The doctor who stops women ageing - menopause/fertility

[OhHolyJesus]

I can see the benefits but I do think there is a god complex with these doctors at ProFAM.

The doctor who stops women ageing

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/58515a70-c35f-11e9-b964-2cc1b53edc70

I don't know how to link to a share token but I'll be back once I've figured it out.

I find it a bit worrying. Have they researched the aftereffects of delaying a menopause? There is a reason that our bodies do it when they do it.

I do think there is a limit to playing God. I always wonder when our Tower of Babel is going to get too high.

There was so much that was disturbing, even the piece on the violent and erratic doctor he worked with in Italy who helped a 62 year old woman get pregnant and the comments from associates who thought it would have been better if he had died in the Hatfield train crash.

The god complex in IVF and Women's medicine is as present as ever.

Messing around with nature, women have had the menopause for thousands of years, what will happen if they start deliberately delaying it?

What will happen is that you will simply delay it until you get to an age where any bad side effects will be even harder to cope with.

I had an easy menopause in my early 50s but even as a very healthy 75 year old I would not want to have it now.

You delay it anyway when you take HRT. The consultant I first saw many years ago who was a leading gynaecologist in the treatment of menopause told me this. And when I stopped HRT for a period the symptoms were horrendous. Am now back on it for the rest of my life if need be.

I totally agree that this doctor seems to have a god complex. At the same time though, while menopause is a natural event in a woman's life, for many it's extremely unpleasant and for some it leads to all sorts of adverse health outcomes. I'm going to take HRT as long as I can.

It’s behind a paywall but I heard the story on Radio4 when it first broke.

I agree with pp saying that the delay is similar to taking HRT. I’d rather do that than have a natural menopause with all the misery that entails.

Once a woman stops her periods she is considered old and non fuckable.

Fuck that shit.

Old men can be world leaders and be considered vital and relevant. Women of a similar age are dried up old prunes.

Again.

Fuck that shit.

Natural menopause is about as hit and miss as a vaginal birth.

Your fanny doesn't dry up and shrivel.

Men's erections do get lesser as they age though. By the time they hit their mid fifties it stands at a 90 degree angle.

Many women get through the menopause without having to take HRT and HRT is no magic bullet either. I'm not saying it doesn't help some women but menopause does not have to equal misery.

but menopause does not have to equal misery

My periods stopped after endometrial ablation when I was 47. I must have subsequently gone through the menopause but I didn't notice anything.

Cant read full article but why delay it?

Do women really want to have babies in their 60s? Thats bonkers.

For a 45 year old im pretty fit n healthy. I had my children at 40 and 44. Thats just how life happened but not something i'd recommend. Pregnancy and birth is no joke and a younger body would imo be beneficial. No way would i want to go through it in my 60s!

Can't read as behind paywall, have question.

If they are grafting ovarian tissue, where are they getting the (presumably younger) tissue from?

Also this
'Your fanny doesn't dry up and shrivel.

Men's erections do get lesser as they age though. By the time they hit their mid fifties it stands at a 90 degree angle.'

But your fanny can dry up and shrivel. Something that I didn't know until menopause started being discussed more recently. Men knew though, so now I know why old women are called dried up, shrivelled etc. As ever they are thinking of our cunts, how fuckable we are. I had no idea that's what it referred to before.

Also didn't know that about men, blimey.

Vaginal atrophy is a real and often debilitating symptom of menopause. Trying to pretend women's biology, and the problems that can arise from women's biology, aren't a real thing does none of us any favours.

At its worst, the walls of the vagina can fuse together. And it's not just the vagina that's affected; the bladder and urethra are too, leading to incontinence. The only treatment that works is topical oestrogen creams. You can't cure it simply by saying "dried up fannies are a sexist myth."

I'm very happy for people who sail through menopause, but not all of us do. I don't deny for a moment that this doc sounds like he's got a god complex, and I personally think that any woman wanting to have a baby in her sixties needs her head examined, not her uterus. But none of this detracts from the possibility that this might be a better treatment for menopausal symptoms than pills or patches.

I'm with you Fermats, I think any research into better treatment of women's conditions is worthwhile and for a 9 year old girls ovaries to be removed for her to receive cancer treatment and then go on to have them reinserted and give birth to a child is a wonderful solution which obviously saved her life and her fertility.

My question is really about how much do we know about the safety of this treatment for the menopause and how much research was being done or was it another experimental idea like puberty blockers where everyone says it safe until women ask some questions and then suddenly it's not and we need an investigation.

The writer noted the surgeons own misogynistic language in the interview and his daughter wanted the surgery apparently but may not need it. It could prevent really horrible menopause symptoms but it felt like a one size fits all approach when really very little is known about it. That was what scared me. It felt very Frankenstein.

(I feel quite strongly about IVF for women in their 60s is wrong, I'm not saying it's a fair as men can go on to father children late in life, but as that child would be very likely to lose their mother early on in their life is unfair and selfish of the mother.)

The walls of my vagina have been touching each other since the first trimester of my life.

Share as an email to get a link

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/simon-fishel-interview-the-man-behind-ovarian-grafting-zkc7hfbh6?shareToken=7623feba1c0fa3286737d9195b0c4800

I wouldn't want to be fertile again, but if it could regulate the hormones that'd be great. What I understood was that they had to take tissue from pre-menopause ovary so I think it will be used first for women who will go in to a premature menopause for cancer treatment.

I have had sex with numerous men and had three vaginal births.

Even 20 year old women sometimes need a bit of lubrication.

Oh! And if I was giving birth for the first time from the age of 40 onward it would be considered a risky birth and most likely end up a CS because of twin birth.

Not touching, placemats, fused together. Like abdominal adhesions following surgery. I don't get it? Are you being deliberately obtuse or are you getting some sort of weird kick out of belittling other women's health conditions?

Women who have to loose their breasts, ovaries, uterus, tubes, and cervix due to cancer shouldn't be on hrt.

What if they've lost their fertility due to chemo/radiation therapy for a cancer of some entirely different part of the body? Cancer is not one single disease, you know.

Seriously Fermats? You are telling ME I'm belittling other women's health conditions?

YCFOTTFSOFAWYGTYCFOSM

What if they had chemotherapy as a child?

Does this render them unable to have sex ever again?

It's nonsense.

Vaginal cancer means loss of the vagina.

Bladder cancer means that you may loose your clitoris.

Yes, I am telling you exactly that, because that's exactly what you are doing by repeatedly claiming vaginal atrophy is simply a misogynistic myth about "dried up fannies" and cracking fatuous jokes about how the walls of your vagina touch. Don't want to be told you're belittling other women's health conditions, then don't do exactly that.