Hi @normahorn allow me to bud in here. I have just started learning about bone markers. It seems many clinical settings are not using them as a standardized protocol. After watching 2 separate interviews with 2 clinicians (endocrinologists) who practice at MGH, I was surprised to learn that even a setting like MGH doesn't follow them! Maybe too much variation exists especially with regards to CTX? Nonetheless personally I felt it would be very nice to have them at diagnosis, for a future reference, regardless of their accuracy or interpretation.

As far as cholesterol and the hot topic of statin, personally I'm in the camp of using a sensible choice of statin. I'm an example of careless lifestyle choices which handed me with a mild cad ( shame on me!!! 3 generations of both sides of family have no cvd or diabetes, almost no meds living into their 80s and 90s). My numbers were not too far from guidelines low 200s total, 60-70s hdl, 130-150 ldl. The discovery of my cad was accidental from a CT to investigate my cough. I thanked the MD for potentially saving my life, or extending my life. Cardiologists don't call hdl 'good' cholesterol anymore. If my understanding is correct, the new guidelines for ldl is below 100, and ldl is the one that you want to pay attention to. If one has 2nd risk factor, the target for ldl is under 70, which is easy to achieve in my case with a low dose of statin, but hard with just diet and life style. In my case i could only reduce my ldl to around 100 with a strict diet and some exercise. With that said, the door for future evenity may be closed for me, leaving me with one less choice among the limited treatment tools.