Part of the Longevity Metrics Series: Auditing My Health as I Turn 55

Most people don't think about their bones until one breaks.

That's understandable. Bones don't send distress signals, you don't feel pain when bone density starts declining, there's no obvious symptom that something is eroding quietly beneath the surface. You feel fine. Men and women alike.

And then, decades later, a fall that would have been nothing becomes a fracture that changes everything. For many elderly people, a fall marks the beginning of the end.

That's why Metric 8 of my birthday longevity audit is bone health. And it's one that I think is radically underappreciated for everyone, not because it's complicated, but because the window where you can most influence it is exactly the window when most people aren't paying attention yet.

That window, the menopausal transition, is now for me. But as I'll cover below, men have their own version of this window, and the consequences of missing it are, statistically, even more severe.

Why Bone Health Is a Longevity Metric

Osteoporosis is commonly framed as a disease of old age, something that happens to other people, later. But the research on bone density and mortality reframes it entirely.

A large prospective study published in Frontiers in Endocrinology  found that osteopenia and osteoporosis were significantly associated with all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease mortality, and cancer mortality in a general US population sample. Osteopenia, the stage before osteoporosis and the stage most people will reach before they're diagnosed with anything, carried a 37% higher hazard ratio for all-cause mortality compared to normal bone mass.

This is not primarily about bone as a structural tissue. It's about bone as a metabolic and systemic organ, one that is deeply interconnected with immune function, inflammatory load, cardiovascular health, and muscle mass. A skeleton in decline signals a body in accelerated aging.

But the most acute and dramatic longevity risk from bone loss is the one most people do understand, even if they underestimate it: fracture.

Hip fracture is one of the most mortality-predictive events in the life of an older adult. Research published in AJMC  puts one-year mortality rates following hip fracture at approximately 22% in women. In men, the numbers are worse: studies show one-year mortality after hip fracture runs between 31 and 37% for men , significantly higher than in women, and almost never discussed. The first 90 days are the most critical, and the excess mortality risk persists for a full decade after the fracture event. This is not a one-year consequence. It is a life-trajectory-altering event.

A fracture that you could have prevented in your 50s by building and protecting bone density is one of the most avoidable contributors to premature death in older age. For both sexes.

The Menopausal Window: Where Bone Loss Accelerates in Women

Bone density is not static. Throughout your lifetime, bone is constantly being broken down by specialized cells called osteoclasts and rebuilt by osteoblasts in a process called remodeling. In youth, building outpaces breakdown. Around peak bone mass (typically reached in your late 20s to early 30s), they balance. After that, breakdown gradually edges ahead, and at menopause, the pace dramatically accelerates.

Estrogen is central to this process. Estrogen acts directly on osteoclasts to suppress bone breakdown. When estrogen declines, that brake releases. The result is a significant surge in bone resorption that begins in the perimenopause (the year or two before the final menstrual period) and continues for approximately three to five years afterward.

Research on menopausal bone loss  estimates an average loss of around 10% of bone mineral density during the menopausal transition. That's an average. Some women lose up to 20% in the five to seven years around menopause. This is not a slow, decades-long drift. It is a rapid, estrogen-driven collapse in bone maintenance that happens in a narrow window, one that largely determines where you land for the rest of your life.

The tragedy is that this window is also when most women feel fine. There are no symptoms of bone loss. No warning signs, no labwork to flag it. Just the quiet acceleration of a process that won't announce itself until a fracture does it for you, twenty years later.

This is exactly why I got a DXA scan at 55, rather than waiting for the currently recommended screening age of 65, and why I think every postmenopausal woman should be having this conversation with her doctor well before then.

What About Men?

Bone health is almost always discussed as a women's issue. The data says otherwise.

1 in 4 men over 50 will experience an osteoporosis-related fracture in their lifetime . More than 33% of men over 50 have low bone mass. And yet only about 2% of men with osteoporosis are diagnosed before a fracture occurs. Only 10% receive adequate treatment. The screening conversation, standard for women at 65, recommended earlier by many practitioners, almost never happens for men at all, because bone health is not culturally framed as a male problem.

This is a significant gap, because men's post-fracture outcomes are worse . Men have higher peak bone mass than women, which creates a false sense of security. Their bone loss is more gradual, there's no estrogen-cliff equivalent which makes it easier to miss. But when a fracture does happen, men are twice as likely as women to die in hospital, and their one-year mortality rates run 10 to 15 percentage points higher.

The mechanism in men is different but parallel. Testosterone plays a role in maintaining bone density, and declining testosterone with age drives accelerating bone loss, particularly after 70. Men who have low testosterone, take certain medications (corticosteroids, androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer), have a history of heavy alcohol use, or are tall and thin carry additional risk. These are the conversations worth having proactively, not after a fracture makes the gap visible.

The interventions, resistance and impact exercise, vitamin D with K2, and adequate calcium are the same for men and women. The screening access is not. If you are a man over 50 with any of the risk factors above, asking your doctor for a DXA scan is a reasonable and evidence-supported request.

Understanding Your DXA Results: T-Scores, Z-Scores, and FRAX

A DXA (Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry) scan is the gold standard for measuring bone mineral density. It's a low-radiation, non-invasive scan that typically measures the spine and hips, the sites most clinically relevant for fracture risk.

The results are expressed in two ways:

T-score compares your bone density to that of a healthy young adult at peak bone mass. This is the number used for diagnosis.

• T-score at or above -1.0: Normal
• T-score between -1.0 and -2.5: Osteopenia (low bone mass)
• T-score at or below -2.5: Osteoporosis

Z-score compares your bone density to other people of your same age, sex, and ethnicity. A Z-score of 0 means you're exactly average for your demographic. Above 0 means your bones are denser than average for your age group. Below -2.0 is considered below the expected range for age.

The T-score is the clinical diagnostic tool. The Z-score is the contextual one: it tells you how your bone density compares to your peers, not to a 30-year-old. Both matter, and understanding the difference prevents a lot of unnecessary alarm or false reassurance.

FRAX (Fracture Risk Assessment Tool) goes one step further. Developed by the World Health Organization, it takes your bone density plus clinical risk factors (age, weight, smoking, alcohol use, prior fractures, parental history of hip fracture, corticosteroid use) and calculates your 10-year probability of a major fracture. It's calculated when T-scores fall in the osteopenia range (-1.0 to -2.5). The treatment threshold used by the National Osteoporosis Foundation is a 10-year hip fracture risk of 3% or higher, or a major osteoporotic fracture risk of 20% or higher.

Importantly, FRAX captures something the T-score alone misses: many fractures occur in people with osteopenia, not osteoporosis. The bone density alone undersells the risk. Clinical context matters. And FRAX can be calculated for both men and women, the tool uses sex-specific inputs.

The Bone-Muscle Connection: Osteosarcopenia

Bone does not exist in isolation from the rest of the body, and nowhere is that more clinically significant than in its relationship with muscle.

Bone responds to mechanical load. The compression and tension created by muscle contractions signals bone to maintain and build density, a principle called Wolff's Law. When muscle mass declines, the mechanical stimulus for bone maintenance declines with it. The two systems go down together.

This is why there is now a recognized clinical syndrome called osteosarcopenia, the coexistence of low bone density and low muscle mass. Research published in PMC found that individuals with osteosarcopenia have a 30% higher three-year mortality risk than those with sarcopenia alone, and an 8% higher risk than those with low bone density alone. The combination is more dangerous than either condition in isolation, and it's more common than most people realize in postmenopausal women losing both estrogen-dependent bone maintenance and muscle mass, but also in older men, where declining testosterone affects both systems simultaneously.

This is why the body composition metric and the bone health metric in this audit are not separate topics. They're the same conversation. As I covered in Metric 6 on body composition , skeletal muscle is the primary site of insulin-stimulated glucose uptake, the primary determinant of metabolic health, and through its mechanical loading of bone, a direct driver of bone density. Building and preserving muscle mass is the single intervention with the widest reach across this entire audit. Bone health is one of the reasons why.

What Actually Moves the Needle

The evidence base for bone health interventions is solid, and most of it applies equally to men and women.

Impact and resistance exercise. Bone responds to load. Specifically, it responds to the kind of load that creates stress on the skeleton: impact, weight-bearing, and resistance training. A 2025 network meta-analysis in Nature Scientific Reports  comparing exercise modalities for bone density in postmenopausal women found that impact exercise and resistance training produced the most consistent benefits at both spine and hip sites. The evidence in men points in the same direction. Combined interventions (doing both) outperform either alone. 

The key word is impact. Walking is good. Walking with impact (hiking, jumping, running) is better for bone. Activities that load the skeleton with ground reaction forces signal bone to maintain density in a way that swimming or cycling, though excellent for cardiovascular health, do not.

Vitamin D with K2. Vitamin D is essential for calcium absorption. Without adequate vitamin D, calcium consumed through food or supplements is poorly absorbed and utilized. But calcium getting into the bloodstream is only half the story: it also needs to get into bone rather than depositing in soft tissue and arteries. This is where vitamin K2 becomes important. K2 activates proteins (osteocalcin and matrix Gla protein) that direct calcium toward bone and away from blood vessels. Recent research describes vitamin K2, D, and calcium as a synergistic triad for bone protection, and the evidence for their combined effect is considerably stronger than for any one of them in isolation. This applies for men and women.

HRT (women) and testosterone optimization (men). Hormone replacement therapy is one of the most evidence-supported interventions for postmenopausal bone protection. Because estrogen directly suppresses bone breakdown, replacing it during the period of most rapid bone loss is logically and clinically sound. Research confirms that HRT significantly reduces fracture risk  in postmenopausal women, and guidelines from the Menopause Society support its use for bone protection in women who are appropriate candidates. For men, the parallel conversation is testosterone. Research shows that low testosterone is associated with accelerated bone loss and increased fracture risk in men, and testosterone replacement therapy in hypogonadal men has been shown to improve bone mineral density. If you are a man with declining testosterone and concerns about bone health, this is a conversation worth having with your doctor.

My Numbers

My DXA scan was performed in March 2026, using a Hologic Horizon W densitometer. The indication was postmenopausal screening for osteoporosis.

Bone Density Results:

Impression: Normal bone density in a postmenopausal woman based on the lowest T-score using WHO criteria and ISCD guidelines.

FRAX: Not calculated, because all T-scores for spine, total hip, and femoral neck were at or above -1.0. This is itself a meaningful result: FRAX only triggers in the osteopenia range, and none of my sites reached it.

A few things worth unpacking here.

The spine at -0.9 is the number I'm watching. It's normal, but it's the closest of all my sites to the osteopenia threshold, and the spine is typically where bone loss shows up first in postmenopausal women. I am not alarmed by it, I am paying attention to it. That's exactly the right relationship to have with a number at the edge of a range.

The hip scores are genuinely good. Positive T-scores at both femoral necks and total hips means my hip bone density is actually above the young adult peak bone mass average. For a postmenopausal woman, that's a result I'll take.

The Z-scores tell a complementary story. My spine Z-score of 0.1 puts me right at average for women my age. My hip Z-scores (1.1 to 1.8) put me well above average for my age group. My hips are strong relative to my peers.

My protocol: 

HRT, vitamin D with K2, and Krav Maga.

I want to say something about the Krav Maga specifically, because it's not the intervention most people would associate with bone health. Krav Maga is a high-impact, physically demanding form of self-defense that involves the kind of loading and impact that bone responds to. Every time I kick, punch, or do break-falls, I'm creating ground reaction forces that signal bone to maintain density. Resistance training targets bone through mechanical load. Impact training targets it through ground reaction forces. Krav Maga does both simultaneously, while also building the strength, coordination, and reflexes that reduce fall risk as well as plenty of opportunity to practice falling without being injured.

I get that Krav Maga isn't everyone's cup of tea. The best intervention for bone health is one you'll actually do, sustainably, for decades. But I've been training for years, and I don't plan on stopping. There's just too much that's good about it, which I'll be writing about in the future.

One more note on my protocol: I don't take a calcium supplement. I get my calcium from food, and I spread it throughout the day deliberately.

There are two reasons for this. The first is practical: the body can only absorb around 500mg of calcium at a time, so spreading intake across meals is simply more effective than taking a larger dose at once. The second is cardiovascular. The research on calcium supplementation gives me pause in a way that dietary calcium does not. Supplements can cause a brief spike in blood calcium levels that food sources don't, and that spike appears to contribute to the process by which circulating calcium binds to existing arterial plaque and hardens it. Dietary calcium, by contrast, is associated with cardiovascular protection. The issue isn't calcium itself - it's the delivery mechanism.

This connects directly to something I shared in the lipids post: my coronary artery calcium score, done at 51, came back at 3. My doctor and I both expected a zero. It wasn't alarming - a score of 3 is treated as functionally similar to zero by most risk calculators - but it wasn't zero, and my elevated Lp(a) is almost certainly the explanation. Avoiding calcium supplements in favor of dietary calcium spread throughout the day is one small, deliberate response to that finding.

So I eat calcium-rich foods throughout the day: leafy greens, dairy, canned fish with bones. Paired with vitamin D and K2, the calcium gets where it needs to go.

The Summary

Bone health is a longevity metric because bone loss predicts mortality: through fracture, through its connection to cardiovascular and systemic health, and through its relationship with muscle mass. The window of greatest vulnerability and greatest opportunity is different for men and women, but the window exists for both, and in both cases, it is largely invisible, and largely ignored until it's too late.

For women, that window is the menopausal transition, when rapid estrogen-driven bone loss occurs in the absence of any symptoms. For men, it's the gradual testosterone-mediated decline that accelerates after 70, in a population that is almost never screened.

My numbers are solid. Every site is in the normal range. FRAX was not indicated. My hips are strong relative to both young adult norms and my age group. The spine at -0.9 is the number I'm watching, and my protocol (HRT, D with K2, and years of high-impact training) is the evidence-supported combination for both maintaining what I have and continuing to build.

The audit continues!

Ready to understand your own bone health picture and build a protocol around it? My concierge coaching program works with your specific data and health history to build an approach that reflects where you actually are. Learn more here .

Frequently Asked Questions