spend is just going to waste - literally.

Jackie

Jackie,

Thanks very much. Your reply was very helpful. I will save it in a file in my AFib directory.

John

If Carlsons and Metagenics are both of the Albion Process, and Carlsons has less additives, along with the same amount of Mg. per tablet, then what makes Metagenics better. I have both, and have been taking Metagenics, but I honestly didn't think there was a difference.

Any comments?

Richard

So many people have reported less arrythmia etc. with higher doses of Mg.! At the time of discharge from CC, I did have a chance to get in one question to Dr. L, (although I almost knew what the answer would be.) I asked if the Cardio/EP experts there recognized articles, etc., advocating use of Mg. by AF patients in higher quantities than the minimum daily requirement. He cautioned against "loading up" on Mg because of the potential for concentration... resulting in kidney stones. I thought I had read that excess is not cumulative and is excreted. Any thoughts? Char

Magnesium does not promote kidney stones...calcium does. If there's a medical reference for the accumulation of magnesium contributing to such a problem, I've never readit, but i'd like to know about it. I think the doc got confused.

As for Richard's question, I notice a difference between the Carlson's and the Metagenics, and the Metagenics is better. Why? In my opinion, it's because the Metagenics appears to be better absorbed and utilized. My experience with Carlson's (which has an enteric coating that Metagenics does not have, perhaps interfering with full absorption) is that the 200 mg tablet is not absorbed and utilized by my body as well as Metagenics.

I can take a 200 mg Carlson tab before bedtime, and there could be muscle twitching in the middle of the night. That does not happen with Metagenics.

I have a bit more faith in the Metagenics product.

Is the Metagenics product a capsule? Is that the difference, Carlson in tablets and Metagenics in capsules?

John S.

Maybe the kidney stones increase was due to the fact that many mag products often contain a large amount of calcium also!! Just a possibility.




blessings,
MLM

Metagenics is NOT a capsule. It is a compressed tablet, just like Carlson's, but WITHOUT the enteric coating, and at half the dose (100 mg vs 200 mg per tab).

Thank you, Jerry. I did not notice that the Metagenics was 200mg per 2 tablets, whereas Carlsons is 400mg per 2. One sure has to read the label closely. It must mean that Metagenics is less compressed than Carlsons, and you're right. The Carlsons does seem to have a coating.

Richard