Breast cancer rates fall, perhaps because of declining hormone use

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dandelion_Wine
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok. Maybe I’m wrong her. But, birth control pills are hormones also right?

So if the stopping the use of hormones reduces the rate of breast cancers in older women, then stopping the use of hormones in younger women should reduce it even further right?

Or am I looking at this wrong?
 
Do you think mainstream medicine will even tell women that though?
 
Well this certainly seems like a good thing. I hope that breast cancer rates and all cancer rates continue to fall.
 
KathleenElsie said:
Ok. Maybe I’m wrong her. But, birth control pills are hormones also right?
Click to expand...
That’s what my gynacologist told me years ago when I was a teenager - I had to take them (he liked calling it “The Pill” - contained estrogen - came in a ‘nice little’ package resembling contraceptive pills… :eek: ) because I don’t have any naturally producing hormones - certain organs didn’t develop (I’m one of the oddball medical cases where, if I wanted to get married and have relations, then I would need an operation to create an opening, but I still wouldn’t be able to have kids, as there’s no reproductive organ.). If I didn’t take it, I would be rather… flat-chested. I don’t take it anymore since the pills were making me gag a bit (rough edges and I have sensitive skin) - that caused arguments because my parents wanted me to take it. He did mention that risk factor of cancer, too. That was one of the ethical questions he asked us.

I really didn’t have a choice back then - either I didn’t take “The Pill”, and risk not looking like a fully developed woman, or take “The Pill”. An odd dilema, I guess. Techincally, it’s immoral, but what happens if you don’t have any of the organs? :ehh:

Add to that, I have a good half dozen other issues (hearing, vision, anatomical oddities like webbed toes, etc.). I’m a regular medical oddball! 😛 Good thing the best hospital in the world is several miles down the street in the city.
 
Jennifer_G said:
I really didn’t have a choice back then - either I didn’t take “The Pill”, and risk not looking like a fully developed woman, or take “The Pill”. An odd dilema, I guess. Techincally, it’s immoral, but what happens if you don’t have any of the organs? :ehh:
Click to expand...
Medicine is morally neutral, it’s how you intend to use it that makes it good or evil. If you are using it to reproduce/supplement a naturally abnormally low level of estrogen I’m pretty sure it’s okay.

There are much better hormone treatments than BCPs though! I need hormone replacement as well, but I’ve never been given birth control by my doctors.
 
The Women’s Health Iniative Study was a fifteen year study started in 1991 and stopped in 2002 I believe. It cost $625 million. It was the second study on combined hormone replacement therapy stopped due to report of breast cancer, strokes and Alzheimer’s related to estrogen and progestin.

I heard a doctor point out that the regular birth control pills are often used by women for periods of time say for a year and then at a later date for another year.

Also consider the millions of 40+ age women who are taking these medications including birth control and don’t even need it.
 
gam197 said:
The Women’s Health Iniative Study was a fifteen year study started in 1991 and stopped in 2002 I believe. It cost $625 million. It was the second study on combined hormone replacement therapy stopped due to report of breast cancer, strokes and Alzheimer’s related to estrogen and progestin.

I heard a doctor point out that the regular birth control pills are often used by women for periods of time say for a year and then at a later date for another year.

Also consider the millions of 40+ age women who are taking these medications including birth control and don’t even need it.
Click to expand...
I lack ovaries as well, without hormone replacement I never make estrogen, it was as if I was born postmenopausal. Without HRT I would die by 35, maybe earlier. HrT gives me the hope of hitting 50 or farther. Just because they are bad for healthy women does not mean they do not work for those with conditions. Think of it as too much of a good this, they made estrogen on their own, I never have.
 
I am sure it is OK for medical reasons.

I had a hysterectomy post-menopausal and haven’t taken the hormone replacement therapy.

Maybe someone knows the answer to this.

How does estrogen and progestine affect the body postmenopausal. I had heard that estrogen and progestin goes down as you get older so I thought if it is low, is it that important?
 
Plus for the sake of this thread, 99.9% percent of young woman do not need extra synthetic estrogen or progestin.

Most young bodies function well. Yet they are dosing themselves with strong chemicals. Most won’t even conceive in their 40’s and they are still on the birth control pills into their fifties.
 
Also it is important that teenagers do not go on the Pill, because it affect their sexual development.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menarche#Menarche_and_fertility

In most girls, menarche does not signal that ovulation has occurred. Studies of American girls suggest that the average interval between menarche and ovulation is several months. Irregular, anovulatory menses commonly occur for 1-2 years or more before regular ovulation is established.
Regular ovulation is usually indicated by predictable and consistent intervals between menses, predictable and consistent durations of menses, and predictable and consistent patterns of flow (e.g., heaviness or cramping). Continuing ovulation typically requires a body fat content of at least 22%. An anthropological term for this state of potential fertility is nubility.
 
I recall that just last year the World HEalth Organization released a study that showed that use of birth control does increase a women’s risk of breast cancer, by about the same rate as HRT. Don’t know for sure, but it seems like probably more women use artificial birth control than HRT - if so, it seems the breast cancer risk could really plummet if artificial birth control was not so readily pushed.

It also seems that the drive for early breast cancer detection may actually be a way for those who push an artificial birth control agenda to avoid the issue. In other words - so what if women get breast cancer from birth control - as long as it is caught early, it can be cured. But ask anyone who has gone through the treatments (and I am not in anyway arguing against screening for early detection) - the treatment can be extremely difficult to endure.
 
I recall that just last year the World HEalth Organization released a study that showed that use of birth control does increase a women’s risk of breast cancer, by about the same rate as HRT.
Click to expand...
You are correct that the WHO released this statement in July 2005, which is “based on data published since 1999”:
iarc.fr/ENG/Press_Releases/pr167a.html#Vol91

I just want to clarify the ovary produces progesterone, not progestin. There are risks and benefits.

Autumn
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top