Re: Natural Glo - calcium/phosphorous
Gwen Dluehosh (dluehosh@vt.edu)
Thu, 09 Jan 1997 21:06:16 +0500
>Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 20:57:26 +0500
>To: "Susan F. Evans" <suendavid@worldnet.att.net>
>From: Gwen Dluehosh <dluehosh@vt.edu>
>Subject: Re: Natural Glo - calcium/phosphorous
>
>Umm, maybe I missed something here, but eating a ton of calories is NOT the
same as eating a ton of electrolytes... (I should know, I eat enough!) THey
are dealt with in separate fashions by the body, so it may BE possible to
offset with Phosphorus.. However, I think I would want to stick with
slightly high Ca here in the east becasue most everything has plenty of P in it.
>Gwen
>>> The alfalfa part is right. I would be real careful about using very
much with grass
>>> hays. Coastal bermuda is 0.32% Ca and 0.20% P. 20 pounds grass and 2
pounds Natural
>>> Glo gives a Ca/P of 0.86 (and that was using the upper number of Ca
range given).
>>> Anything less than 1.0 is a problem.
>>
>>Duncan, you're terrific. I agree a Ca;P ratio below 1.0 is a Bad
>>Thing, because the body will pull the extra calcium it needs from
>>anywhere it can get it, including bones if necessary. The ratio should
>>be 1.2 or higher, although anything much over 2.0 is excessive in Ca.
>>However, I disagree that feeding more phosphorus is the way to "balance"
>>excessive calcium, as cited above. If you're feeding alot of calcium,
>>adding more phosphorus doesn't change the fact that you're feeding alot
>>of calcium. Look at it this way (and Duncan, I know you know this, this
>>is for any of the newbies that maybe don't know):
>
Gwen Dluehosh
Desert Storm Arabians
1156 Hightop Rd, #89
Blacksburg, VA 24060
540/953-1792