06-05-2015, 01:09 AM
Hi Lotus,
I couldn't go through the immense effort of quoting and inserting that huge message.
a) thanks for the compliments (I think?) about making you laugh.
b) more fool me for asking for references non-specifically.
Yes, I can quite believe that there are phytoestrogens that have bad side effects.
However, we know that there are 3 kinds of natural human female estrogens all of which exhibit more or less risk. There are dozens of phytoestrogens. Deoxymiroestrol in only bioavailable by metabolising miroestrol from PM, correct?
and is not available from any other phytoestrogen, correct?
So the references that I am interested are specific measured adverse effects from PM on animals and humans, not the phytoestrogens that you get from Red Clover, fenugreek, hops etc. Just like I would expect the effects of Premarin from horses to be somewhat riskier than Estradiol, which I believe to be riskier than PM because there are papers that say so. I haven't found any specific evidence that says that PM is riskier than conventional HRT.
My point is this:
If you have GD sufficiently badly that you need female hormones to control it, which is riskier? Conventional HRT or PM?
My feeling is that if PM were as risky as HRT, then either HRT would be available OTC or PM would be controlled by the authorities.
Secondly, risky how? To your health, your marriage, or both?
I remain to be convinced that PM is more risky in either category.
My gut instinct tells me that taking HRT under a shrink and a Doctor is a slippery slope.
Incidentally, the BN threads are as I thought, mostly anecdotal, either containing vague worries, or (for real females) upset that a female hormone mimic has upset their periods (why wouldn't it?) I even contributed to them myself, dealing with headaches and lower back pain. (Incidentally, I have almost NO headaches now that I have given up all high carb foods, including ALL grains, and I'm fairly sure that the back pain thing was symptomatic of testicular atrophy).
B.
I couldn't go through the immense effort of quoting and inserting that huge message.
a) thanks for the compliments (I think?) about making you laugh.
b) more fool me for asking for references non-specifically.
Yes, I can quite believe that there are phytoestrogens that have bad side effects.
However, we know that there are 3 kinds of natural human female estrogens all of which exhibit more or less risk. There are dozens of phytoestrogens. Deoxymiroestrol in only bioavailable by metabolising miroestrol from PM, correct?
and is not available from any other phytoestrogen, correct?
So the references that I am interested are specific measured adverse effects from PM on animals and humans, not the phytoestrogens that you get from Red Clover, fenugreek, hops etc. Just like I would expect the effects of Premarin from horses to be somewhat riskier than Estradiol, which I believe to be riskier than PM because there are papers that say so. I haven't found any specific evidence that says that PM is riskier than conventional HRT.
My point is this:
If you have GD sufficiently badly that you need female hormones to control it, which is riskier? Conventional HRT or PM?
My feeling is that if PM were as risky as HRT, then either HRT would be available OTC or PM would be controlled by the authorities.
Secondly, risky how? To your health, your marriage, or both?
I remain to be convinced that PM is more risky in either category.
My gut instinct tells me that taking HRT under a shrink and a Doctor is a slippery slope.
Incidentally, the BN threads are as I thought, mostly anecdotal, either containing vague worries, or (for real females) upset that a female hormone mimic has upset their periods (why wouldn't it?) I even contributed to them myself, dealing with headaches and lower back pain. (Incidentally, I have almost NO headaches now that I have given up all high carb foods, including ALL grains, and I'm fairly sure that the back pain thing was symptomatic of testicular atrophy).
B.