{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.034210526315789476, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010526315789473684, 'mean_word_length': 5.101604278074866, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Seasonal Variation in Bone Histomorphometry

We are pleased to note that the data of Armas et al. confirmed our findings on the seasonal variation in bone mineralization, although they used the adjusted mineralization lag time (MLT), whereas we used the unadjusted value, which has been the practice in our laboratory for many years. Our calculation has been called the “direct” method, and their more orthodox calculation is the “indirect” method. We applied both calculations to our data and found that the ratio of winter to summer MLT was the same (1.2), but the uncorrected difference was significant (as we reported), whereas the adjusted lag time did not reach significance because of the error introduced by the adjustment for mineralizing surface. We also note that the correlation between serum 25(OH)D and lag time was higher for the unadjusted value (−0.175) than the adjusted value (−0.056)—but even the former did not reach significance. Given the uncertainty about the physiology of “osteoid maturation,” we are inclined to believe that both variables actually represent mineralization lag-time, albeit with different errors.