The Danger of
Declining Hormones in Women
By Paul D. Tortland, D.O. T
here are two schools of thought regarding hormones and ag- ing. Conventional medicine says that we age, therefore our hormones decline. Preventive and age management practitio- ners, on the other hand, claim that our hormones decline, therefore we age! It is a subtle but powerful difference. According to conventional medicine, the hormone decline seen in aging is natural and nothing should be done to address it. After all, as many gynecologists say to women who have had a hysterectomy, “You don’t have a uterus; why do you need progesterone?” But following this logic, why do those same doctors support the use of glasses to correct aging eyes, or the use of hearing aids to correct ailing hearing? Failing eyes and hearing are “natural” conse- quences of aging also, right? And herein lies the hypocrisy.
Consequences of Declining Hormones Put simply, hormones are chemical messengers that mainly
travel through the blood and signal cells to perform various func- tions, many of them critical. Among the many functions controlled by hormones are included (but not limited to): • stimulation or inhibition of growth • mood swings • activation or inhibition of immune response • regulation of metabolism • hunger cravings • sexual arousal • concentration and mental acuity
A decline in hormone function can have adverse effects in any or all of the above areas, and then some. For this article, we are focusing on estrogen and progesterone on women. Lack of estrogen and progesterone causes the following: • Vaginal atrophy, drying, and painful intercourse • Skin changes (dry, brittle, thin)
• Decreased bone density (osteopenia and osteoporosis) • Incontinence
• Difficulty regulating body temperature • Breast changes • Fatigue, decreased libido, weight gain • Increased arterial plaque formation
Yet, these are “normal,” we’re told, and we should embrace
these changes as part of the aging process! “Natural” vs. Synthetic Hormones
Many women come to me asking for “natural hormones.” But
what they are really asking for are bio-identical hormones. “Bio- identical” means the exact same molecule that the body produces. Not all natural hormones are bio-identical.
18 Natural Nutmeg May 2012
For example, the most popular prescription estrogen replace- ment is Premarin®. The name, Premarin, comes from pregnant mare’s urine. Yes, that’s right, Premarin comes from horse pee! It’s certainly “natural,” but it’s far from bio-identical. Conversely, bio-identical doesn’t mean natural. Most bio-iden- tical estrogen is created in a lab. Most bio-identical progesterone, on the other hand, is derived from plant sources. However, for the purposes of our discussion, we’ll distinguish between synthetic (not bio-identical) and bio-identical. The problem with synthetic hormones is that they are not bio- identical, and they do not act the same way in the body as do bio- identical hormones. Premarin, for example, contains more than 40 different estrogen subtypes, none identical to human estrogen, and two of which, equilin and equilinin, are known carcinogens. Provera® (medroxyprogesterone acetate) is marketed as proges- terone. But it is nothing like bio-identical progesterone. It’s a proges- tin, not progesterone (a fact sadly lost on most physicians, including ob/gyns). And it has potentially serious side effects, including depres- sion, breast swelling and tenderness, irregular bleeding, weight gain, water retention, and a significantly increased risk of breast cancer.
Hormones & Cancer: The Sad Saga of the WHI Study Most women are afraid of taking hormones, and most physicians
are afraid to prescribe them, because of a fear of causing cancer. Let’s put this issue to rest.
In 1991 the National Institutes of Health (NIH) initiated the
Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study to investigate the major health problems of older women, including cardiovascular disease, cancer, and osteoporosis. There were four subgroups investigated. One looked at the use of PremPro® (a combination of Premarin and Provera). Another looked at Premarin use only. In the Premarin-only group there was actually a decreased risk of breast cancer. However, when Provera was added (the PremPro group), breast cancer rates shot up over 30%. (This is what got the
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52