HORMONE
HERESY
Estrogen's Deadly Truth, Part 2
by Sherrill Sellman
The promotion of synthetic estrogens and estrogen-mimicking chemicals is a major medical mistake and an unforeseen environmental health hazard. Estrogen is quite a high-profile hormone these days. For some, it represents the Golden Fleece that excites so many medical practitioners, pharmaceutical companies and writers in search of its miraculous properties. For others, estrogen is a rather perilous hormone, fraught with many unknown and unspoken dangers. Most women are lost in the dark and bottomless abyss, somewhere between truth and fiction. All too often they are desperately confused about whether to trust their instincts or medical science. Their physical, emotional and mental health and long-term well-being hang in the balance. The estrogen story is similar to a modern-day thriller. It is a story of deception, betrayal, hidden agendas, propaganda and misinformation. As a story it could be quite entertaining, but as a real-life drama its effects are disastrous to the lives of tens of millions of women around the world. Hormones are very powerful substances. Begin tampering with Nature's finely tuned messengers of life's processes and you are asking for trouble. This is especially true for women. A woman's psyche is intimately connected to her monthly flow of hormones. Hormones not only direct and determine her physiological processes, but also influence her emotional and psychological state. Besides creating myriad health problems, hormonal imbalance can undermine self esteem, creativity, mental acuity and a healthy sex-drive. Perhaps the bigger picture about the estrogen story is the fact that the introduction of synthetic hormones, as a legitimate need of women, is basically experimentation under the guise of standard medical practice. As a result, medical science has expanded its control of women's lives. Germaine Greer sums up the medical establishment's intrusion into a woman's hormonal health quite astutely when she says, "Menopause is a dream specialty for the mediocre medic. It requires no surgical or diagnostic skill; it is not itself a life-threatening condition; there is no scope for malpractice action. Patients must return again and again for a battery of tests and check-ups."(1) Quite simply, tampering with a woman's hormones is tampering with her power.
Introducing Estrogen Dominance
The natural design of the body is to produce the two
hormones, progesterone and estrogen, in a very sensitive and
precise balance so that reproductive ability is maximized. These
two hormones are closely interrelated in many ways and, although
they are generally antagonistic towards each other, each helps
the other by making the cells of a target organ more sensitive.
Estrogen really isn't a single hormone. To be accurate, it refers
to a class of hormones with estrus activity (i.e., proliferation
of endometrial cells in preparation for pregnancy). The estrogens
are named estradiol and estrone—both of which are implicated
in stimulating abnormal cell growth when found in
higher-than-normal amounts in the body—as well as estriol,
which is known to be cancer-inhibiting. Each type of estrogen has
a different function in the body. These estrogens are produced
mainly in the ovaries, although small quantities are secreted
from the adrenal glands, the placenta during pregnancy, and fat
cells. When puberty arrives, estrogen encourages in a girl the
development of breasts and the expansion of the uterus. Estrogen
contributes to the molding of female body contours and maturation
of the skeleton. After that, it helps regulate the menstrual
cycle and plays other necessary roles in maintaining bone-mass
and keeping blood cholesterol levels in check. When excessive
quantities of estrogen, regardless of source, are present in a
young woman's body they will contribute to the 'burnout' of her
ovaries and undermine fertility. In the case of progesterone,
however, we are talking about only one specific hormone. Thus,
progesterone is both the name of the class and the single member
of the class. In the ovaries, progesterone is the precursor of
estrogen. Progesterone is also made in smaller amounts by the
adrenal glands in both sexes and by the testes in males. It is
the precursor of testosterone and of all important adrenal
cortical hormones. From progesterone are derived not only other
sex hormones but also corticosteroids, which are essential for
stress response, sugar and electrolyte balance, blood pressure,
not to mention survival.(2) While estrogen
is the primary hormone during the first two weeks of a woman's
menstrual cycle, fulfilling its role of preparing the endometrium
for pregnancy, progesterone is the major female reproductive
hormone during the latter two weeks of the menstrual cycle.
Progesterone is necessary for the survival of the fertilized
ovum, the resulting embryo and the fetus throughout gestation
when production of the progesterone is taken over by the
placenta. There is a very delicate balance between the interplay
of estrogen and progesterone. If that balance is interfered with,
devastating effects occur. Unfortunately, introduced synthetic
hormones as well as environmental pollutants are presently
wreaking havoc with our hormones. "Estrogen dominance"
is a term that was first used by Dr. John Lee. A retired medical
practitioner from California, Dr. Lee has spent the better part
of the last two decades exploring the basis for the proliferation
of such female problems as PMS, endometriosis, ovarian cysts,
fibroids, breast cancer, infertility, osteoporosis and menopausal
problems. From his clinical experience in the field of female
health, as well as from his published research, Dr. Lee believes
that many women are suffering from the effects of too much
estrogen. He finds that stress, nutritional deficiencies,
estrogenic substances from our environment, and taking synthetic
estrogens, combined with an ensuing deficiency of progesterone,
are the likely contributing factors to the creation of estrogen
dominance. The following is a list of symptoms that can be caused
or made worse by estrogen dominance: acceleration of the aging
process, allergies, breast tenderness, decreased sex-drive,
depression, fatigue, hair thinning, excessive facial hair,
fibrocystic breasts, foggy thinking, headaches, hypoglycemia,
increased blood-clotting, increased risk of stroke, infertility,
irritability, memory loss, miscarriage, osteoporosis,
pre-menopausal bone-loss, PMS, thyroid dysfunction mimicking
hypothyroidism, uterine cancer, uterine fibroids, water
retention, bloating, fat gain (especially around the abdomen,
hips and thighs), gall bladder disease and auto-immune disorders
such as lupus and thyroiditis.(3) In
addition to the synthetic estrogens, women are also prescribed
synthetic progestins. They have been added to the estrogen
formula to offset the hazards of estrogen drugs. Nancy Beckham in
her book, Menopause—A Positive Approach Using Natural
Therapies, was able to identify more than 100 adverse effects
for the most commonly prescribed estrogen and progestin
medications. According to Dr. Lee, many of these common health
problems can be offset by increasing the level of natural
progesterone. The problem is not always that progesterone levels
are actually lower than normal, but they are low in comparison to
elevated estrogen levels. Due to increased exposure to these
estrogenic substances in the body, women become more affected by
estrogens made in the body from their mid-30s onwards. Around
this time, women do not ovulate with every menstrual cycle. Since
progesterone is made from the ripened follicle (corpus luteum),
if there is no ovulation there is no corpus luteum formed and
hence no progesterone made. Stress, nutritional deficiencies and
chemical pollutants all contribute to anovulatory cycles. The
frequency of these anovulatory cycles increases as menopause
approaches, changing the menstrual pattern to an either heavier
or longer menstrual flow. While not commonly understood by
medical science, the growing incidence of anovulatory cycles,
even in young women, and the ensuing hormone imbalance are
creating huge health problems. Women of all ages are now exposed
to a higher risk of the entire range of estrogen-dominant
conditions.
Estrogen Dominance in the Environment
Extremely disturbing events are being reported globally
about the alarming changes happening in the environment. Not long
ago in Lake Apopka in Florida, wildlife biologists discovered
that strange biological effects were happening in the alligators
living there. In 1980, a toxic spill occurred which dumped huge
amounts of a pesticide similar to DDT into the lake. That event
was almost forgotten until five years later when it was
discovered that 90 per cent of the alligators had disappeared.
Most of those that remained were incapable of reproducing or had
no urge to mate. The males were born with penises that were not
only 75 per cent shorter than average but were also deformed.
Further testing indicated that their testosterone levels were so
low that they hormonally resembled females. Moreover, the females
had abnormal ovaries and follicles, described as "burned
out."(4) Recent reports show that
strange fish caught in Port Phillip Bay in Victoria, Australia,
were hermaphrodites. Similarly, a major British study revealed
that male fish downstream from sewage treatment plants changed
sex as a result of estrogen chemicals which had not been removed
from treated effluent.(5) Dr. Ana Soto, an
endocrinologist at Tufts University in the United States, had
been experimenting with cancer cells taken from the breast and
then cultured. She found they would only grow if they were fed
estrogens. One day, the test simply stopped working. The cancer
cells continued to grow for four months, even when no estrogens
were fed to them. Dr. Soto then realized that the manufacturer of
the flasks she had been using had started to use a different
plastic one that, when it becomes warm, releases minute
quantities of the estrogen-like compound, nonylphenol! Her
tissues samples were being contaminated by the xeno-estrogens
from the plastic flasks!(6) The widespread
use of herbicides, pesticides and plastics have created a problem
that has never before existed on this planet. We are polluting
our environment and ourselves in a sea of estrogen-like mimics.
They are everywhere: in the air, water, soil, and over abundantly
in our bodies. Called xeno-estrogens, these are substances which
have a powerful estrogenic effect on the body, are fat-soluble
and non-biodegradable. They are also dangerously toxic. We
presently live in a world awash with petrochemicals.
Petrochemicals are everywhere. Our machines run on
petrochemicals, and millions of products including plastics,
microchips, medicines, clothing, foods, soaps, pesticides and
even perfumes are either made from petrochemicals or contain
them. The popular slogan in the early 1950s, "Better Living
Through Chemistry," is returning to haunt us. The legacy of
this pollution has resulted in an epidemic of reproductive
abnormalities, including the steadily increasing number of
cancers of the reproductive tract, infertility, low sperm counts,
poor sperm quality and the feminisation of males. The potential
consequences of this overexposure are staggering, especially
considering that one of the consequences is the passing on of
reproductive abnormalities to offspring.(7)
Just how serious is this problem? In a May 1993 article in the
British medical journal, The Lancet, researchers in
Scotland and Denmark hypothesized that xeno-estrogens are
responsible for a steadily declining sperm count in men.
According to Neils Skakkebeak of the University of Copenhagen,
sperm counts have dropped by more than 50 per cent since 1940.
Meanwhile, the rate of testicular and prostate cancer in the
United States and Europe has tripled in the past 50 years.
Reproductive abnormalities such as undescended testicles have
become increasingly common. Xeno-estrogens are also implicated in
impaired brain development in children.(8)
They are also directly implicated in the 30 to 80 per cent
increase in breast, ovarian and uterine cancers in women over the
past 50 years.(9) In some rural communities
in Australia, where heavy pesticide use has left residuals in
drinking water, there have been reports of boys with abnormally
small penises, along with reports of the feminisation of males
and the masculinisation of females. It is time for us to wake up
and pay heed to these warnings for the sake of future
generations. You can play your part in protecting your
grandchildren and great-grandchildren in the same ways you can
protect yourself: by refusing to use pesticides, minimizing your
use of plastics, purchasing hormone-free meat and organic
produce, using 'green' products for detergents and household
cleaners, and, in general, using 'natural' products in favor of
petrochemical products.
The Myth of Estrogen Deficiency
The trend these days is to push hormone replacement
therapy (HRT), featuring synthetic estrogens and progestins, onto
all menopausal women. Unfortunately, however, this enthusiasm for
drugs is not backed up by the facts. Estrogen deficiency is
loudly proclaimed by medical practitioners, pharmaceutical
advertising and many lay publications as the primary cause of all
the symptoms attributed to menopause and post-menopause, such as
mood swings, depressions, hot flushes, vaginal dryness, loss of
sex-drive and accelerating osteoporosis. But is there really such
a thing as estrogen deficiency? While it is true that menopause
is associated with decreasing estrogen levels, it is not known
whether these decreased levels of estrogen do in fact cause all
the symptoms of menopause. Dr. Carolyn DeMarco, author of Take
Charge of Your Body and a physician specializing in women's
health issues, says there is no direct proof that estrogen-lack
causes heart disease or other ailments associated with the
menopause. Germaine Greer, well-known feminist and author of The
Change, writes that "the proponents of HRT have never
proved that there is an estrogen deficiency, nor have they
explained the mechanism by which the therapy of choice effected
its miracles. They have taken the improper course of defining a
disease from its therapy." Dr. Jerilyn Prior, researcher and
Professor of Endocrinology at the University of British Columbia
in Vancouver, BC, Canada, points out that no study proving the
relationship between estrogen deficiency and menopausal symptoms
and related diseases has yet been done. "Instead," says
Dr. Prior, "a notion has been put forward that since
estrogen levels go down, this is the most important change and
explains all the things that may or may not be related to
menopause. So estrogen treatment at this stage of our
understanding is premature. This is a kind of backwards science.
It leads to ridiculous ideas—like calling a headache an
aspirin-deficiency disease."(10)
Considering that Western women tend to have a 10-to-15 year
period prior to menopause when they are estrogen-dominant and
suffering from estrogen-dominance symptoms, why are their doctors
prescribing them still more estrogen? Dr. Prior has shown that,
during menopause, progesterone decreases to 1/120th of baseline
levels, whereas estrogen decreases to one-half to one-third of
pre-menopausal baseline levels. Would it not be wiser to consider
the progesterone-loss effect when evaluating post-menopausal
symptoms and such related conditions as osteoporosis, heart
disease, depression and loss of sex-drive? In most menopausal
women, estrogen levels are below those necessary for pregnancy
but sufficient for other normal body functions. The estrogen
"deficiency" hypothesis as an explanation of most
menopausal symptoms or health problems is thus not supported by
the facts of estrogen blood levels, by worldwide ecological
studies or by endocrinology experts. Dr. Lee believes that
"Menopause per se should be regarded as a normal adjustment
reflecting a benign change in a woman's biological life away from
child-bearing and onward to a period of new personal power and
fulfillment. The Western perception of menopause as a threshold
of undesirable symptoms and regressive illness due to estrogen
deficiency is an error not supported by fact. More accurately, we
should view our menopause problem as an abnormality brought about
by industrialized cultures' deviation from a healthy
lifestyle."
Synthetic Hormones and the Havoc they Wreak
With hindsight, it will very likely be recorded in history
that the widespread prescribing of synthetic hormones to women
was the biggest medical bungle of the century. Most women taking
the contraceptive pill and HRT have very little idea about the
hormones they are putting into their bodies; nor are they
knowledgeable about their side-effects. Oral contraceptives are
made with synthetic estrogen and synthetic progestins (known as
the combined Pill). In the early 1960s the Pill was widely
marketed as an effective, safe and convenient method of birth
control. However, the initial trials were flawed and inadequate.(11) Nonetheless, the Pill was promoted with all
the enthusiasm the pharmaceutical companies could muster. Dr.
Ellen Grant, author of The Bitter Pill and Sexual
Chemistry, was an early researcher of synthetic hormones and
their effects on health. Back in the 1960s she was shocked when
synthetic hormones were not withdrawn from the market due to
their known, serious side-effects. So, just what are the effects
of suppressing natural hormones with synthetic ones? The Pill
literally stops menstruation, and bleeding occurs each month only
because the synthetic hormones are not taken for seven days of
the cycle. The bleeding that occurs would be more accurately
termed "withdrawal bleeding," not menstruation. Taking
the combined Pill increases the risk of coronary artery disease,
breast cancer and high blood-pressure. The side-effects include
nausea, vomiting, headaches, breast tenderness, weight increases,
changes in sex-drive, depression, blood clots and increased
incidence of vaginitis. Also, women with a history of epilepsy,
migraine, asthma or heart disease may find their symptoms worsen.(12) Many of these effects may persist long after
women discontinue taking the Pill. According to Nancy Beckham in
her book, Menopause—A Positive Approach Using Natural
Therapies, "Women on the Pill have a greater tendency to
liver dysfunction and to more allergies. Estrogen drugs also
affect vitamin concentrations. Vitamin A levels may be raised in
the blood; vitamins B12 and C may be lowered. The clinical
significance is not yet known." The introduction of the
mini-Pill and Depo-Provera, both of which are made from synthetic
progestins, is equally disturbing to women's hormonal health,
with all the previously listed side effects and risks. Hormone
replacement therapy was the next great discovery to arrive,
following on from the Pill. The pharmaceutical companies had
found another lucrative market for their synthetic hormones: the
menopausal woman! While HRT is given at lower doses than the
Pill, the side effects are often more subtle and are slower to
show up. HRT is now available in a variety of forms: pills,
patches and implants. One of the most popular synthetic estrogens
is Premarin, which is made from the urine of pregnant
mares—just what a woman's body needs!
Hormone Addiction
What is little-known about taking HRT is that it is an
addictive drug. A former president of the London Royal College of
Psychiatrists warns that estrogen used in HRT to counteract
symptoms of menopause could be as addictive as heroin.(13) In the 1970s, testing was conducted on two
groups of menopausal women. Half received estrogen replacement
and the other half sugar pills. All were monitored for insomnia,
nervousness, depression, dizziness, weakness, joint pain,
palpitations, prickling sensations and hot flushes. Both groups
of women experienced dramatic improvement during the first 90
days of the study, except that the sugar-pill group experienced
more discomfort from hot flushes. When the groups were switched,
those who had initially received estrogen experienced a
pronounced return of their symptoms. It became apparent that,
once estrogen replacement stopped, a 'cold turkey' withdrawal
effect was often experienced. This was especially true with
implants, since the blood estradiol levels may become much higher
than the body would normally produce.(14)
Nancy Beckham warns that "Women on hormone replacement
therapy who have enhanced well-being when their estradiol levels
are very high, but feel unwell when their blood levels are
normal, may be experiencing reactions similar to those of people
on social drugs. It is well-researched knowledge that when you
first have these drugs they give you a lift, which is pleasant.
As you get used to the substance you find you need more to give
you the same effect, and ultimately your body craves a high level
even though you may be unwell. When the substance in your blood
drops below a certain level, you can experience withdrawal
symptoms such as flushing, perspiration, sleep disturbance,
shaking and other nervous reactions." While it is easy to
prescribe HRT for women, there is hardly any medical data
concerning the effects of stopping HRT in women who have received
long-term treatment.(15) In one trial
lasting three-and-a-half years, withdrawal lasted for six months.
So, unbeknownst to women, 'menopause's little helper' could in
fact be making estrogen junkies out of them. It's great news for
the pharmaceutical companies, but a calamity of untold proportion
for women. Not only do they experience a wide range of physical
symptoms but they also suffer from psychiatric disturbances. Dr.
Ellen Grant has said that "when higher-than-expected rates
of attempted suicide and violent deaths were recorded among
HRT-takers, the excuse was that more women suffering from
depression are put on estrogens in an attempt to treat
them." Estrogens are rarely considered as an implicating
factor in depressive behavior.
Hormone Balance and Illness: Debunking the
Myths
HRT is now almost universally recommended to menopausal
women for a wide variety of reasons. The two most significant
reasons women are encouraged to embark upon the HRT bandwagon are
HRT's supposed contribution in preventing or lessening the
effects of osteoporosis and of cardiovascular disease. The
tremendous fear of these two illnesses that is instilled by
well-meaning doctors-who, after all, are the targets of effective
pharmaceutical advertising and education (usually the only source
of information they receive about these products)—often
overrides a woman's natural instincts. It's time to unravel the
myths that hide the real story.
Myths of Osteoporosis
Dr. John Lee, author of What Your Doctor May Not Tell
You About Menopause, writes this about the myths of
osteoporosis: Myth #1: Osteoporosis is a calcium-deficiency
disease. Most women with osteoporosis are getting plenty of
calcium in their diet. It is quite easy to get the minimum daily
requirement of calcium in even a relatively poor diet. The truth
is that osteoporosis is a disease of excessive calcium-loss
caused by many factors. In osteoporosis, calcium is being lost
from the bones faster than it is being added, regardless of how
much calcium a woman consumes. Myth #2: Osteoporosis is an
estrogen-deficiency disease. Not even basic medical texts
agree with this. It is a fabrication of the pharmaceutical
industry with no scientific evidence to support it. Osteoporosis
begins long before estrogen levels fall, and accelerates for a
few years at menopause. Taking estrogen can slow bone-loss for
those few years, but its effect wears off within a few years
after menopause. Most importantly, estrogen cannot rebuild new
bone. Myth #3: Osteoporosis is a disease of menopause.
This is at least a decade short of the truth. Osteoporosis begins
anywhere from five to 20 years prior to menopause, when estrogen
levels are still high. Osteoporosis accelerates at menopause or
when a woman's ovaries are surgically removed or become
non-functional, such as can happen after hysterectomy. It is
staggering to think how many thousands or millions of women have
been doomed to a crippled old age or early death because their
ovaries and/or uterus were unnecessarily removed before menopause
and natural progesterone replacement was ignored. To understand
osteoporosis it is important to know a bit about bones.
Bone-forming cells are of two different kinds. One type are
called osteoclasts, and their job is to travel through the bone
in search of old bone that is in need of renewal. Osteoclasts
dissolve bone and leave behind tiny unfilled spaces. Osteoblasts
move into these spaces in order to build new bone. A lack of
estrogens, as experienced at menopause, indirectly stimulates the
growth of osteoclasts, thus increasing the risk for developing
osteoporosis. HRT containing estrogen should therefore help
prevent osteoporosis. From this point of view it does. However,
osteoclast cells have been shown to have no estrogen receptors in
themselves, so cannot directly build new bone. On the other hand,
osteoblast cells, which are responsible for making new bone, have
been shown to have not estrogen but progesterone receptors. What
this means is that it is progesterone (the natural form, not the
synthetic progestins), not estrogen, which is responsible for
building bone tissue. This view is upheld in the Scientific
American Updated Medicine Text 1991, which states,
"Estrogens decrease bone resorption, but associated with the
decrease in bone resorption is a decrease in bone formation.
Therefore, estrogen should not be expected to increase bone
mass." The authors also discuss estrogen side effects,
including the risk of endometrial cancer which "is increased
six-fold in women who receive estrogen therapy for up to five
years; the risk is increased to fifteen-fold in long-term
users." Dr. Kitty Little from Oxford found masses of tiny
clots in the bones of rabbits treated with hormones. She is
convinced that HRT in the form of estrogen and progestins will
increase the risk of osteoporosis. Blood clots originate from
sticky clumps of platelet cells in the blood. She believes that
blood clots in the bones can cause bone to break down, leading to
osteoporosis.(16)
More and more research findings are emerging that challenge the estrogen-deficiency/osteoporosis relationship and reinforce the progesterone-deficiency link. The results of a three-year study of 63 post-menopausal women with osteoporosis verify this. Women using transdermal progesterone cream experienced an average 7 to 8 per cent bone-mass density increase in the first year, 4 to 5 per cent in the second year, and 3 to 4 per cent in the third year! Untreated women in this age category typically lose 1.5 per cent bone-mass density per year! These results have not been found with any other form of hormone replacement therapy or dietary supplementation!(17) Bone loss is the result of many other factors besides progesterone deficiency. Excess protein in the form of meat and dairy products (contrary to the dairy industry's advertising) contributes to bone loss. An acidic condition is created in the blood which then pulls out calcium from the bones to neutralize it. Another major factor is lack of exercise. Bone growth is dependent on weight-bearing exercise. In addition, sugar, diuretics, antibiotics, fluoride, cigarettes, alcohol abuse and cortisone are all deleterious to bones. To sum it up, post-menopausal osteoporosis is a disease of excess bone-loss caused by a progesterone deficiency and, secondarily, by a poor diet and lack of exercise. Progesterone restores bone mass. Natural progesterone hormone is an essential factor in the prevention and proper treatment of osteoporosis at any age.(18)
Cardiovascular Disease
Estrogen is being touted by mainstream medicine as a great
preventer of cardiovascular disease in women and therefore a
major reason to have women on HRT. According to Dr. Lee, the one
notable study which formed the entire basis of the positive
estrogen-cardiovascular link—the 1991 New England Journal
of Medicine report known as the Nurses' Questionnaire Study,
conducted with a large sampling of nurses—was radically
flawed and the statistics manipulated.(19)
Although there is ample evidence from numerous other studies
showing that, indeed, the opposite is true—that estrogen is
a significant factor in creating heart disease—these
findings have been virtually ignored in the frenzy for profits.
He goes on to say that the pharmaceutical advertisements also
neglected to mention the fact that stroke death incidence from
that study was 50 per cent higher among the estrogen users. Nancy
Beckham's research into the estrogen-cardiovascular link reveals
the following:(20) High doses of estrogens
are likely to be thrombogenic (blood-clotting) during use, and it
is possible that even moderate doses may increase the risk of
clotting among women who smoke or who already have clogged
arteries. Reports are now starting to come in, indicating that
high-dose estrogens, particularly as experienced with estradiol
implants, cause hypercoagulability, which means that the blood
has a tendency to clot, thereby increasing the risk of heart
attack and stroke. A British medical report also states that the
cardiovascular effects of synthetic progestins used with estrogen
in the much larger number of women who have not undergone
hysterectomy are unknown. Some researchers do not consider that
heart disease is linked to the cessation of the body's estrogen
production. (Actually, it is inaccurate to use the word
"cessation," since estrogen production is only reduced
in menopause.) Natural progesterone also seems to play a
significant role in protecting women from cardiovascular disease.
We know now that anovulatory cycles and lowered progesterone
levels occur prior to menopause, and progesterone levels after
menopause are close to zero. Estrogen, on the other hand, falls
only 40 to 60 per cent with menopause. A woman's passage through
menopause results in a greater loss of progesterone than of
estrogen. Perhaps the increase in heart risk after menopause is
due more to progesterone deficiency than to estrogen deficiency.
Dr. Lee has noted in his clinical experience that lipid profiles
improve when progesterone is supplemented.(21)
What is known about progesterone is that it increases the burning
of fats for energy and, in addition, has an anti-inflammatory
effect. Both of these actions could be protective against
coronary heart disease. Progesterone protects the integrity and
function of cell membranes, whereas estrogen allows the influx of
sodium and water while allowing the loss of potassium and
magnesium. Progesterone, a natural diuretic, promotes better
sleep patterns and helps one deal with stress. When the known
actions of progesterone are reviewed, it is clear that many of
its actions are also beneficial to the heart. When it comes to
increased risk of coronary heart disease, dietary factors are
extremely important. Heart disease risk is increased by the
following: overeating in general; animal fat, sugar and refined
carbohydrates; over-processed foods; excess salt or sodium;
trans-fatty acids; lack of fiber; magnesium and/or potassium
deficiency; and lack of antioxidant-rich food or supplements such
as vitamins C, E, and A, beta-carotene and selenium. Stress is
also a risk factor for heart deaths.
Cancer
The evidence connecting female cancers of the breast,
uterus and ovaries with high estrogen levels is growing.
Estrogen's job in the uterus is to cause proliferation of the
cells. Under the influence of estrogen, uterine cells multiply
faster, and then progesterone should normally come on the scene
with ovulation and stop the cells from multiplying. Progesterone
causes the cells to mature and enter the secretory phase that
causes the maturing of the uterine lining, which is now ready to
receive a possible fertilized egg. Estrogen is the hormone that
stimulates cell proliferation, and progesterone is the hormone
that stops growth and stimulates ripening. Estrogen dominance
also stimulates breast tissue. Premenstrual women who suffer from
estrogen dominance often suffer from breast-swelling and
tenderness. Progesterone, as a hormone of maturation, brings the
cells back into balance and thus can eliminate breast tenderness.
There is certainly an alarmingly high incidence of breast and
uterine cancer amongst Western women. There is evidence that
breast cancer occurs most often at the stage of life when
estrogen is dominant for the full month and progesterone is not
coming in at the halfway point of ovulation. Dr. Graham Colditz,
of Harvard University, maintains that unopposed estrogen is
responsible for 30 to 35 per cent of breast cancers.(22) Some experts would put that percentage even
higher. Johns Hopkins Private Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic
accumulated 40 years of research which was published in the
American Journal of Epidemiology in 1981.(23)
What they discovered was that, when the low-progesterone group
was compared to the normal-progesterone group, the occurrence of
breast cancer was 5.4 times greater in the women in the
low-progesterone group. That is, the incidence of breast cancer
in the low-progesterone group was over 80 per cent greater than
in the normal-progesterone group. When the study looked at the
low-progesterone group for all types of cancer, they found that
women in this group experienced a tenfold increase for all
malignant cancers, compared to the normal-progesterone group.
This would suggest that having a normal level of progesterone
protected women from nine-tenths of all cancers that might
otherwise have occurred.(24) It is
interesting to note that the study disappeared into oblivion when
there was no money available to pursue the obvious implications
of a progesterone-deficiency role in cancer. In a 1995 study
published in the Journal of Fertility and Sterility,
researchers did a double-blind randomized study examining the use
of topical progesterone cream and/or topical estrogen in regard
to breast cell growth. The results showed that women using
progesterone had dramatically reduced cell-multiplication rates
compared to the women using either the placebo or estrogen. The
women using only estrogen had significantly higher cell
multiplication rates than any of the other groups. The women
using a combination of progesterone and estrogen were closer to
the placebo group.(25) This exciting study
provides some of the first direct evidence that estradiol
significantly increases breast cell growth, and that progesterone
impressively decreases cell proliferation rates even when
estrogen is also supplemented. At this point, it's important to
explore the implications of the experimental drug Tamoxifen which
is being prescribed to women with breast cancer. Since it is
proposed to have anti-estrogenic effects, it is used as a breast
cancer treatment since it blocks the uptake of estradiol and
estrone (the cell-proliferating estrogens), thereby protecting
the breast tissue from the cancer-promoting estrogens present in
the body. A growing number of doctors insist that the same
results can be achieved by giving natural progesterone. Uterine
cancer is one of the possible side-effects of Tamoxifen. One
study showed that 27 per cent of women taking Tamoxifen showed
hyperplastic (unfavorable new growth) changes in their wombs
within 15 months.(26) Tamoxifen is
carcinogenic and can cause an early menopause, osteoporosis,
endometrial cancer, liver cancer and clotting disease. Taking 20
milligrams of Tamoxifen per day can increase the risk for
developing endometrial cancer by up to five times. Clotting
disorders are seven times more frequent. One study showed just a
meager 0.7 per cent benefit for women taking Tamoxifen
preventively to reduce the risk of developing further tumors in
the breast.(27) It is also interesting to
note that menstruating women who have breast surgery carried out
during the second half of their menstrual cycle—the luteal
phase, when progesterone is high in order to balance
estrogens—survive far longer than do women whose surgery is
done early on in their cycle during the estrogen-dominant
follicular phase.(28) The only known cause
of endometrial cancer is unopposed estrogen. Here again, the
culprits are estradiol and estrone. Estrogen supplements given to
post-menopausal women for five years increase the risk of
endometrial cancer six-fold, and longer-term use increases it
fifteen-fold. In pre-menopausal women, endometrial cancer is
extremely rare, except during the five to 10 years before
menopause when estrogen dominance is common.(29)
Synthetic hormones are also linked to cervical cancer. The cells
of the cervix are extremely hormone sensitive. Levels of
synthetic progestins, low enough not to alter the cells of the
lining of the womb, have been shown to change the cells that line
the cervix. Progestins dry up cervical secretions, and this may
be part of the reason why cancer of the cervix develops quickly
in the presence of cervical infections.(30)
It was predicted in the 1960s that the Pill would increase the
chances of a woman developing a melanoma, the most lethal of all
skin cancers. Hormones control the pigmentation of our skin, and
melanoma cancer cells have estrogen receptors which can make the
growth of cancer more likely. Women taking HRT are at greater
risk of developing melanomas than the average woman.(31) Dr. Lee strongly believes that because of
its many benefits, its great safety, and particularly its ability
to oppose the carcinogenic effects of estrogens, natural
progesterone deserves far more attention and application than it
is generally given in the prevention and care of women's health
problems today. The long road we have been traveling over the
past 35 years, that has encouraged and promoted the wide range of
synthetic hormone products, is taking us to a deadly dead-end.
The scare-tactic techniques and intimidation employed by doctors
and pharmaceutical companies alike to use such products, often
overriding a woman's better judgment, have pushed millions of
women into using drugs that are unproven and unsafe. It is no
surprise, therefore, that Dr. Lee has issued an ominous warning
when he says, "We will soon regard making estrogen the key
ingredient in hormone replacement therapy as a major medical
mistake."(32) Women must be able to
make educated, informed choices about their bodies and their
health treatment preferences. It's impossible to make important
health decisions if fundamental facts are missing or
misconstrued. It is also evident that the health care providers,
whom we have come to rely upon, either have not received
adequate, unbiased education themselves or have become imprisoned
by their own arrogant and narrow-minded points of view. It is
really up to every woman to read, question, trust her natural
instincts and learn about her own body. It is also essential that
a woman honor her own cyclic nature and intuitive wisdom. It is a
woman's right to choose with dignity the best approach to her own
health care.
End notes
1. Greer, Germaine, The Change, Hamish
Hamilton, London, 1991.
2. Lee, John R., M.D., What Your Doctor May Not
Tell You About Menopause, Warner Books,
New York, 1996, pp. 67-68.
3. Op. cit., pp. 42-43.
4. Kenton, Leslie, Passage to Power, Random
House, London, 1995, p. 34.
5. Archer, John, The Water You Drink: How Safe Is
It? Pure Water Press, Australia, 1996, p.34.
6. Kenton, Leslie, op. cit., p. 32.
7. Lee, John, op. cit., p. 50.
8. Op. cit., p. 56.
9. Wheel of Hormones, TV production with Lars
Mortensen, TV2 Denmark, 1995.
10. Lee, John, op. cit., p. 44.
11. Archer, John, Bad Medicine, Simon & AMP
Schuster, Australia, 1995, p. 210.
12. Neil, Kate, Balancing Hormones Naturally, ION
Press, London, 1994, p. 28.
13. Beckham, Nancy, Menopause—A Positive Approach
Using Natural Therapies, Penguin
Books, Australia, 1995, pp.
36-37.
14. Ibid., p. 36.
15. British Medical Bulletin (1992) 48:458-68.
16. Neil, Kate, op. cit., p. 46.
17. Lee, J. R., "Osteoporosis Reversal: The Role of
Progesterone," Intern. Clin. Nutr. Rev. (1990)
10:384-391.
18. Lee, John R., M.D., What Your Doctor May Not Tell
You About Menopause, p. 183.
19. Op. cit., p. 18.
20. Beckham, Nancy, ibid., pp. 42-43.
21. Lee, John, op. cit., p. 197.
22. Op. cit., p. 207.
23. Ibid.
24. Op. cit., p. 208.
25. Chuang, King-Jen, M.D., T. Y. Tigris, Lee, M.D.,
Gustavo Linares-Cruz, M.D., Sabine
Fournier, Ph.D., Bruno de
Lignières, M.D., "Influences of percutaneous administration
of estradiol and progesterone
of human breast epithelial cell cycle in vivo," Journal
of Fertility and Sterility 63:4
785-791, April 1995.
26. Beckham, Nancy, op. cit., p. 48.
27. Neil, Kate, op. cit., p. 40.
28. Kenton, Leslie, op. cit., p. 94.
29. Lee, John, op. cit., p. 220.
30. Neil, Kate, op. cit., p. 41.
31. Ibid.
32. The Sunday Telegraph, London, 12 May 1996.