Suzanne Somors hormone replacement???
Comments
-
LJ13--I have to say that having reviewed your posts I agree with Deidre. I am sure you mean well and are passionate about advocating what you believe is in the best interest of others--but you come across as insensitive and defensive. I often find your posts irrational and ignorant which is precisely what you accuse others of being on a regular basis. Perhaps you should re-read your posts before you push submit--if you really are interested in others hearing your opinions you will edit the sarcasm--otherwise I think others will start to just ignore your posts.
-
Desdemona--I had not read your comment before I made my last post. I want to be clear that my remarks were not directed at you. I do not think you or actually anyone else is a troll and truly understand why you would find that inaccurate and disrespectful--I think it is important for people who disagree to be able to have a respectful dialogue and my point is that is only possible when people do not take pot shots. I have found your comments about what is 'natural' by the way of hormones very helpful and it has given me something to think about. Thank you.
-
<
"The scientist in me pushes me in the direction of saying how it's made is less important that what it precisely is."
Timothy,
I enjoyed your post about trying to accurately describe "what it precisely is."
I wish the medical literature was not so sloppy in using the terms, "progestins," "progestogens," and "progesterone" almost interchangably. To add to the confusion, there must be dozens of different progestins which have a different molecular structure than the most widely used, medroxyprogesterone acetate (Provera).
The confusion has gone on for years. Do you have any sense of how terminology gets changed in science? Who generates the distinctions and changes the vocabulary?
A.
-
sarah -
Oh, well thank you, dearest. I'm so glad to hear that you haven't found me to be condescending, because I have really tried to just stimulate some thought on the matter and get people to think about Suzanne Sommers and her ideas about what is healthy for women, especially for women with breast cancer. I can truly sympathize with anyone who is frightened and trying to find answers, any answers, to this terrible disease we have all been afflicted with! It's so sad - I would never try to make anyone feel I'm trying to put them down intentionally.
-
The alternative site is the only place on the boards I feel comfortable to ask questions. The women here are going to understand why I chose alternative over conventional. I don't feel judged here. Other than surgery I was not comfortable choosing the conventional approach. I respect those that do.
I am so grateful for all those who added their research and thoughts about bio-identical hormones on this thread. You have helped me so much. I am the type of person who gets an idea and runs with it. You've made me stop and think.
I am grateful to those who have been around for awhile, like Vivre, Floidalady, and Deirdre. Thank you for being honest, protecting the threads, and your constant encouragment. It's you that has brought me back here.
There are times I thought this thread should stop. I log on and again was encourage to find another post that brought more clarity on this subject. I have a lot better understanding now, and more cautious about prematurly taking them...although like Deirdre I wonder about progesterone. When I was pregnant I produced progesterone and not estrogen. I wonder if I took progesterone if it would be a natural way to counteract the estrogen + to prevent recurrence.
The last thing...I really didn't know anything about Suzanne Somers much before the Ophra interview. But, she's a human being, and deserves a little respect. I don't like thrashing anyone, not even her. And I think she is only 62. I don't think we should judge anyone before we've walked a mile in their shoes.
Let's be careful. We're all fragile. B.Barry
-
Starla, the posts on the last few pages did get a little hot, but I appreciate a lively discussion. Hearing the pro's and con's are good as long as we do it respectfully. The fact that my bc sisters are protecting us from being harassed is comforting, and by them doing so I feel supported. There is so much on these threads. I want to copy a lot of the information before it gets lost.
-
Hi. I have been interested in HRT, actually the bio-identical ones and have thought that I could get some good information here but it's hard to find with the bickering and people calling others "ignorant and looney" and then instead of apologizing, just saying its a fact.
Why can't the people that want this type of information post here and the people who don't go post on the thread that speaks towards traditional treatment?
I guess I can print this out and try to find the posts with information instead of insults.
-
We all need to come to our decisions in the way that we feel most comforable. For me, it is reading a lot of books, by many different doctors and looking at as much data as possible. It is not my desire to convince anyone that I have all the answers. I am looking for them just as others are, and I appreciate anyone who shares what they have found out in their own research. I came across Suzanne Somers' books, long after I had come to my own conclusion that a lot of what is standard of care is not for me. I spent a lot of time getting healthy again, and I have no desire to do anything that will mess up my immune system again. I personally prefer not to put anything chemically produced in my body as long as I can avoid it. If other people feel, differently, that is their choice. That said, I feel I have related information that I have found, and people are entitled to take or leave in as they see fit. I have no desire convince people that I have the only answers, nor do I want to converse with people who seem to want to bait me with insults and innuendo. And if anyone wants to know where Suzanne Somers stands and what really happened to her healthwise, you can read it for yourself here:
http://www.randomhouse.ca/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780307237255&view=excerpt
This thread was never about following the advice of celebrities. It was about sharing information on hormone therapy. I hope my input has been helpful.
-
Sorry if this has been posted here earlier. I haven't read all the pages here on this thread yet. This is Dr. Lee giving a talk about how he got started on recommending using natural progesterone cream:
-
Sorry, no matter how many sock puppets show up, I won't stop putting valid information onto the thread, and I won't stop defending myself and others from childish attacks.
And my suggestion is the everyone refrain from personal comments. Period. You don't call her condescending, she doesn't call you ignorant. No one is above reproach.
-
Rosemary44 - thank you for that.. and I hadn't seen it here either, but there have been distractions from the main point so again thank you for putting this up because it brings me back to progesterone..
Even as we age our ovarys, brain and fat all produce (albeit different kinds) of estrogen, so when we are in menopause their is still estrogen but the progesterones have flat lined.. so perhaps progesterone's in smaller amounts to counterbalance the estrogens that we continue to be exposed to environmentally and through the other above mentioned paths is a solution to that
But:
When they (pathologists) label our tumors PR+ have they determined that the tumor or lesion is "fed" by the progesterone or only that the lesion or tumors are reactive to progesterone? If anyone knows the answer to this I'd appreciate a response because the doc's I have asked and the studies I have looked at do not address this - they tend to lump both estrogen and progesterone in the same wrapping but when asked to define PR+ there is confussion. Thanks in advance!
LJ13: Really? Look up PROJECTION you'll find it in a psychology book - it might explain why you attack and then see everyone attacking! All anyone here wants is respect - to get it you have to give it.
-
Lj,
But first you call people here sock puppets. Do you hear yourself? This is a research thread, please bring all research, pro and con and let's find out one way or the other. Opinions, please leave them somewhere else. Caustic remarks, go somewhere else, please.
-
My suggestion was that people refrain from personal comments ... and 2 people reply with personal comments. Posts reported.
Rosemary, I included myself in the reproach. That's why I suggested we ALL clean it up.
It is easy to find offense when one is looking for it.
-
Ok then, new beginning. Just research and a discussion of what we find. Amen.
-
Deirdre,
I've been curious about the role of progesterone in breast cancer as well, and have therefore done a lot of research on it. The basic conclusion is that they do not know exactly what it does. It has been found to have both a proliferative effect (bad) and an inhibiting effect (good) on cancer cells, and they even know which metabolites of progesterone are responsible for each of these effects. But they still can't say why some of the bad metabolites have a stronger effect than the good ones.
I'm going to paste a bit of a science-y abstract I found today below, and hopefully you can glean some information from it too.
Proliferative changes in the normal breast are known to be controlled by female sex steroids. However, only a portion of all breast cancer patients respond to current estrogen based endocrine therapy, and with continued treatment nearly all will become unresponsive and experience relapse. Therefore, ultimately for the majority of breast carcinomas, explanations and treatments based on estrogen are inadequate. Recent observations indicate that 5-pregnane and 4-pregnene progesterone metabolites may serve as regulators of estrogen-responsive as well as unresponsive human breast cancers. The conversion of progesterone to the 5-pregnanes is increased while conversion to the 4-pregnenes is decreased in breast carcinoma tissue, as a result of changes in progesterone metabolizing 5-reductase, 3-hydroxysteroid oxidoreductase (3-HSO) and 20-HSO activities and gene expression. The 5-pregnane, 5-pregnane-3,20-dione (5P) stimulates, whereas the 4-pregnene, 3-hydroxy-4-pregnen-20-one (3HP), inhibits cell proliferation and detachment, by modulation of cytoskeletal and adhesion plaque molecules via the MAP kinase pathway and involving separate and specific plasma membrane-based receptors. The promotion of breast cancer appears to be related to changes in in situ concentrations of cancer-inhibiting and cancer-promoting progesterone metabolites. New diagnostic and therapeutic possibilities for breast cancer are suggested.
~ (from the Journal of Steroid Biochemistry & Molecular Biology 93 (2005) 201-208)
I also found a recent exchange in the Journal of Oncology debating whether PR receptors should even be measured in breast cancer pathology, because some say they offer no diagnostic or therapeutic value (i.e. treatment recommendations are rarely based on the information). I can't link to these articles because they are susbscription-based (I'm a university student with good online library access). But if anyone wants the full PDF, I can email it to you, so PM me.
-
Rosemary, didn't you say you were PR+ too? I was pr- and my last blood test shows no progesterone. I am wondering, in response to Deidre, how much pr+ you were? Women who are menopausal will still show they are producing progesterone, but the progesterone level varies more during the monthly cycle. I was menopausal at dx, which would seem logical that I was
PR-.
Nonetheless Rosemary, that was a great link to one of Dr. Lee's lectures. He is the pioneer in all of this and he makes a lot of great points. I love the way he relates it all to rise in breast cancer.
-
I have liked Lee's stuff too and in answer to Deirdre's earlier question his material would make it appear that PR+ does not mean that progesterone feeds the cancer but rather that it makes it more possible for the cell to receive the benefits of progesterone. On a cautionary note though, I have found the following website helpful in making sense of a lot of this--although they are really in to BHRT they are very cautious when it comes to breast cancer and while they don't say "never" they explain why it might be of concern. In addition to this particular link they have other good stuff about this topic...
http://www.womenshealthnetwork.com/breasthealth/default.aspx
Edited by Mods to update link -
I also find this interesting: (sorry, I've been reading all along but haven't chimed in before)
"...despite the fact that PR-A-expressing tumors are smaller and Tamoxifen responsive in the above model, other data and our unpublished work indicate that they have a more aggressive phenotype. Indeed, a study by Hopp et al. of more than 100 Tamoxifen-treated women shows that patients with PRA-rich tumors have a poorer disease free survival (DFS) than ones with PR-B-rich tumors. Thus, the type of PR present in a tumor, independent of progestin treatment, may have dramatic effects on estrogen-regulated growth. Overall, the studies lend support to our hypothesis that PRs are not just passive markers of functional ERs, but can independently, and in the absence of progesterone, influence tumor phenotype."
(from Expression Profiling of Human Breast Cancers and Gene Regulation by Progesterone Receptors, Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia, Vol. 8, No. 3, July 2003)
So it sounds like we should know specifically which PR subtype is expressed in our tumours...
-
StacyR: Thanks for the input, I was able to gleam a bit of info from the data you presented, but I think what stood out for me more was the Oncologist who are questioning whether it (PR statues) should be tested for at all! If Oncologists are debating whether the testing is necessary it certainly explains the reason for the confussion of my bs, gp, obgyn..
Vivre: I was PR+ 80+ and at the time I was not (I believe) menopausal so are you saying that if the PR is high perhaps that is a better indicator that I was not in true or full menopause?
sarbhealed: I had read this article too and was concerned that perhaps it leaned a bit too much towards BHRT.. but it is chalk full of info!
Well it seems if the scientific data is not there for progesterone, and the altern. doc's (Dr. :Lee etc) believe that balance is the important piece (ie equal parts of estrogen & progesterone) I would think that EVEN the estrogen piece of the stats could be wrong. Perhaps there is a catalyst effect that occurs when equal parts of progesterone, estrogen and testosterone come together and that is what keeps bc in check? Just a muse.
-
There is a suggestion further up that "we ALL clean it up".
Now, I view this as a reasonable statement.
It is hard enough, I think, confusing enough, to try and make difficult decisions, isn't it?It would be nice if we could try and keep EXCHANGING information and points of view as much as possible in this most interesting thread (and I believe that's why most of us came here in the first place). We might not always agree with each other, but we all stand to learn something .....important.......Of course, those of us who lean towards Integrative Medicine, we will not change our minds 360 degres; and those who lean towards "allopathic" medicine [I am NOT using this expression in a derogatory fashion] will not change drastically, either (but if treatment is like everything else in life, it is probable that nothing is completely white or completely black).
And Heaven knows we need to learn as much as we can, don't we?
-
Vivre,
I'm 90% ER+ and 10% PR+.
Remember when I mentioned I had read something before about this and then I went on to other things. This is what I read before in the Dr. Dixie Mills article posted above.
"Some women will metabolize extra progesterone into estrogen- we call these women "highly estrogenic." They tend to respond quickly to supplemental progesterone with increased breast tenderness (particularly during ovulation) and irregular spotting or bleeding. The closer this kind of woman is to menopause, the more cautious she should be with any form of progesterone. With the right medical practitioner and a deep understanding of her whole health picture, it can be possible for such a woman to actually change the way she metabolizes progesterone to make it safe to supplement with bioidentical forms."
That's what frightened me off.
I stopped my HRT's, I should have been in the 12% group that didn't get BC. More is at play, I guess.
-
Here is a very interesting article on bio-identicals. It supports my assertion that HRT is HRT. Bio-identical hormone treatments are already approved by the FDA - the Climara patch is one example. I used Climara, btw.
http://women.webmd.com/news/20090115/oprah-and-bioidentical-hormones-faq
-
Here is a copy of the of this website's official policy on alternative medicine:
The difference between complementary medicine and alternative medicine
Alternative medicine is not the same as complementary medicine. Complementary medicine is USED WITH conventional medicine. Alternative medicine is USED INSTEAD OF conventional medicine.
It might help you to add yoga, tai chi, or massage to your regular treatment plan. But you should NEVER replace any part of your regular treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, hormonal treatment) with something else. Therefore, Breastcancer.org does not recommend alternative medicine.
-
If breastcancer.org "does not recommend alternative medicine" then why is the forum referred to as Alterative, Complementary & Holistic Treatment ? I imagine that the comment is a CYA for insurance liability purposes. Whether or not this site recommends alternative medicine is not going to stop me if I find more specific data in those areas that directly effects the medical situation I am trying to address.. So the "you should never replace regular treatment".. is your opinion (and or this sites opinion) and as we have all said before treatment is a very personal decision and everything that could possibly help can and should be weighted into the situation. For example, there are treatments in Japan and in Italy as well as other parts of Europe that can and should be considered but until they are "proven" to the FDA they may be considered alternative and after FDA approves them 10 - 15 years from now - complementary medicine.. Why interrupt a good conversation to put yourself in the position of suggesting that we are off topic? Or was that just a disclaimer on your part for advising yoga etc??
-
What I don't understand about the Oprah story is why is she only taking estrogen and not PR with it? Does she not know about the estrogen dominance theory?
-
Do Fibrocystic breast indicate estrogen + ??? All I know so far is I have a lot of fibrocystic changes, and cyst. I'm post menapaulse. I do not know where I'm at with progesterone or estrogen...or the other variables you talk about. I'm a real novice as I suppose are a lot of newbies learning about cancer variatons, and various kinds of tumors as well as natural treatments . The study by Hopp is confusinng. What are PRA-rich tumors? What are PR-B-rich tumors?
-
I am so excited! I have been looking for a doctor to help me with this for months. I found out there is a compounding pharmacy in my town, so I stopped by today and they give me a list of doctors who they work with who perscribe Natural HRT. So I called one of them and had a great conversation. She reinforced a lot of what we have talked about on this thread. She also assured me she has treated a lot of women with breast cancer. But she really through me for a loop when she said the solution for me may be testosterone! So now I am even more confused. But at least all my bloodwork is done so when I meet with her I guess I will find out what she is talking about. Anyway she gave me two more websites to check out.
hormonebalance.org
was started by a women doctor. Dr Rebecca Glafer who was a breast surgeon, my prospective doctor said that Dr. Glafer often speaks at seminars in other countries but is held back in the US because of all the problems with the FDA
Sound familiar?
another site for general info is
naturalhrt.info
Barry, It does say in Dr. Reiss' book that fibrocystic breasts are effected by estrogen levels. I do not know what it means by PRA rich tumors. You might also like to check out my doctor who is now doing thermographys for me at drnick.net. He talks about how helpful thermography is at finding tumors in fibrocystic breasts. I did two thermographs last year because I am so afraid of any more radiation and I found it gave me a lot of peace of mind.
-
Desdemona222 wrote:
" .....you should NEVER replace any part of your regular treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, hormonal treatment) with something else"
I think it should be noted that, while surgery does, indeed, reduce one's risk by 80-85% (at least in my case), chemotherapy, radiation, and hormonal treatment combined only manage to reduce said risk by maybe another 5% (this is according to the color-coded chart prepared by my very-mainstream oncologist's team). [Here, I am referring to CONVENTIONAL hormonal treatment; I assume from this discussion that the jury is still out on bioidenticals]
Obviously, we need to find better treatments. Lamentably, howver, I personally feel that won't be possible as long as research is so profit-driven and controled by the very people who sell the drugs.
I feel there is something terribly wrong with this mercantilism, and that's why I have stopped participating in different "pink" fundraising efforts (I no longer see the need to keep on pumping money "for breast cancer research," (little funny face) when most of that money goes into administrative spending, instead of research). And the portion that actually makes it into research is, too often, not allocated to truly innovative research.
Instead, we keep sticking with the same old, same old, same old chemotherapy, etc....
-
Those are interesting statistics Yazmin. However they would only be applicable when one does surgery first. More and more the standard of care is neoadjuvant therapy. It is preferred at cutting edge cancer treatment hospitals.
Do you know the statistics for neoadjuvant therapy?
I believe also that efficacy of chemo is completely dependent on tumor pathology. Hormone positive tumors tend to be less receptive to chemo, hormone negative tumors tend to respond quite well to chemo.
Radiation reduces recurrence rates in breast conserving surgery and is recommended for any node positive disease.
-
Yasmin -
The stats on lumpectomy with radiation therapy vs lumpectomy alone are very significant on a number of levels. Basically, the radiation therapy reduces the recurrence rate by over 16% over a 12-year period - that is very significant because 12 years is quite a long time. Lots of breast cancer stats only apply to a 5-year window of time.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/breast/HealthProfessional/page5/print
Categories
- All Categories
- 679 Advocacy and Fund-Raising
- 289 Advocacy
- 68 I've Donated to Breastcancer.org in honor of....
- Test
- 322 Walks, Runs and Fundraising Events for Breastcancer.org
- 5.6K Community Connections
- 282 Middle Age 40-60(ish) Years Old With Breast Cancer
- 53 Australians and New Zealanders Affected by Breast Cancer
- 208 Black Women or Men With Breast Cancer
- 684 Canadians Affected by Breast Cancer
- 1.5K Caring for Someone with Breast cancer
- 455 Caring for Someone with Stage IV or Mets
- 260 High Risk of Recurrence or Second Breast Cancer
- 22 International, Non-English Speakers With Breast Cancer
- 16 Latinas/Hispanics With Breast Cancer
- 189 LGBTQA+ With Breast Cancer
- 152 May Their Memory Live On
- 85 Member Matchup & Virtual Support Meetups
- 375 Members by Location
- 291 Older Than 60 Years Old With Breast Cancer
- 177 Singles With Breast Cancer
- 869 Young With Breast Cancer
- 50.4K Connecting With Others Who Have a Similar Diagnosis
- 204 Breast Cancer with Another Diagnosis or Comorbidity
- 4K DCIS (Ductal Carcinoma In Situ)
- 79 DCIS plus HER2-positive Microinvasion
- 529 Genetic Testing
- 2.2K HER2+ (Positive) Breast Cancer
- 1.5K IBC (Inflammatory Breast Cancer)
- 3.4K IDC (Invasive Ductal Carcinoma)
- 1.5K ILC (Invasive Lobular Carcinoma)
- 999 Just Diagnosed With a Recurrence or Metastasis
- 652 LCIS (Lobular Carcinoma In Situ)
- 193 Less Common Types of Breast Cancer
- 252 Male Breast Cancer
- 86 Mixed Type Breast Cancer
- 3.1K Not Diagnosed With a Recurrence or Metastases but Concerned
- 189 Palliative Therapy/Hospice Care
- 488 Second or Third Breast Cancer
- 1.2K Stage I Breast Cancer
- 313 Stage II Breast Cancer
- 3.8K Stage III Breast Cancer
- 2.5K Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
- 13.1K Day-to-Day Matters
- 132 All things COVID-19 or coronavirus
- 87 BCO Free-Cycle: Give or Trade Items Related to Breast Cancer
- 5.9K Clinical Trials, Research News, Podcasts, and Study Results
- 86 Coping with Holidays, Special Days and Anniversaries
- 828 Employment, Insurance, and Other Financial Issues
- 101 Family and Family Planning Matters
- Family Issues for Those Who Have Breast Cancer
- 26 Furry friends
- 1.8K Humor and Games
- 1.6K Mental Health: Because Cancer Doesn't Just Affect Your Breasts
- 706 Recipe Swap for Healthy Living
- 704 Recommend Your Resources
- 171 Sex & Relationship Matters
- 9 The Political Corner
- 874 Working on Your Fitness
- 4.5K Moving On & Finding Inspiration After Breast Cancer
- 394 Bonded by Breast Cancer
- 3.1K Life After Breast Cancer
- 806 Prayers and Spiritual Support
- 285 Who or What Inspires You?
- 28.7K Not Diagnosed But Concerned
- 1K Benign Breast Conditions
- 2.3K High Risk for Breast Cancer
- 18K Not Diagnosed But Worried
- 7.4K Waiting for Test Results
- 603 Site News and Announcements
- 560 Comments, Suggestions, Feature Requests
- 39 Mod Announcements, Breastcancer.org News, Blog Entries, Podcasts
- 4 Survey, Interview and Participant Requests: Need your Help!
- 61.9K Tests, Treatments & Side Effects
- 586 Alternative Medicine
- 255 Bone Health and Bone Loss
- 11.4K Breast Reconstruction
- 7.9K Chemotherapy - Before, During, and After
- 2.7K Complementary and Holistic Medicine and Treatment
- 775 Diagnosed and Waiting for Test Results
- 7.8K Hormonal Therapy - Before, During, and After
- 50 Immunotherapy - Before, During, and After
- 7.4K Just Diagnosed
- 1.4K Living Without Reconstruction After a Mastectomy
- 5.2K Lymphedema
- 3.6K Managing Side Effects of Breast Cancer and Its Treatment
- 591 Pain
- 3.9K Radiation Therapy - Before, During, and After
- 8.4K Surgery - Before, During, and After
- 109 Welcome to Breastcancer.org
- 98 Acknowledging and honoring our Community
- 11 Info & Resources for New Patients & Members From the Team