Strontium citrate, fractures and lack of research

The European product withdrawn was Strontium Ranelate - I can't find the report right now.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

Yes, "exhausted" is the word because there is so much to learn in order to make sure and to know what works for each person.

The supplements, exercises and medications, ALL of that is what I am researching because it requires piecing together so one gets the whole idea.

As far as exercise, I am adding a modified heel drop where I don't tip toe so much.

I was doing a a foot stomp based on Cleveland Clinic and another source. I may still do that but if you try both, at least for me I notice the heel drop impact seems to translate more impactfully to my hip

And the stomp, while somewhat the same impact, I feel a little more in my knee.

I just hope we can all benefit somehow and I am so grateful for everyone here sharing and researching together.

@healthmatters That looks like a very technical study that would take me a lot of work to understand. That's not a criticism, just saying. I do not see in your comment that it is a small mouse study (small in number of mice - not that they chose tiny mice). It's definitely something to keep in mind when talking about increases in TMD (which btw is a term I am unfamiliar with).
When most human studies are talking about percentage increases in bone density they are talking about DXA scans in humans. That's how Evenity, Forteo etc are being evaluated. These percentages are in Ovariectomized mice using micro ct. Not saying this isn't good or important research, just saying it's important to remember that this is not apples to apples with the numbers commonly seen in this group when discussing increases in bone density.
Thanks for bringing this paper to our attention.

@heatlh matters that study cites many contradictory results among similar studies. The lowest impact found was, unfortunately, strontium citrate, the from sold in the US as far as I know. It looks like impact on femur is low. TMD refers to mineral density. I am still unclear what the presence of more strontium (or calcium, phosphorus) means and if it is a good thing.

The conventional wisdom is that strontium is heavier/denser than calcium and competes with it. (The study showing increased calcium would seem to contradict this.) Since strontium is heavier/denser, and replaces calcium in bone (again this is what I have seen so often in readings) the DEXA is affected and makes bones look denser than they really are. I guess we could conclude that CT would be better to evaluate the effects of strontium versus a DEXA?

@awful truth "tiny mice" LOL

The study refers to micro CT. so I am picturing tiny mice inside a miniature CT machine!

Too many contradictory studies so far, and the real concern for many of us is cardiovascular. Is that risk equal among the different forms of strontium. There is this idea that strontium is "natural" but there is nothing natural about 680 mg and in Europe the ranelate form is considered a medication. Here it is in health food stores so is considered "natural" but it is not, and it is also not regulated.

My cardiologist also advised against taking strontium due to my blood thinner.

I am taking Forteo and have seen conflicting information on which minerals are ok to take with it. So far, no in depth information. I have heard warnings about Calcium to take and not to take. My vitamin D level was elevated to 99 & my Endo Dr told me to stop taking it until blood tests in 4 months.
I was taking Algae-Cal, however it has high levels of Vitamin D.
Calcium dilemma. To take or not to take?

@elaussies I read that too high Vitamin D increases calcium. Is your doctor doing blood and/or urine calcium testing?