TASK FORCE TO POSTMENOPAUSAL WOMEN
Hormone replacement poses risks
By Jennifer LaRue Huget SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON POST
- WASHINGTON — A national board of doctors recommended yesterday that postmenopausal women not take hormone-replacement therapy to prevent chronic disease, as the health risks that HRT poses outweigh its likely benefits.
The statement, from the United States Preventive Services Task Force, confirms a similar recommendation the panel made in 2005. The statement was posted on the online edition of the Annals of Internal Medicine.
- The task force’s review of research published since 2005 showed that combined estrogen and progestin therapy after menopause reduces the risk of bone fractures. But women taking that combined HRT do not decrease their risk of heart disease, and they are actually at increased risk of breast cancer, stroke, blood clots, gallbladder disease, dementia and urinary incontinence.
A Task Force fact sheet posted on the group’s website said that for every 10,000 women who use combined therapy each year, 46 may avoid a fracture. But eight may develop breast cancer, nine may have a stroke, nine may develop a serious blood clot in their lungs, 12 may develop a serious blood clot in their legs, 20 may develop gallbladder disease, 22 may develop dementia and 872 may develop urinary incontinence.
The group said it was addressing only the use of HRT for chronic disease. The recommendation, it said, does not apply to the use of HRT for managing symptoms of menopause such as hot flashes and vaginal dryness. Nor does it apply to women younger than 50 who have had a hysterectomy.
“If a woman is miserable with symptoms of menopause,” said Michael Le-Fevre, one of two vice-chairmen of the task force, “we encourage them to talk with their health-care provider” to determine whether the benefits of HRT outweigh the risks.
- The task force is an independent panel of primary-care providers who are experts in prevention and evidence-based medicine; they issue recommendations to guide primary-care clinicians and health systems.
The findings echo an earlier report. In 2002, the federally funded Women’s Health Initiative found that hormones’ benefits were outweighed by risks, including heart disease and breast cancer. After the report, hormone use plummeted by more than half.
In 2010 the Initiative found that women who used HRT were more likely to have tumors that appeared to be larger and were more likely to have spread to their lymph nodes. But most important, their risk of death appeared elevated.
It’s true, I may be slipping a little more than I thought in that I DID post Matt Monarch’s message twice recently – on the Metabolic Therapeutic Enzymes. I dunno, maybe I should think about hanging it up. For God’s sake, I’m 83 and this can’t go on forever, but I do love my blog as it gives me pleasure and so many wonderful people come here to see and share. So the point is, I do know that I asked you to see Dr Jonathan Wright’s interview with Dr Mercola on HRT.
I don’t need this stuff as I’m way past it and never needed it, but am aware how important it is. Since so many women have given this help up due to the risk-benefit thing, unless you’ve had some nut-case like me beseeching you to go and hear Dr Wright and take it to heart, well, you could be missing out on a whole lotta help you’re entitled to. The (HRT) hormone replacement treatment is an excellent idea. It did take time and trial and error to perfect, but it IS available to those of you who are being troubled with this hormonal phase of life. Dr Wright has been doing this since 1982-3. It works. Will not harm you like pharmaceuticals do as his are entirely “bio-identical” in other words – just the way nature does it. I won’t go into that, you can go hear it yourself (6-06-12). He recounts the benefits and why it works so well. It may take the established medical complex another 30 – 40 years to accept this.
But I will touch on another aspect which I read about in Dr Wright’s monthly newsletter which in my opinion is so relevant. This is a paid subscription and I don’t think it would be acceptable for me to lay it all out, but I intend to suggest a point or two. The October ’12 issue has I0dine 101, a splendid article. Iodine deficiency is discussed in detail and the fact that the entire body is dependent on iodine for optimum function. He goes a great deal into why America is so deficient in general and women in particular and the high incidence of breast cancer relating to this deficiency. I would strongly recommend going to the site http://www.WrightNewsletter.com, subscribe if you can or at least inquire about getting access to this information because of own need and interest. Tho I am sure it wouldn’t do any good at all, you may use my name or blog as a reference. Good luck to you. Jan)