Suzanne Somors hormone replacement???

I'm a big girl like Vivre and many others who can read for ourselves....I don't need a doctor to read what I can read for myself. I never look at one or even two articles. I do ask my doctor if it something I have to consider.  But I can tell you there are many times where I educated my doctor on lastest information.

Flalady

I have to agree with LJ13 and Desdomona.  Thanks for having the nerve to say your mind. 

I have to take everything I see on that breast cancer choices website with a HUGE grain of salt.  I looked up what they had to say and it seems that wearing bras has been one of the causes of our cancers.  Please!!

LisaF -

Yes, it seems that going braless and stinky (ie - no deodorant or powder since this is the way to "breast detox") is the answer.  And don't forget to put that iodine on your breasts every day.   

LJ13 wrote: 

FDA approval of drugs is based primarily on the companies conducting clinical trials that prove the safety and efficacy of the drug

Perhaps you had not noticed this phrase from Dr. David Graham, a senior scientist within the FDA's Office of Drug Safety (on CBS/60 Minutes):

"FDA has a system in place now that will guarantee that unsafe drugs will remain on the market"--------http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/15/60II/main674293.shtml

This is only one scientist among many others out there who have presented the FDA with CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. Very strong statement from a man who works for that government agency.

Still many more independent analysts are worried that the FDA is simply understaffed, thus unable to function properly. Which might partially explain the rush-to-approve of these past few years.

With supplements, of course there are companies out there making billions of dollars, as well. Of course, some of their products are not what they claim. Of course, some of them do contain dangerous poisons. But at least, one can protect oneself to a certain point by staying with supplements taken under a doctor's supervision (using reputable companies whose products have been thoroughly peer-reviewed by well-known independent analysts). Obviously, it is even better if you have a Medical Doctor like mine, who has chosen to make a LOT LESS money and to spend a LOT MORE TIME researching supplements.

One problem I have with the medical system is that doctors do not have the material time to research the medicine that they prescribe: If it's FDA-approved, that's all they want to know. But as we said before, the FDA has often been a disappointment: The FDA has been too wrong, too often (which, sadly, many have paid with their lives).

...So there are still legions of drugs out there, approved in a hurry by the FDA, drugs that offer a modest tumor shrinkage [WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH OVERALL SURVIVAL], and those drugs also contain as many poisons as the unregulated supplements (toxic substances responsible for the many dreadful side-effects described on this very website, as on others).

Not to mention the case of Andrew von Eschenbach, FDA Commissioner, who, during his four-year tenure as Director of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), embarrassed many of his peers with his bizarre announcement that the suffering and death due to cancer could, and would, be eliminated by the year 2015. To those who have worked industriously for decades towards that elusive goal, von Eschenbach's assertion seemed both fantastic and inappropriate. (http://www.cancerdecisions.com/mrstore/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=2&products_id=507)

Such extravagant claims have done very little to boost confidence in the FDA as a leading overseeing agency (which it should be).

If such is the state of that agency's preparedness to review "...clinical trials that prove the safety and efficacy of the drug" (also knowing that those clinical trials are done by none other than the applying companies themselves)........Then heaven help us.

desdemona222b:

I am sure that Prozac has helped you a whole lot, just as it has helped many others. My problem with the medical system is OVERPRESCRIPTION, not only of Prozac, but of all other drugs, down to antibiotics (which created undefeatable superbugs that hospitals are currently struggling to control, and this dangerous situation is growing progressively more and more threatening).

There is no doubt in my mind that Prozac was the right drug for you. And Tamoxifen is most definitely the right drug for a minority of the patients, including a lady in my support group, for whom Tamoxifen is currently keeping metastatic uterine tumors under control, allowing her to live a perfectly normal life. Would I suggest that this person gets off Tamoxifen because I feel it only helps a minority of patients? NO WAY: Tamoxifen is a life-saver in that situation.

It is, however, undeniable that Prozac is a very powerful drug which, as mentioned in the maker's instructions, must only be taken under very strict supervision from a medical professional.

If I am not mistaken, "off-label" is the term used to describe the use of a drug for a condition for which it was not originally approved. And we have been warned time and again to be careful with the off-label use of medicine.

I certainly do not see using such a powerful and specific drug as Prozac for hot flashes.

Yazmin, considering your concerns that FDA may be imperfect, it is amazing that you consider the supplement industry to be safer. Safer? Because some companies do peer-reviewed studies? Wow. Talk about double standards.

I never claimed FDA was infallible, nor that every drug that is approved is perfect. In fact, I can state that no drug is. I can also state categorically that no supplement is. No thing on earth is. There is no doubt that there are inefficiencies at FDA, and that they are strained to meet their workload. Still, they set the criteria which manufacturers must meet. 

Your gripe about the manufacturers paying for the trials is silly. Of course they pay for the trials. It is their drug that they want to prove works. You should really do some more research about how the process of drug approval works. There are years of study that must occur even before the first human testing occurs. Protocols are offered, modified, and finalized. Multiple sites are chosen to perform clinical studies. Multiple doctors are involved. Frequently, independent third parties conduct the actual trials, collection of data, and submission to FDA. Different stages have to meet the criteria of success in order for the next stage to be approved. 

Sometimes, bad drugs get through. This is always going to happen when humans are involved. In spite of the paranoid rantings of alternative fans, the maxim that one should never attribute to evil what can adequately be explained by stupidity is far truer. Not that someone was paid off, but that people simply made errors. They derived conclusions on data that was presented, and the studies did not adequately assess all the possible risk factors. It is always going to happen. Sick people are clamoring for drug approvals. Doctors are clamoring for drugs to treat their patients. If FDA demands more and more data, until every possible human condition is accounted for, then people die. They go with statistical models of how much data is enough. Usually, this is enough. Sometimes, it is not.

Most drugs take a decade to obtain approval. You consider that "a hurry"? The women who died of metastatic breast cancer didn't care that Herceptin wasn't approved ... they could see that it worked. But they couldn't get it ... literally to save their lives. Was the decade during which it was studied "a hurry"? 

You criticize FDA and conventional medicine and offer instead the complete anarchy of the supplement industry, where no products at all are required to prove that they work at all, for anyone, or are tolerated by anyone, that their manufacturing facilities meet procedural requirements, that their goods even contain what they say they do. This is supposed to offer a viable alternative? 

Dear desdemona222b:

Perhaps there is a misunderstanding somewhere: I never said that I don't like the idea of taking Prozac. Much to the contrary, if you are seeing what I wrote, I am saying that I am convinced that this is the right medicine for your and for many other people (who might be unable to live a normal life without Prozac).

What I did add is that it is a  powerful medicine, and I do question the use of it for something like hot flashes.

For me, for instance, this would not be right, even though I have treatment-induced hot flashes (but not severe enough, in my view, for such a strong-handed approach to solving my particular problem). Anybody who would advise you to get off Prozac would be completely wrong, I am sure.

Wikipedia may not be the MOST authoritative source, but in this case perhaps it will help lift the fog for some:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approved_drugs

Note the statement that the drug approval process for the US and Canada is the most stringent in the world.

I work for a medical device manufacturer. We usually launch our products outside the US because the regulatory requirements for US launch are so much more strict. We are able to use data from ex-US placements to support our regulatory filings with FDA.

How many other people commenting on FDA and product approval processes here actually WORK in the industry?

Just wondering.

Actually my bills would be paid more handily if it were not for the costs required to comply with FDA requirements.

If you had any understanding of business practices, you would understand that if we sell the products outside of the US, we actually are selling products and can make money. If money wasn't a factor? This is a business. Do you understand? Businesses exist by selling products and services.

Why would we wait for FDA to approve the product for sale in USA? We can sell it outside of the US. What would be the point? 

I have no reason to protect FDA. I don't work for them. They cost my company money in compliance. I'd much rather see that money go into my pocket. It's weird. You just seem to get everything backwards.

But all of this is off topic. I explain how FDA works, and if you choose to not believe it, that is your choice. You don't gain credibility by disbelieving what can easily be verified. All FDA proceedings related to drug approvals are publicly published.

LJ13 wrote:

Your gripe about the manufacturers paying for the trials is silly

Please accept my apology if I have offended you in any way. That certainly was not my goal: Posting messages that are offensive to others does not further our cause and most definitely does not help win the offended parties to somebody else's opinion. Opinion, as mentioned time and again on this forum, is the most highly personal matter.

I never intended to imply that manufacturers pay for the trials. I just expressed my wish that those trials were done by completely, reliably independent third parties.

And did I "critize" the FDA and offered anarchy? (Wow, me, an anarchist? (mortified)). If you read me well, it is not that I am criticizing the FDA: I am just trying to put forth different opinions for us all to reflect upon. Just trying to bring different points of view to the discussion in order for all of us to get something extra out of it. Because there might be something right and something wrong on each "side" of the discussion, I am contemplating all treatments with an open mind.

I do appreciate your taking the time to respond to my post. I value your input, as I believe it is possible and necessary to try and learn something new everyday from someone else. Receiving feedback from others, even in disagreement, helps me fine-tune my own research. Thanks to alternative opinions like yours, I  keep on reassessing my point of view every opportunity I get. I know that there is excellent medicine out there, and who know? perhaps I will need one of those drugs some day, so being informed is always the best way to go.

I believe I have written black on white that there are all kinds of bad products to beware of on both " sides"  (now I do also happen to believe that supplements, when they are not efficient, are still generally (generally) less dangerous than powerful, highly synthethized drugs). Unless, of course, those supplements contain some kind of poison, of course. And, in all fairness, such accidents have happened, indeed.

I am also convinced that anger, which is bad for everybody, is especially destructive in our particular situation, here. Therefore, I will never allow anybody to drag me down to that level (it clouds judgment and causes one to lose one's credibility altogether).

As for Herceptin, I  just wished Absolute and Relative statistics did not disagree so wildly...........http://www.annieappleseedproject.org/relrisverabr.html (again, I apologize for this being a complementary link, but I am unable to go get the same information I have been collecting from regular mainstream organizations at this time).

Please have a great evening (it is evening where I am) and let's all keep on taking care of ourselves as best we can.

I have been coming to this site because I have wanted to learn more about the SS journey in breast care but quite frankly I am more confused than ever. I have come to know some of you from different threads but didn't post here for fear of getting slammed upside the head". I no longer can keep silent.

I have taken 'amitryptiline' for 15 years because of a chronic back pain, not for depression. My friends are on it for fybromialgia and it's helped us all. There are other maladies these drugs help..they are not just for depression. Prozac and others do the same. But then it's not shameful to take these drugs... after all that BC survivors have gone through. It can put anyone over the edge.

The estrogen topic for (estrogen +) people totally blows my mind. How can HRT be 'natural' when God has made our bodies to naturally 'deplete' our estrogen as we age?My tumor sucked in the estrogen I had left , why in the world would I want to feed another one lurking out there? I am all for alternative supplementing, along with conventional. Studies are not in vein, they are to help us.

Arguing without conclusive evidence is blowing in the wind.It's no help to people out here who are gravitating to the the last bit of hope for a cure in this disgusting journey.

For you 'sponges' out there...please don't take some of this thread as gospel. Do the research and make up your minds as to what is good for YOU.Sorry I offended some of you.

Thanks, Artsee

P.S. as for 'Herceptin"..It's the best thing that could of been invented for HER+ patients.It's saved dear friends of mine!

NATURAL BIO-IDENTICAL HORMONE ARTICLES

It is surprising how little the medical community knows about progesterone, especially the consequences of a progesterone deficiency. In many cases, these consequences can be prevented with the use of natural progesterone replacement. It is fairly easy to diagnose women with low progesterone levels because these women are the ones who have PMS, severe menstrual cramps, headaches with their periods, and breast tenderness. They will be estrogen-dominant and very often will wind up with complications such as fibroids in the uterus and fibrocystic disease of the breast.

A recent article in the British medical journal, The Lancelet, indicated that women with fybrocystic disease have a higher incidence of breast cancer. This is not surprising when you consider that fybrocystic disease is found in women with low progesterone levels. Low progesterone levels leads to an over-production of estrogen. Estrogen is known to cause cancer.

In the pre-menopausal woman, administration of natural progesterone eliminates PMS, menstrual cramps, headaches, and breast tenderness. In addition, it helps eliminate migraine headaches and allergies, including asthma. Progesterone prevents weight gain for several reasons. It is thermogenic - it helps fat burn. Progesterone helps the thyroid to function better. And, most importantly, progesterone prevents the over-production of insulin, which is the main hormone that creates fat and keeps fat stored.

For those women who already have fybrocystic disease or uterine fibroids, administration of natural progesterone cream will tend to make these problems disappear. There are 300 different receptor sites throughout the body for progesterone so it is easy to comprehend how important this hormone is. Women with low levels of progesterone often suffer from morning sickness when they're pregnant and may have problems with miscarriages.

For those women in their menopause, natural progesterone should be the primary replacement

hormone and not estrogen as the usual case. Natural progesterone is more beneficial for osteoperosis than is estrogen because it both prevents osteoperosis, as well as helps bone to calcify. Estrogen is damaging to blood vessels, which is the reason why it is not recommended for women with coronary artery disease. Progesterone is ver beneficial for blood vessels, and can even prevent coronary artery spasm. As stated previously, estrogen is known to be carcinogenic. In fact, first year Premarin was released, 60,000 women developed cancer of uterus. This is the reason why women who still have their uterus are given synthetic progestins, such as Provera, to prevent uterine cancer.

Estrogen has always been a risk factor for breast cancer, and recently they discovered that Provera doubles a woman's chance of developing breast cancer. Natural progesterone, on the other hand, helps to prevent cancer of the breast, uterus, and ovaries.P L A T T M E D I C A L C E N T E R w w w . d r p l a t t . c o m c o p y r i g h t © 2 0 0 7

In addition, estrogen and synthetic progestins are lipogenic - they create fat and cellulite. Natural progesterone helps to eliminate fat. Progesterone is the "feel good hormone" for women and helps to enhance a woman's libido - estrogen does not.

There are several factors I want to leave you with. Number one, it is a lot easier to prevent disease than it is to treat it. It is very likely that breast cancer can be prevented with the simple administration of a natural hormone. Number two, it is extremely important for the body's hormones to be in balance - a deficiency of one often leads to an over-production of others which can lead to unfortunate consequences. A simple blood panel can determine a person's hormone status, and the judicious replacement or enhancement of various hormones can allow one to live healthier for a longer period of time.

One last thing to keep in mind. I realize that people reading this piece would think, "If natural progesterone is so beneficial why don't we hear about it?" Please keep in mind that business runs this world. Pharmaceutical companies are big business. They cannot patent a natural product and thereby have no interest in natural hormones. Pharmaceutical companies support most of the drug research in this country, which is the main source of articles published in medical journals. This is the reason most doctors are unaware of natural progesterone, or other natural hormones, which can be replaced. This allows Premarin, and drug known to cause cancer and in damaging to blood vessels, to be the largest selling drug in the world.

For those of you who might be interested, I would be glad to discuss natural hormone replacement or replenishment with you and I can give you the names of books from which you may get further information.

If you google Dr. Michael E. Platt, you will find a website devoted to the Platt Medical Centre.  It has a fair amount of information about Dr. Platt, and also a "Store" where you can buy his books and a quite extensive number of supplements.

FYI, the British medical journal he calls "The Lancelet" is actually called "The Lancet".

I do not doubt his belief in the benefits of progesterone.  I am concerned about his medical bona fides, however, in part because he seems to have turned his medical involvement into what appears to be a thriving business.  I would want to get the opinion of a well-respected basic scentist whose sole interest is in studying disease at the cellular level (and whose funding is not from a pharmaceutical co.).  Contrary to what Dr. Platt asserts, there are plenty of basic scientists working at universities and hospital research institutes who fall into that category.  I know -- I raised funds for some of the best.

With respect,

Linda

Wahine and Barry,  I am still looking at all of this too. As I said, I am not going to jump into bioidentical hormones without finding a doctor who can prescribe it correctly. I think that is the key. It is not one size fits all. I like what Dr. Platt has to say, because he presents both sides. I am also reading Dr. Uzzi Reiss's book, Natural Hormone Balance. It is very detailed and sites pages and pages of references. He is a gynie and has been treating women successfully for over 20 years.

I think it is helpful that we all respect each others rights to search for answers. I continue to be thankful for the women here who have taught me so much, especially Fla Lady who has continued to keep Stage 4 cancer under wraps by integrating traditional and alternative treatments, and sharing her successes with us. She has been a blessing and inspiration to me from the first time I came here.