Anyone choosing NOT to use HRT?

[WandaWomblesaurus73]

Does anyone feel that HRT isn't for them or feel happier without it?

Department of health etc aren't all actively encouraging women to take hrt to take the pressure off the NHS if nothing else.

This is a fair point.

If anyone is concerned or questioning their bone health, instead of looking for answers online - which won't tell you much- get yourself a DEXA scan.

Sadly, the NHS only offers smear tests and mammograms. Yet more women suffer from osteoporosis ,become disabled, and die from its complications.

The biggest loss of bone is in the first 5 years after your periods stop. It can be 5% a year, so in 5 years you can lose 20% of bone.

The only way to know how your bones are, is an X-ray.
It costs around £200 and ideally needs to be done every 3 years, if it shows you have bone loss.

If you have a family history of bone loss, your GP should refer you for a scan. If not, you can pay for them privately.

Don't wait till you get to your 60s and break a bone before finding out what's wrong, as the drug treatments tend to have quite unpleasant side effects for a lot of women.

'I’ve just been thinking this too and it does make me question it. The cost later on is high enough that if there is an easy prevention why is it not used'

Yes and when people liken it to insulin or thyroxine it weakens their argument imo because nobody would suggest insulin is a choice, that a type 1 diabetic could manage without if they chose.

I want to hear Chris whitty discuss this on This Morning (post covid obviously) or Jenny Harries, not Dr Louise Newson with her waiting list for £300 consults.

*25% over 5 years!

I want to hear Chris whitty discuss this on This Morning (post covid obviously) or Jenny Harries, not Dr Louise Newson with her waiting list for £300 consults.

They are not menopause specialists.

If you want to understand it all from a neutral point of view, stick to the BMS.

I keep posting their statements and they keep being ignored.

I am not ignoring it

It doesn't make me change my mind

Me. No neg symptoms so far. i'm 53

A dexa scan seems like a reasonable thing to look in to.

'They are not menopause specialists.'

They are public health experts and more than able to analyse data and give their professional opinion on risks and benefits.

The Department of Health surely should be pushing this if evidence is apparently so clear.

Hilarious that the chief medical officer's opinion on this would not be valid as he isn't a meno expert.

@JinglingHellsBells

If anyone is concerned or questioning their bone health, instead of looking for answers online - which won't tell you much- get yourself a DEXA scan.

Sadly, the NHS only offers smear tests and mammograms. Yet more women suffer from osteoporosis ,become disabled, and die from its complications.

The biggest loss of bone is in the first 5 years after your periods stop. It can be 5% a year, so in 5 years you can lose 20% of bone.

The only way to know how your bones are, is an X-ray.
It costs around £200 and ideally needs to be done every 3 years, if it shows you have bone loss.

If you have a family history of bone loss, your GP should refer you for a scan. If not, you can pay for them privately.

Don't wait till you get to your 60s and break a bone before finding out what's wrong, as the drug treatments tend to have quite unpleasant side effects for a lot of women.

Thank you. I need to get this done again

@JaniieJones

'They are not menopause specialists.'

They are public health experts and more than able to analyse data and give their professional opinion on risks and benefits.

The Department of Health surely should be pushing this if evidence is apparently so clear.

I think you are optimistic about the cash starved public health services in the UK. Hence why we end up discussing it here!

The info is out there - jingling keeps posting it very kindly - are women reading it? I think many aren’t because no one told them they might need to. I had no idea about peri menopause until i was in it. Never heard of it. Thank heavens for the new wave of books and experts stepping up to tell us.

Information shouldn’t be ‘out there’ it should be analysed and simplified for public

I’ve got a general check up next week as per invitation (surprisingly easy to get f2f) so I’ll see what they say.

There are easily accessible positions re public eg folic acid, fluoride, vitamin d etc

The cost of bone fragility is high for NHS it makes sense to look at better messaging if it’s key

Even if it’s just look into this for this reason

Maybe there is a lag but really this isn’t new so why so opaque in communications

Just my experience age 71. I had my womb removed age 50 after a decade of horrendous periods. I retained my ovaries but they soon stopped producing estrogen. GP suggested I had HRT to prevent osteoporosis, so I was on a patch for 5 years. I then had a Dexa scan which revealed severe osteoporosis, so GP said I may as well stop the HRT as it had made no difference. I was prescribed bisphosphonates, which I still take. My rheumatologist recently suggested I go on Prolia (Denosumab) which does actually rebuild bone. A quick google took me to many class action lawsuits in the USA regarding Prolia. Yes it rebuilds bone, but once discontinued there is a rebound effect with multiple fragility fractures. So I have refused that treatment and continue the older drug. It also has side effects but they are more understood.

So I'm a bit wary of "HRT prevents osteoporosis" statements.

Information shouldn’t be ‘out there’ it should be analysed and simplified for public

Quite a task with something so complex! I'm personally satisfied only seeking help on this if I have problems and it's good we have an NHS we can get advice from. However, I think it's naive to assume one size fits all. There needs to be no gatekeepers for knowledge. Understanding is the gatekeeper and it becomes evident. If you have the understanding, great you will know what to do, if you don't you need additional advice.

@eyeseeyou

Information shouldn’t be ‘out there’ it should be analysed and simplified for public

Quite a task with something so complex! I'm personally satisfied only seeking help on this if I have problems and it's good we have an NHS we can get advice from. However, I think it's naive to assume one size fits all. There needs to be no gatekeepers for knowledge. Understanding is the gatekeeper and it becomes evident. If you have the understanding, great you will know what to do, if you don't you need additional advice.

Obviously it can exist. I’m not suggesting it go

More that it shouldn’t be our only recourse and if it is, why?

The things mentioned on this thread cost the NHS a lot so it makes sense to take a position if the benefit really is as evident as people are saying

'There are easily accessible positions re public eg folic acid, fluoride, vitamin d etc'

'The cost of bone fragility is high for NHS it makes sense to look at better messaging if it’s key'

Exactly. It just seems odd that great we can read a pp's links but it is isn't the point I was making. We all know, for example, that 'breast is best', no need to go googling specific sites. The public health message is loud and clear. So why isn't it with hrt?

This Morning reckon that are going to keep raising awareness. Let's hope that involves more than featuring celebs using private clinics and their private Drs.

The things mentioned on this thread cost the NHS a lot so it makes sense to take a position if the benefit really is as evident as people are saying

What sort of position? Surely any position taken would involve a bias. I wouldn't want to feel pressurised into taking HRT if it wasn't most likely to be beneficial to my particular circumstances neither would I like to be refused it if it was most likely to be beneficial. Medicine is supposed to be evidence based and individual although the data is largely empirical. Get the balance wrong and people suffer.

@eyeseeyou

The things mentioned on this thread cost the NHS a lot so it makes sense to take a position if the benefit really is as evident as people are saying

What sort of position? Surely any position taken would involve a bias. I wouldn't want to feel pressurised into taking HRT if it wasn't most likely to be beneficial to my particular circumstances neither would I like to be refused it if it was most likely to be beneficial. Medicine is supposed to be evidence based and individual although the data is largely empirical. Get the balance wrong and people suffer.

How about information re HRT and osteoporosis link? As people kept suggesting exists

Many see HRT as a way to relieve symptoms, I haven’t thought about it much at all as I feel good and no reason so far.

No one is forced to do anything it’s just information that is easily accessible. I have no idea why anyone would be against this, public health gives mass advice all the time. Particularly for preventative measures.

Plus I’m more asking why it’s not the case..

Maybe it’s not because the cost / benefit doesn’t lead to it.

@MarshaBradyo, ah, I think we might have been talking at cross purposes. I'm all for the availability of information. (Although I don't feel it needs to be shoved down people's throats.) When you said 'position' it felt like you were advocating an institutional bias - as there is with promoting the collection of data, for example, since empiricism relies upon it.

Particularly for preventative measures.

But these are not straightforward since no one is a fortune teller. There are complexities regarding individual human bodies which need to be taken into consideration when deciding upon individual medical interventions. Added to which genetic tendencies are just that, the study of epigenetics and gene expression illustrates this.

But if someone has a health problem, or is worried, I agree, help and information should be freely available.

That's why I'm a strong advocate for bodily autonomy and against anything that erodes this.

@MarshaBradyo

Plus I’m more asking why it’s not the case..

Maybe it’s not because the cost / benefit doesn’t lead to it.

Yes. We know for example smokers and obese people are a massive drain on services so we constantly see public health advice.

So again if there really are 100k excess deaths every year caused by osteoporosis that would be massively reduced if women took hrt why aren't they pushing it? I mean 100k is a lot.

It can't be because they can't be bothered and they expect us all Google and educate ourselves. When it comes to costs to the nhs PHE would take a very proactive approach here. I can't help thinking it is because HRT would not stop the excess deaths.

I'm astonished how many women don't know that the Mirena coil releases progestogen - which is a hormone. Almost like hormone replacement...