Contemporary Hormonal Contraception and the Risk of Breast Cancer

This is a subject I don't feel comfortable with handling in public.

 

I take your point, really I do. Having survived cancer myself I value all positive announcements about improved or reduced survival. But sadly, my inner demon took over briefly and I was being obliquely humerous about 'handling breasts' in public. Now I shall be publicly reviled by our female readers.

 

i prefer to live as naturally as possible, ingesting as few man made chemicals as possible. even my cholesterol meds bother me.

 

Know what you mean. There will be some worse off than me but I'm down to 9 a day.

 

ny times: one concern is that 2 of the studies authors are former employees of danish pharma company novo nordisk, who funded the study.

 

There is extensive literature on breast cancer risk vs. environmental and intentional chemical exposure. It is very challenging to rank them by epidemiology, and we just can't expose people to potential harm in science.

Better to say it is tightly regulated, I guess.

For hormonal contraception in particular I suppose it makes sense to compare health risks of non-use because pregnancy and delivery have their own medical risks.

Also there is some evidence for synergistic effects among chemicals which was not at all the aim of this study.

 

And also compare to non-pregnancy-related diseases and conditions that are reduced by hormonal contraception, such as ovarian cancer.

These drugs have a mixed bag of health side effects. Not including the very obvious primary benefit of avoiding unwanted pregnancies, it still isn't clear to me that the net overall result of the various side effects is positive, negative, or too close to neutral to yet have a clear answer.

 

Dr. John Lee specialized in the effects of the hormone progesterone up until his death in 2003. His major observation was that progestin drugs were not equivalent to progesterone. In fact, the action of progestins is to displace progesterone. That's why birth control with progestins works - progesterone is required for pregnancy, and progestins displace it.

His theories were quite controversial at the time, but have been largely validated. He theorized that progesterone was anti-cancer, and blocking it with progestin drugs would promote cancer. Most of the medical profession regards progestins and progesterone as equivalent, which has certainly been demonstrated to be wrong.

He was quite the hero for many women who were using HRT for their menopausal symptoms. Replacing the drug HRT with natural progesterone improved many of their lives, at least according to the women. More recent practice by natural oriented doctors generally involves multiple hormones, rather than just progesterone. Dr. Lee started it all.

Dr. Lee's website is still up, and sells products related to hormone balance. His newsletters are also available there. Website is Official Website of John R. Lee, M.D., Expert in Progesterone and HRT .

Rumor has it that transdermal progesterone is good for grumpy old men as well...

 

Pie?
Did somebody mention Pie?

I do not trivialize contraception, and I've seen menopause and manopause through both ends of the telescope.
However (comma!) since I'm the husband of a wife, father of a daughter, and two granddaughters I've learned that with such things I can offer a point of view.........once.......IF asked.
Even then.....I get 49.99999 percent of the vote.

When science finally determines whether caffeine if good for you or bad for you......or butter.....or which way to hold the 'food pyramid' then I will hold it in higher regard.
As far as manopause is concerned, I'm staying ahead of the skinny dude with the scythe with a fitbit, and 5 acres of land to maintain and chasing grandchildren.....and one aspirin before bed when I can think of it......and no thank you for any advice to the contrary!
I do not offer young women advice on contraception, nor older ones about the dismal choices on menopause treatment......unless asked.

What kinda pie?

 

Well, I, for one would like to see what David Gorski, breast cancer surgeon and researcher has to say on his blog. I find his topics interesting, although sometimes a bit repetitive.

RESPECTFUL INSOLENCE - "A statement of fact cannot be insolent." The miscellaneous ramblings of a surgeon/scientist on medicine, quackery, science, and pseudoscience (and anything else that interests him).

Posted via the PriusChat mobile app.

 

You could suggest that by email Ms. Pilot.

Would make more sense for you to do so because you could add some sincere praise.

 

It's not surprising that interfering with nature's normal process shows evidence of increase of cancer. Every girlfriend I've had we've talked about contraceptives, protection, etc. before engaging in you know what, and I've never had a girlfriend not report changes to mood or effects on their body from them.

There's a new contraceptive for men called Vasalgel that should be coming to market soon. It's basically superglue that gets injected into the vas deferens and blocks it (instead of cutting it in a vasectomy). It works like a temporary vasectomy. When you decide you do want to have kids, they inject a solvent that dissolves it and everything flows again like normal. TMI alert - If the side effects are as low as a vasectomy, I plan to be one of the first to have this done.

 

Makes a pleasant change from sniffing glue, anyway!