nervous starting HRT

[chrismartinsfuturewife]

Hi I'm 42 and about to start HRT but im really nervous and hesitant to start. I will be taking Evorel 50 patches for 2 weeks then Evorel Conti patches for 2 weeks.

I feel like a fraud taking them because im not having hot flushes, sweats etc. but doctor said my bloods indicate I should, however I do have moments such as panic, helplessness, very dry skin and have put on about 3 stone in weight.

My gut feeling is I'm feeling Ok and maybe I should leave the HRT for now ?

Any advice would be much appreciated.

Thanks

Polly - it is quite scary when breast Cancer sites equate HRT to the possibility of breast cancer.

Thanks Polly. I might start using it again a bit more assiduously. Though I also stopped because I hate the bloody stuff sliding out of me

As for the other symptoms, I am just going to battle on I'm afraid. I still think, in my case, I am better off seeing it through now rather than later.

Lol But it does help 'other things' slide in more easily..

I think it's bad in away they put that bump in the pack because it's all about combined HRT and BC- there are no figures there for using Ovestin. My mum uses it and she's almost 90. Not for sex but for comfort.

I don't dispute there is a link between BC and combined HRT. But you have to look at the actual figures, your own personal risk factors for that and other possible illnesses in later life. Not many women know that being overweight or drinking 2 units a day have a higher BC risk than HRT - yet we they aren't all becoming teetotal are they?

And not all HRT is equal- some types are showing NO increase in risk.

It's also wise to look beyond the headlines at absolute numbers - 3 x risk means what? 3 in 1 million, not in a million? 3 in 10K not 1 in 10K?
The actual numbers are still small.

Thank you all for your messages, it's help me enormously, I've even taken the HRT out of the cabinet and the bag!!! Next step.........

I do, however, have a deep seated fear of cancer

Whilst the rest of us are positively embracing it.

What a ridiculous thing to say! Unless you are sick in the head, everyone has a deep seated fear of cancer.

I do wonder sometimes quite seriously if there is almost some conspiracy out there to make women feel they have to 'embrace' the menopause and eschew HRT in favour of slowing accepting a poor quality of life and a decrepit old age. The impression given in the media through the focus on the (flawed) science and the downside of HRT is that women do not 'deserve' to be able to work well into old age, or lead lives as fulfilling professionally as men. Because the 'fears' about HRT quoted in the media surpass anything that is written about for other illnesses and the side effects of other powerful drugs, many of which are dished out quite casually. (eg ADs.)

In the past, women died long before they had to live 30-40 years post menopause. If they didn't they often had illnesses which they attributed to old age , which are now treatable or preventable with HRT. But for some reason there seems to be this 'legacy' of HRT being viewed as a 'vanity' drug to 'keep women young' ( bit like using Botox or whatever) rather than something to enable them to function (like men) well into their 60s and 70s and beyond.

No one using HRT is blind to the risks of cancer. I think about that risk every day. But I also have spent a lot of time weighing up - for me- the pros and cons. There is no perfect solution.

But what annoys me is that the benefits are not given the same 'airtime' . The main killers of women are all partly prevented by HRT- heart disease, osteoporosis and bowel cancer. This is before you even think about the quality of life stuff like prolapse, insomnia, hot flushes, bladder problems, mental decline, etc.

And the things that contribute to breast cancer MORE than HRT - regular drinking and weight gain- are rarely mentioned.

Everyone has to make their own choice but all I'd say is look at all the facts, not a few selective headlines.

Thats really interesting Polly, thank you for all the information. I am also 42 and I think I am in peri-menopausal stage. I see a herbalist to treat my symptoms and so far so good.

But I think I would strongly consider HRT as my Mother had an early menopause and now in her seventies has very bad osteoporosis. She said she took HRT for ten years though, so she got osteoporosis anyway, although she is also hypothyroid and that can cause it as well.

When do you need to start taking HRT? I am peri but apart from my periods being lighter and irregular (usually early at 25 days or last two cycles late by a few days) and hormone related moments of anxiety, hot flushes at night on the run up to my period, I am okay.

It's really worrying that women who are having an early menopause are being frightened off taking HRT when they really need it in order to prevent other problems - particularly osteoporosis - later on.

And GPs aren't clued up enough if a women in their late 30s or 40s goes to see them about it.

www.menopausematters.co.uk/pm-definition.php
There is a lot of info here - there are sub sections on prem meno on the menu section of this website under Menopause.

Oh how unnecessarily unpleasant of you Doreen, when I had been so welcoming of your earlier comments. Perhaps my terminology was wrong. What I meant was I worry more than I should do about getting cancer, certainly it is my first thought when I have any odd symptom. Whereas I worry not one whit about getting heart disease, diabetes, MS, osteoporosis, and all the other nasties out there.

I really think your aggressive response to my comment was entirely unjustified though.

And now I think my leat post is open to misinterpretation too. Obviously I am not saying any of those other illnesses are a walk in the park, or nothing to worry about. Just that my predisposition is not to worry about getting them in the future whilst I worry about getting cancer often.

Oh well, misinterpret and write something snide if you want.

Whereas I worry not one whit about getting heart disease, diabetes, MS, osteoporosis, and all the other nasties out there.

Well you should do. I've just been diagnosed with Osteoporosis today. I've missed out on 7 years HRT because my female doctor wouldn't listen to me 7 years ago.

How awful for you. I am sorry, and hope you get the best treatment now.

But I would prefer it if you did not single me out for unpleasant comments. I have taken a bit of heart from this thread, reading other people's experiences and knowledge, but I am not on this thread, or on Mumsnet, for verbal abuse.

Whereas I worry not one whit about getting heart disease, diabetes, MS, osteoporosis, and all the other nasties out there.

But osteoporosis if untreated or undiagnosed kills more women than cancer. (In old age, women tend to die from complications like pneumonia or blood clots, having been admitted for broken hips.) It also limits quality of life and leads to disability with terrible pain.

Heart disease is the No 1 cause of death for women.

But I would prefer it if you did not single me out for unpleasant comments. I have taken a bit of heart from this thread, reading other people's experiences and knowledge, but I am not on this thread, or on Mumsnet, for verbal abuse

I am sorry but what I said was not verbal abuse. I said that your comment about cancer was a ridiculous thing to say. Which it is.

It isn't a ridiculous thing to say. I explained what I meant, but you don't seem to want to acknowledge that.

I agree it is a ridiculous thing to worry about the possibility of getting one illness over another, especially as my family history would suggest I will get none of them, but that's how it is. I was only explaining why I worry about the link between HRT and cancer, not trying to rationalise my thoughts. Indeed I have already acknowledged yours, and Polly's, useful contributions to the counter argument.

Thanks for that, but I am bowing out now as I am not interested in debating this further.

I'm just not sure about relying on family history as way of being 'relaxed' (not that you are) about possible illnesses. For instance only 5% of breast cancer is hereditary.

I had advanced osteopenia in my late 40s and yet my mum, now almost 90, same build as me, same hormone profile (in fact my menopause was a bit later) doesn't have osteoporosis ( as far as we know.)

Don't blame you electric. Lot of uncalled for aggression about.

I don't have a deep seated fear of cancer... don't think I'm sick in the head, either. (shrug).

:( that Electricfly got hounded off thread.

I wouldn't worry about it - I'm completely fucked now.

Doreen- your treatment can and should reverse your osteo. You've caught it early, which is good. Has your GP apologised?

I'm wary of adding more bad feeling here but I don't think Electric meant it to come over as it's been interpreted. I can't speak for her though.

The way I see it, she meant she was not willing to do anything (eg HRT) that might increase her risk of cancer, even slightly. Fair enough. Some people feel that way.

But I'm also sure that every single one of us is scared of cancer- who'd not be! All anyone can do is work hard at the lifestyle that reduces the odds of it happening- exercise, diet, etc. (A huge amount of cancer is directly related to lifestyle- something like 40%.)

But it's a moot point about which is the 'better' way to go. My late MIL spent almost 20 years housebound, disabled by back problems caused by osteoporosis (amongst other things) with zero quality of life.