Rarely is there a distinction between bio identical hormone replacement therapies and other commercial hormones which may be equine estrogens (Premarin) plus a man made progesterone like substance or progestin (Provera or medroxyprogesterone). The studies that reveal the increased risks for breast cancer, dementia, heart disease and stroke are with the use of equine estrogens and medroxyprogesterone. These studies do necessarily correlate with the use of natural micronized progesterone and bio identical estrogens in the combination normally found in the body but at much lower doses. There are always risks with the use of any hormones but you should educate yourself regarding the differences between bioidentical hormone replacement and PremPro. A wonderful book that has all the latest information is "Stay Young and Sexy With BioIdentical Hormone Replacement" by Jonathan Wright, MD - available on Amazon.com. I is very comprehensive, easy to read and understand. Another really good book is "Keeping ABreast" by Dr. Mahmud - also available on Amazon.
Debra Blaker, FNPof OR10:03PM June 18, 2012
In full disclosure, I’m an advocate of natural products so my first inclination is the cheer the panel’s recommendation. It has been my read of the last decade of literature as well. However, it is oversimplified to come to the conclusion that HRT is good or HRT is bad. That binary way of thinking is ruinous. I strongly believe there is a definite place for Hormone Replacement Therapy. I also believe it cannot be used as the panacea it once was thought to be. For the rest of the post, click here http://naturalhealthint.blogspot.com/2012/06/updated-evidence-on-menopause-hormone.html
Dr. Corey Schulerof MN11:09PM June 05, 2012
So glad they are distinguishing between estrogen only and estrogen with progrstin hormaone use and the absense of a uterus. These are details that were mis-construed when the Women's Health study first came out. Dr.'s misinterpreted results and many women who were on estrogen only (without a uterus) were taken off their estrogen and suffered horribly hotflashes and insomnia etc. Luckily, I am a nurse and read the report in detail and have a wonderful OB/GYN physician who did too. I am 56 and still on estradiol (went into menopause @ 36 & have no uterus). I only take 3 tabs/week now of 1mg and that seems to "hold me" but I get moody. I am doing OK.
Sueof MI6:31PM June 03, 2012
Yes the challange, in the complex decisions needed to manage the health of our women, to optimize evidence base health in all the systems and to maintain their quality of life.
Janet Maxson FNP, PhDof ND1:45AM June 02, 2012
As a person who takes bio identical estrogen/progestine after menopause, I can only say that I am furious that there are no other drugs available to women to assist with the negative changes to our body. Many of which are life altering. I am not talking about hot flashes. It is interesting to me that males have many drugs for impotence and even baldness, but women's choices are limited and appear to be life threatening. I keep asking my ob/gyn but she just shakes her head. Why are the pharmaceutical companies not addressing this need?
Mikel 12of OH1:02PM June 01, 2012
Hmmm....and what were the controls for these studies? What types of estrogen/progesterone were evaluated? Was the estrogen your basic derived from the urine of pregnant horses or was it bio-identical? When were the women started on HRT therapy? Was it post-menopause or during the peri-menopausal phase? How were the hormones administered - by mouth, topically or by implant?
There is much information missing in this article.
Tommy Mommyof TX7:30PM May 29, 2012
glad to see someone putting the brakes on all this new runaway nonsense that HRT is beneficial and risk-free if you take it the right time, etc. NORTH AMERICAN MENOPAUSE SOCIETY and the INTERNATIONAL MENOPAUSE SOCIETY have been very cavalier when it comes to recommending these drugs, slamming the conclusive results of clinical research as somehow not applying to this or that group of women.
what's funny is that this "timing hypothesis" never existed before WHI. it was only when experts, many of whom are still paid by the pharmaceutical companies, didn't like the studies' results that they contorted the data to fit their preconceived notions. bottom line: estrogen is risky. it may prevent fractures, but at the cost of more strokes, blood clots, and dementia.
Reader Comments
Back to article
Debra Blaker, FNP of OR 10:03PM June 18, 2012
Dr. Corey Schuler of MN 11:09PM June 05, 2012
Sue of MI 6:31PM June 03, 2012
Janet Maxson FNP, PhD of ND 1:45AM June 02, 2012
Mikel 12 of OH 1:02PM June 01, 2012
Tommy Mommy of TX 7:30PM May 29, 2012
wr of CA 6:25PM May 28, 2012