Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sparrow]

Shadyglade, in this very thead!

..someone quoted Prof Studds.

Okay, if the research is rubbish my same question is why panic.

Isn't the said Professor a private consultant.  No conflict of interest then!!

Doesn't the post by Dr. Currie put it into perspective??

[orrla]

So this is what everyone is saying, including myself.

Don't panick!

[Sparrow]

Shadyglade, in this very thead!

..someone quoted Prof Studds.

Okay, if the research is rubbish my same question is why panic.

Isn't the said Professor a private consultant.  No conflict of interest then!!




Doesn't the post by Dr. Currie put it into perspective??

As any news editor will know too well, that article will cause widespread panic. Look at the reactions on this forum today. As soon as anyone says there is a definite link between HRT use and breast cancer, anxiety will ensue.
Not everyone knows that the findings need to be pulled apart and examined precisely to understand that alcohol use and obesity are bigger cancer risk factors. Newspapers and news stories in the media spread fear very efficiently – the headline alone does just that.

Does that mean you would rather not know??

Ignore the article and read the research paper.

[Sparrow]

I'm lucky in that I don't take any prescription medication.  However, if I did I would want all the information I could get.  But having said that this research shows an increased risk of 1 per 50 woman as a worse case sinario.  So if you balance that with the benefits I would say it is of concideration but not panic.

Nothing else I can say really.

[Hurdity]

Just for clarification the Women's Health Initiative is based in US and it was that group that carried out the controversial HRT trials, the results of which led to much of the current (mis)information on the effect of HRT and cancer risk. It was this particularly which was discredited for a number of reasons, but because it was a randomised controlled trial it was originally given a lot of credence. The Oxford Group carried out the Million Women Study - I don't know much about this but was an long-term observational study just using questionnaires I think, not a trial, but also published around the same time. Information is still being collected. Because it is not a trial then again no definite conclusions about cause and effect can be drawn even though data are interesting.

Also re the timing - I agree it is very unfortunate and likely to scare a lot of women into stopping HRT at a time when it's difficult to get hold of. However it takes some time for a paper to be published from the time of submission as it has to be peer-reviewed. Having looked at the Lancet website this morning there can be a fast-track process where a paper can be reviewed and published within 4 weeks so if this process was followed for this paper then it presumably was submitted a month ago - possibly before the recent headlines about HRT shortages?

Like someone said earlier in the thread, my husband also was expressing sympathy towards me as he brought me my morning cuppa having heard the headlines this morning, saying I might get breast cancer (which I might anyway), and he's a scientist. After I explained to him in a befuddled half awake state after looking briefly at the Lancet paper he understood what I was getting at.

Yes Mirena does provide continuous progestogen at approx the same rate probably as a Femseven patch but probably less than tablet HRT. However in the short term I really wouldn't worry and as others have said - get slim, take exercise, eat well, stop smoking, cut the booze and you will at least be able to take HRT knowing you are minimising other risks and protecting yourself from other long term conditions.

I shall continue to use my oestrogen patch and bio-identical progesterone taken on a long cycle (ie minimising the progesterone), and be vigilant about any adverse symptoms or unexpected bleeding.

Rock and a hard place come to mind as we contemplate living into our 90's - the lucky ones.

Hurdity  x

[Katejo]

My cynical side suspects that our attention has been drawn to this new study now because of the shortages of patches!      On the FB VA group, others have suggested exactly the same. They got there before I did. I have just been to the GP for something unrelated but couldn't resist the chance to ask about an alternative to Evorel Conti if I can't get more until next year. (no answer given) and then suggest this.
GP looked slightly surprised but didn't say anything to reject my suggestion.
I'd like to hear what the author of "Oestrogen Matters" thinks of this latest study.

[Hurdity]

I was trying not to be cynical Katejo but it is difficult in the circumstances!! The press love a sensational headline don't they?

Hurdity x

[MicheleMaBelle]

Well said Hurdity.
We all know HRT carries a degree of risk, it might turn out that the risk is now greater ( but still small ) or just the same and that we can minimise risk by making good lifestyle choices.
I'm going to stay on mine for the time being but thinking of coming off it after my holiday and this has absolutely nothing to do with this latest scare.

[orrla]

Whichever was first Hurdity, it is us older women who are being hit!... again.

Think of all 45+ walking into Meno blind unaware of what's ahead, and who saw today's headline!

I have enough of Evorel Conti till end of January. I can only pray they'll sort the issue by that time, and sympathise with all who are going through difficulties right now.

Articles like today's one do not help!

[Katejo]

Well said Hurdity.
We all know HRT carries a degree of risk, it might turn out that the risk is now greater ( but still small ) or just the same and that we can minimise risk by making good lifestyle choices.
I'm going to stay on mine for the time being but thinking of coming off it after my holiday and this has absolutely nothing to do with this latest scare.

I want to stay on the patches for now to give time to get the full benefit. They are possibly starting to relieve the tight muscles in my calves/feet and I want to see if that continues or not. I only noticed a slight improvement this week so I am not sure yet. The study does say that the risk may not be increased if the HRT has been used for under a year and I only started full patches in July.

[Joaniepat]

Well said Hurdity.

This whole sorry business gives me a sense of deja vu, from when my oestrogen only HRT was stopped by a GP in 2003, after the publicity originally given to the WHI and Million Women Studies. Hopefully today's middle aged and older women will be better educated about the menopause and about what to do if given similar poor treatment.

None of the organisations and individual experts who have responded to the meta analysis seem to think it has advanced our knowledge at all, or have I missed something? At any rate, we won't let it distract us from the alarming shortage of HRT products, which is of much greater concern.

JP x

[Katejo]

The following response from Louise Newsom is more positive/offers some reassurance. https://www.newsonhealth.co.uk/news/sensationalised-report-on-increased-breast-cancer-risk-concentrates-on-older-hrt-ignores-proven-benefits?fbclid=IwAR1KQeuOIAu-mcNz7pu1EJPVsebgkNzy35HqU0s4u5TRtLQpaUGh28jJJQw

[Kathleen]

Hello ladies.

I am not an expert on the science but we all know that HRT carries a small risk of cancer, it's a question of risk management, surely. 

If we need HRT to have any quality of life perhaps we can lower our overall cancer risk by not smoking and drinking and not being obese. I believe we still have a lot of control over our health and I take comfort from that.


Wishing everyone well.

K.

[Callisto]

These studies shake out and affect the views of the wider public, that is one thing, what worries me ( and causes me considerable anxiety) is the affects on GP's who act as our gatekeepers. I
make an informed choice to take HRT. I also take exercise, don't smoke, try to be healthy. I pay for my hormones. I think it should be every woman's choice to weigh up her circumstances and it should not be up to others to decide for her.
My Mum had many happy years on HRT before that last big American scare directly affected the women of her generation and she was more or less frogmarched off hormones by new skewed directives given to NHS GP's whom she trusted.
I do not want the same to happen again to this generation and it fills me with fear.

🐾C

[Jeana1]

Hi Ladies

I emailed Dr Karen Morton (consultant gynecologist) this morning about the HRT study and told her I was very worried about it, here is the reply she sent me.

Dear Jeana, I am sure you are not the only woman who listened to the Radio 4 broadcast with anxiety. I sometimes wonder what the press would do without these sort of studies to raise alarm about. I inset here the response that a colleague of mine, Dr Peter Greenhouse has written to the Editor of the programme wishing that the whole picture was better portrayed. 'To the Editor I hope you will have someone authoritative speaking in response to Prof Val Beral's Lancet study. Nobody should alter their HRT regime or consider not starting HRT because of this research because: 1. Women who take HRT are less likely to DIE of breast cancer than those who've never taken it 2. Women who take HRT and do develop breast cancer have a significantly better 10 year survival (80%) than those who've never taken it (64%) 3. Women who take HRT have a lower all-cause mortality than those who've never taken it - due mostly to a substantially reduced risk of death from heart attack 4. The risks of being denied HRT far outweigh any from taking it, as there is a “Mortality Toll” from HRT avoidance These four simple messages should be offered to the public with equal emphasis to the information from the Oxford group Lancet study.' So Jeana, I hope that reassures you. I do not think you should change anything, but of course, like all women, be vigilant about self examination and having your regular mammograms. Very best wishes, Karen


Jeana