May
15
2021

Research about Side Effects of the AstraZeneca Vaccine

Research about side effects of the AstraZeneca vaccine revealed some worrisome facts. An article that appeared in the German “Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung” explained that people should not worry about the vaccine.

The heading of the article was:” People no longer have to be afraid of the AstraZeneca-Vaccine.” But subsequently it describes how vaccinating with the AstraZeneca vaccine against Covid-19 developed blood clots in some people. Researchers at the University of Greifswald examined 7 cases where following the vaccine blood clots developed.  Dr. Andreas Greinacher is Head of the department of Transfusion Medicine in Greifswald, Germany. He said that blood clots are extremely rare following vaccinations. The 7 people who did form clots in sinuses (big vein structures) of the brain had all antibodies against platelets. Normally platelets help with hemostasis for wounds, but when specific antibodies bind to platelets, they can cause blood clots.

Research about side effects of the AstraZeneca vaccine identified blood clots as a problem

The Greifswald medical team said that they know how to treat this blood clot condition when it occurs. They are using blood clot dissolving medication like heparin and warfarin to dissolve the clots. But if this treatment is not instituted right away, the patient could get a stroke or pulmonary emboli, which is a life-threatening condition. Normal minor side effects of the vaccine occur on the first and second day after the vaccination. If blood clots appear in brain veins, symptoms of severe headaches develop on day 4 or 5 following the vaccination. Other patients might develop a painful leg due to a blood clot in the leg veins. If this should happen, the patient must present immediately at the emergency department of a hospital. Physicians will start anticoagulation therapy right away. The 7 patients who developed blood clots did so between day 5 and 14 following the AstraZeneca vaccination.

European decision to reinstate the AstraZeneca vaccine

The European Medical Agency stated that the benefits would outweigh the risks of the AstraZeneca vaccine. They recommended reinstatement of vaccinations with the vaccine. However, there remain problems with the vaccine. First, the effectiveness of the vaccine was initially determined to be 79%, but retesting showed it is only 76%. Next the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut that monitors complications of medical procedures in all of Germany determined 31 cases of blood clots. 9 patients died from them.

Interestingly, the EMA has reversed their opinion about the AstraZeneca vaccine on April 6, 2021 as can be seen from this press statement. Now they are saying that there is a clear association between the vaccine and rare blood clots in the brain.

In the US the CDC and FDA have not approved the AstraZeneca vaccine. The CDC also said that the Johnson-Johnson’s vaccine should be put on hold until a re-examination of the blood clot issue is clarified.

Discussion

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are pure RNA vaccines that are known to have very few complication rates. Researchers stated that only very few people develop clots in their brain or leg veins. They also stated that the majority of people benefit from the AstraZeneca vaccine. This is a simplification. There are other vaccines that doctors can use as alternatives that do not produce clots. It would be better to ask why there is clot formation with the AstraZeneca Vaccine!

The AstraZeneca vaccine contains a DNA adenovirus

The AstraZeneca vaccine contains remnants of a DNA virus, namely an adenovirus. Researchers added the gene for the coronavirus spike protein to the DNA adenovirus.

The DNA shell from the adenovirus helps to protect the vaccine at fridge temperatures, which increases the shelf life of the vaccine. But as with other DNA vaccines there are more complications possible. This question was reviewed here already 10 years ago.

In the end we are still faced with RNA vaccines against Coved-19 that work, versus a DNA vaccine that has possible complications with blood clots. I for one would not accept anything else but an RNA vaccine that does not have the clot formation side effect. I feel that the authorities should stop the AstraZeneca vaccine for now. The researchers should carry out further studies to see whether improvements can make the vaccine safer.

Research about Side Effects of the AstraZeneca Vaccine

Research about Side Effects of the AstraZeneca Vaccine

Conclusion

The AstraZeneca vaccine contains a deactivated DNA adenovirus. Researchers added the gene for the coronavirus spike protein to the adenovirus. This is a completely different approach from the RNA vaccines that do not have these side effects. The fact that some patients developed blood clots is likely explainable on the grounds that they received a DNA vaccine. In my opinion the authorities released the AstraZeneca vaccine prematurely. They should put a hold on this vaccine until scientists can develop improvements to the vaccine. In the meantime, people should receive the safer RNA vaccines.

To continue vaccinating with AstraZeneca vaccine is unacceptable

I disagree that governments allow a vaccine that has serious complication rates for which doctors offer anticoagulation therapy. It is only a matter of time that a few deaths occur, because the blood clots escaped diagnosis. The company has now renamed the vaccine as Vaxzevria. This seems to be a move of AstraZeneca to move away from the complications of the AstraZeneca vaccine. This does nothing to help solve the problem with the blood clots that don’t only occur “in a few cases”. We are dealing with a serious side effect, and you should ask yourself the question, whether it is worth the risk.

Incoming search terms:

Oct
05
2019

Breast Cancer Risk Persists After Hormone Replacement Therapy

New research showed that the breast cancer risk persists after hormone replacement therapy (HRT). This is described in this CNN article. It is common knowledge for some time that female patients who use synthetic hormones as hormone replacement in menopause, have a 1.6-fold to 1.8-fold risk to develop breast cancer. However, since the abrupt ending of the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) in 2002 the truth about the risks of HRT became known and made HRT more confusing. After all, in this trial they wanted to show once and for all that HRT would be beneficial. The expectation was that HRT would prevent osteoporosis, heart attacks and breast cancer. But the results were quite different. Instead the study found a 41% increase in strokes, 29% increase in heart attacks, 26% increase in breast cancer, 22% increase in total cardiovascular disease and a doubling in the risk for blood clots.

Missing information about synthetic hormones

What the authors of the study did not explain was the fact that it was the properties of the synthetic hormones, progestagen and Premarin, that were responsible for the negative effects. Had researchers insisted to perform the study with bioidentical hormones, the results would have been quite the opposite! With bioidentical hormone replacement we see the prevention of heart attacks and clots; cancer rates are lower than controls, and the prevention of osteoporosis is another benefit. The end result is a reduction in mortality rates. These horrifying results from the use of synthetic hormones still frighten many women. This is particularly so when it comes to replacing hormones after menopause.

Breast cancer risk study with HRT in more details

The research study described in the CNN article is based on this comprehensive Lancet study. The researchers did a Meta analysis of 58 prospective studies. Unfortunately all the hormones given were synthetic hormones (not bioidentical ones) that had the same configuration as in the WHI. On average women became menopausal at age 50. This is when the physicians commenced HRT. The prospective follow-up showed that 108,647 postmenopausal women developed breast cancer around the age of 65. 55,575 women (51%) had used HRT. Postmenopausal women who used estrogen/progestagen combinations during years 1–4 had a relative risk of 1.60-fold to develop breast cancer. This risk increased during years 5–14 after exposure to estrogen/progestagen with a relative risk of 2.08-fold to develop breast cancer. 

More details about breast cancer risks

The risk of developing breast cancer was lower when women took estrogen only as a form of HRT. For years 1-4 the relative breast cancer risk for patients on estrogen alone was only 1.17-fold. Regarding years 5-14 with estrogen-alone replacement the breast cancer risk was 1.33-fold.

Women of average weight who started their HRT of estrogen/progestagen pills at age 50 with menopause one woman in 50 users developed breast cancer between the ages of 50 and 69. In women who used estrogen regularly, but progestagen only irregularly, one in 70 users developed breast cancer. For estrogen only users one in every 200 women developed breast cancer.

Discussion of the above results

Dr. Wright and Dr. John Lee have pointed out years ago that there are alternatives to taking synthetic hormones as HRT. Taking oral synthetic hormone preparations is problematical. First, the pharmaceutical company attached chemical side chains to the synthetic hormones. The women’s estrogen receptors recognize the synthetic hormones only partially. Hormone researchers developed progestagen to mimic a woman’s progesterone. But it turns out that the estrogen receptors read progestagens like an estrogen. This is the reason why there are higher breast cancer rates with the combination of estrogen/progestagen than estrogen alone. Secondly, there is a problem of estrogen dominance, which causes a higher likelihood that the patient develops breast cancer or heart attacks.

Avoiding estrogen dominance reduces breast cancer risk

If estrogen is balanced with progesterone, the cancer promoting effect of estrogen is counterbalanced, and the women on bioidentical hormone replacement are protected from the serious side effects women of the WHI had to endure.

Bioidentical estrogen applications are available through creams that women apply to the skin. This avoids the problem of the first-pass effect; if estrogens are absorbed from a pill in the gut they have to pass through the liver, which is the organ that metabolizes them.

Bioidentical hormone replacement as an alternative to HRT

In Europe there has been a strong resistance to using synthetic hormones. As a result long-term studies were able to show that there is no danger when bioidentical hormone replacements therapy uses creams that are applied to the skin or intravaginally. This avoids the first-pass effect in the liver, as is the case with synthetic estrogens and progestagens taken orally as pills.

John Lee stated that physicians should measure hormones and identify those women who are truly hormone deficient. These are the ones who need hormone replacement. However, physicians should use only bioidentical hormones in a hormone replacement therapy. And they should also replace only as much as necessary to normalize the hormone levels. This is also the level where postmenopausal symptoms disappear. Dr. Lee noted: “A 10-year French study of HRT using a low-dose estradiol patch plus oral progesterone shows no increased risk of breast cancer, strokes or heart attacks”.

How is bioidentical hormone replacement done?

The best method is usually a bioidentical hormone cream application to the forearms or to the chest wall once per day. A woman on bioidentical hormone replacement applies bioidentical Bi-Est cream and progesterone cream to the skin of her forearms or chest wall. The hormones get directly absorbed into the blood stream and can do their job without interference. The treating physician can prescribe different amounts of the bioidentical hormones depending on saliva tests or blood tests. 1 or 2 months later repeat blood or saliva tests can follow to verify that the amounts of the replacement hormones and their absorption are adequate for the patient’s need.

Difficulties to measure progesterone levels

Dr. David Zava, PhD gave a talk on breast cancer risks. This was a presentation at the 24th Annual World Congress on Anti-Aging Medicine (Dec. 9-11, 2016) in Las Vegas that I attended. Dr. Zava, who runs the ZRT laboratory, spent some time to explain how to measure progesterone in a physiological way.

Blood (serum) progesterone levels do not adequately reflect what the hormone tissue level is like in a woman’s breasts. On the other hand saliva hormone levels are giving an accurate account of what breast tissue levels are like.

Progesterone blood levels versus progesterone tissues levels

Dr. Zava gave an example of a woman who received an application of 30 mg of topical progesterone. Next, laboratory tests observed hourly progesterone levels in serum and saliva. The serum progesterone levels remained at around 2 ng/ml, while the saliva progesterone levels peaked 3 to 5 hours after the application. It reached 16 ng/ml in saliva, which also represents the breast tissue progesterone level. Dr. Zava said that the important lesson to learn from this is not to trust blood progesterone levels. Too many physicians fall into this trap and order too much progesterone cream based on a misleading low blood test. This leads to overdosing progesterone. With salivary progesterone levels it is possible to see the physiological tissue levels, which is impossible with blood tests. Dr. Zava emphasized that testing blood or urine as progesterone hormone tests will underestimate bio-potency and lead to overdosing the patient.

Breast Cancer Risk Persists After Hormone Replacement Therapy

Breast Cancer Risk Persists After Hormone Replacement Therapy

Conclusion

A new Meta analysis of 58 prospective studies with a large amount of participants showed that standard hormone replacement therapy (HRT) for postmenopausal women causes breast cancer. Postmenopausal women who used estrogen/progestagen combinations during years 1–4 after menopause had a relative risk of 1.60-fold to develop breast cancer. This risk increased during years 5–14 after exposure to estrogen/progestagen with a relative risk of 2.08-fold to develop breast cancer. Unfortunately all of the patients had received the standard Premarin estrogen and synthetic progestagen combination. The body’s estrogen receptors read both of these synthetic hormones as estrogen, which led to estrogen dominance. Estrogen dominance (with missing natural progesterone) is known to cause breast cancer.

Comments and discussion of bioidentical hormone replacement (BHRT)

I have explained in my comment that the investigators should have used bioidentical hormone replacement therapy (BHRT) instead of making a similar mistake as in the Women’s Health Initiative, where synthetic hormones caused cancer, heart attacks and blood clots.

Bioidentical hormone replacement is started with progesterone creams first in order to avoid estrogen dominance. After hormone tests estrogen is gradually introduced as Bi-Est cream applied to the skin and balanced with the progesterone. The physician orders blood estrogen levels and progesterone saliva hormone tests from time to time to monitor the hormone levels. No cancer occurs with bioidentical hormone replacement. It also protects from osteoporosis, heart attacks and strokes.

Part of this blog was published here before.

Incoming search terms:

Oct
21
2017

Bioidentical Hormone Replacement

Recently Medical News Today published an article on bioidentical hormone replacement in the Sept. 19, 2017 edition.

Although it was partially informative, I felt that there was an underlying bias against the use of bioidentical hormone replacement. The article made it sound as if hormone replacement therapy would not be safe. But the opposite is true with bioidentical hormone replacement.

Why are many women afraid of bioidentical hormone replacement?

At the time when there was a lot of confusion about hormone replacement therapy (HRT) the results of the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) made it even more confusing. After all there was one trial to show once and for all that HRT would be beneficial. The expectation was that HRT prevents osteoporosis, heart attacks and breast cancer. But the results were quite different. Instead the study found a 41% increase in strokes, 29% increase in heart attacks, 26% increase in breast cancer, 22% increase in total cardiovascular disease and a doubling in the risk for blood clots.

Missing information about synthetic hormones

What the authors of the study did not explain was the fact that it was the properties of the synthetic hormones, progestin and Premarin were responsible for the negative effects. Had research insisted to perform the study with bioidentical hormones, the results would have been quite the opposite! With bioidentical hormone replacement we see the prevention of heart attacks and clots; cancer rates are lower than controls, and the prevention of osteoporosis is another benefit. The end result is a reduction in mortality rates. But the horrifying results that are due to the use of synthetic hormones and that the WHI warned about linger on in the minds of many women.

The use of bioidentical hormone replacement

Dr. John Lee pointed out in several of his books that the physician should only replace hormone loss with bioidentical hormones. He also pointed out that physicians should only replace those hormones that are at low levels or missing. This means that the woman should have confirmatory blood tests like FSH, LH, blood estrogen and salivary progesterone. If estrogen and progesterone are missing, the physician usually starts the woman on progesterone cream first. After two months, when laboratory tests show a saturation with progesterone , the addition of estrogen can follow, typically as the Bi-Est cream. This is a mix of estriol and estradiol.

Caution to balance against estrogen dominance

Progesterone is started first to balance against the potential cancer-inducing effect of estradiol. With the addition of progesterone a balance is the result, and estrogen will not cause breast cancer. This is also why Bi-Est is used: it is a mix of estriol and estradiol. Estriol is neutral with regard to causing breast cancer. Estradiol is the main natural estrogen in a woman, so some of it is necessary to make the woman feel normal. This is how the body receptors are functioning. But estradiol alone, when not in balance with progesterone, can cause breast cancer and uterine cancer.

The key is that only women who need bioidentical hormones should receive it. There are some women whose blood tests do not show a lack of estrogen, but only a lack of progesterone. These women should receive replacement with bioidentical progesterone to re-establish the hormone balance between estradiol and progesterone.

Safety of bioidentical hormone replacement products

As I have mentioned before, the Women’s Health Initiative in 2002 showed that on Premarin and progestin, two synthetic hormone products women came down with breast cancer, heart attacks, stroke, and thromboembolic events. They were using the synthetic drugs, namely conjugated equine estrogen and medroxyprogesterone acetate. The reason these women had to suffer these side effects was because their physicians insisted in using “pure hormones that a drug company had manufactured”. But these synthetic hormones were not pure hormones; they were adulterated with side chains so that pharmaceutical companies could patent them. These side chains made the synthetic hormones not fit the body’s hormone receptors. And this is the reason why the synthetic hormones created chaos in form of breast cancer, strokes and heart attacks.

Women’s Health Initiative authors whitewashed study results

Instead of admitting their mistakes, the full truth never became public. Instead the authors of the WHI study stated that it would be necessary to limit hormone replacement in menopause to the minimum amount of synthetic hormones to control symptoms, and their use should not exceed more than 5 years. These authors never distinguished between bioidentical hormones that fit the body’s hormone receptors and the synthetic hormones that irritated or blocked the body’s hormone receptors. There are thousands of women in Europe who have been on bioidentical hormones for decades, and they are doing just fine!

Bioidentical hormones in balance have no side effects

The truth is that bioidentical hormones –as long as they are kept in balance-do not have any side effects. Bioidentical hormones are the same that a woman produces in her ovaries before menopause sets in. The production of her bioidentical hormones kept her healthy. But the treating physician needs to carefully watch the balance of the hormones in the woman who is replaced with bioidentical estrogen and progesterone. This means that she needs to get enough progesterone to counterbalance estrogen stimulation. Hormones are constantly changing and if you don’t measure them, you don’t know what you are dealing with.

Dr. Lee said to measure hormone levels

John Lee showed a long time ago that you should measure hormones and identify those women who are truly hormone deficient. These are the ones who need hormone replacement. However, physicians should use only bioidentical hormones to replace what is missing. And they should also replace only as much as necessary to normalize the levels. This is also the level where postmenopausal symptoms disappear. Dr. Lee noted: “A 10-year French study of HRT using a low-dose estradiol patch plus oral progesterone shows no increased risk of breast cancer, strokes or heart attacks”.

How is bioidentical hormone replacement done?

The best method is usually a bioidentical hormone cream application to the forearms or to the chest wall once per day. This avoids the first-pass metabolism where the hormones, if absorbed from a pill in the gut have to pass through the liver. Part of the hormones can get metabolized and some of the hormone effect may disappear. By applying bioidentical Bi-Est cream and progesterone cream to the skin, the hormones get directly absorbed into the blood stream and can do their job without interference. The treating physician can prescribe different amounts of the bioidentical hormones depending on saliva tests or blood tests. 1 or 2 months later repeat blood or saliva tests can follow to verify that the amounts of the replacement hormones and their absorption are adequate for the patient’s need.

What are the side effects of bioidentical hormone replacement?

Normally, when estrogen and progesterone are in balance, there should be no side effect. However, in the beginning of replacement therapy sometimes one of the hormones gets too high. If this happens with estrogen replacement, the woman becomes estrogen-dominant. She would experience symptoms of bloating, fatigue, weight gain, depression, headaches, loss of sex drive. She can also develop uterine fibroids, endometriosis and hypothyroidism. It was Dr. John Lee who first described this (Ref.1). There can also be mood swings, craving for sweets, irritability, and sluggishness in the morning. The key is to cut back on the estrogen dosage; alternatively, if progesterone is low in saliva tests, this hormone may need an increase, which would rebalance estrogen. At the end of fine-tuning of bioidentical hormone replacement the woman will feel normal and have no negative side effects, but the process of fine-tuning may take several months.

Difficulties to measure progesterone levels

Dr. David Zava, PhD gave a talk on breast cancer risks. This was a presentation at the 24th Annual World Congress on Anti-Aging Medicine (Dec. 9-11, 2016) in Las Vegas that I attended. Dr. Zava, who runs the ZRT laboratory spent some time to explain how to measure progesterone in a physiological way.

Blood (serum) progesterone levels do not adequately reflect what the hormone tissue level is like in a woman’s breasts. On the other hand saliva hormone levels are giving an accurate account of what breast tissue levels are like.

Progesterone blood levels versus progesterone tissues levels

Dr. Zava gave an example of a woman who received an application of 30 mg of topical progesterone. Next, laboratory tests observed hourly progesterone levels in the serum and in the saliva. The serum progesterone levels remained at around 2 ng/ml, while the saliva progesterone levels peaked 3 to 5 hours after the application. It reached 16 ng/ml in saliva, which also represents the breast tissue progesterone level. Dr. Zava said that the important lesson to learn from this is not to trust blood progesterone levels. Too many physicians fall into this trap and order too much progesterone cream based on a misleading blood test. This leads to overdosing progesterone. With salivary progesterone levels you see the physiological tissue levels, with blood tests you don’t. Dr. Zava emphasized that testing blood or urine as progesterone hormone tests will underestimate bio-potency and lead to overdosing the patient.

Bioidentical Hormone Replacement

Bioidentical Hormone Replacement

Conclusion

Bioidentical hormone replacement, properly done, does not cause cancer, does not cause blood clots and prevents heart attacks and strokes. It also prevents osteoporosis and the associated fractures in older women. The key is that the natural hormones fit the body’s own hormone receptors. The reason why menopausal symptoms appear is that natural hormones (estrogen and progesterone) are missing. Physicians treated patients with synthetic hormones during the Women’s Health Initiative. In contrast, hormone replacement for missing hormones in a menopausal woman with bioidentical hormones  has no side effect. Contrary to the Women’s Health Initiative in 2002 there are no breast cancers, no heart attacks and no strokes with bioidentical hormone replacement. What is even better is that these women will live without all the postmenopausal problems, and their life expectancy will be about 10 years longer than without bioidentical hormone replacement.

References

Ref. 1. Dr. John R. Lee: “What your doctor may not tell you about menopause: the breakthrough book on natural hormone balance”. Sept. 2004.

May
14
2016

Hormone Replacement Therapy In Menopause

Back in the 1980’s many physicians were hopeful that hormone replacement therapy in menopause (HRT) could extend the lives of postmenopausal women by approximately 10 years, if HRT would be started early enough. But the HERS study (Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study) in 1998 and the WHI study (Women’s Health Initiative) of 2002 changed things dramatically.

The HERS study did not show any benefit with regard to prevention of heart disease. Instead it showed more gallbladder disease (1.38-fold) and blood clots (2.89-fold) develop in the experimental group versus the placebo.

The WHI study was complex and had several arms. There also were some methodological errors in the study as pointed out here.

Instead of a decrease in heart attacks, there was an increase, when estrogen and progestin was combined. There were more cases of colon cancer, more blood clots and heart attacks in the placebo groups compared to the experimental groups. It seems that something went wrong with these trials.

Unknown facts about hormone replacement therapy in menopause

Premarin is not bioidentical to human estrogens

Both clinical trials used the wrong hormones to do the trials. If you use the wrong hormones in a trial, you would expect to get the wrong test results. Horse derived estrogen (equine estrogen) is hardly a match for bioidentical, human estrogen in women. But decades ago the drug manufacturer had decided that estrogen was easiest to manufacture on a large scale when urine from pregnant mares was used. The product contains conjugated horse estrogen and is known by the name Premarin. Premarin is not bioidentical to human estrogens.

Synthetic progesterone causes heart attacks

The other hormone, medroxy progesterone (MPA) is a progestin, a bad copy of the bioidentical progesterone that a woman’s corpus luteum of one of her ovaries produces. This is in the second half of her menstrual cycle. During pregnancy the placenta produces lots of progesterone to protect the pregnancy. As Dr. Masley, a cardiologist stated synthetic progestins cause heart attacks, while progesterone does not. Masley said: “Medroxy progesterone (MPA) increases the risk for heart disease and for breast cancer. I can’t understand why any physician would recommend medroxy progesterone during menopause, but it is still in use.”

Don’t use estrogen orally, but only by estrogen patch or estrogen cream

Next there is the question whether the liver changes the composition of an oral hormone tablet metabolically or not. The answer is: yes! Dr. Masley stated in the link above that oral estradiol, when compared to estrogen rubbed onto the skin, increases levels of inflammation by 192%. The C-reactive protein (CRP) can be measured with a blood test. The risk for a blood clot increases by 400%. A woman using estrogen should always use the estrogen patch or an estrogen cream with bioidentical estrogen to avoid these complications.

Measure hormones, don’t estimate

Measure hormones – don’t estimate: Hormones are constantly changing and if you don’t measure, you don’t know what you are dealing with. Dr. John Lee showed a long time ago that you should measure hormones and identify those women who are truly hormone deficient. These are the ones who need hormone replacement. However, you use only bioidentical hormones to replace and you replace only as much as is needed to normalize the levels. This is also the level where postmenopausal symptoms disappear. Lee noted: “A 10-year French study of HRT using a low-dose estradiol patch plus oral progesterone shows no increased risk of breast cancer, strokes or heart attacks.”

Measure progesterone hormone levels only in saliva

The elusive progesterone: when the physician measures progesterone as a blood test, it may come back as high while it can be low in a saliva hormone test in the same woman. Dr. Lee has pointed out that studies have shown that progesterone levels in tissue are usually higher by several factors when compared to blood levels and that blood levels are not reliable predictors of tissue levels (Ref.1). On the other hand he found that saliva levels have a good correlation with tissue levels in organs like the ovaries or the uterus. Dr. Lee preferred saliva hormone tests for this reason. When it comes to progesterone levels you can trust saliva test, but you cannot trust blood tests. Many physicians ignore that fact and strictly order blood progesterone levels coming to false conclusions.

Progesterone to estradiol ratio

We know that estrogen and progesterone must be balanced to avoid troubles of developing heart attacks or cancer. The link of Dr. Lee above stated that women without breast cancer have saliva progesterone hormone levels that are more than 200-fold higher than the saliva estradiol levels. On the other hand women with breast cancer have a ratio of less than 200 to 1 with respect to progesterone to estradiol saliva levels. There is a similar ratio in men. Here the ratio of testosterone to estradiol must be larger than 20 to 1. If this is not the case, he is at a higher risk of developing prostate cancer. Unfortunately many older men, when overweight or obese, have high estrogen levels and the ratio is less than 20 to 1.

Bioidentical hormones can prevent heart attacks and strokes

Masley has mentioned that in the first 6 years after menopause using a topical form of estrogen and micronized progesterone as tablets can minimize the risk of future heart attacks and strokes. But after 10 years it is less obvious what is the best solution. The question is what type of estrogen application is used. Is it estradiol or is it Bi-Est or Tri-Est, which are other topical estrogen applications. Tri-Est is 80% estriol, 10% estrone, and 10% estradiol while Bi-Est is 80% estriol and 20% estradiol. Tri-Est in particular would be very close to the natural composition of estrogens in a woman’s body.

What to do after 10 years of hormone replacement therapy in menopause

Given the insecurity what to do after 10 years of menopause, my suspicion is that there are other factors that play a role with respect to hormone replacement. A lot of women have extra pounds accumulated. Fatty tissue contains an enzyme called aromatase.

This makes estrogen from androgenic hormones including testosterone. The adrenal glands situated above the kidneys produce these hormones in menopause. The more overweight or obese a postmenopausal woman is, the higher the estrogen levels in her blood because of the action of the aromatase. Most physicians have not measured hormones in the past, but just replaced hormones monitoring only postmenopausal symptoms. This is changing. What I said under point 4 above is happening more.

Bioidentical hormone replacement practiced by naturopaths

Naturopaths tend to be more comfortable with bioidentical hormone replacement the way I have described it. If you did hormone tests (preferably saliva hormone tests) you would pick up higher estrogen levels and low progesterone levels with unfavorable progesterone to estrogen ratios as mentioned. These women do not need estrogen (they have it already in their systems). They need progesterone replacement only. A woman can take progesterone by mouth as micronized bioidentical progesterone capsules at night. It also  comes as bioidentical progesterone cream for application to the skin. Here is another take on the use of bioidentical hormones.

Hormone Replacement Therapy In Menopause

Hormone Replacement Therapy In Menopause

Conclusion

Bioidentical hormone replacement is complex. It requires some basic knowledge of the facts mentioned above. I find it surprising that two separate research groups could not free themselves of the Big Pharma grip. In not doing so they unwillingly produced studies showing all of the undesirable side effects of using artificial hormones. When manufacturers modify natural hormones with unnatural side-chains, the end products are synthetic hormones. These do not fit the appropriate natural hormone receptors. The anti-aging community as represented by the A4M group (American Academy Of Anti-Aging Medicine) with more than 25,000 physicians worldwide has been saying this all along. Now we know that it is really true. Use hormone replacement knowledgeably and use bioidentical hormones!

References

  1. Dr. John R. Lee: “Natural Progesterone – The remarkable roles of a remarkable hormone”, Jon Carpenter Publishing, 2nd edition, 1999, Bristol, England.

Incoming search terms:

Feb
01
2014

Early Alcohol Use Will Result In Memory Loss Later In Life

Researchers found that heavy alcohol use in males during midlife paves the way to memory loss from dementia later in life.

I thought that this would be a good topic to review the effect of alcohol in general. Alcohol is a known cell poison, yet cardiologists keep on referring to the beneficial effects of that 1 glass of wine per day that will prolong your life. I will attempt to explain these diverse effects, where small amounts are supposed to be good for you while high amounts can be very damaging.

Review of the effects of alcohol

50% of the world population drinks alcohol, 10% to 20% have chronic alcoholism (Ref.1).  Just recently a Guardian news study was released showing that an astounding 25% of Russian men die before reaching the age of 55, compared to only 7% of men in the United kingdom and less than 1% of men in the US. The study looked at the effects of consuming large amounts of vodka.  There are about 10 million chronic alcoholics in the US. Chronic alcohol consumption leads to 100,000 deaths every year in the US. More than 50% of these deaths are from traffic accidents, the rest from medical problems caused by alcohol (Ref.1). Most of the alcohol gets detoxified through the liver cells and is metabolized into acetaldehyde. This involves the cytochrome P-450 system. That means that when a person also takes narcotics, sedatives or psychoactive drugs that are also metabolized through this liver enzyme system drugs and alcohol are taking much longer to be metabolized. This can lead to lethal overdoses that we hear about on TV all the time, hence the warning that you must not mix alcohol with drugs.

Early Alcohol Use Will Result In Memory Loss Later In Life

Early Alcohol Use Will Result In Memory Loss Later In Life

Alcohol is a cell and nerve poison. The most vulnerable organs in the body are the liver, brain, heart, pancreas, bone marrow and stomach. So, here are a number of conditions caused by drinking alcohol:

a)    Anemia: When a person drinks heavily and regularly anemia shows up in a blood test. Alcohol has a toxic effect on the bone marrow, which interferes with the production of red blood cells. But certain vitamins required by the bone marrow to manufacture red blood cells are often also missing in the diet of an alcoholic, which contributes to anemia as well.

b)    Cirrhosis of the liver develops in 10% to 20% of heavy drinkers. With cirrhosis part of the liver cells get replaced by fibrotic tissue and in advanced cases this can lead to a hepatic coma and death. Others are developing alcoholic hepatitis. This is an inflammation of the liver with fever and jaundice where the skin and eyeballs turn yellow. It is associated with severe abdominal pain.

c)    Gastritis: Alcoholic gastritis is common, but often undetected. The affected individual may just have stomach pains for a few days, or vomit food and/or blood in addition. With continued use of alcohol it may turn chronic. Alcoholic gastritis can turn into gastric ulcers with massive bleeding that often lead to death.

d)    Pancreatitis: The pancreas is a particularly vulnerable glandular tissue, which gets damaged by regular alcohol intake and with chronic alcohol intake gets partially replaced by fibrotic tissue causing the feared and painful chronic pancreatitis. This is a condition with vomiting and severe abdominal pains that can be unrelenting.

e)    High blood pressure, seizures, dementia, depression, heart irregularities and nerve damage:

You may ask yourself how all of these conditions would be reasonably under one heading. The heading for this is “nerve damage”. Let me explain: The sympathetic nerve is very sensitive to alcohol toxicity and when the sympathetic nerve fibers are damaged, you will develop high blood pressure. You see your physician, get blood pressure medication, but the pressure is difficult to control, if you continue to drink alcoholic beverages. It does not make sense to just add blood pressure pills and hope that this will cure your problem. Seizures are due to direct nerve damage in the more sensitive parts of the brain, which will cause these areas to produce extra electrical activities, which we call seizures. Again, just treating with anti-seizure medications is not the solution. Avoidance of alcohol is the other part of the treatment schedule. Dementia from heavy alcohol use is due to direct nerve atrophy in the brain. Our brain shrinks normally 1.9% to 2.8% per decade, depending on which research papers you read. But in the presence of heavy drinking the frontal lobe of the brain is particularly vulnerable to brain shrinkage.

As this publication shows, mild and moderate drinkers did not suffer more frontal lobe shrinkage than abstainers, but heavy drinkers had a 1.8-fold higher risk of frontal lobe shrinkage on average when compared to abstainers. It was calculated that alcohol had contributed 11.3% to that frontal lobe shrinkage.

The rest of the toxic effect on the nerve tissue explains why depression would develop. The frontal brain contains most of the serotonin producing nerve cells. When serotonin-producing nerve fibers get damaged, the body does not produce enough serotonin to prevent depression from setting in; GABA producing cells often also get damaged, which causes anxiety. It’s not good enough to just prescribe anxiolytic drugs to which the patient will get addicted. The whole person needs to be treated, and abstinence from alcohol has to be part of the program.

Heart irregularities (atrial fibrillation, ventricular fibrillation) can be life-threatening complications due to the toxic effect of alcohol on the nerve fibers within the heart muscle. Emergency physicians are aware of the connection of these conditions to alcohol consumption. Some people’s hearts are more sensitive to the effects of alcohol than others. The most common cause of temporary atrial fibrillation is excessive alcohol intake (holiday heart) according to Ref. 2.

Finally there is the effect of alcohol on nerves in the body. This explains that heavy alcohol consumers can come down with painful pins-and-needles sensations in their hands and feet or with numbness or loss of muscle strength. When the parasympathetic nervous system is affected embarrassing incontinence or constipation can result. Erectile dysfunction in men is also very common. Viagra and continuing to drink is not the solution.

f)      Gout: This painful formation of uric acid crystals in joints can be precipitated in sensitive individuals by consuming alcohol in combination with eating large helpings of beef. There may be a history of gout in the family. Treatment for this is to refrain from alcohol and avoid foods that are leading to uric acid production when ingested.

g)    Cancer: When the body detoxifies alcohol in the liver, the breakdown product is acetaldehyde, which is a known cancer producing substance. A whole array of cancers are known, which come from heavy, chronic alcohol consumption: cancers in the mouth, larynx, esophagus, stomach, pancreas, liver and colorectal cancer have all been linked to excessive alcohol intake.

h)    Cardiovascular disease: heart attacks and strokes can be caused particularly by binging; it is thought that binging makes platelets from the blood more sticky so they clump together and cause blood clots, which in turn leads to heart attacks and strokes.

i)      Infections: Alcohol weakens the immune system, which is another effect on the bone marrow similar to causing anemia, except that this is the toxic effect on the white blood cells and lymphocytes. Heavy alcohol consumers are more prone to pneumonia, to HIV, sexually transmitted diseases, and tuberculosis.

Cardiology view of preventative alcohol

Despite all of these hair raising toxic effects cardiologists have painted the rosy picture that 1 glass of wine for women and 2 glasses of wine for men per day will prevent heart disease. What is the true story here?

Ref.2 points out that there are about 100 prospective studies that confirm that there is an inverse relationship between mild to moderate alcohol consumption and “heart attack, ischemic stroke, peripheral vascular disease, sudden cardiac death, and death from all cardiovascular causes”. It describes further that the reduction of risk in these various studies was persistent and consisted of a 20% to 45% risk reduction. Using blood tests investigators have found that this is because of an increase of HDL cholesterol, reducing blood clotting, making platelets less sticky and reducing inflammation as evidenced by a reduction of the C-reactive protein. Further research has pinpointed that it is the phenols and resveratrol that are contained in alcoholic beverages that are responsible for the beneficial effects. The bad news is that three glasses of wine or more do the opposite, so does binge drinking. Unless you are extremely disciplined and never increase your allowed limit (1 drink for women, 2 drinks for men) you will CAUSE heart disease rather than PREVENT it (Ref.2). Some people have a family history of breast cancer or colon cancer and they should avoid alcohol altogether; also people coming from alcoholic families should avoid alcohol.

Conclusion

Where does this leave us with regard to prevention of heart attacks, strokes and hardening of the arteries in the legs (peripheral vascular disease)? If you are disciplined and stick to the limits, you could prevent 20% to 45% of cardiovascular risk. The brain study mentioned in the beginning of the blog would also confirm that there was no difference between dementia or brain shrinkage when mild to moderate drinkers were compared to abstainers over 10 years. What is not told by the wine industry is that the same effects that prevent cardiovascular disease in mild to moderate drinkers can also be achieved by natural means: exercising regularly will raise your protective HDL cholesterol; taking ginkgo biloba, flax seed and omega-3 fatty acids thins your blood and the platelets are getting less sticky; omega-3 reduces inflammation and resveratrol elongates telomeres making you live longer. At the A4M conference in Las Vegas in December 2011 there were three speakers who pointed out that even small amounts of alcohol will poison mitochondria of your cells and interfere with normal hormone action. This was enough to make me join those who abstain alcohol completely. One thing has not yet been investigated in long-term studies, namely how small effects of alcohol may affect the body over several decades and over an entire lifetime. Despite all the promises of interest groups that red wine is a trendy drink for those interested in heart health, the fundamental long-term studies are missing. What does a guy do with a healthy heart and a brain that is not functioning too well? I just do not want to be the guinea pig in that worldwide study.

More information on alcoholism: http://nethealthbook.com/drug-addiction/alcoholism/

References:

  1. Kumar: Robbins and Cotran: Pathologic Basis of Disease, Professional Edition, 8th ed. © 2009 Saunders
  2. Bonow: Braunwald’s Heart Disease – A Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine, 9th ed. © 2011 Saunders

Last edited Nov. 7, 2014

Dec
01
2008

Home Monitoring Works For Patients On Blood Thinner

The standard treatment for patients with risks for blood clots is a prescription for the medication called warfarin. Patients who suffered a stroke or who have atrial fibrillation will receive this drug, as do individuals who have a mechanical heart valve. Following pulmonary emboli blood thinners are also required for a period of time. Even though warfarin is a medication that has been in use for several decades, there are important guidelines. Warfarin is a blood thinner, and it is imperative that the blood values of the patients are closely monitored. Too much warfarin could lead to disastrous bleeding, whereas too little medication can lead to blood clots. Both conditions can be life threatening. As a result, patients who are taking warfarin have to present for blood tests on a weekly basis at a lab. Managing proper coagulation may become less cumbersome in future, as a trial that was run at 28 Veteran Affairs medical centers has shown. Tests enrolled 3,644 patients who required warfarin, and they received training in using a home monitor, which took about 30 minutes. They used the home monitoring device for 2 to 3 weeks, after which they returned to their local center for assessment, how successfully they had monitored their INR level.

Monitoring INR at home

 

 

The results were encouraging: 2,922 patients-80% of the original group showed that they could successfully handle home monitoring, either by themselves or with the help of a caregiver. They would phone in their test results on a weekly basis and would receive instructions by phone for dosage adjustment. The advantage for the patient is the fact, that they become more involved and empowered in their own care and show more engagement towards their health.

More information on:

1. Atrial fibrillation: http://nethealthbook.com/cardiovascular-disease/heart-disease/irregular-heart-beats/atrial-fibrillation/

2. Pulmonary emboli: http://nethealthbook.com/lung-disease/pulmonary-emboli/

The Home INR Study (THINRS , Presented at the Annual American Heart Association Meeting, New Orleans, Nov. 8 to 12, 2008

Last updated Nov. 6, 2014

Incoming search terms:

Oct
01
2004

What Went Wrong With VIOXX

Merck &. Co., Inc. announced on Sept. 30, 2004 that VIOXX® (rofecoxib), an arthritis and acute pain medication, would be withdrawn voluntarily worldwide. VIOXX was FDA approved as a new anti-inflammatory drug for osteoarthritis in 1999. Later it was also cleared for rheumatoid arthritis. As a Cox-2 inhibitor it was different from aspirin and the conventional anti-inflammatory drugs such as Naproxen, Motrin or Voltaren.

In a study called VIGOR , which is detailed more under this link, VIOXX was compared to Naproxen in terms of gastrointestinal side-effects. It was found that the risks of bleeding ulcers, perforation and bowel obstruction were 50% reduced (frequency of cases with naproxen 1.22% versus VIOXX with a frequency of 0.52%). Surprisingly, in this study of 4000 patients over 1 year the cardiovascular risks such as heart attacks, strokes, blood clots for VIOXX was 1.8%, 3-fold higher than Naproxen, which had only 0.6% such complications. In addition it was noted that high blood pressure was more common in rheumatoid patients. The FDA made Merck add a warning on the drug label regarding these added risks, but this went more or less unnoticed by the public.

It has been known for some time that aspirin (ASA) has polyp preventative action on the colon and thus reduces the risk of colon cancer. A specific study, called APPROVe (Adenomatous Polyp Prevention on VIOXX) trial, was designed to show that VIOXX could do the same as aspirin, but with less toxic side effects. In 2000 Merck started enrolling patients into this 3 year long trial.

What Went Wrong With VIOXX

What Went Wrong With VIOXX

After 18 months into the trial cardiovascular side-effects started to show up that were statistically significant when compared to controls. This is what prompted the recent press release that VIOXX would be taken off the market altogether.

More info on treatment of osteoarthritis: http://nethealthbook.com/arthritis/osteoarthritis/treatment-osteoarthritis/

Comments: One of the potential problems with receptor specific medications is that they can be so specific that the metabolism in the human body is changed. What’s good for the gut may not be good for the circulation, blood pressure and the heart. Merck did the right thing to withraw the medication altogether. It is not known at this time whether other similar medications such as Celebrex, which has a different molecular configuration, will stand up in the future to post-marketing testing.

Addendum on Nov. 6, 2012: In 2005 Bextra was also taken off the market by the FDA, but Celebrex was allowed to stay, but required to label their product with warnings about potentially serious side-effects.

Last edited October 27, 2014

Nov
01
2003

Blood Clots In Legs Can Be Caused From Long Flights

A new study from Australia has shown that the risk for developing blood clots in the legs (deep vein thrombosis) is increased 4-fold in the first two weeks after a long-haul airplane flight. This was published on Nov. 8, 2003 in the British Medical Journal (BMJ. 2003;327:1072) with the lead author being Dr. C.W. Kelman of the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing, Canberra.

Data was collected of 5,408 patients who had been hospitalized to Western Australian hospitals for deep vein thrombosis between 1981 and 1999. A total of 153 Australians were admitted with blood clots in the leg veins within 100 days of international flights. 46 of these patients developed their blood clots within 14 days of arrival, which was much more than would have been expected in the general population. The researchers found that between 15 days and 100 days following a long-haul flight the risk of developing clots in the deep veins of the legs was not increased from the background rate of the general population. The patients who had developed their blood clots within 14 days of a long flight had a risk that was 4.17-fold higher than the average population’s risk. Of these patients 76% were thought to have developed the clots as a result of a flight. In terms of a yearly risk, if a person does one long-haul flight per year, the probability of developing a clot in the leg veins would be about 12% higher than in a non-traveling comparison group. As this condition is treated effectively with blood thinners, the death rate is quite low, approximately 1 per 2 million long-haul flights.

Blood Clots In Legs Can Be Caused From Long Flights

Blood Clots In Legs Can Be Caused From Long Flights

This would be much lower than the risk of death from car accidents. The authors suggested that more study is needed to determine the risk factors for developing flight induced deep vein thrombosis. When this is known, investigations will be able to concentrate on blood clot prevention from air travel.

Link to a chapter on pulmonary emboli, which can develop from a deep vein thrombus that breaks loose.

Last edited December 9, 2012