Help interpreting hair steroid analysis for estrogen dominance please?

[Wendy B]

Got my results (attached) but not totally certain how to interpret. First thing is my progesterone is what looks like incredibly high, presumably due to supplementing the month prior. Does this make ED test impossible? Half inch of hair growth roughly represents a month of growth, and I had been supplementing progesterone for a month so we cut a *full inch* below the scalp, thinking recent suppplementing wouldn't show. But Im guessing my hair grows faster than i thought. (I was trying to get an idea of what my hormones were prior to supplementing and whether i truly have ED or not). I'm 55, in menopause, have no P. or E. on blood test. It's not possible for that progesterone value to reflect a non-supplmented state would it?

What about "good estrogen" vs. "bad" (estrone)? Are they all bad? My estrone's in range, the other two high but looks like not even twice as high as the range max, if im undrstanding right. So not like the 5 x's or 100 x's range I've heard can happen in menopause. Also, i don't understand what the "range" really means. Just the average amount women have? the average "healthy" amount? As for the ratio P/E, the instructions at the bottom of report are not super clear to me. Appreciate your help.

My health is quite poor. But I'm unclear if ED is a part of the problem or not. Grateful for any feedback.

 

[Sherbert]

It was a good idea to cut a full inch away. I would take results as what you were aiming for, ie your p4 level before supplementing. Regarding ED I’m not sure if high p4 necessarily means your estrogen isn’t dominant. Hope someone else can answer that for you.
Re good or bad estrogen, my under standing is, just coz some are weaker doesn’t make their effect ok.
I think the range is where most of those tested fall. You’re right that it doesn’t necessarily mean the desirable scores but it’s there to give you an idea as a starting point in assessing where you stand.
Hope that helps

 

[Wendy B]

I can't figure out the quote feature yet - how to get it to show here. Brain is fairly fried.

Sherbert said: "It was a good idea to cut a full inch away. I would take results as what you were aiming for, ie your p4 level before supplementing. Regarding ED I’m not sure if high p4 necessarily means your estrogen isn’t dominant. Hope someone else can answer that for you.
Re good or bad estrogen, my under standing is, just coz some are weaker doesn’t make their effect ok.
I think the range is where most of those tested fall. You’re right that it doesn’t necessarily mean the desirable scores but it’s there to give you an idea as a starting point in assessing where you stand."

Thanks for your feedback Sherbert. I appreciate it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------


If I'm understanding right, the listed range on the test for P4 is: 0.51 - 35*. (there are other values listed to the right of my value and I don't know what they mean. But my P4 value was 4916! Is that really possible without supplementation? It's so out of range, it's hard for me to imagine that would be from endogenous progest. But I really don't know about these things.

The "test report results" at the end of the analysis says: 1608 is my P/E ratio (I think that's what it's saying).


Then farther down it says: "Progesterone/Estrogens ratio*female-specific indicator for estrogen dominance. P4/(E1+E2+E3) Ratio (adult females, non-pregnant): 100-500 (in serum), 143.2-716 (hair, correlation coefficient with blood = 1.432). Yang et al., J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. (1998) 67:5-6, p. 447. doi: 10.1016/S0960-0760(98)00120-4"...


...I don't know what "hair, correlation coefficient with blood = 1.432" means, but taking my P4 number and dividing by my three estrogens added together i get this.....4916/ (.51 + 2.6 + 2.57= 5.68) = 865.492957746. ....865 is higher than the range "143.2-716" but I don't know what the co-efficient info is. If my progest is endogneous, that would mean Im out of range for ED, if i understand right. I'm not sure if 865 is the right number. If 1608 is the right number, then im way out of range for ED wtih that high of Progest.


I got feedback elsewhere that pointed out that it's not necessarily how much Estrogen we have but what our bodies do with it (like make testosterone i guess?) but that wouldn't be ED then right? That is more just a liver issue? Thanks again for anyone's feedback on these things.

 

[Wendy B]

Bump, Just checking back if anyone can help. Thanks!

 

[haidut]

I can't figure out the quote feature yet - how to get it to show here. Brain is fairly fried.

Sherbert said: "It was a good idea to cut a full inch away. I would take results as what you were aiming for, ie your p4 level before supplementing. Regarding ED I’m not sure if high p4 necessarily means your estrogen isn’t dominant. Hope someone else can answer that for you.
Re good or bad estrogen, my under standing is, just coz some are weaker doesn’t make their effect ok.
I think the range is where most of those tested fall. You’re right that it doesn’t necessarily mean the desirable scores but it’s there to give you an idea as a starting point in assessing where you stand."

Thanks for your feedback Sherbert. I appreciate it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------


If I'm understanding right, the listed range on the test for P4 is: 0.51 - 35*. (there are other values listed to the right of my value and I don't know what they mean. But my P4 value was 4916! Is that really possible without supplementation? It's so out of range, it's hard for me to imagine that would be from endogenous progest. But I really don't know about these things.

The "test report results" at the end of the analysis says: 1608 is my P/E ratio (I think that's what it's saying).


Then farther down it says: "Progesterone/Estrogens ratio*female-specific indicator for estrogen dominance. P4/(E1+E2+E3) Ratio (adult females, non-pregnant): 100-500 (in serum), 143.2-716 (hair, correlation coefficient with blood = 1.432). Yang et al., J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. (1998) 67:5-6, p. 447. doi: 10.1016/S0960-0760(98)00120-4"...


...I don't know what "hair, correlation coefficient with blood = 1.432" means, but taking my P4 number and dividing by my three estrogens added together i get this.....4916/ (.51 + 2.6 + 2.57= 5.68) = 865.492957746. ....865 is higher than the range "143.2-716" but I don't know what the co-efficient info is. If my progest is endogneous, that would mean Im out of range for ED, if i understand right. I'm not sure if 865 is the right number. If 1608 is the right number, then im way out of range for ED wtih that high of Progest.


I got feedback elsewhere that pointed out that it's not necessarily how much Estrogen we have but what our bodies do with it (like make testosterone i guess?) but that wouldn't be ED then right? That is more just a liver issue? Thanks again for anyone's feedback on these things.

Unless you have been supplementing with P4, or are pregnant, such as a high P4 value (and, consequently, P4/estrogen ratio) warrants further exploration by a blood test and an endocrinologist. That's about as much as I can say legally. So, I'd ask a doctor to do blood tests for the values that came back abnormal on the hair test - P4, estradiol and estriol.

 

[Wendy B]

Unless you have been supplementing with P4, or are pregnant, such as a high P4 value (and, consequently, P4/estrogen ratio) warrants further exploration by a blood test and an endocrinologist. That's about as much as I can say legally. So, I'd ask a doctor to do blood tests for the values that came back abnormal on the hair test - P4, estradiol and estriol.

Thank you. Not sure if you read original post...I had indeed been supplementing progesterone in the 3 weeks prior to testing. Was advised 1/2" hair growth roughly reflects a month of growth, so we cut 1" and lower below scalp. It's possible my hair grows much faster than i realized though. My estradiol and estriol were either very low or not detected on blood testing. (I'm 55 and in meno). I understand you may not be able to further comment.