How many women on HRT

[ParisUSM]

Does anyone know the figures on how many women in the UK are presently on HRT? Just interested after reading comments about all well informed women being on HRT for life and realising that although I think it is a tiny minority, I don't really know the figures.

I tried HRT the oestrogel & progesterone tablets and couldn't get on with it felt awful. I use the Vogels menopause support tablets and really find they have helped me with symptoms and now get no symptoms. I do lots of exercise and my vitamin D levels were recently checked in a blood test and are fine so I am happy that my bones are ok and my cholesterol is low too and am at low risk of heart issues due to exercise and healthy weight but I agree HRT is up to the individual and if I had found it had helped me then I'd have stayed on it as long as possible.

Hi Fontella. Out of interest, which self help remedies worked for you? I've decided to come off HRT and I have ordered some supplements (they may not work for me but I've got to try). Thanks.

To be honest, most of the things I tried didn't make any difference and were a waste of time and money, apart from one - and that was flaxseed oil for hot flushes. I was getting them day and night - horrendous - and that was the point I very nearly went on HRT, but after trying various self help remedies to no avail, I read on a forum somewhere that flaxseed oil might help, so I thought I'd try it as a last ditch attempt.

I started taking it - a tablespoon first thing every morning before I ate or drank anything else - you have to keep it in the fridge and it is absolutely foul tasting. In the first few days it gave me an awful headache and I just thought - this is another waste of time - but then I read that headache was a common early symptom and it would pass and to stick with it. So I did - and after a couple of weeks there was a noticeable decline in the intensity and frequency of my hot flushes and it was more than placebo effect.

I was so impressed with it I recommended it to a friend ... but it did absolutely nothing for her!! Which only goes to show that what works for one will not necessarily work for another, and it really is trial and error.

Now I'm through menopause - I still have a couple of spoonfuls of ground flaxseed every day now - usually in natural yogurt with a sliced banana as it's a good source of lignens - a type of plant oestrogen. Whether it does any good or not I have no idea, but I doubt it does any harm either.

Apart from that I just take a really good multi-vitamin every day, drink a lot of green tea, watch my diet and do yoga.

I won't lie - going through those peri-menopause years was hell, but one thing I did notice is that I would get a symptom - it would be awful - but then my body would sort it out. So it would be intense and unpleasant for a while but then it would go, usually to be replaced by something else. But the symptoms came and then they went ... until eventually I was through it and out the other side.

I find this worrying - I started going through the menopause in my early forties (I am now in my early sixties) and nobody (including my GP) ever once suggested HRT. Is this because I didn't go to the doctor complaining of symptoms? I did have them, but I suppose not so badly or in any case I just thought it was what you had to put up with.

Keep wondering if I have missed out on some important medical intervention. (Too late now).

Dory I think you misunderstand my post.

I was responding to the suggestion that all educated and informed women would be on HRT (and by inference, those of us who are not must be under-educated and ill-informed) with an example that shows that is not always the case.
That does not in any way diminish your decision. My point is that educated women will make that informed decision for themselves based on their own symptoms and situation and taking it or not taking are both valid choices rather than right or wrong

educated women will make that informed decision for themselves based on their own symptoms and situation and taking it or not taking are both valid choices rather than right or wrong
I agree with this however some appear to take the view that HRT is the smart choice for all women regardless of the severity of symptoms, that menopause is a deficiency disease for which hrt is the cure.
That nature has programmed us to malfunction and die at age 50.

Fact is that humans are one of the few species who outlive their fertility, menopause is an adaptation which allows human females to have a longer lives in order to contribute to the community by caring for grandchildren.
www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-new-theory-for-why-killer-whales-go-through-menopause/

*I find this worrying - I started going through the menopause in my early forties (I am now in my early sixties) and nobody (including my GP) ever once suggested HRT. Is this because I didn't go to the doctor complaining of symptoms? I did have them, but I suppose not so badly or in any case I just thought it was what you had to put up with.

Keep wondering if I have missed out on some important medical intervention. (Too late now).*

You clearly navigated menopause without medical intervention and your symptoms weren't severe enough for your GP to suggest HRT.

Where's the problem?

Thanks for that. I shall look into this. I've just put in for my repeat prescription of femoston ; I've decided to split the tab in half and take that daily for the next couple of months. Then a quarter if I can physically manage to cut the small tab up even smaller.

^I find this worrying - I started going through the menopause in my early forties (I am now in my early sixties) and nobody (including my GP) ever once suggested HRT. Is this because I didn't go to the doctor complaining of symptoms? I did have them, but I suppose not so badly or in any case I just thought it was what you had to put up with.

Keep wondering if I have missed out on some important medical intervention. (Too late now).^

kaitlinktm - it's important not to look back. Starting to go through menopause is not the same as reaching menopause. The guidelines refer to the age of menopause ie last period - if no other intervention ie mini-pill, CCP por Mirena (which don't give a true date of last period). If you were feeling pretty well as you went through menopause and feel fine now then that's great. No point worrying about what might have been. You can still look after yourself as best you can so as to reduce your risk factors for all health conditions that are age-related - and we should all be doing that irrespective of whether or not we take HRT. ie healthy diet with plety of fresh ingredients, fruit and veg etc cooked from scratch, and limiting sugar fat and refined carbs, lots of exercise including body conditioning and cardio activity, keeping to healthy BMI by losing weight and increasing exercise if necessary, reducing alcohol intake and stopping smoking. All this will be beneficial to your future health. If you have very low BMI you might ask doc to look at your bone density as this puts you at greater risk of osteoporosis. Also if you mother has/had osteoporosis there may be a genetic link.

The point is with more recent research around HRT, and risks vs benefits, and publicity surrounding menopause, and the fact that many more women are living longer - there is no longer any need to put up with debilitating symptoms and in younger women - you might also be protecting your future health.

But don't worry about it and look forward, and do the best you can for yourself now and in the future.

*however some appear to take the view that HRT is the smart choice for all women regardless of the severity of symptoms, that menopause is a deficiency disease for which hrt is the cure.
That nature has programmed us to malfunction and die at age 50.

Fact is that humans are one of the few species who outlive their fertility, menopause is an adaptation which allows human females to have a longer lives in order to contribute to the community by caring for grandchildren.
www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-new-theory-for-why-killer-whales-go-through-menopause/ *

I haven't come across the view that we are programmed to malfunction and die at 50? Menopause isn't a deficiency disease itself but it is a deficiency condition which in the long term can lead to long term health conditions and diseases eg osteoporosis, cardi-vascular disease, and the earlier that menopause is reached, the more at risk women are from these conditions, as a consequence of oestrogen deficiency. There is a body of published scientific and medical evidence which supports this which has led to the current recommendations re HRT and the prevention of dieases after menopause.

There are various theories about the evolution of menopause and the most important factor is that whatever happens for it to have evolved it must confer genetic benefits and be past on through greater survival of the offspring. In any case - in modern western society we no longer live in closely related family groups so the evolutionary reason for menopause is irrelevant. We have it - it's here - and some women may live 30, 40 or even 50 years in a post-menopausal state. Whether these years are lived in a healthy state or not may well depend on choices we make around the time of menopause and may be improved by taking HRT.

Of course it is a personal choice - but one that needs to be taken looking at all the available evidence and the most up-to-date recommendations. Personally I mostly rely on gynaecologists and research scientists to do that for me.

Personally I mostly rely on gynaecologists and research scientists to do that for me
Wow you're so smart... wish I'd thought of that.
I mostly rely on my local witch doctor, he throws chicken bones into a pile looks at them for half an hour and tells me what to do based on how they land

the evolutionary reason for menopause is irrelevant
I posted a link to what I thought was an interesting article in the scientific American journal about the evolution of menopause and you dismiss it as irrelevant
well thanks a bunch 😕

Furthermore we do still live in communities where grandmothers can increase their chances of passing on their genes by devoting their energy to caring for grandchildren (as opposed to continuing to have their own children)

kaitlin I think there’s scope for having a look into this further even though you’ve navigated this well. My menopause has been slightly earlier than average (46) and my symptoms were not severe ((sleeplessness as others have described plus random aches) but I went on HRT because the dr told me that women could expect to have and were designed to have a higher level of oestrogen at my age than I had. The relatively early loss of this level meant that I was missing out on its bone protecting qualities and its positive impact on heart health. I therefore had a longish window in which I could take HRT before I would be over treating myself.

There is no history of cancer in my family (touch wood) so I felt comfortable with that and have been happily on HRT for three years. I hadn’t considered it as something you might take for protective reasons as well as symptom resolving reasons but that’s part of it for me.

the dr told me that women could expect to have and were designed to have a higher level of oestrogen at my age than I had
I agree with this, evolution has designed human females to have oestrogen levels which decline in their 50s
We are not designed to have higher oestrogen levels in our 50s 60s 70s and beyond

Being following the evolutionary discussion with interest. I'm not sure the whale article adds much. It doesn't stack up to me. Evolution goes back millions of years.If women have a menopause so they can help with grandchildren and not be encumbered by their own children, how did this work pre-contraception? A 50 year old women, half a million years ago, could still be having children. (If she hadn't died from diseases, a woolly mammoth, or starvation.) At the same time, her own daughters would be becoming pregnant at any time from puberty. So grandmothers, daughters and granddaughters would all
be pregnant and looking after children in the cave at the same time.

Who knows why we are born with a finite number of eggs? Does it matter?

The fact is we are living longer, but not living better. Instead of dying in our 50s or 60s from typhoid, TB or malnourishment (which most women did 150 years ago) we are living to our 80s and 90s but often in poor health with disability.

This table shows how 100 years ago, a woman could expect to live to 63. So, around 10 years postmeno. Too soon for osteo and CVD to be diagnosed.
www.jbending.org.uk/stats3.htm

Thanks for the advice and information (and reassurance) everyone.

Menopause is not a natural part of life women are probably meant to be dead before it happens either through disease, childbirth or trauma, evolutionary changes take hundreds if not thousands of years to happen, its only over the last century that life expectancy has increased!

How did ancient women manage? They died early of age related diseases, that's how!

Does Vagifem count as HRT?

evolutionary changes take hundreds if not thousands of years to happen

hundreds of thousands, actually!

Maybe one day the menopause won't happen except by choice!
There is research around now which is using stem cells from ovaries which can regenerate them and prevent or delay the menopause.

www.nursingtimes.net/stem-cell-fertility-treatment-may-allow-women-to-delay-menopause/5000520.article

The recent stats for HRT were quoted by Louise Newson (meno dr) on Womans Hour a while back. She said 10%.

Interestingly, both she and consultant Dr Heather Currie use HRT so if these women who know all the facts are keen, that says a lot.

All the scare stories about hrt are from oral hrt ( tablets). If it is metabolised via the liver, ( first pass metabolism) it is toxic and our hormones would naturally never be metabolised that way.
Gels or patches are not toxic but do cost more.
Anyone scared of their hrt should give sub cutaneous methods a try first. The side effects are less too and you absorb and can utilise more.
Have a look at nick Panay's web info.

there is clearly some misunderstanding here...life expectancy is expressed as a mean average, this means that it shifts downwards with high rates of infant mortality

I’m a retired doctor in my 60’s and never used HRT. Living in a cold climate, (Scotland!) I actually welcomed hot flushes- I would wait for one before getting out of bed on winter mornings!
Every woman’s experience of menopause is different, and you all need to decide for yourselves whether your symptoms need treatment or not. Mine was fairly benign and I didn’t see the need to medicalise a normal stage of life.

There is no overall misunderstanding about the difference in average life expectancy between (eg) the 1700s and the 21stC.

Women were not working up to their 70s (in professional roles) and beyond, 100-200 years ago. They weren't part of the sandwich generation looking after their own children but also elderly parents.

I hope that one day all this emotion around HRT will be dead and gone.

if it makes you feel better and able to function, use it. The risks are tiny compared to the diseases women die from: CVD and osteoporosis. Not enough is said about the benefits of HRT, imo. We are still living with the damage done by the invalid stats of 20 years ago.

I don't think it's right to make opinions like We are not designed to have higher oestrogen levels in our 50s 60s 70s and beyond into a fact when it's not backed up by research proving this! Some UK gynaes at the forefront of meno research- Nick Panay for example- have papers on the benefits of very low dose HRT, for life.

In case you missed my question, does anyone know if Vagifem (vaginal tablet oestrogen) counts as 'being on HRT'?

If we accept that the average ancestral human had a hunter gatherer lifestyle then looking at hunter-gatherers should give us a good idea of life expectancy for most of human evolution.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2007.00171.x
The Abstract
Post‐reproductive longevity is a robust feature of human life and not only a recent phenomenon caused by improvements in sanitation, public health, and medical advances. We argue for an adaptive life span of 68‐78 years for modern Homo sapiens based on our analysis of mortality profiles obtained from small‐scale hunter‐gatherer and horticultural populations from around the world. We compare patterns of survivorship across the life span, rates of senescence, modal ages at adult death, and causes of death. We attempt to reconcile our results with those derived from paleodemographic studies that characterize prehistoric human lives as “nasty, brutish, and short,” and with observations of recent acculturation among contemporary subsistence populations. We integrate information on age‐specific dependency and resource production to help explain the adaptive utility of longevity in humans from an evolutionary perspective.

The data show that modal adult life span is 68–78 years, and that it was not uncommon for individuals to reach these ages, suggesting that inferences based on paleodemographic reconstruction are unreliable.” (Gurven & Kaplan, 2007) They noted that past 70 years, the quality of life begins to deteriorate, as senescence sets in. This does not differ very much from the pattern of life still seen in WEIRD countries; while they have made significant improvements in overall longevity over the past century, the quality of life in those additional years has not always kept pace