Thanks for the response and I'll be checking out your linked post shortly. In answer to your question about supplementation and osteoporosis, the theme is quite common in many books that I've read but I might be extrapolating the direct link between supplements and osteoporosis.
Perhaps science has disproved the long-standing Natural Hygiene stand against supplementation as being wasteful of both organic and monetary resources and I suspect that your link will address this possibilty. Lesson 39 - Food Supplements of TC Fry's Life Science course goes into great detail on this subject and this is one very telling reference:
"The giving of vitamins "therapeutically" or the introduction of drugs orally or by injection in the hope of favorably influencing the progress of a certain disease is a serious error because, in reality, we do not cure but simply suppress the curative actions already in progress within the system, these having been initiated by the organism itself. The suppression of the symptoms is what is normally accepted as a "cure," but, unfortunately, the cure represents only a temporary surcease until utility is recovered."2.17 Vitamins and "Cures"
This entry also relates the consumption of inorganic material with brittleness of bones:
"If a sufficient amount of inorganic material is taken into the system, it may settle out adding to the viscosity, the thickness, of the fluids to such an extent that, in time, the body will simply have to deposit the "sludge" wherever convenient, in arteries, in joints, around nerve synapses, in muscles causing an imbalance in the solid-fluid ratio, with a gradual stiffening and rigidity of muscles and brittleness of the bones taking place." 3.5 Inorganic Salts and Man
"Mineral supplements are of no benefit to the body because they are: 1) inorganic and 2) fragmented.
Because mineral supplements are inorganic, the body cannot assimilate or use them. In fact, the body must work harder to compensate for the inbalance created by ingesting these supplements. The body accelerates its eliminative activities and works hard to expel these foreign substances. This stimulation is often mistaken for the "beneficial action" of the supplement. Actually, the supplements are not beneficial—they are harmful—and they are inanimate and therefore incapable of acting (except chemically)."
"One has but to delve into a little biology, biochemistry and physiology to know that supplementation is not only impractical but a tragic commercially fostered hoax. There is no such thing as supplementation and there cannot be! There are foods and nonfoods. Supplements do not fill a single condition required of a food. That is the delusion of supplementation."
H M Shelton in his work Orthotrophy, basically says the same thing about supplements in this chapter Diet Reform vs. Supplemental Feeding. So are we Hygienists just holding on to misguided beliefs or are we relying on sound science?
My understanding is that even if supplements are derived from organic sources, the process of extracting them makes them inorganic for the very reason that they're no longer consumed in context with their plant sources nor derived second hand from eating freshly-killed animals. I know that several non-Hygienic experts refute this viewpoint saying that the body can use inorganic supplements but there are always experts willing to endorse a viewpoint regardless of the trail of diseased and dead bodies.
The body deals with inorganic substances by excreting them as much as possible, and neutralising the rest with our alkaline reserves, and when the reserves run out by extracting minerals from bones and teeth, primarily calcium, thus leading to osteoporosis. By this logic, continuous consumption of supplements must eventually deteriorate the bones and teeth.