Guest guest Posted August 11, 2003 Report Share Posted August 11, 2003 " askbillsardi.com " The hormone trap Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:22:02 -0700 E-HEALTH REPORT Knowledge of Health, Inc. Investigative health reporter Bill Sardi answers the big question for menopausal women: What should be used instead of hormone replacement therapy? Will it be the new aromatase inhibitors soon to be widely promoted by the pharmaceutical companies, or will a tablespoon of flaxseeds do just as well? And, is there really a cure for breast cancer? Read all about it at www.askbillsardi.com to read entire article. Approx. 3 pages of 22 pages available. 1 | How To Find Your Way Out of the Hormone Trap Copyright Bill Sardi August 2003 www.askbillsardi.com London Times, Wednesday, July 10th, 2002 " The entire picture of routine postmenopausal estrogen therapy is in a state of complete confusion. We must proceed with circumspection and caution. We need less passion, fewer hypotheses, and more facts. " -- GS Berger and WC Fowler Jr, Journal of Reproductive Medicine, April, 1977 Introduction • Hormone replacement therapy, widely prescribed for decades, is now falling into disfavor. 5000 women each day join the ranks of the 40 million American women already in menopause. Only a small percentage of women continue to take HRT, mostly for symptoms of hot flashes and night sweats and " retaining beauty " rather than any health benefits. What now for these women? How will they avoid bone loss, breast cancer, uterine cancer? • With millions of dollars spent on research, there is still no preventive measure for breast cancer, only treatment after it has been diagnosed, which consists of estrogen-blocking tamoxifen after conventional surgical, chemo or radiation therapy. But tamoxifen itself promotes endometrial cancer and turns on every woman and promotes breast cancer so it cannot be taken for more than five years. Has the wonder drug tamoxifen had its day? • New aromatase inhibitor drugs, which stop the production of estrogen in fatty tissues, rather than block its entry into cells like tamoxifen, are being widely studied because they prolong tumor remissions more so than tamoxifen. But in the long run aromatase inhibitors only delay the inevitable for women with breast cancer. They don’t reduce mortality rates and they may accelerate bone loss and mental depression. • This pushes American women into the unguided use of phytoestrogens, plant, seeds, beans and herbs that have estrogen-like molecules. But are they any safer or effective? • Why does crushed whole flaxseed exhibit unusual health benefits for the heart, kidneys, bones, prostate and breast tissues? What is it that whole flaxseeds provide that other herbal phytoestrogens do not, which produces such incredible health benefits? Read the following three-part report. How To Find Your Way Out of the Hormone Trap What are women to do now that hormone replacement therapy has no proven health benefits and slightly increases risks for disease? By Bill Sardi 2 | How To Find Your Way Out of the Hormone Trap Copyright Bill Sardi August 2003 www.askbillsardi.com PART I: Hormone Replacement Therapy So much has been said about hormone replacement therapy and the state of breast cancer treatment, yet so many questions still remain to be answered. This limited report will never be able to answer all the remaining questions American women have about supplemental hormones. But it may provide a clearer picture of what is really going on. And it may, for the first time, give interested readers a valid scenario for the prevention of breast cancer altogether. For almost three decades American women have had estrogen and progesterone, pharmaceutically extracted from horse mare urine, prescribed for the change of life, first to calm the hot flashes and mood issues associated with the change of life, and second to allegedly improve bone health, reduce cardiovascular risk and inhibit the onset of breast cancer. In 1976 Consumer Reports indicated the use of hormone replacement had almost tripled from 1965 to 1976 and the incidence of cancer rose in women over 50 were in high-socioeconomic groups, the groups most likely to use estrogen therapy. Estrogen therapy was supposed to be restricted solely to women with vaginal shrinkage or a few other narrow indications. Consumer Reports said: " Earlier reports suggested estrogen might protect against breast cancer; most recent studies suggest the opposite. " [Consumer Reports 41: 642-45, 1976] Doctors weren’t there to step into the breech and protect American women. They acquiesced to the pharmaceutical companies because hormone replacement therapy filled their appointment books and the greatest yet-to-be-proven medical experiment was underway. Phytoestrogens Dismissed In the meantime, non-prescription, plant-based estrogens (called phytoestrogens) were cast aside and mis-characterized. A 1978 report said phytoestrogens " can markedly enhance tumor cell proliferation. " [Endocrinology 103: 1860-67, 1978] Of course, this conclusion was drawn from test-tube studies where cells were flooded with plant estrogens rather than being given in doses commonly found in raw plantfood diets. One of the biases revealed in animal and test-tube studies is that they may utilize very high, if not unobtainable, levels of plant estrogens which would then induce the same side effects as estrogen. In one such study, 300 milligrams of black cohosh per kilogram (2.2 pounds) of body weight was given to rodents. That is equivalent to nearly 22,000 milligrams of black cohosh in an adult human, or 1100 black cohosh pills. [J Medicinal Food 4: 171-78, 2001] So doctors proceeded to prescribe millions of American women pharmaceutical-grade estrogen, and while they conceded estrogen replacement increased the risk of endometrial cancer, this risk was dismissed by prescribing progesterone and advising women on hormone replacement to come in for frequent checkups. [Postgraduate Medicine 62: 73-79, 1977] All the while, doctors were saying food supplements like flaxseed, black cohosh and red clover were unproven, even " snake oil. " The Bomb Drops on Hormone Replacement Therapy For decades doctors continued to prescribe hormones to postmenopausal women under the assumption they improved health for postmenopausal women. But after years of customary use it was time for a scientific review. Did hormone replacement therapy really improve health? The bomb dropped in July of 2002 with reports that hormone replacement slightly increased the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular events like strokes. At the time the news report hit the American public, 6 million women were taking these prescribed hormones. With the news that hormone replacement therapy posed health risks, doctors were so overwhelmed by phone calls from millions of women that they simply shut off their office phones. Then just 11 months later American women were hearing news stories about hormone replacement therapy increasing their risk for being mentally demented in their later years of life. Among 2229 postmenopausal women who took estrogen plus progesterone replacement pills beginning in 1996 thru 2002, 40 were diagnosed with probable dementia compared with just 21 in a group of 2303 women who did not use hormone pills. The relative risk doubled among the hormone users. The absolute risk was low, 1.8 percent among hormone users, just 0.9 percent among non-users. Among the 6 million American women now taking hormone replacement therapy this could increase the number of cases of Alzheimer’s disease by about 13,800 annually. [J Am Med Assoc 289: 2651-62, 2003] The increased risk was still small but the point had been made. A small increased risk weighed against no potential benefits meant the widespread use of hormone pills had to be re-evaluated. In March of 2003 the FDA approved a lower dose of Prempro, the most popular hormone replacement pill, due to concerns over side effects. Imagine trying to be a sales representative for Wyeth Labs, the producer of Prempro. By May of 2003 postmenopausal women were being told still more bad news. Here is what Judy Siegel-Itzkovich of the Jerusalem Post had to say about hormone replacement therapy. It can’t be said any better than this: " Middle-aged women should think twice before taking combined progestinestrogen pills to alleviate their hot flashes, night sweats, and other disturbing menopausal symptoms, according to an analysis of data from last year’s US Woman’s Health Institute study on the effects of hormone replacement therapy. What pharmaceutical companies have pushed for decades as a ‘preventive fountain of youth’ for menopausal women, now seems to increase the risk of breast cancer even when taken for only one year. " [Jerusalem Post June 25, 2003; J Am Med Assoc 289: 3243-53, 3254-63, 2003] With the negative scientific studies, the use of estrogen therapy in Canada has dropped an astonishing 32 percent from 2001 to 2002. [J Am Med Assoc 289: 3241-42, 2003] But statistically the increased risk for breast cancer was small, and some women simply didn’t want to face a return to all those hot flashes and mood problems. So a few million women keep taking the pills. And for good reason, at least in the minds of those who take hormone replacement. As a report in New York Times so aptly said, " Some women said they could never give up the pills, not because they needed them for severe menopause symptoms but because they were convinced that estrogen prevented wrinkles or because it staved off mental fogginess. " [New York Times July 5, 2003] " Some women said they could never give up the pills, not because they needed them for severe menopause symptoms but because they were convinced that estrogen prevented wrinkles or because it staved off mental fogginess. " [New York Times July 5, 2003] Women have been conditioned to accept menopause as a period of life where life-long medication with hormones is normal. Although there have been many warnings against the use of hormone replacement, " they have either been ignored or trivialized. " [int J Health Services 31: 769-92, 2001] Not counting the cost of doctor’s office visits, hormone replacement pills cost nearly $2 billion in the USA annually. Even more bombs dropped on hormone replacement therapy (HRT) in August of 2003. First the New England Journal of Medicine reported after five years that HRT (estrogin + progestin) ncreased the risk of a heart attack by a relative 81 percent. [New Eng J Med 239: 523-34, 2003] In the same week the British medical journal The Lancet reported that HRT increased the risk for breast cancer by 5 per 1000 users which resulted in about 20,000 extra cases of breast cancer in Britain over the past decade. [The Lancet 362: August 9, 2003] Incredibly, a spokesperson for one of the hormone drug companies responded to this study by saying: " The representation of these findings may cause unnecessary alarm and distress to some women taking HRT. These findings do not necessitate any urgent changes to a woman’s treatment. " [The Guardian, Aug. 8, 2003] What will American women do now as menopause approaches and they experience all those symptoms of night sweats, hot flashes and mood changes? It’s quite a dilemma since there are about 5000 more American women who reach menopause, the permanent end of menstruation, each day, added to the 40 million who are already in their menopausal years. Reactions to menopause appear to be culturally conditioned in females. Mayan women from Guatemala Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 Fwd: The hormone trap " askbillsardi.com " The hormone trap Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:22:02 -0700 E-HEALTH REPORT Knowledge of Health, Inc. Investigative health reporter Bill Sardi answers the big question for menopausal women: What should be used instead of hormone replacement therapy? Will it be the new aromatase inhibitors soon to be widely promoted by thepharmaceutical companies, or will a tablespoon of flaxseeds do just as well?And, is there really a cure for breast cancer? Read all about it at www.askbillsardi.com to read entire article. Approx. 3 pages of 22 pages available. 1 | How To Find Your Way Out of the Hormone Trap Copyright Bill Sardi August 2003 www.askbillsardi.com London Times, Wednesday, July 10th, 2002 " The entire picture of routine postmenopausal estrogen therapy is in a state of complete confusion. We must proceed with circumspection and caution. We need less passion, fewer hypotheses, and more facts. " -- GS Berger and WC Fowler Jr, Journal of Reproductive Medicine, April, 1977 Introduction • Hormone replacement therapy, widely prescribed for decades, is now falling into disfavor. 5000 women each day join the ranks of the 40 million American women already in menopause. Only a small percentage of women continue to take HRT, mostly for symptoms of hot flashes and night sweats and " retaining beauty " rather than any health benefits. What now for these women? How will they avoid bone loss, breast cancer, uterine cancer? • With millions of dollars spent on research, there is still no preventive measure for breast cancer, only treatment after it has been diagnosed, which consists of estrogen-blocking tamoxifen after conventional surgical, chemo or radiation therapy. But tamoxifen itself promotes endometrial cancer and turns on every woman and promotes breast cancer so it cannot be taken for more than five years. Has the wonder drug tamoxifen had its day? • New aromatase inhibitor drugs, which stop the production of estrogen in fatty tissues, rather than block its entry into cells like tamoxifen, are being widely studied because they prolong tumor remissions more so than tamoxifen. But in the long run aromatase inhibitors only delay the inevitable for women with breast cancer. They don't reduce mortality rates and they may accelerate bone loss and mental depression. • This pushes American women into the use of phytoestrogens, plant, seeds, beans and herbs that have estrogen-like molecules. • Why does crushed whole flaxseed exhibit unusual health benefits for the heart, kidneys, bones, prostate and breast tissues? What is it that whole flaxseeds provide that other herbal phytoestrogens do not, which produces such incredible health benefits? Read the following three-part report. How To Find Your Way Out of the Hormone Trap What are women to do now that hormone replacement therapy has no proven health benefits and slightly increases risks for disease? By Bill Sardi 2 | How To Find Your Way Out of the Hormone Trap Copyright Bill Sardi August 2003 www.askbillsardi.com PART I: Hormone Replacement Therapy So much has been said about hormone replacement therapy and the state of breast cancer treatment, yet so many questions still remain to be answered. This limited report will never be able to answer all the remaining questions American women have about supplemental hormones. But it may provide a clearer picture of what is really going on. And it may, for the first time, give interested readers a valid scenario for the prevention of breast cancer altogether. For almost three decades American women have had estrogen and progesterone, pharmaceutically extracted from horse mare urine, prescribed for the change of life, first to calm the hot flashes and mood issues associated with the change of life, and second to allegedly improve bone health, reduce cardiovascular risk and inhibit the onset of breast cancer. In 1976 Consumer Reports indicated the use of hormone replacement had almost tripled from 1965 to 1976 and the incidence of cancer rose in women over 50 were in high-socioeconomic groups, the groups most likely to use estrogen therapy. Estrogen therapy was supposed to be restricted solely to women with vaginal shrinkage or a few other narrow indications. Consumer Reports said: " Earlier reports suggested estrogen might protect against breast cancer; most recent studies suggest the opposite. " [Consumer Reports 41: 642-45, 1976] Doctors weren't there to step into the breech and protect American women. They acquiesced to the pharmaceutical companies because hormone replacement therapy filled their appointment books and the greatest yet-to-be-proven medical experiment was underway. Phytoestrogens Dismissed In the meantime, non-prescription, plant-based estrogens (called phytoestrogens) were cast aside and mis-characterized. A 1978 report said phytoestrogens " can markedly enhance tumor cell proliferation. " [Endocrinology 103: 1860-67, 1978] Of course, this conclusion was drawn from test-tube studies where cells were flooded with plant estrogens rather than being given in doses commonly found in raw plantfood diets. One of the biases revealed in animal and test-tube studies is that they may utilize very high, if not unobtainable, levels of plant estrogens which would then induce the same side effects as estrogen. In one such study, 300 milligrams of black cohosh per kilogram (2.2 pounds) of body weight was given to rodents. That is equivalent to nearly 22,000 milligrams of black cohosh in an adult human, or 1100 black cohosh pills. [J Medicinal Food 4: 171-78, 2001] So doctors proceeded to prescribe millions of American women pharmaceutical-grade estrogen, and while they conceded estrogen replacement increased the risk of endometrial cancer, this risk was dismissed by prescribing progesterone and advising women on hormone replacement to come in for frequent checkups. [Postgraduate Medicine 62: 73-79, 1977] All the while, doctors were saying food supplements like flaxseed, black cohosh and red clover were unproven, even " snake oil. " The Bomb Drops on Hormone Replacement Therapy-- For decades doctors continued to prescribe hormones to postmenopausal women under the assumption they improved health for postmenopausal women. But after years of customary use it was time for a scientific review. Did hormone replacement therapy really improve health? The bomb dropped in July of 2002 with reports that hormone replacement slightly increased the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular events like strokes. At the time the news report hit the American public, 6 million women were taking these prescribed hormones. With the news that hormone replacement therapy posed health risks, doctors were so overwhelmed by phone calls from millions of women that they simply shut off their office phones. Then just 11 months later American women were hearing news stories about hormone replacement therapy increasing their risk for being mentally demented in their later years of life. Among 2229 postmenopausal women who took estrogen plus progesterone replacement pills beginning in 1996 thru 2002, 40 were diagnosed with probable dementia compared with just 21 in a group of 2303 women who did not use hormone pills. The relative risk doubled among the hormone users. The absolute risk was low, 1.8 percent among hormone users, just 0.9 percent among non-users. Among the 6 million American women now taking hormone replacement therapy this could increase the number of cases of Alzheimer's disease by about 13,800 annually. [J Am Med Assoc 289: 2651-62, 2003] The increased risk was still small but the point had been made. A small increased risk weighed against no potential benefits meant the widespread use of hormone pills had to be re-evaluated. In March of 2003 the FDA approved a lower dose of Prempro, the most popular hormone replacement pill, due to concerns over side effects. Imagine trying to be a sales representative for Wyeth Labs, the producer of Prempro. By May of 2003 postmenopausal women were being told still more bad news. Here is what Judy Siegel-Itzkovich of the Jerusalem Post had to say about hormone replacement therapy. It can't be said any better than this: " Middle-aged women should think twice before taking combined progestinestrogen pills to alleviate their hot flashes, night sweats, and other disturbing menopausal symptoms, according to an analysis of data from last year's US Woman's Health Institute study on the effects of hormone replacement therapy. What pharmaceutical companies have pushed for decades as a `preventive fountain of youth' for menopausal women, now seems to increase the risk of breast cancer even when taken for only one year. " [Jerusalem Post June 25, 2003; J Am Med Assoc 289: 3243-53, 3254-63, 2003] With the negative scientific studies, the use of estrogen therapy in Canada has dropped an astonishing 32 percent from 2001 to 2002. [J Am Med Assoc 289: 3241-42, 2003] But statistically the increased risk for breast cancer was small, and some women simply didn't want to face a return to all those hot flashes and mood problems. So a few million women keep taking the pills. And for good reason, at least in the minds of those who take hormone replacement. As a report in New York Times so aptly said, " Some women said they could never give up the pills, not because they needed them for severe menopause symptoms but because they were convinced that estrogen prevented wrinkles or because it staved off mental fogginess. " [New York Times July 5, 2003] " Some women said they could never give up the pills, not because they needed them for severe menopause symptoms but because they were convinced that estrogen prevented wrinkles or because it staved off mental fogginess. " [New York Times July 5, 2003] Women have been conditioned to accept menopause as a period of life where life-long medication with hormones is normal. Although there have been many warnings against the use of hormone replacement, " they have either been ignored or trivialized. " [int J Health Services 31: 769-92, 2001] Not counting the cost of doctor's office visits, hormone replacement pills cost nearly $2 billion in the USA annually. Even more bombs dropped on hormone replacement therapy (HRT) in August of 2003. First the New England Journal of Medicine reported after five years that HRT (estrogin + progestin) ncreased the risk of a heart attack by a relative 81 percent. [New Eng J Med 239: 523-34, 2003] In the same week the British medical journal The Lancet reported that HRT increased the risk for breast cancer by 5 per 1000 users which resulted in about 20,000 extra cases of breast cancer in Britain over the past decade. [The Lancet 362: August 9, 2003] Incredibly, a spokesperson for one of the hormone drug companies responded to this study by saying: " The representation of these findings may cause unnecessary alarm and distress to some women taking HRT. These findings do not necessitate any urgent changes to a woman's treatment. " [The Guardian, Aug. 8, 2003] What will American women do now as menopause approaches and they experience all those symptoms of night sweats, hot flashes and mood changes? It's quite a dilemma since there are about 5000 more American women who reach menopause, the permanent end of menstruation, each day, added to the 40 million who are already in their menopausal years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.