Barbell training and bone density

**Will Morris** · 02-14-2013, 08:59 PM

Granted, an n=1 case study isn't the highest on the hierarchy of scientific evidence, but it is higher than expert opinion. The term "weight bearing exercise" gets thrown around by physicians, PTs, etc as a way to stave off bone density loss, but it is a commonly held belief that bone density peaks at, or around, the age of 25 and begins to slowly decrease after that. According to a well respected orthopedic physician in the military, there is nothing that can be done to reverse this. "Weight bearing exercise" can only slow the loss. We all know that studies that may look at the benefit of heavy barbell training and bone loss will almost certainly be inherently flawed, so I submit my own n=1 case study.

Admittedly, I am a small dude, and am built more like an insect than a lifter. But, yesterday I was able to have a DXA scan, which primarily measures body composition and bone density. My measured bone density was calculated as being 2 standard deviations higher than other men my age (31), and my spine, pelvis, tibia, and talus all tested higher than 2SD. My total bone density would have been higher, but my cranium was measured as being normal for my age.

I know the answer to the question, but what would you put forward as a hypothesis for why my spine, pelvis, tibia, and talus were more than 2SD higher than normal, while my skull was normal? Could it be that genetically, my skeleton should be normal, but my short history (2 years) of barbell training has actually significantly increased my bone density in the weight bearing structures?