Can anyone tell me how this makes sense? “ If patients are left untreated for osteoporosis, their bone density will increase rapidly. ” Isn't the point of taking Fosamax, calcium, etc., to increase BMD? Is it a typo? The rest of the article, though discouraging, made sense. The article is from a legit source: NIH (the National Library of Medicine). Its title: “Discordance between Hip and Spine Bone Mineral Density: A Point of Care.” The rules here forbid me to post the link.

I would like to go off alendronate (Fosamax) partly because it inhibits bone resorption, which means my skeleton is retaining old bone that deteriorates as it ages, which can make it more susceptible to fractures. I'm 76, so this is happening in a lumbar spine that (see article) is undergoing age-related degeneration that can itself produce fragile bones given to fractures. As the NIH article points out can happen, a bone scan on my lumbar spine indicates it has gained BMD, but this probably reflects not healthy bone growth but lumbar degeneration (the bone gets spurs, squishes the cartilage, hardens where it shouldn't, etc., and so the DEXA reads it as having a higher BMD, but it's not healthy BMD). I do not want to host a double whammy—degeneration due to old age plus retention of deteriorated bone due to Fosamax anti-absorption properties. So what do I do?

What is likely to happen if I stop taking Fosomax? The NIH article says lack of treatment rapidly elevates BMD, but how can that be? Plus, the NIH article implies the increase in BMD would be bad. In what way?