This month's Woman and Home mag says this about HRT...

[ssd]

"Today, following the results of a number of studies, it seems rather than being a cure-all, HRT can increase the risk of breast cancer and may not protect the heart. It has now been recommended that HRT should only be prescribed in the lowest dose needed and for the shortest possible time - if it all."

from what I've learned on here, mostly from pollyperky, this advice is rubbish, yet it's in a national magazine!

so are they correct? as I understand it being overweight carries a higher risk of breast cancer than taking HRT, this was on Kirsty Wark's menopause documentary.

it's on page 124, sept issue with fiona Bruce on the cover

the article tries to promote handling the meno naturally, but this advice about HRt is just wrong and will put many women off.

This is the current NHS advice...very different
www.nhs.uk/Livewell/menopause/Pages/HormoneReplacementTherapy.aspx

FFS...

That NHS piece isn't dated, but given that they cite studies from 2000-2004 it's hardly up-to-date!

And with the greatest respect to PollyPerky, as far as I know she isn't a medic or HRT specialist either.

There will always be risks with any medication, and you have to (in discussion with your GP or consultant) decide if those risks are worth taking for you.

It's easy for other people to dismiss potential risks as small when they're not risks you're taking!

The NHS information is dated 2014 and is up for review at the end of September.

It mentions the 2000 - 2004 studies because a great deal was made of the negative side of them and widely publicised. Since then, a lot of and discussion has taken place since then, and things have moved on somewhat. The NHS advice explains and reflects this.

The Woman and Home article is still in 2004 and scaring people unnecessarily.

Date is stated clearly.

Sorry - I missed the date. (I did look!)

Dr Louise Newson ( HRT GP ) is trying to contact the editor for Miss information regards this piece.

www.facebook.com/LouiseNewsonMyMenopauseDoctor/posts/1413588682061686

I wanted to write to them too, This is so wrong. it's written by someone who practises alternative treatments for meno.

It's not the ed who is at fault- they can't edit medical information as non-experts - they just print what the writer has written and take them at their word. The real villain of the piece is the author.

BIWI No I'm not a medic but I do write on health and research it . I've spoken to former and current chairs of the BMS (British Menopause Society) for my information as well as my own Harley St consultant, for over 10 years.

Actually I think it is the editor's fault. If you've commissioned a piece about a subject which has life changing consequences for your readers and the person writing it has a very obvious financial interest in pushing their own side then it is the editor's responsibility to check that the advice given is in line with current best practice or if not that there's some form of disclaimer to the effect that "this is the view of columnist X, who happens to be in the business of selling alternative remedies".

Does the article suggest how to protect 'alternatively' against the insidious impact of osteoporosis then? 🤔I got my prescription for HRT this morning, following a total hysterectomy, and am definitely looking forward to the protective benefits and hopefully some relief from those increasingly sore joints, interrupted sleep (from night sweats) and hot flushes!

The main editor of a publication is unlikely to edit every feature; that's the role of the feature editor(s). They are unlikely to challenge writers with an established reputation because they believe they are experts.

And it's no wonder that people are confused about what to do!

It is really the editor's fault, surely with something as important as this she should look it over before publishing it?

If I hadn't read the excellent advice on here I'd have believed it.

That' s not how it works, I'm afraid.

The editor in chief of a glossy rarely reads and gives the nod to every word in every feature in a magazine (or newspaper.) They rely on their feature editor who commissions the work.

It's unclear if this box-out on HRT was added by Maryon Stewart the writer or by staff at W&H- it is more than likely MS did it, because that's how writing works, and has been 'selective' over the evidence because it fits with the message of the article .

If you feel strongly contact the BMS (Chair etc) and ask if they can contact the magazine.

The other thing is ssd you are assuming that the editor is an expert on HRT. 'Looking over it' would achieve nothing.

They ask experts to write features. MS has written almost 30 books on women's health including menopause. The editor is not going to challenge her writing any more than they would challenge the accuracy of a feature written by a top meno consultant, or the Chair of the BMS.

They assume the person writing it is correct.

I see. Thanks pp.