The Dangers of Hormone Replacement

By Todd Mangum, Catalyst. Posted November 21, 2002.

The recent media blitz on the negative effects of conventional hormone replacement therapy (cHRT) has, understandably, fostered reactions from bewilderment to outrage. With good reason, women should be alarmed that what they have been sold as the fountain of youth could instead be the kiss of death.

For decades, cHRT has successfully treated menopausal symptoms such as hot flashes, vaginal dryness, night sweats and insomnia. Although not life-threatening, these symptoms can be detrimental to health and quality of life. Several recent articles I've read, condemning cHRT, have entirely trivialized these problems. I suspect the authors to be men who may regret having called insomnia trivial when their prostates swell and nature calls, awakening them all through the night. Women have also started cHRT hoping to prevent the diseases of aging like heart disease, osteoporosis, Alzheimer's and even some forms of cancer.

More than 16,000 women were enrolled in an eight-year study to determine the risks and benefits of various forms of cHRT. One of the studies was terminated after only five years because of conclusive evidence that Prempro, a combination of an estrogen and a progestin, causes more harm than good. The study using an estrogen alone is still in progress.

In this study 30 out of 10,000 women who were given a placebo and 38 out of 10,000 who were taking Prempro developed invasive breast cancer. In other words, Prempro increased a woman’s chance of developing breast cancer by 27 percent. For every 10,000 women using Prempro, eight more had strokes, seven more had heart attacks, and 18 more had complications from blood clots than among those taking a placebo. This means strokes increased by 38 percent, cardiac complications (mostly nonfatal heart attacks) increased by 23 percent, and blood clots or thromboembolisms, particularly injurious to the lungs, brain and heart, increased by 52 percent.

Favorable findings of the study included six out of 10,000 fewer colon cancers and five out of 10,000 fewer hip fractures for those taking Prempro compared to placebo. In the final analysis, there were 30 more negative outcomes per 10,000 women from taking Prempro than from taking a placebo. These are not acceptable side effects or risks to achieve some greater good, especially considering many of the complications were what women tried to prevent by taking cHRT in the first place. When the cure increases one’s chances of developing the disorder, something has gone tremendously awry.

Prempro is a combination of Premarin and Provera, the two most commonly prescribed and widely researched hormones used in cHRT. Premarin is extracted from pregnant mare’s urine, which is how it gets its name (pregnant mare’s urine). It is composed of equine estrogens, which are foreign to humans and problematic for us to metabolize. Because of this, Premarin often increases an undesirable form of estrogen known to be carcinogenic. It also contains some estrogens found in humans.

Provera, or medroxyprogesterone, is a synthetic version of progesterone; its actions bear little resemblance to the natural hormone. Most physicians mistakenly call Provera progesterone, so it’s not surprising that the media doesn’t understand, let alone emphasize, the difference either. Comprehending the available information on cHRT requires an extensive understanding of hormone physiology. Unfortunately, very few physicians and even fewer in the media can explain cHRT or converse intelligently about the variety of viable and healthy alternatives to cHRT already in existence.

Even more disturbing are many of the "solutions" or alternatives to cHRT offered in popular magazines. No one has mentioned using the real ones to combat hormone deficiencies. Instead, recommendations include Prozac for depression, Lipitor for cholesterol, high blood pressure drugs to treat hot flashes and, of course, the recently patented (and profitable) designer estrogens and biphosphates to treat osteoporosis. The side effects of these are alarming.

Conventional medical doctors have known for decades that progesterone counters the negative effects that excessive estrogens can cause throughout a woman’s system. With consistent use of inappropriate hormones like Provera, however, this knowledge dwindled to the myth that progesterone only protects the uterus and is therefore unnecessary if a woman has had a hysterectomy. The entire foundation of cHRT has been faulty from the beginning because of misinformation like this.

It’s not the least bit surprising that using mismatched and artificial hormones has delivered less than optimal results. What is surprising is that it has taken medicine this long to figure that out. Almost everyone intuitively understands that using diesel truck parts in a finely tuned sports car would hamper performance, if not stop it altogether. Yet, we’re repeatedly given the equivalent of diesel parts for our finely tuned human bodies.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »