Osteoporosis is a complex, multi-factorial condition characterized by reduced bone mass and impaired micro-architectural structure, leading to an increased susceptibility to fractures. Although most of the bone strength (including bone mass and quality) is genetically determined, many other factors (nutritional, environmental and life-style) also influence bone. Nutrition is important modifiable factor in the development and maintenance of bone mass and the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Approximately 80-90% of bone mineral content is comprised of calcium and phosphorus. Other dietary components, such as protein, magnesium, zinc, copper, iron, fluoride, vitamins D, A, C, and K are required for normal bone metabolism, while other ingested compounds not usually categorized as nutrients (e.g. caffeine, alcohol, phytoestrogens) may also impact bone health. Unraveling the interaction between different factors; nutritional, environmental, life style, and heredity help us to understand the complexity of the development of osteoporosis and subsequent fractures. This paper reviews the role of dietary components on bone health throughout different stages of life. Each nutrient is discussed separately, however the fact that many nutrients are co-dependent and simultaneously interact with genetic and environmental factors should not be neglected. The complexity of the interactions is probably the reason why there are controversial or inconsistent findings regarding the contribution of a single or a group of nutrients in bone health.

Although high-protein diets induce hypercalciuria in humans, the source of the additional urinary calcium remains unclear. One hypothesis is that the high endogenous acid load of a high-protein diet is partially buffered by bone, leading to increased skeletal resorption and hypercalciuria. We used dual stable calcium isotopes to quantify the effect of a high-protein diet on calcium kinetics in women. The study consisted of 2 wk of a lead-in, well-balanced diet followed by 10 d of an experimental diet containing either moderate (1.0 g/kg) or high (2.1 g/kg) protein. Thirteen healthy women received both levels of protein in random order. Intestinal calcium absorption increased during the high-protein diet in comparison with the moderate (26.2 +/- 1.9% vs. 18.5 +/- 1.6%, P < 0.0001, mean +/- sem) as did urinary calcium (5.23 +/- 0.37 vs. 3.57 +/- 0.35 mmol/d, P < 0.0001, mean +/- sem). The high-protein diet caused a significant reduction in the fraction of urinary calcium of bone origin and a nonsignificant trend toward a reduction in the rate of bone turnover. There were no protein-induced effects on net bone balance. These data directly demonstrate that, at least in the short term, high-protein diets are not detrimental to bone.

Osteoporosis and sarcopenia are degenerative diseases frequently associated with aging. The loss of bone and muscle results in significant morbidity, so preventing or attenuating osteoporosis and sarcopenia is an important public health goal. Dietary protein is crucial for development of bone and muscle, and recent evidence suggests that increasing dietary protein above the current Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) may help maintain bone and muscle mass in older individuals. Several epidemiological and clinical studies point to a salutary effect of protein intakes above the current RDA (0.8 g/kg per day) for adults aged 19 and older. There is evidence that the anabolic response of muscle to dietary protein is attenuated in elderly people, and as a result, the amount of protein needed to achieve anabolism is greater. Dietary protein also increases circulating insulin-like growth factor, which has anabolic effects on muscle and bone. Furthermore, increasing dietary protein increases calcium absorption, which could be anabolic for bone. Available evidence supports a beneficial effect of short-term protein intakes up to 1.6 to 1.8 g/kg per day, although long-term studies are needed to show safety and efficacy. Future studies should employ functional measures indicative of protein adequacy, as well as measures of muscle protein synthesis and maintenance of muscle and bone tissue, to determine the optimal level of dietary protein. Given the available data, increasing the RDA for older individuals to 1.0 to 1.2 g/kg per day would maintain normal calcium metabolism and nitrogen balance without affecting renal function and may represent a compromise while longer-term protein supplement trials are pending.

Objectives Sarcopenia, the involuntary loss of skeletal muscle with age, affects up to one-quarter of older adults. Evidence indicates a positive association between dietary protein intake and lean muscle mass and strength among older persons, but information on dietary protein’s effect on physical performance in older adults has received less attention. Design Cross-sectional observational analysis of the relationship of dietary protein on body composition and physical performance. Setting Clinical research center. Participants 387 healthy women aged 60 – 90 years (mean 72.7 ± 7.0 y). Measurements Measures included body composition (fat-free mass, appendicular skeletal mass and fat mass) via dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), physical performance (Physical Performance Test [PPT] and Short Physical Performance Battery [SPPB]), handgrip strength, Physical Activity Scale in the Elderly (PASE), quality of life measure (SF-8), falls, fractures, nutrient and macromolecule intake (four-day food record). Independent samples t-tests determined mean differences between the above or below RDA protein groups. Statistical Analysis Analysis of covariance was used to control for body mass index (BMI) between groups when assessing physical performance, physical activity and health-related quality of life. Results The subjects consumed an average of 72.2 g protein/day representing 1.1 g protein/kg body weight/day. Subjects were categorized as below the recommended daily allowance (RDA) for protein (defined as less than 0.8 g protein/kg) or at or above the RDA (equal to or higher than 0.8 g protein/kg). Ninety-seven subjects (25%) were in the low protein group, and 290 (75%) were in the higher protein group. Women in the higher protein group had lower body mass, including fat and lean mass, and fat-to-lean ratio than those in the lower-protein group (p <0.001). Composite scores of upper and lower extremity strength were impaired in the group with low protein intake; SPPB score was 9.9±1.9 compared to 10.6±1.6 in those with higher protein intake and PPT was 19.8± 2.9 compared to 20.9± 2.1 in the low and higher protein groups, respectively. The results were attenuated by correction for BMI, but remained significant. The physical component of the SF-8 was also lower in the low protein group but did not remain significant when controlling for BMI. No significant differences were found in hand grip strength or reported physical activity. Conclusion Healthy, older postmenopausal women consumed, on average, 1.1 g/kg/d protein, although 25% consumed less than the RDA. Those in the low protein group had higher body fat and fat-to-lean ratio than those who consumed the higher protein diet. Upper and lower extremity function was impaired in those who consumed a low protein diet compared to those with a higher protein intake. Protein intake should be considered when evaluating the multi-factorial loss of physical function in older women.