# Therapeutic Potential of Chrysin in Improving Bone Health
## 3 Results
### Effect of Therapeutic Interventions on The Femur and Tibia-Fibula Weights, Lengths, and Hardness  
The study showed that there was a significant (\(p<0.05\)) decrease in the femur and tibia-fibula weights and hardness in DC animals when compared with normal animals, representing decreased bone strength, which may increase the risk of osteopororotic-related fractures. In contrast, animals treated with chrysin and in combination with CaCO\({}_{3}\) and/or vitamin D\({}_{3}\) showed a significant (\(p<0.05\)) increase in the femur and tibia-fibula weights and hardness, demonstrating increased bone strength. However, no significant (\(p<0.05\)) difference was found in the lengths of the femur and tibia-fibula in any of the groups studied (Table 4).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Parameters** & **Calcium (mg/dL)** & **Phosphorus (mg/dL)** & **Magnesium (mg/dL)** \\ \hline
**Days** & **7 th** & **28 th** & **7 th** & **28 th** & **7 th** & **28 th** \\ \hline Group I & 6.68 \(\pm\) 0.49 & 6.98 \(\pm\) 0.40 & 1.21 \(\pm\) 0.02 & 2.91 \(\pm\) 0.22 & 1.4 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 2.45 \(\pm\) 0.022 \\ Group II & 7.73 \(\pm\) 0.59 & 10.40 \(\pm\) 0.38 8 & 1.03 \(\pm\) 0.021 & 4.61 \(\pm\) 0.19 8 & 1.98 \(\pm\) 0.098 8 & 4.88 \(\pm\) 0.98 \\ Group III & 6.88 \(\pm\) 0.30 * & 6.05 \(\pm\) 0.22 * & 0.88 \(\pm\) 0.01 & 2.31 \(\pm\) 0.12 * & 0.92 \(\pm\) 0.021 * & 2.94 \(\pm\) 1.20 * \\ Group IV & 6.76 \(\pm\) 0.73 * & 5.11 \(\pm\) 0.42 * & 1.63 \(\pm\) 0.09 & 1.97 \(\pm\) 0.12 * & 1.02 \(\pm\) 0.065 * & 1.99 \(\pm\) 0.06 * \\ Group V & 6.165 \(\pm\) 0.67 * & 5.00 \(\pm\) 0.41 * & 1.92 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 2.01 \(\pm\) 0.11 * & 1.24 \(\pm\) 0.08 & 2.42 \(\pm\) 0.071 * \\ Group VI & 6.66 \(\pm\) 0.39 * & 4.6 \(\pm\) 0.23 * & 1.52 \(\pm\) 0.087 & 2.55 \(\pm\) 0.24 * & 1.11 \(\pm\) 0.056 * & 3.01 \(\pm\) 0.06 * \\ \hline \end{tabular} Note: Data are expressed as the mean \(\pm\) SD (\(n=6\)), analyzed by two-way ANOVA followed by [PERSON]’s multiple comparison test * = \(p<0.05\) is considered statistically significant when comparing group, I vs. group II * = \(p<0.05\) is considered statistically significant when compared with the other treatment groups (group III, IV, V, and VI) vs. diet control group.  
\end{table}
Table 2: Effect of therapeutic interventions on urinary calcium, magnesium, and phosphorus levels.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Parameters** & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Bone Ash Content**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**BMD**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **Ash Weight (g)** & **Calcium (mg/dL)** & **Phosphorus (mg/dL)** & **Magnesium (mg/dL)** & **Femoral Bone Mineral** \\ \hline Group I & 0.79 \(\pm\) 0.64 & 17.40 \(\pm\) 1.01 & 9.29 \(\pm\) 0.48 & 5.05 \(\pm\) 0.36 & 0.158 \(\pm\) 0.007 \\ Group II & 0.66 \(\pm\) 0.80 * & 15.16 \(\pm\) 0.80 * & 9.23 \(\pm\) 0.44 & 4.98 \(\pm\) 0.17 & 0.140 \(\pm\) 0.0015 * \\ Group III & 0.82 \(\pm\) 0.69 * & 18.20 \(\pm\) 0.96 * & 9.85 \(\pm\) 0.75 & 5.21 \(\pm\) 0.18 & 0.154 \(\pm\) 0.011 * \\ Group IV & 0.95 \(\pm\) 1.43 * & 19.38 \(\pm\) 0.66 * & 11.34 \(\pm\) 1.09 * & 5.21 \(\pm\) 0.18 & 0.161 \(\pm\) 0.008 * \\ Group V & 0.86 \(\pm\) 1.50 * & 17.45 \(\pm\) 0.72 * & 10.46 \(\pm\) 1.11 * & 5.10 \(\pm\) 0.32 & 0.169 \(\pm\) 0.0095 * \\ Group VI & 0.98 \(\pm\) 0.99 * & 18.59 \(\pm\) 0.86 * & 11.34 \(\pm\) 1.06 * & 5.13 \(\pm\) 0.41 & 0.186 \(\pm\) 0.003 * \\ \hline \end{tabular} Note: Data were expressed as the mean \(\pm\) SD (\(n=6\)), analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by [PERSON]’s multiple comparison test * = \(p<0.05\) is considered statistically significant when comparing group, I vs. group II * = \(p<0.05\) is considered statistically significant when compared with the other treatment groups (group III, IV, V, and VI) vs. diet control group.  
\end{table}
Table 3: Effect of drug treatment groups on bone ash content (ash weight, calcium, phosphorus, and magnesium levels) and femur bone mineral density (BMD).