Bone Health Trestment

@nycmusic I've heard the same from a lot of sources - that it basically masks actual density. If so that'd disappoint a lot of people but should be circulated. shmabstracts.org/abstract/strontium-not-all-its-cracked-up-to-be/
From a long study discussing some benefits of strontium:
"These large changes may provide a useful way of monitoring patient compliance (Fogelman and Blake 2005). However, caution is necessary in interpreting the BMD increases as a real change in bone mass because much of the effect is due to the higher atomic number of strontium (Z=38) compared with calcium (Z=20) (Blake and Fogelman 2005). When BMD is measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), strontium atoms in bone attenuate X-rays more strongly than calcium causing BMD to be overestimated. This effect was studied quantitatively by Pors Nielsen et al (1999) who constructed phantoms containing mixtures of calcium and strontium hydroxyapatite that were scanned on different manufacturers’ DXA systems. They concluded that the same factor (a 1% molar ratio of Sr/(Ca+Sr) causing a 10% overestimation of BMD) applied to all the DXA brands studied. Since 3 years treatment with strontium ranelate results in a molar ratio of ~1%, it is clear that a significant percentage of the BMD increase in the clinical trial data can be explained by the increased attenuation due to the bone strontium content (Blake and Fogelman 2006). Also https://www.womenshealthnetwork.com/bone-health/the-problem-with-high-dose-strontium/. And others.

Thanks for the clarification - I haven't yet done serious research on it, just had come across claims on both sides while looking more closely at other treatments. I'll dig deeper.

@beccac
Both your examples actually show that strontium works; the first in its facts; the second in its conclusion

Firstly, the shmababstract actually shows a patient at the initial visit before strontium with poor bone health, diffuse demineralization of her sternum, and a fracture.
Then she begins strontium,
"3 years later, bone densitometry showed osteopenia of the lumbar spine (T-score -1.6), normal hip (T-score -0.4) and normal femoral neck (T-score -0.7). This demonstrated a remarkable increase of 20% in hip bone density and 31.7% in lumbar spine bone density in only three years." No more fractures in those 3 years.
The researchers don't believe it so they title the report of what they don't believe as strontium not all its cracked up to be.....no bad dexa, no fractures, just a good dexa that they can't disprove.
Plus, I cannot locate the study which they mention and neither can ai mode. and the studies which they quote are not cited or linked in this article.
And plus, plus, the fact that she stopped fracturing would make any endocrinologist skip for joy.
In addition this article is from a hospitalist conference, not a bone‑metabolism research group. These abstracts often:
• highlight “surprising” or “gotcha” cases
• use dramatic titles to attract attention
• misunderstand the known DXA‑strontium interaction
• assume that any DXA increase from strontium is “fake”
But the DXA increase is not fake — it reflects real mineral incorporation.
The only question is how much of the increase is due to strontium vs. new bone formation.
Even conservative estimates still show real gains.

To beat a "dead horse" again REMS and TBS make the dexa skew of strontium moot now. In other words, TBS and REMS are not affected as the DEXA by the denser strontium and they show good bone density and bone quality for strontium users.

The next quoted section in your post is not from the hotlink which you provided and is not the conclusion which the actual research with that quote reached.

Here is part of the actual conclusion and the actual hot link for the research which says strontium showed great results similar to other osteoporosis drugs:
"The results of the SOTI and TROPOS studies confirm that strontium ranelate is a safe and effective treatment to prevent vertebral fractures and hip fractures in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. The 40% reduction in vertebral fracture risk found in the pooled analysis (Roux et al 2006) is similar to that found in trials of other osteoporosis treatments including alendronate (Black et al 1996), risedronate (Harris et al 1999), ibandronate (Chesnut et al 2004), and raloxifene (Ettinger et al 1999). Strontium ranelate has also been proven to reduce non-vertebral fracture risk by 15% (Roux et al 2006). This includes the prevention of hip fractures in older patients with a femoral neck BMD T-score"
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2699648/

@kathleen1314 the key is not getting fractures ! Sure,meds can help, but it ideally must be more than taking pills/getting shots…patients also have to find ways to do PT /exercise (even small ) and see where diet can help. If one can be proactive, it feels better and can lift spirits.

@nycmusic
Yes, research shows lowering of fracture risk with strontium about 49%.

Plus, the research seems to indicate a unique "sacrificial bond" situation which strontium produces which helps bone be less likely to fracture.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16455319/.
"Finally, biomaterials enriched with Sr consistently perform better than their Sr-free counterparts both in vitro and in vivo. Despite changes to the solubility and ion release kinetics of Sr-doped biomaterials, some in vivo studies suggest that local Sr release alone is sufficient to promote bone formation in the absence of other osteogenic ions. Furthermore, accelerated bone healing has been observed with these materials, presenting an alternate mechanism to explain enhanced osseointegration. These findings are largely from animal studies, however, small case studies in humans have found Sr-doped materials to be biocompatible and useful for procedures such as vertebroplasty, kyphoplasty and craniotomy (Izci et al., 2013; Korovessis et al., 2018; Cheung et al., 200"
Sacrificial bonds:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352187220300334

@nycmusic
Yes, research shows lowering of fracture risk with strontium about 49%.

Plus, the research seems to indicate a unique "sacrificial bond" situation which strontium produces which helps bone be less likely to fracture.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16455319/.
"Finally, biomaterials enriched with Sr consistently perform better than their Sr-free counterparts both in vitro and in vivo. Despite changes to the solubility and ion release kinetics of Sr-doped biomaterials, some in vivo studies suggest that local Sr release alone is sufficient to promote bone formation in the absence of other osteogenic ions. Furthermore, accelerated bone healing has been observed with these materials, presenting an alternate mechanism to explain enhanced osseointegration. These findings are largely from animal studies, however, small case studies in humans have found Sr-doped materials to be biocompatible and useful for procedures such as vertebroplasty, kyphoplasty and craniotomy (Izci et al., 2013; Korovessis et al., 2018; Cheung et al., 200"
Sacrificial bonds:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352187220300334