home » blog »

Can lack of improvement be a good thing? You BET it can!

The other day, I had an e-mail from a 70-year-old woman who is following the Women to Women bone health program I helped create. She was obviously very frustrated by what she considered a lack of progress. “I’m doing everything I’m supposed to,” she said, noting that she was eating alkaline and testing her pH, exercising daily with weights, meditating, and taking her vitamin supplements religiously. But she’d just had a DEXA scan and was upset because nothing had changed. Her bone density was no different than it had been the last time she’d had her bone density measured 2 years ago, and she couldn’t understand why it hadn’t improved.

At first, this struck me as a little bit funny. She clearly didn’t understand something very important. For a woman after menopause, keeping bone density stable is a big accomplishment! Keep in mind that the average in her 60’s and 70’s loses 1 or 2% of her bone mass every two years. That means that over the course of 3 years, this particular woman had maintained her bone density instead of losing the 1-2% she might normally have expected to lose just from the average wear-and-tear of aging. Compared to a lot of her peers, she’s doing pretty well! In light of the fact that the average women loses as much as 47% bone of her bone mass by her late 80’s, this client’s stability of bone as she ages is a real sign of success.

Then I reconsidered. I thought, "this woman thinks she’s failing at something when she’s succeeding — that’s a problem!" Here she was, beating the odds and keeping her bones stable year after year, yet she felt like she wasn’t doing enough. I did not want her to walk away feeling defeated when she’d just won a wonderful victory. But how to get that point across to her and others like her?

Well, here’s a small analogy for you. Many personal trainers will tell someone they’re helping to lose weight to pay no attention to what the scale says, but instead gauge their weight loss success by how their clothes fit. It’s somewhat the same with bone health. For many of us, “optimal bone health” might mean results not visible to the naked eye or even to a DEXA scan — a strengthening of bone that leaves it more flexible and less prone to fracture, but that doesn’t increase its overall density. Some might also find their bone density stabilizes, as the woman who wrote me did (even if she didn’t recognize this stability for the achievement it is). Some see small gains in bone density, and a few see significant increases in bone density. But for most, the improvement might not really show up on any measurement made by a DEXA scanner.

What you do often get with a natural bone health program is a visible improvement in overall health — stronger nails, more supple skin, healthier teeth and gums, often better digestive health — that signifies that the body is getting what it needs and therefore doesn’t need to tap the bones for resources. Like a pair of suddenly loose pants on a person whose bathroom scale says she hasn’t lost a pound, sometimes the measuring device should be disbelieved if the body itself says that good changes are happening.

It’s also true that one might have such gains but not see them, since (as I’ve commented in earlier blogs) DEXA machines are notorious for having poor accuracy from one scan to another. A DEXA scan must show a change in density of at least 5-6%, according to noted bone researcher Susan Ott, to indicate a definite change in bone density; anything less than that could just be variation in the scanner or operator skill. The woman who e-mailed me, for example, could very well have had an increase in bone density of 1% from year to year, but the variability in DEXA measurements might have masked the increase.

So there are two points I’d like everyone to take away from this. One is that your success might not be measurable or quantifiable in terms of increased bone density—but that doesn’t mean you should discount it. Having stable bone mass as we age is something to celebrate! The other is that the point of a Better Bones Program and the approach I’ve long advocated is not to make sure everyone has bones equivalent in density to a 25-year-old athlete, but to give the bones — and the body, too — the resources they need to obtain optimal health.

 

We created the Osteo Blast blog as our forum to express opinions and educate the public about natural means of supporting and improving bone health and overall wellness. As part of this forum, we sometimes discuss medical issues and medications, and their effects on bone health in general. However, we cannot advise readers about specific medical issues in this forum. If you wish to obtain advice from Susan E. Brown, PhD, about your specific bone health and nutritional concerns, please visit our Consultations page. Other specific medical questions should be referred to your healthcare provider.

Comments

August 2. 2011 15:55


Would you please comment on the whole body vibrational-type platform.  One stands on a vibrating platform and the whole body vibrates.  Is this helpful for me...a 70 year overweight woman.  I'm off Foximax now, and I wonder if vibrations would help strengthen bones and connective tissue.
Thank you very much.

Mariel Friberg

August 3. 2011 09:07

Hi Mariel,  The research on whole body vibration looks very good, I use it myself several times a s week to help maintain both bone and muscle.  You will see in the "shop" section of this website the type of platform I found to be the best buy.  Now that you are off Fosamax, be sure to do the full Better Bones Program (the 20 key nutrients, the alkaline diet, the stress-reduction, along with the WBV exercises.  All great for a 70 year old and everyone else. Best wishes and keep up the good work, Susan

Susan E Brown

August 31. 2011 14:02

"For many of us, 'optimal bone health' might mean results not visible to the naked eye or even to a DEXA scan — a strengthening of bone that leaves it more flexible and less prone to fracture, but that doesn’t increase its overall density."

Here is a confirmatory anecdote. I am light weight and small-boned, and my DEXA numbers are terrible. The doc has been after me for a decade to take Fosamax.  In the past year as a consequence of three minor bicycle accidents, I have sustained moderate trauma to the left hip, the left wrist (took four months for the residual pains to go away), and the right hip (three months).  Nothing broke.  I walked/rode away from the accidents involving the hips, and the wrist was X-rayed the next day and found fine.  The doc no longer talks about Fosamax.

I don't follow any complete program, but since my original scan in 1997, I have looked for things that would help my bones.  In retrospect, I think most important has been testosterone (credit the doc for that) and adequate vitamin D, magnesium, and, especially, vitamin K2. I regard it as a tragedy that conventional medicine has been (and mostly still is) so slow to accept vitamin D and to learn that K2 even exists...

JBG

August 31. 2011 14:10

JBG, thanks for your comment -- we are trying hard to raise awareness of the value of vitamin K2 in a bone health program, but it's an uphill battle when most media sources are still chanting the calcium litany (although you are starting to hear more "vitamin D" added into that now...)

Managing Editor

August 31. 2011 17:07

You made me laugh. I'm a personal trainer. And I've personally thrown away TWO scales over the last 15 years since I find them so demoralizing.

Is anything in the works that will determine the flexibility of bone, rather than its density?

Meanwhile, I'll be on the lookout for the signs of bone health you mention: more supple skin, healthier teeth and gums, stronger nails, etc. PS, I asked my dental hygienist if my newly diagnosed osteoporosis could have anything to do with my abysmal tooth and gum condition. She said no. I thought that unlikely and wish health professionals would become better informed!

PPS - I HATE your Captcha box below. I can never figure out the letters! Why make it so difficult?

Kathleen

September 1. 2011 13:38

Kathleen,

We're glad you enjoy the site. (Laughter is good for bones, too!)

As far as we know, the only non-invasive way to measure bone strength & flexibility is to put it to the test by falling on it -- which we don't recommend. Before the DEXA was invented, osteoporosis was diagnosed by virtue of an individual fracturing under circumstances that didn't seem to warrant it.

Your dentist may be misinterpreting your question. Osteoporosis probably didn't cause your tooth and gum problems, but they may be related. Inflammatory gum disease can be a starting point for systemic inflammation (which then hurts the bones), or it can be a symptom of existing systemic inflammation (which also hurts the bones). It's sort of like trying to figure out where a forest fire began -- pretty difficult to identify the spark point when there are multiple lightning strikes in a tinder-dry forest.

We're sorry about the Captcha box... we needed a fast solution to a rapidly growing problem of unblockable spam posts that were overwhelming the moderators' ability to keep up, and this was what our IT department came up with. We'll ask them if maybe we can find something a little easier to read that still stops the spammers. Just know that we put it there for a reason... even if we don't much like the reason, it's better than the alternative. We were getting 30+ spam posts an hour at one point!

Managing Editor

September 1. 2011 14:39

I am 69 yrs old and when I was 62 I had a DEXA for the first time and was told I had osteoporosis in my spine.  At -3.2 this was not considered borderline.  It was shocking news to me.  I did a lot of research, bought Dr. Brown's book and started to improve my nutrition and although I was already fairly active, researched exercises to strengthen my back muscles.  I refused the doctor's recommendation to take Fosamax and she said OK as long as I had a follow-up DEXA in a year to make sure I was not losing bone rapidly.  I waited 2 years and when it was done, there was no change.  Whew!
Earlier this year, it was decided I should do another DEXA since it had been 4 years since the last one.  This time it was to be on a different machine so I was quite curious (and a bit apprehensive admittedly) as to what it would show this time.  My spine had improved to a T-score of -2.9!  I was delighted with this result but my doctor said that it was likely the result of arthritis in my spine.  But my back does not hurt!, I said.  Apparently arthritis does not always hurt.  The doctor wants me to do a follow-up in a year, but does this mean my T-score will keep "improving" because of arthritis?  If I have it now at 69, would not a lot of women my age and older also have it and so how does one really know the condition of their spine?  I am not sure what to think now but will carry on with my supplements, most importantly Vitamin D, and keep active.    

Sharon Behmann

September 1. 2011 22:03

Hi Sharon,
Sounds like you are making good progress to me.  I suspect you doctor is referring to the idea that arthritis in the spine has some degree of calcification and can look like denser bone on a bone density test. If you do not have any significant arthritis, and this is likely as you do not have pain, there would be no such interference on the density test.  The radiologist reading the bone density generally comments in his/her report if they suspect arthritis is interfering with the spinal bone density result. Also remember I like the urine markers of bone resorption (The NTx test) was a way to assess the current rate of bone loss.  You can search my site for this test, I talk about it a great deal.  Best wishes, Susan

Susan E Brown

September 2. 2011 08:27

I agree that even no bone density loss as read on a bone density scan is progress for a woman over 60.  I also go by the fact that she likely did not have a bone fracture during that time (as it was not mentioned).  That is the real test - no fractures for a person having osteoporosis is a victory.

Bonnie

Bonnie

September 7. 2011 07:19

I apologise for being so late in responding to your replies.  I checked the DEXA scan report and indeed discovered that the radiologist wrote under limitations as follows:  "Multilevel spondylosis which overestimates BMD in the spine."  I looked up spondylosis and it apparently signifies disc degeneration?  So I am still not sure that any follow-up DEXA scan would be able to tell me my true fracture risk.  It also indicates my Absolute Fracture Risk Category is :  "High, greater than 20%".
Interestingly, this being a new machine for me, my femoral neck which was graded as ostopenia 4 years ago was normal this time.  More arthritis I suppose?
And yes Bonnie, I have had no fractures.
Thanks Susan for reminding me of the NTx test - I will discuss this with my doctor the next time the subject of my osteoporosis comes up.  :-)
Thank you!

Sharon Behmann

September 7. 2011 09:20

Sharon, have you taken our fracture risk assessment? http://www.betterbones.com/bonehealthprofile/default.aspx If not, please do -- it might ease your mind (or, offer you some ideas about places that could stand to be improved). Dr. Brown created it to account for the majority of factors contributing to fracture risk, of which bone density is but one factor. If your situation is such that you have trouble getting an accurate idea of your bone density, then maybe the next step is to focus on other factors contributing to fracture risk and see if there are areas you can improve. Best of luck to you!

Managing Editor

September 7. 2011 15:09

I did the fracture assessment when I was first diagnosed with osteoporosis but have not done it recently, but I will.  Good idea!  Thank you again!  Some things will not have changed like I am still fine-boned and even older than before but my nutrition has certainly improved and my smoking habit.  lol

Sharon Behmann

Add comment





Loading




Recent Posts