Is Biomimetic Dosing be the Answer to Hormone Restoration?

Jan 8
16:10

2009

Kristin DeAnn Gabriel

Kristin DeAnn Gabriel

  • Share this article on Facebook
  • Share this article on Twitter
  • Share this article on Linkedin

Recent studies on hormone replacement therapy (HRT) are of tremendous importance, and offer much hope to women in menopause. The research suggests that women must cycle their hormones and have a menstrual bleed to be truly safe from cardiovascular events.

mediaimage

Danish research regarding healthy hormone replacement therapy (HRT)suggests that women must cycle their hormones and have a menstrual bleed to be truly safe from cardiovascular events. The study found that overall there was no increased risk of heart attacks in current users of HRT compared to women who had never taken hormones before.

The study is a significant validation of the value of cyclical (estrogen,Is Biomimetic Dosing be the Answer to Hormone Restoration? Articles followed by a combination of estrogen and progesterone) hormone therapy, indicating that biomimetic hormone restoration therapy (BHRT) may actually be safer than statically dosed continuous-combined.

There are more and more women today turning back to Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT), but there are many products on the market, making the right choice difficult.

Thia Danish observational study is the largest to look at the effects of HRT since the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) trial in 1991, which followed 698,098 healthy Danish women, aged 51-69. All of the questions about hormone therapy started back when the National Institute of Health (NIH) sponsored the WHI study of more than 161,000 women, which was designed to identify the benefits and risks of using hormone restoration therapy to prevent chronic diseases. It was ended mid-stream in 2002 when WHI investigators found that the risks of this approach using synthetic therapy exceeded the safety limits.

Results from the WHI dealt with only women over 65 who were taking only synthetic hormone replacement therapy which just consisted of the drugs Premarin and premPro. This study proved that dosing synthetic HRT in a static, low-dose regimen was harmful to woman over 65, with regard to stroke and cardiac situations.After 14 years and nearly $800 million taxpayer dollars, the overly emphasized negative results of the WHI were released back in the year 2002.

This news caused millions of women to immediately stop taking their Premarin or Prempro, or any other product deemed a hormone by their doctors.

Interestingly, the WHI never looked at hormones, only drugs with "hormone-like" effects dosed in a regimen far from that of human replacement. This study has led us to believe that conjugated equine estrogens (from pregnant mare urine) and a synthetic progestin (Prempro) dosed on a daily basis in static doses is clearly very harmful to women after only a few years, and yet, in contradictory reports from the same agency, PremPro seemed to have had positive effects as well. The other drug studied, daily Premarin, seemed to show substantially less harmful effects. Bioidentical hormones in static doses were not included in the study because they tend to be prescribed and dosed too many different ways.

Acquiring hormones has been a challenge as doctors are leery of even what is known as the "Standard of Care" approved synthetic hormones. Finding legitimate insurance-covered mainstream physicians to prescribe bio-identical hormones has been hard.

This is why the new studies on hormone replacement are of tremendous importance, and offer much hope to women in menopause.