Re: now, if I were a vulcan . . .

I do know this. Japanese women's bones are not as dense as western women's bones but they have much lower rates of osteoporosis. So, the standard used to determine bone strength here is a false standard, it's not about density.
I suppose that we could compare this to an image of a beefed-up body builder used as an example of health...
Calcium supplementation has been used in reversing fluorosis, I know that you've mined the archives, so I'm sure that you know this. Fluoride binds to calcium, and as long as we minimize the risk inherent of that calcium redepositing into soft tissue...?
I've asked that question on VWT, and received some good responses. And I asked knowing that most folks there are anti-calcium supplementation.
Search VWT for V's "calcium pectin rant". Let me know, I'll find the posts for you, if you wish.
If I suspected that I had a problem with fluoride I would certainly not be averse to supplementing some form of calcium...TEMPORARILY.
I have the same Qs as you re: bone health.
I think that a lot of older folks break bones because they don't get any exercise. They're afraid of falling, and breaking a hip, so they don't move and get the exercise they need. Then the body becomes weak and frail, then when they DO fall, a break is pretty much guaranteed.
And yes, thyroid hormone is essential to bone formation, health. Iodine is essential to thyroid hormone.... :)
The really technical stuff is over my head, but fluoride binds with calcium, but the bond is imperfect, and inherently weak.
*flashback to the 70's* victor what's his name, "survival into the twenty-first century", sez...bone cells turn over every seven years. I do assume that that is constant, though:) Can we replace imperfect fluoridated bone with iodinated bone? Absolutely. How do we know, or measure this? I dunno:)

Tweet