Over the years I've found the male-dominated medical profession to be manipulative and self-centered in a lot of women's prescriptions. Often times drugs weren't even tested on women! One of the women who lectures on PBS said it best, in a talk that pointed out that giving women estrogen after surgery or at menopause may keep tissues in good shape for sexual activity for the man, but without testosterone, for many women, who cares?

Those of you who haven't made up your minds about HRT might want to consult Christiane Northrup's Women's Bodies, Women's Wisdom (link to Amazon) or her The Wisdom of Menopause. I found the first book very helpful, particularly the tables in the back. I haven't read the second.

I lost my uterus and ovaries to cancer surgery; my doctor and I both agreed that I wasn't menopausal yet and that HRT was appropriate. We have osteoporosis in my family (Scandinavian women are very succeptible). My male oncologist obviously didn't read his own survey I filled out (mom died of breast cancer) and damned if he didn't put me on full-dose premarin when I was in the hospital after surgery. I stopped after about three days and worked my way through samples from my OB/GYN, and she was very supportive of my desire to get away from the synthetic horse hormones. If you look at the study that started this discussion, all of those women were taking that synthetic horse stuff, no one mentions bioidentical.

I figured out what amounts of estrogen and testosterone felt right (just enough--I'm just barely into the zone of "enough" of these) by taking the Estratest half-strength (I broke tablets and would take the same approximate dose for a couple of weeks before deciding if it was enough or not). One and a third worked for me. Once I had an idea of how much, and at the same time could feel that something wasn't "right" with the synthetics, I switched to bioidentical hormones (E2 and E3, not E1 most commonly linked with breast cancer). The methyltestosterone is still synthetic (but not horse-like) because your body can turn the bioidentical testosterone into estrogen if it needs it, and it tends to turn it into the E1 that is more risky for breast cancer risk and/or survivors.

It has been my experience that the formlated prescription is much less $$ than the name brand. I paid $40 for a three month supply on my by-mail plan; for the compound that is made specifically for me, I pay $10.23 for three months. Why? Because they're generic bioidenticals (they're made from Mexican yam). I feel like my old self, and I'm in no rush to get off of the HRT.

I personally don't believe the doctors conducting that survey were doing women a favor by nobly "stopping the study" to prevent what they perceived as a considerable amount of die-off due to a few increased statistics. They don't discuss the types of hormones available, or the sources of them. I think the omissions in that statement about ceasing the study is misleading and disingenuous. Someone is covering their backside in one way while leaving a lot of women hanging.

SRS