The evidence suggests that bioidentical hormones do not have a completely different risk profile, but they may have a more favorable one in certain respects.
Compared with the regimen studied in the WHI (Premarin plus medroxyprogesterone acetate), transdermal 17β-estradiol combined with oral micronized progesterone is associated with:
a lower risk of venous thromboembolism,
less adverse impact on cardiovascular risk markers,
more favorable metabolic effects,
and observational evidence suggesting a lower breast cancer risk than combinations using synthetic progestins.
However, no form of systemic hormone therapy is completely risk-free. The balance of benefits and risks depends on the woman's age, time since menopause, dose, route of administration, duration of therapy, and individual risk factors. Many menopause specialists now consider low-dose transdermal estradiol plus micronized progesterone to be one of the more favorable systemic hormone therapy options for women who require treatment and have no contraindications.
Bioidentical hormone therapy (BHRT) does not have a completely different risk profile from conventional hormone therapy, but the risks do differ depending on the specific estrogen and progesterone used. The distinction is particularly important for oral conjugated equine estrogens (Premarin) and synthetic progestins such as medroxyprogesterone acetate (Provera) versus 17β-estradiol and micronized progesterone.
Bioidentical hormone therapy (BHRT) does not have a completely different risk profile from conventional hormone therapy, but the risks do differ depending on the specific estrogen and progesterone used. The distinction is particularly important for oral conjugated equine estrogens (Premarin) and synthetic progestins such as medroxyprogesterone acetate (Provera) versus 17β-estradiol and micronized progesterone.
Are you talking about bio identical hormone replacement or synthetic? I thought the risk factors are associated with synthetic and not bio identical (assuming patient is healthy weight, eats well, exercises regularly, no alcohol and no smoking etc).
Bioidentical hormone therapy (BHRT) does not have a completely different risk profile from conventional hormone therapy, but the risks do differ depending on the specific estrogen and progesterone used. The distinction is particularly important for oral conjugated equine estrogens (Premarin) and synthetic progestins such as medroxyprogesterone acetate (Provera) versus 17β-estradiol and micronized progesterone.
Its enough now. You have made our point. You clearly have no medical knowledge and ZERO understanding about cancer. You are being very disruptive and very rude.
Bioidentical hormone therapy (BHRT) does not have a completely different risk profile from conventional hormone therapy, but the risks do differ depending on the specific estrogen and progesterone used. The distinction is particularly important for oral conjugated equine estrogens (Premarin) and synthetic progestins such as medroxyprogesterone acetate (Provera) versus 17β-estradiol and micronized progesterone.
Your comments about HRT are incomplete and will be interpreted incorrectly. The only association of increased risk of breast cancer with HRT found in the WHI study was with an artificial oestrogen ( Premarin) and artificial progestin ( medroxyprogesterone acetate). Those women not given the MPA ( because they had no uterus) saw no increased risk and there was a suggestion of decreasing risk! Nowadays any good doctor will only prescribe body identical hormones for HRT, which is oestradiol and micronised progesterone ( or progesterone pessaries). These is no evidence that either of these is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Furthermore the benefits of replacing natural hormones are huge - reduced osteoporosis, reduced cardiovascular disease, reduced dementia, reduced urogenital syndrome of menopause that can cause UTIs leading to sepsis and death, reduced anxiety and depression, not to mention reduced musculoskeletal symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, sleep loss etc! I suggest you contact Dr Louise Newson here in the UK who is an expert in this area. She has a website, an app ( balance menopause), and many videos on YouTube of her podcast and Q&As. She is friends with Dr Kelly Casperson if you want an American, but Kelly is a urologist not a menopause specialist.
There is also no evidence that the mammogram screening programme prolongs life, please research that a little better!
Natural hormones are very anti inflammatory and so the association between prolonged lifetime exposure to oestrogen and breast cancer I suspect is confounded. Women with early menarche and late menopause are more likely to have longer exposure to artificial hormones in contraceptives which are associated with an increased risk. Why does having more children lower the risk of breast cancer when the levels of oestradiol during pregnancy are sky high?
But this is a wonderful helpful article, clearly illustratedand easy to understand. Helpful! Thank you once again. But get up to date on hormone replacement and bioidentical vs synthetic.
Respectfully--even cumulatively--I suspect none of those risk factors mentioned come close to the impact of a lack of Iodine. Just search "Iodine and Breast Cancer" on PubMed, for instance.
Wonder your thoughts on widespread Iodine deficiency/insufficiency being a factor in breast (and other cancers) occurrence, and replacement efficacy in treatment? Interesting to read and hear Dr. David Brownstein speak positively about it.
Its enough now. You have made your point. You clearly have no medical knowledge and ZERO understanding about cancer. You are being very disruptive and very rude.
The evidence suggests that bioidentical hormones do not have a completely different risk profile, but they may have a more favorable one in certain respects.
Compared with the regimen studied in the WHI (Premarin plus medroxyprogesterone acetate), transdermal 17β-estradiol combined with oral micronized progesterone is associated with:
a lower risk of venous thromboembolism,
less adverse impact on cardiovascular risk markers,
more favorable metabolic effects,
and observational evidence suggesting a lower breast cancer risk than combinations using synthetic progestins.
However, no form of systemic hormone therapy is completely risk-free. The balance of benefits and risks depends on the woman's age, time since menopause, dose, route of administration, duration of therapy, and individual risk factors. Many menopause specialists now consider low-dose transdermal estradiol plus micronized progesterone to be one of the more favorable systemic hormone therapy options for women who require treatment and have no contraindications.
Bioidentical hormone therapy (BHRT) does not have a completely different risk profile from conventional hormone therapy, but the risks do differ depending on the specific estrogen and progesterone used. The distinction is particularly important for oral conjugated equine estrogens (Premarin) and synthetic progestins such as medroxyprogesterone acetate (Provera) versus 17β-estradiol and micronized progesterone.
Bioidentical hormone therapy (BHRT) does not have a completely different risk profile from conventional hormone therapy, but the risks do differ depending on the specific estrogen and progesterone used. The distinction is particularly important for oral conjugated equine estrogens (Premarin) and synthetic progestins such as medroxyprogesterone acetate (Provera) versus 17β-estradiol and micronized progesterone.
Yes.. same thing.
Are you talking about bio identical hormone replacement or synthetic? I thought the risk factors are associated with synthetic and not bio identical (assuming patient is healthy weight, eats well, exercises regularly, no alcohol and no smoking etc).
Bioidentical hormone therapy (BHRT) does not have a completely different risk profile from conventional hormone therapy, but the risks do differ depending on the specific estrogen and progesterone used. The distinction is particularly important for oral conjugated equine estrogens (Premarin) and synthetic progestins such as medroxyprogesterone acetate (Provera) versus 17β-estradiol and micronized progesterone.
Its enough now. You have made our point. You clearly have no medical knowledge and ZERO understanding about cancer. You are being very disruptive and very rude.
Bioidentical hormone therapy (BHRT) does not have a completely different risk profile from conventional hormone therapy, but the risks do differ depending on the specific estrogen and progesterone used. The distinction is particularly important for oral conjugated equine estrogens (Premarin) and synthetic progestins such as medroxyprogesterone acetate (Provera) versus 17β-estradiol and micronized progesterone.
How about the book:
Dressed To Kill: The Link Between
Breast Cancer and Bras
By Sydney Ross Singer and Soma Grismaijer
The numbers are stronger than the link between smoking and lung cancer. Bras disrupt the lymphatic drainage system. Take a look.
Whether that is true or not — switching to an undershirt, years ago, instead of bra improved my health. Recommend it to all women.
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/how-your-clothes-and-their-materials
Bioidentical hormones have a completely different risk profile than synthetic progestin and Premarin type estrogens.
Bioidentical can decrease cancer risk and greatly improves quality of life.
The Landmark study that demonized all hormone use has now been debunked. A generation or 2 of women have been cheated by more medical malpractice
Your comments about HRT are incomplete and will be interpreted incorrectly. The only association of increased risk of breast cancer with HRT found in the WHI study was with an artificial oestrogen ( Premarin) and artificial progestin ( medroxyprogesterone acetate). Those women not given the MPA ( because they had no uterus) saw no increased risk and there was a suggestion of decreasing risk! Nowadays any good doctor will only prescribe body identical hormones for HRT, which is oestradiol and micronised progesterone ( or progesterone pessaries). These is no evidence that either of these is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Furthermore the benefits of replacing natural hormones are huge - reduced osteoporosis, reduced cardiovascular disease, reduced dementia, reduced urogenital syndrome of menopause that can cause UTIs leading to sepsis and death, reduced anxiety and depression, not to mention reduced musculoskeletal symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, sleep loss etc! I suggest you contact Dr Louise Newson here in the UK who is an expert in this area. She has a website, an app ( balance menopause), and many videos on YouTube of her podcast and Q&As. She is friends with Dr Kelly Casperson if you want an American, but Kelly is a urologist not a menopause specialist.
There is also no evidence that the mammogram screening programme prolongs life, please research that a little better!
Natural hormones are very anti inflammatory and so the association between prolonged lifetime exposure to oestrogen and breast cancer I suspect is confounded. Women with early menarche and late menopause are more likely to have longer exposure to artificial hormones in contraceptives which are associated with an increased risk. Why does having more children lower the risk of breast cancer when the levels of oestradiol during pregnancy are sky high?
But this is a wonderful helpful article, clearly illustratedand easy to understand. Helpful! Thank you once again. But get up to date on hormone replacement and bioidentical vs synthetic.
Respectfully--even cumulatively--I suspect none of those risk factors mentioned come close to the impact of a lack of Iodine. Just search "Iodine and Breast Cancer" on PubMed, for instance.
Excellent post Dr. Marik.
Wonder your thoughts on widespread Iodine deficiency/insufficiency being a factor in breast (and other cancers) occurrence, and replacement efficacy in treatment? Interesting to read and hear Dr. David Brownstein speak positively about it.
Its enough now. You have made your point. You clearly have no medical knowledge and ZERO understanding about cancer. You are being very disruptive and very rude.
You mentioned “combined estrogen‑progestin” being a negative factor. What about estrogen with progesterone?
Thank you Dr. Marik .