Consider watching lectures by Dr. John Bilezikian on YouTube. He is one of the top osteoporosis doctors in the world. Here's a link to the first one in the late

Consider watching lectures by Dr. John Bilezikian on YouTube. He is one of the top osteoporosis doctors in the world. Here's a link to the first one in the latest series, but all his stuff on YouTube is great: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnOQsYYalyQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnOQsYYalyQ To your question, no, you would expect BMD to be a function of person size. Because it's not actually density. The bigger the person bones are the larger BMD you would see given the same volumetric density. DEXA measures how many grams of calcium fall on a square centimeter, and bigger bones will result in higher numbers. For people close to mean in size the difference is academic, for somebody 3-4 standard deviations below the mean in size not so much. This is covered in Dr. Bilezikian’s lectures. You can also Google [BMD areal volumetric]. In any case, this may not matter, BMD is predictive of fracture risk regardless of size. There seems to be some but not much science there on achondroplasia and osteoporosis. The few papers that pop up do suggest a link. Since you are an outlier I'd consider doing this: -learn more about osteoporosis from these lectures on YouTube -find a facility with a HRPQCT which is a gold standard for diagnosing bone density issues -the doctor who owns this machine is going to be a researcher who should find this case interesting, and will be able to reason from first principles not just follow guidelines, the guidelines that may not be applicable to somebody of an outlier size. Consult with his doctor Feel free to friend me on LinkedIn if you want to talk more.