Anyone choosing NOT to use HRT?

[WandaWomblesaurus73]

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

I have had appointments with two different GPs, a practice nurse and a menopause specialist, and I have been pleasantly surprised that not one of them was dismissive in any way. I had feared that the GPs would be.

It's what actually are all the facts

When people suggest everyone needs hrt are those with a financial interest, when part of the rationale ( downrhread ) is women were never meant to live past 56 , it makes me question thier judgement

My mother never had hrt. 30 years ago her doctors advice was HRT or plenty of milk , nowadays I think they add exercise to that

I had my womb removed at 45. I had told the doctor to leave my ovaries as I didn't want to have hormones . I had terrible depression when on the pill . He told me afterwards that one ovary had already burst due to a cyst and the other one had a 10cm cyst on it, which he removed . I had no problems afterwards and was told my remaining ovary would stop working within a couple of years.

@bordermidgebite

It's what actually are all the facts

When people suggest everyone needs hrt are those with a financial interest, when part of the rationale ( downrhread ) is women were never meant to live past 56 , it makes me question thier judgement

My mother never had hrt. 30 years ago her doctors advice was HRT or plenty of milk , nowadays I think they add exercise to that

A good GP will tell you the facts - mine certainly did. She gave me loads of sheets l, discussed any risk factors for me etc The issue is some GPs don’t get much training in meno. We can’t base our decisions today on what women now in their 60s and above were told

The facts don't seem to me to indicate that every female must take HRT

Yip medical training is patchy and some doctors have not treated women well

I brought up my mother because some seemed to imply it was impossible for a woman to reach an active healthy old age without HRT -again the type of hyperbole that makes me suspicious

I brought up my mother because some seemed to imply it was impossible for a woman to reach an active healthy old age without HRT -again the type of hyperbole that makes me suspicious

Well yes. It might be easy to believe that it's impossible, except that my mother, age 89 now, is in extremely good physical shape, without HRT, as was my grandmother who also lived well in to old age in relatively good physical health.

No, l am fortunate l am 53 have no symptons. l have a mirena coil which l get on well with and havent had a period since first once fitted many years ago. l eat healthy and exercise, self care is an essential for me as very busy life.

Ah, I think hormones can go haywire and cause problems which HRT might solve (if the balance is right) but also that the body can be adaptive or not. A lot to go wrong, a lot we can adapt to without intervention. And of course our bodies can also adapt to an intervention.

We are individuals, the goalposts move. But we are individuals which also have a lot in common. The mechanisms might well be the same but are complex with a myriad of permutations.

@Moonface123

No, l am fortunate l am 53 have no symptons. l have a mirena coil which l get on well with and havent had a period since first once fitted many years ago. l eat healthy and exercise, self care is an essential for me as very busy life.

The coil is providing you with some extra hormones.

@bordermidgebite

The facts don't seem to me to indicate that every female must take HRT

Yip medical training is patchy and some doctors have not treated women well

I brought up my mother because some seemed to imply it was impossible for a woman to reach an active healthy old age without HRT -again the type of hyperbole that makes me suspicious

I think it’s key to know that you will prob base your assumptions on what your mum experienced. Other women will have very different experiences. The women in my family for example had osteo and heart issues. ‘Facts’ in medicine are going to be complex for each individual and good GPs work with that.

'Well yes. It might be easy to believe that it's impossible, except that my mother, age 89 now, is in extremely good physical shape, without HRT, as was my grandmother who also lived well in to old age in relatively good physical health.'

It does seem a lottery doesn't it. My dm is very active and fit, doesn't have any health issues, isn't incontinent and is still happily married after 60 yrs. Luckily Dad wasn't one 'chasing younger models' as a pp suggested non hrt takers dh's do. She walks miles, doesn't take any medication. Of course this doesn't represent everyone but my point is some on this board seem to promote hrt with scare stories where imo it is very much a choice. If you can't manage and need it absolutely fine! but being decrepit in your 80s with fractures and incontinence is not a foregone conclusion.

It certainly isn’t for everybody @bordermidgebite. For some it is contraindicated for medical reasons but for people like me it has been life changing.

Unfortunately knowledge of what the menopause involves long term is an almost taboo subject. So many uninformed women believe that hot flushes, night sweats, mood swings and brain fog just about covers it. Those who see a rapid dip in oestrogen levels suffer, those whose oestrogen levels tail off gentry are spared these miseries.
Time passes, now in their 60s and 70s these women start to suffer the hugely debilitating long term effects and are shocked to be told the conditions are irreversible and caused by prolonged low oestrogen levels.
My mother suffered from osteoporosis, and I mean SUFFERED. Yes she got treatment but her bones crumbled and made her latter years miserable. My friends suffer from a variety of avoidable menopausal issues now in their 70s. Most have some level of stress incontinence, one rarely leaves home because she has lost bladder control, loss of libido is common, on Gransnet when this is discussed you get loads of women piling in saying they’d rather have a nice up of tea. My neighbour is hoping to get her prolapse operated on this month. That operation has been postponed repeatedly. Last week when I visited her she was in tears. My sister in law has osteoarthritis, black cohosh didn’t work for that.
I am sick and tired being told “If only I had known this could happen”. Women’s health has been put on the back burner for so long. If menopause happened to men you can bet that they’d be taking their HRT with only those for whom it was contra indicated experiencing the extreme decline in old age.
Do not make a decision in ignorance. Learn about the long term effects then discuss it with a medical professional. It may not be right for you. What you decide is your business. The risks for each individual and for each combination of treatment vary widely. I am in the happy position of only taking oestrogen. The benefits for me hugely outweigh the small risks.
I am not evangelical about women taking HRT. I am a bit evangelical about ensuring they don’t take decisions based on ignorance. Please don’t get to my age saying *”If only I had known”.”

'Ah, I think hormones can go haywire and cause problems which HRT might solve (if the balance is right) but also that the body can be adaptive or not. A lot to go wrong, a lot we can adapt to without intervention. And of course our bodies can also adapt to an intervention.'

Yes this does seem to be key. For some the transition is smooth with no long term damage, for others the adjustment doesn't seem to settle down and with family history of osteoporosis they of course rightly choose hrt.

Everyone should assess their individual ability to cope, their long term risk factors and make an informed choice.

It's the "could have" that's my problem

I don't see a clear analysis that takes all factors into account that lets you estimate your own risk and benefit

( at this point I do think that if we were men that analysis would exist)

I have a relatively young friend with HRT whi has osteoporosis and a mother without both so it's clearly not simple as "it would not have happened if they had had hrt "

If it's doubling a minute risk for me personally I am not interested . But I don't know my personal risk ( beyond it doesn't run in the family ) and I don't know the true benefit for me ( active and relatively healthy diet )

I’m not there yet but when the time comes I’m not allowed HRT as I have APS (my blood is sticky) and it’s a clotting risk for me. I’ve found this thread useful so thanks.

'I don't see a clear analysis that takes all factors into account that lets you estimate your own risk and benefit'

I know it's frustrating. There are risk factor flow charts for so many conditions but not this.

Surely if having close family members with breast cancer may be a risk factor then having elderly close family members without osteoporosis, prolapses, incontinence or heart disease may also be factors to suggest you don't need it?!

I'm as always on the fence, I have family and friends peri and menopausal some on hrt, some not.

Out of my group of pals a lot do use HRT it plenty dont. Not everyone gets bad symptoms. You must know that from your research. It strikes me with me amd my pals that it's very much up to the individual. Are you sure you doctor said what you said he said? Seems an odd thing to say or think.

when part of the rationale ( downrhread ) is women were never meant to live past 56

That isn't what was said. The comment was on the fact that its only in modern times that women in general have had extended lives significantly beyond 56.

There are two issues to consider in HRT and they should be considered independently.

One is as a treatment for significant symptoms of menopause which can be debilitating physically and mentally. The other is a potential replenishment of a long term shortage of hormones which contribute to another set of debilitating conditions in older age and which women didn't experience until more modern times.

I don't see anyone saying the health conditions associated with diminishing testosterone in mean should not be treated because its "natural".

That isn't what was said. The comment was on the fact that its only in modern times that women in general have had extended lives significantly beyond 56

Although this isn't necessarily true either. My family tree demonstrates my family on both sides living well into old age.

Although this isn't necessarily true either. My family tree demonstrates my family on both sides living well into old age

Women in general. Average live expectancy is the metric you need, not anecdata from individual family trees.

'Women in general. Average live expectancy is the metric you need, not anecdata from individual family trees'

Anecdata from individual family trees is very relevant.

@Djwt

That isn't what was said. The comment was on the fact that its only in modern times that women in general have had extended lives significantly beyond 56

Although this isn't necessarily true either. My family tree demonstrates my family on both sides living well into old age.

Humans have been around for over 5 million years djwt. Your family tree presumably goes back a few hundred years. Evolutionary adaptations are extremely slow.

Do men go onto forums and argue over whether they choose to take certain treatments?

@JinglingHellsBells

Do men go onto forums and argue over whether they choose to take certain treatments?

Is it arguing?

I just want to get information tbh

Although it does seem muddy still rather than clear

'Is it arguing? I just want to get information tbh'

It's a disappointing attitude isn't it. Many women confused and just wanting clarity and information. The only 'argument' on the thread been regarding a pp's odd, insensitive comments about how very young she looked.