Well, a lot of these old concerns do stem from the dexa skews for strontium. Skews of about 10% greater for strontium users depending on the machine, because of their denser bones and how the radiation penetrates strontium differently than a more largely calcium bone.
Plus, doctors are bound by FDA authorizations and frankly led by their pharma representatives. That is actually how I was introduced to strontium; my endocrinologist had heard about the strontium ranelate being sold by a large pharma co in Europe and mentioned it to me in an office visit. I researched and surprise there was strontium citrate. Still, there has been quite a bit of research about strontium over the years, and it seems to have been ignored by the medical community.
But dexa.....
Those old dexa skew concerns are now very dated and don't "hold water" because of the TBS and the REMs. Both TBS and REMS are not affected in the same way by the denser aspect of strontium. Because of the use of TBS and REMS, more and more strontium users are showing tests that show good bone density and good bone quality.
So I would ask those doctors if they still have the same concerns. I would expect at least a moderation based on the consistent results for REMS and TBS and strontium users, but it is difficult for anyone to say "I was wrong", especially a doctor that may have mislead many patients. I do know several medical providers on Inspire are starting to moderate their antistrontium screes, but no apologies have been issued.
With good bone density, good bone quality and bone biopsies showing good density and bone quality and research showing significant lessening of fracture risk and few side effects, it is now very very hard to be "against" strontium.
Indeed, as I have said in the past, my endocrinologist told me to change nothing, and I have never known a doctor to tell a strontium user, with good results, to stop using strontium. It would be a strange doctor who would tell a patient with good results and who is not fracturing with no side effects to stop strontium and take another pharma drug.
Contact some of them and ask, I would be interested. They will probably give you the standard reply that "it is early days, and they will be interested to see more research and studies".
Ok, I asked AI google and copied your exact question. This was its answer:
"Experts like Keith McCormick and Dr. John Neustadt are cautious about strontium due to concerns over inaccurate DEXA scan results, the lack of large-scale clinical trials for the supplement form, and potential cardiovascular risks associated with the prescription form. Dr. Doug Lucas's position is less clear, with some sources suggesting he is an advocate for the supplement form as part of a specific protocol."
So the dexa concern is shot down by rems and tbs results, and if you will read my previous reply about the cardio risks that cropped up in one flawed population study then you can put that concern into context. Plus, there are several osteoporosis drugs that have written cardio concerns in their literature, (Evenity, Forteo, Prolia), so I don't understand the demands for strontium citrate to prove no cardio concerns especially when it has never had a cardio concern listed in any of its studies. sigh
I would like more large scale clinical trials on strontium citrate also. Indeed, I, like many doctors, never think that we have enough research. ha