Those children whose mothers had the highest educational achievement were taller but thinner, and those children whose mothers had minimal formal education were shorter but more obese. We interpreted this as higher educational achievement being associated with longer but more slender bones, whereas lower educational achievement was associated with shorter, wider bones, and as a consequence bone area was the same across the range

of educational achievement. Our work confirms that educational achievement does affect skeletal development, and suggests that the pathway via which educational achievement exerts its effects on bone mass is by opposing actions on height and weight. This may be a further explanation for the conflicting SAHA HDAC research buy evidence of an association between educational attainment or level of income and osteoporotic

Bleomycin mw fracture in adults. It is likely that the studies found in this comprehensive systematic review did not assess the effects of socio-economic status on determinants of fracture risk such as bone mass, and they certainly did not assess the effects on determinants of bone mass, particularly height and weight. Conflicts of interest None References 1. Brennan SL, Pasco JA, Urquhart DM, Oldenburg B, Hanna F, Wluka AE (2009) The association between socioeconomic status and osteoporotic fracture in population-based adults: a systematic review. Osteoporos Int 20:1487–1497CrossRefPubMed 2. Clark EM, Ness A, Tobias JH (2005) Social position Capmatinib supplier affects bone mass in childhood through opposing actions on height and weight. J Bone Miner Res 20(12):2082–2089CrossRefPubMed”
“Dear

Editors, We thank Drs Clark and Tobias [1] for their comment regarding our systematic review, which examined the role of socioeconomic status (SES) of the individual adult aged  > 55 years and their risk of osteoporotic fracture [2]. The strict eligibility criteria of our review meant that studies that had examined the role of parents’ SES upon bone mass acquisition by their offspring did not fulfil the inclusion criteria. The findings of BCKDHA this review were based upon the data provided by 11 eligible studies ranked as high quality. Three of the studies ranked as high quality had examined education as a prime predictor [3–5]. Of these, only one was a cohort study from which causality could be inferred [3]; however, it did not adjust for height and weight. Further, of the two cross-sectional studies that assessed education and were deemed as high quality, only one had accounted for body mass index (BMI) in the final model [5]. Thus, we confirm that not all the reviewed studies had accounted for weight or height within the final model, although they had adjusted for various combinations of other risk factors for low bone mass, including age, gender, smoking, physical activity, medications, and prior fracture.