Breast Cancer Risk From Using HRT Is ‘twice What Was Thought’

[LeeLemonoil]

Guardian from a few hours ago.
A positive aspect to takeaway from: Even professors at places like Oxford are not entirely corrupted

Breast cancer risk from using HRT is ‘twice what was thought’

 

[LeeLemonoil]

Sorry, doublepost

 

[biffbelvin]

This is plastered across pretty much every paper in the UK today.

Good to see the study is open for further review. I was going to jump in and say that they didn't mention which progestogen, but then this paragraph caught my eye:

During years 5–14 of use of an oestrogen-progestagen combination, the RR was greater for oestrogen plus daily progestagen than for oestrogen plus intermittent progestagen (which usually involved 10–14 days of progestagen per month); RR 2·30 (2·21–2·40) and RR 1·93 (1·84–2·01), respectively, heterogeneity p<0·0001.

In general, the RR did not differ substantially by the progestagenic constituent of the combinations, including rarely used hormones, such as micronised [natural] progesterone (RR 2·05, 1·38–3·56), although the RR appeared to be somewhat lower for oestrogen plus dydrogesterone (appendix p 45). The RR was significantly increased during years 5–14 of progestagen-only MHT (1·39, 1·11–1·75; p=0·0055) and of tibolone (1·57, 1·43–1·72; p<0·0001).​

So it seems from the study that using natural progesterone in combination with Estrogen is still worse than using Estrogen alone. The broad range however shows that it could have no greater risk or a huge (in relation to synthetics) risk. Does anyone have any ideas on the range? Could this be a manufacturing issue, or something?

It's a shame there's no data for progesterone only (I take it this is something that doesn't happen). Is anyone aware of a physiological mechanism that could explain why taking progesterone with estrogen would be more harmful than just taking estrogen?

My mother had to undergo Menopause and was on HRT for a year, but stopped taking it when she read articles about the increased risk. I imagine, she will write it off completely now this is front page everywhere. Out of curiousity, does anyone have experience with Pregnelenone/DHEA as an alternative?

 

[ecstatichamster]

The question nobody will bother asking is, how could this happen?

17 studies said HRT was wonderful.

What about all these studies that touted HRT?

Ha.

I have relatives on many dangerous drugs including Fosamax (there’s another disaster much worse than HRT), statins and more.

Basically every drug that the drug companies put out for chronic medical conditions is really bad.

 

[LucyL]

This is plastered across pretty much every paper in the UK today.

Good to see the study is open for further review. I was going to jump in and say that they didn't mention which progestogen, but then this paragraph caught my eye:

During years 5–14 of use of an oestrogen-progestagen combination, the RR was greater for oestrogen plus daily progestagen than for oestrogen plus intermittent progestagen (which usually involved 10–14 days of progestagen per month); RR 2·30 (2·21–2·40) and RR 1·93 (1·84–2·01), respectively, heterogeneity p<0·0001.

In general, the RR did not differ substantially by the progestagenic constituent of the combinations, including rarely used hormones, such as micronised [natural] progesterone (RR 2·05, 1·38–3·56), although the RR appeared to be somewhat lower for oestrogen plus dydrogesterone (appendix p 45). The RR was significantly increased during years 5–14 of progestagen-only MHT (1·39, 1·11–1·75; p=0·0055) and of tibolone (1·57, 1·43–1·72; p<0·0001).​

So it seems from the study that using natural progesterone in combination with Estrogen is still worse than using Estrogen alone. The broad range however shows that it could have no greater risk or a huge (in relation to synthetics) risk. Does anyone have any ideas on the range? Could this be a manufacturing issue, or something?

The words that caught my eye were "rarely used". Was it even used enough to give a good sampling for the study? It looks like it's trying to say 'estrogen alone' is the best. Estrogen council work? (disclaimer, I haven't read the link yet)

 

[lampofred]

Glad they took the step to point the finger against estrogen.

 

[jb116]

That was a good one haha
I love these kinds of studies because it exposes a truth about something they are trying to sell while implicating something else they would like to oppose. It's known that HRT or MHT compounds are made of estrogen and progestin. That is the synthetic, pharma version of the actual good stuff. If you look at this study in a different way you'll see the revelation.
Compound 1 Estrogen + progestin = poison 1 + poison 2 = higher risk
Compound 2 Estrogen alone = poison 1 alone = lower risk as compared to compound 1.

Now if they went on to show the whole picture it would look like this:
Compound 3 (real) progesterone = lower risk overall compared to all.

They didn't do that. But others have:
Progesterone vs. synthetic progestins and the risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

nice try though

 

[LeeLemonoil]

Yup, when I read „progestin“ I world-wisely nodded my head in melancholia.
Suckers.

 

[LeeLemonoil]

Suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked, in fact.