Strontium citrate (Algaecal) and fractures

I just wish the scientific community would show more interest in the potential benefits of strontium citrate. There is so much research about other supplements: calcium, magnesium, Vitamin K2, boron, etc. even if some of that is also inconclusive. There is an onslaught of discussion about which exercise is best, how many prunes to eat, which weighted vest to wear, dealing with oxalates in our diet, but for some reason, the mention of strontium stirs up controversy. For those of us who are not ready to go down the prescription medication route, it would be helpful to have a better idea of whether this might be a safe alternative to try first, or as maintenance post medication. I’ve read so many anecdotal success stories regarding strontium citrate, but the lack of solid scientific human-based research, and I’m not counting AlgaeCal’s claims as research, still makes me hesitate. I know there are no simple answers in this osteoporosis quest, but seems like we should be open to investigating all avenues.

@glojo as you probably know, approval of strontium ranelate was withdrawn in Europe for awhile due to cardiovascular effects, and is now used sparingly for patients who cannot take anything else. I assume this was the result of research.

I don't know if the controversy over distortion of DEXA's reflects concern for measuring or concern that bone density actually hasn't improved. Even that is unclear. If it is just about measuring, we should be able to take a leap of faith and use it in order to build bone, knowing that bone growth cannot be quantified.

But if the denser weight of strontium only makes bones appear to be denser, when they aren't, then we should probably avoid using it.

This seems to be a very basic question. Does the denser quality (heavier weight) of strontium actually mean better bones? Or does it just cause a false impression of growth on DEXA?

Agree! Another basic question, at least it seems to me, is whether the European issue was a strontium or a strontium compound problem, ranelate versus citrate. The human-based research is largely with sodium ranelate, but it’s questionable to assign its benefits to strontium citrate, without also mentioning the risks, unless there is more study specifically with the citrate compound. Can’t have it both ways, at least in my opinion.

I agree....leave no stone unturned. I have stopped wishing that the medical community would do more to help women but that has not produced results and I have accepted that I will have to continue doing my own research and advocacy. Exhausting.....thank so much to Mayo connect and all who share their experiences.

I wouldn't assign much weight to Dr Lucas. He's quite a salesman. He posts a direct link to algaecal in this video so his promotion of this product is in his self interest. We clearly need more info on strontium from non-biased sources to determine absolute risk and benefit.

I’m just curious if the REMS/echo light scan would be a more accurate scan to test the effects of strontium?? Isn’t this test supposed to test bone quality as well as density?

The European product withdrawn was Strontium Ranelate - I can't find the report right now.

There are still unanswered questions in the studies -
To date they have been conducted on mice or rats with induced osteoporosis, with durations of only a few weeks to months. Is there a difference between induced and natural osteoporosis?What would be the long-term effects in humans?

As @windyshores mentioned, nobody has yet answered the questions as to whether strontium-reinforced bones are less prone to fracture.

Quote 'strontium "falsely elevates" bone density on DEXA.'

Yes, I have run across that - I think someone mentioned on this mayo discussion group, not sure where I read that though.

Here is a little on that in the science article I posted previously https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11012416/:

"Strontium, like calcium, is incorporated into bones. Numerous studies report that the amount of strontium deposited in bones depends on factors such as dosage, sex, and calcium intake. In our study, we assessed the strontium content in the mineral portion of bone tissue. Administration of each of the strontium salts led to an increase in the Sr content of the bone’s mineral portion.

Notably, our findings indicate that SrR resulted in the highest Sr concentration among all the salts, while the lowest concentration was observed following SrC administration, consistent with the findings of Pemmer et al.

In contrast, Wohl et al., who examined both SrC and SrR, reported that both salts delivered an equivalent amount of Sr to the bone.

Our results differ from these findings, which could be attributed to differences in experimental setups. In the study by Wohl et al., strontium was administered to growing 18-week-old rats for 10 weeks, whereas in our experiment, 7-week-old mice with induced osteoporosis were used and salt administration continued for 16 weeks. Additionally, different Sr doses were employed in the experiments.

[Sounds like they are saying that the 18 week old rats didn't have osteoporosis. They were the ones that had the same bone response to both SrC and SrR, while in the study in the article the rats had osteoporosis and SrR resulted in the highest Sr concentration deposited in bone.]

Furthermore, we determined the calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P) content in the mineral portion of the bone tissue. Our experiment revealed that all groups receiving Sr exhibited significantly higher Ca and P levels compared to the OVX group. When comparing the experimental groups, the SrCl group displayed a higher concentration of Ca and P in relation to the other group. [if I am reading this correctly, the SrCl group had not only strontium but a higher concentration of Calcium and phosphorus, so this MAY be a good thing, since bone needs a combination of other minerals and I read somewhere that too much strontium could cause the opposite effect - brittleness. But also, at the 600 dose it actually made bone stronger because more Ca and P become incorporated into the bone. Somewhere I read that the amount of strontium that ends up in bone relative to calcium is determined by the amount of strontium dosing. I believe in that study the dose was around 600/day. I cannot find that article to save my life! But I remember reading that briefly]

IMPORTANTLY: Too, look at Figure 7 - the graphs show what percentages of other bone minerals besides strontium was found in the bones with each type of strontium administered. The graph is much better explained in the article than the graph I was able to post here..

Good question. The article I posted earlier mentions that same issue as it relates to which minerals do get deposited with strontium ranelate relative to the other bone minerals needed for strong bone.

I posted the gist of it in my recent comment. But the article may explain it better than I did.

Yes, I feel I needed to cross reference using other sources after watching his videos to determine the full spectrum of the information.