Dr. Stoll,
I did a search and was suprised to find nothing on hormone replacement therapy on your board.
Can you tell me where you stand on this issue, and/or where to go to educate myself? I remember your often speaking of the "whoops" factor when dealing with hormones. Does this also apply to HRT?
What do you think of the phytoestrogen products, which supposedly do not have the risk of cancer that synthetic products have?
My particular concern is osteoporosis because I have a number of the risk factors and cannot do weight-bearing exercise. (I bike and swim.)
Many thanks,
Irene in TX
Dr. Walt
My naturopath, whom I no longer see, ran a hair analysis test which revealed that my calcium and magnesium are off the scale (in my hair). Consequently, he advised me to get off all Calcium and Mg supplements, which I did. He put me on a bunch of supplements, which I won't enumerate right now. I had to stop taking them because of unexplained diarrhea. I also had to stop taking l-glutamine, aloe gel, and Ultra clear, if you recall.
My question is, how reliable are the hair tests? Do you think I should be off calcium and magnesium supplements? I have since had a bone density test and found that I'm on the borderline for osteoporosis at age 48, for my age group and bone structure. I went thru premature menopause at age 38 and have been on estrogen and calcium ever since, until the Nat. took me off them. Now I'm having great pain in my hip . ( I did take a bad fall on that hip about 6 months ago.) Could this be due to osteoporosis or lack of calcium? My Nat. explained that the calcium in my body goes to inappropriate places, such as the tops of my femurs( shows up on my Xrays), hair and blood. BTW, my blood test for calcium is normal. I'm also curious about some posts I've read about mag. injections. I bought some supplements by Nature's Life called "Osteoporsis Formula" with Cal, Mg., C,Betain, Zinc, Mang., Boron, K, Copper, Silcon and D, and have started taking them again because I'm worried about having a deficiency. What do you think? Was this a misjudgement on the part of my naturopath, or was he correct? Of course, my rheumy said the HA was a "fraudulent" test. But, he couldn't even tell me which foods contained alot of calcium.
BTW, I posted another note on massages down below.
Thanks.
Nancy
In Reply to: hair analysis test posted by Nancy on March 13, 1998 at 19:46:24:
Dear Nancy,
For what it's worth, years ago when I had a hair analysis test done also showing calcium and magnesium off the top of the scale, my doc said that this reflected hypoglycemia/low blood sugar.
Kyra
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test posted by Kyra Kitts on March 13, 1998 at 21:51:36:
Kyra
Did he tell you to get off calcium supplements? My doc told me I had a typical profile for hypoglycemia and LGS.
Nancy
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test posted by Nancy on March 14, 1998 at 15:20:13:
Dear Nancy,
Thanks for writing back. I'd forgotten to mention that my old doc said that the excess calcium and magnesium found in the hair analysis reflected my body's inability to assimiliate them, so in fact I had to supplement with both calcium and magnesium even more than I already was. Can't remember the dosages he recommended, as this was years ago.
He didn't know anything about leaky gut syndrome, but I'd imagine that the inability to absorb these nutrients came from LGS, just as your doc said.
Kyra
In Reply to: Estrogen replacement posted by Irene in TX on March 13, 1998 at 12:33:27:
Dear Irene,
It has probably been a year since this was discussed in depth here on this BB. Bill may have it in archives somewhere. If you want more, after I briefly respond to your questions here, leave a note for him and see if he can pull it up.
First of all, I am (and have always been) firmly in favor of estrogen replacement therapy for any post-menopausal woman. About 0.3 milligrams daily, from the first to the 25th of each month, is about right for most people--some need more.
Forty years ago, I was considered a maverick for my views. It has been gratifying to watch the rest of the profession come around to my way of thinking. I was always impressed (even 40 years ago) by the fact that all female gynecologists put THEMSELVES on estrogen replacement upon becoming menopausal--even though they hesitated to offer it to all their patients.
The fact is that there are only 2 relatively rare cancers that are (arguably) increased with HRT. ALL the other common cancers are reduced. Besides, all the diseases of aging are reduced with HRT. In the balance, there is no question which is the healthiest for people to do. There are only the physicians trying to CYA: The sins of commission are much more risky to the doc than the sins of ommission.
It MAY be that the phytoestrogens are "safer" than the animal sources. However,they have not been used long enough, on enough people, to know that. MY guess is that they will be little different.
HRT has been used long enough, on enough people, that the chances of any more whoops factors showing up are remote. Personally, I would only take the estrogen & not the progesterone since the latter is responsible for nearly all the side effects & still has not been proven (to me) to be worth the extra risk & cost.
So far as the osteoporosis is concerned, your exercise choices are wonderful. I would not depend upon exercise & estrogen alone to prevent this, however. I would also be taking (and am) hydroxyapatite as my bone make up resource. Calcium, alone, is totally inadequate.
Walt
In Reply to: hair analysis test posted by Nancy on March 13, 1998 at 19:46:24:
Dear Nancy,
Your note reminds me how important it is for people to never stop learning about all this. Even professionals cannot learn it fast enough. Lay people only have a chance because the only person they have to learn about is themselves.
Your Naturopath is correct in noting that you are putting the calcium you do have in the wrong places--and taking it from where is should be. The high calcium magnesium in the HA is an indicator of this. The solution is not to stop taking what your bones need but to see that minerals stay where they are needed & not go to where they are not.
I have yet to see a menopausal woman who did not have their calcium and magnesium "off the chart" of a HA. I do not know WHY that is since not ALL menopousal women have osteoporosis.
I think we all have a LOT more to learn about hair analysis. I DO think is is a valid test. Vets have been using it for animals, successfully, for many years. Perhaps when we physicians have used it that long we will start to understand it. For now, I think many physicians think it means more than it does. At least we are ahead of the Rheumatologist who thinks s/he knows everything already.
A good holistic physician should be able to figure out WHY your system is misappropriating minerals and do something about that. The best way to find THAT doc would be to call (800) 234-6825 and tell them I suggested you call. You want the names of physicians in your area who have used this lab for at least 2 years. THEN, you will have to call each of them, in turn, once you are as expert as you can get, so you can judge which of them you are willing to entrust your personage to.
I would not even try using anything but hydroxyapatite for osteoporosis prevention. The formulae with boron are best. No other mineral supplement should be needed for osteoporosis. HOWEVER, it is more important to stop your body from borrowing minerals from Peter to pay Paul in the meantime.
I think you should be on the estrogen. See another note I posted today about that.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test posted by Walt Stoll on March 15, 1998 at 11:14:02:
Walt
Thanks for your advice. I'll call that 800 # on Mon. What should I do if my naturopath is on the list? He is not an MD, but I think he has used the HA lab in Dallas for quite a while. By the way, this lab also prescribes the supplement regimen it wants you to take after the analysis.
What are some possible reasons why my system is misappropriating minerals and what might be done about that?
I need to clear up that I never stopped wearing the estrogen patches, just stopped taking the calcium, although, I'd love to be able to get off them. He had me on something called Vitex 40+, with chaste tree berries, wild yam root, dandelion, et.al. in hopes that the hot flashes would decrease to the point that I could go off the estrogen.
One last question: what exactly is hydroxapatite? The osteo formula I bought has 1000 mg calcium (citrate-malate,carbonate),500mg magnesium (oxide, citrate), VC, betaine HCl, mangamese (gluconate), VK, Copper (gluconate), slicon (dioxide), & VD (cholecalciferol), in 4 tablets. Should I discard those and find some of the hydrox..?
I'm sorry for so many detailed questions. I really appreciate all the time you're spending reading and answering them. Maybe I need to do a consult. I've been trying to kind of gather as much info as possible before I do that.
Nancy
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test posted by Walt Stoll on March 15, 1998 at 11:14:02:
Walt
I left out Boron (Citrate) on the list of ingredients in my osteo formula.
Nancy
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test posted by Kyra Kitts on March 14, 1998 at 15:50:24:
Kyra
What you are saying makes me even more uncomfortable with my "doc" taking me off the calcium. Walt is advising us on the BB now, as I'm sure you've seen. He agrees with your doc. Stay on the calcium and estrogen! Well, at least I was only off for a few months.
Nancy
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Walt Stoll on March 15, 1998 at 09:56:34:
Walt
I use a patch that delivers 0.05mg/da. I wear two a week. Do you favor patches or pills? I am leary of pills because a little spot was found on my liver during an ultrasound which detected fibroid tumors in my uterus. I was told that the estrogen pills could have caused that spot. However, when I did the dye test, the spot was not seen that way, so the incident was dismissed as something not to worry about. My GYN said the patch would not go through the liver, so I opted for them. The only side effect I have experienced from them is some redness and occasional itching.
Thanks
Nancy
In Reply to: hair analysis test posted by Nancy on March 13, 1998 at 19:46:24:
Hi,
My acupuncturist had a hair analysis done for me about a year
ago. It sounds like the same lab as they gave a whole list of
supplements they thought I should purchase from them. However,
my acupuncturist was smarter than that. One thing I learned
from talking to her and doing some research is that an imbalance
of one or two minerals can cause all of them to be out of
balance. Other medications can cause this imbalance. For instance,
if you are taking a diuretic this can cause your potasium to
be low. This in turn will cause other minerals to be out of
balance. I stopped taking the diuretic and started taking a
supplement called Mineral Magic which is the best mineral supplement
I have ever read about anywhere. It has everything in it and
since I have been taking it I have never retained fluids again.
As I have candida I do not take esterogen but I do take natural
esterogen supplements and an additional 1500mg of calcium.
It is important, for those who can take it, to use esterogen
because it helps your body to obsorb the calcium.
Geri
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test posted by Walt Stoll on March 15, 1998 at 11:14:02:
Walt
When I went to my chiropractor today, he told me about this calcium supplement he sells to his customers. You won't believe what it is: Cal Apatite by Metagenics. It has microcrystalline hydroxyapatite concentrate in it. Is that the right stuff? How much should I take?
Nancy
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test posted by Nancy on March 15, 1998 at 19:59:06:
Dear Nancy,
I think it is WRONG for a lab to suggest supplements on the basis of a test. A hair analysis--at best-- is just another bit of information that the doc has to include with everything else to even attempt to figure out a recommendation. This is like trying to make all one's diagnoses with a stethoscope.
One of the most common causes of one's body misappropriating minerals is LGS since trace minerals are the hardest thing to absorb. Every few months, now, another mineral is discovered that seems to be essential for bone building. There are probably more than 50 that will eventually be "discovered". MY solution right now is to take what HAS all the minerals normally present in healthy bone (hydroxyapatite), along with the digestive enzymes necessary to digest them, while working on the LGS.
The hydorxyapatite IS that healthy bone preserved in such a way as to not hurt the enzymes that produce the bone matrices. Metagenics is one of the companies I know that take the amount of care needed to be sure of this product. They also sell it under the Lable of Ethical Nutrients. You could call (800) 522-6382 to find the store closest to you that would carry it. The one I take is called Cal Apatite with Boron.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Nancy on March 15, 1998 at 20:20:29:
Dear Nancy,
It is true that the patches bypass the liver the first time around the system. However, they eventually have to be dealt with somewhere & that place is STILL the liver.
Using this as a reason for using patches is a dubious reason at best. The pills are more controllable than the patches but I do not think there is much difference other than expense & convenience.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test--hydrosyapatite posted by Nancy on March 16, 1998 at 17:42:01:
Dear Nancy,
THAT'S THE STUFF!
I would take the 1000 milligram size & take 2 twice a day.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test posted by Geri on March 16, 1998 at 10:32:50:
Geri
Do you take the estorgen orally or in a patch? I wonder if the patch can exaserbate candida symptoms?
Nancy
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test--hydrosyapatite posted by Walt Stoll on March 17, 1998 at 10:45:28:
Wallt
Will do!
Nancy
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test posted by Walt Stoll on March 17, 1998 at 10:07:38:
Walt
Can you tell me which digestive enzymes are needed to absorb the minerals? Is it the same for everyone, or is there some test that would reveal the exact combination appropriate for the individual?
Do you think that taking this supplement can rebuild bone that has already been lost, or can it just prevent further deteriorization?
Thanks!!!
Nancy
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Walt Stoll on March 17, 1998 at 10:11:09:
Walt
I don't understand what you mean by "the first time around the system". Could you explain further?
Thanks
Nancy
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test posted by Geri on March 16, 1998 at 10:32:50:
Dear Geri,
Thanks for your post! GOOD STUFF!
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Walt Stoll on March 15, 1998 at 09:56:34:
Dr. Stoll,
Thank you for your reply. There is so much confusing and conflicting information out there on this topic, and it’s reassuring to be able to come to this board.
I have a few follow-up questions:
You say you would take only estrogen and not progesterone. What is your opinion on taking pure estriol, or a product with mostly estriol called TriEst?
You apparently do not believe breast cancer is increased with HRT. I have seen references to a large prospective study of nurses which shows a 35-40% increase with long-term (10 yrs) HRT. Are these numbers wrong? Or are you speaking of shorter-term usage?
I am confused regarding synthetic (or "semi-synthetic") vs natural estrogen. When people speak of "natural" estrogens, are they speaking solely of plant estrogens? Or is some natural animal product available?
I have been reading John Lee’s book on this topic. Obviously you disagree with him on many points. Since I am concerned with osteoporosis, I was interested his statement that progesterone builds bone while estrogen merely (temporarily) slows its loss. He states that most postmenopausal women should be using ONLY progesterone (plant cream form), the opposite of what you are saying. Do you have a response to him?
Finally, do you believe it is worthwhile or advisable to have a hormone profile test before embarking on HRT, to see which specific estrogens or other hormones are needed?
You suggested that I might "leave a note for Bill" so that he can pull up archive articles on this topic, but it is not clear to me how to do that. Is there an email address I should use?
In appreciation,
Irene in TX
In Reply to: Re: hair analysis test posted by Nancy on March 17, 1998 at 18:48:40:
Dear Nancy,
So far as I know, hydroxyapatite is the only natural substance that can reverse osteoporosis. There is a drug that is now claimed to do this but no substantiating research has been done. Also, you can be sure that the "drug" will have some unpleasant side effects that will become more severe & well known as more people take it for longer periods of time.
I am not good enough about the enzymes to tell you what to take. However, a Naturopath or Chiropractor should be.
There are some tests that can tell you something about these. The best lab, for doing these, in the country (that I know of) is Great Smokies Labs (800) 522-4762.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Nancy on March 17, 1998 at 18:55:19:
Dear Nancy,
Estrogen, as any other hormone dealt with in the liver. circulates in the blood stream. Taken orally, it goes FIRST to the liver BEFORE going to the rest of the body. However, every time it comes back around, part of it has to go through the liver again. Eventually it will be totally cleared from the body.
Taken by injection (or patch), it FIRST goes to the body and then is gradually cleared as it goes through the liver over & over; otherwise, how do you think it gets out of the body?
Thanks for the question!
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Walt Stoll on March 19, 1998 at 12:45:39:
Walt
Thanks. My GYN never explained that to me and I never thought about where it went. I guess my knowledge of anatomy is pretty limited, as I got my degrees in elem. and special education. I took as little science as I could get by with. Looking back on it, that may have been a mistake!
Nancy
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Irene in TX on March 18, 1998 at 12:06:03:
Dear Irene,
Taking your questions in order:
1. Any small fraction, of the complex of natural estrogens your ovaries made all you life, can help. However, it will not help as much as the many fractions that our bodies always made. Why do we make so many fractions if we only need one? Listen to your bodymind. The chances are that you will feel better with a natural complex than you do on one fraction. Most female gynecologists (post mernopausal) do not take the single fractions. Why not?
It IS easier to adjust the dosage when only one fraction is used. What are you looking for: easy for the doc or effective for you?
2. Why does the incidence of breast cancer go up after menopause (when the estrogen levels go down)? While you are thinking of that, it is true that the less common breast cancers that occur prior to menopause ARE slightly increased (over how they would be post-menopausal) by the use of HRT. However, the much more common ones that tend to occur AFTER menopause are decreased by HRT. When one looks at the TOTAL risk there is no doubt at all which is safer: taking estrogen or not taking estrogen. BESIDES, all of the degenerative diseases that become much more common after menopause are helped by HRT. Why so you think that all female gynecologists self-medicate with HRT after menopause?
The problem is a social/economic one--not a scientific one: The sins of commission are much more dangerous to the prescribing physician than the sins of ommision. In other words, if you get a post-menopausal cancer, or die of a coronary or get crippled with arthritis, or have a stroke from hypertension, etc., etc., and the doc had NOT prescribed the HRT for you that could have prevented it, the doc is not likely to be prosecuted for omitting the HRT. HOWEVER, if you get a rare cancer, known to be increased by HRT, and the doc HAD prescribed the HRT, s/he is MUCH more likely to be prosecuted for having prescribed it. I hope this is making sense to you. If not, write again. This is just another example of how the only thing that will protect you is your own knowledge.
3. Premarin is a "natural" combination estrogen from horses. I believe it will take 20 years to find out if a natural plant source has any advantages. At this point, I think I, personally would take the plant source--mainly because Ayerst (producer of premarin) has so blatently gouged the public in price (while spending much of their ill-gotten gains lobbying congress to keep any generic off the market).
Time will tell. In the meantime it looks like Ayerst will soon lose its monopoly since all the scienntific evidence is that the generic (which has been kept off the market by Ayerst's lobbying), which costs but a fraction of the cost of premarin, will soon be on the market. Of course, I thought that 30 years ago, too.
4. I will be interested in what John Lee has to say 20 years from now. I would also be VERY interested in what HE would do for himself were he a menopausal woman. From what I know, I am just telling you what I would do for myself. Stopping smoking, regular exercise, skilled relaxation and using the best source of bone building minerals & catalysts (hydroxyapatite with Boron) will do a lot more good than the progesterone regardless of the source (plant is probably best). Nearly all of the side-effects from HRT are caused by the progesterone.
There have been a VERY few articles showing that progesterone does any more for prevention of osteoporosis than estrogen and NONE that show progesterone working anywhere near as well as the above combination. I am open to learning more but for now.........
5. Estrogen profiles CAN be helpful. However, we are not yet as smart as God & this science is primitive at best. Your bodymind is BY FAR the most accurate (and least expensive) way to determine this. You do have to listen to your bodymind, though.
6. Bill continually "lurks" on the website. If you just titled your note something with his name in it, h
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Irene in TX on March 18, 1998 at 12:06:03:
Hi Irene,
It would be a rather major undertaking for me to find estrogen-related articles from 1996 and 1997. It would probably take me about 3 hours. I'm going to ask that, if you don't have enough info from Dad's answers, to get him to answer again.
I speak of archives of posts made before December 1997. Those are difficult for me to unpack and search. Since December 1997 I have been keeping most archives online (see archives. But there has not been much conversation about Estrogen. I think I will coax Dad into writing an article about it rather than creating a separate archive for it.
Peace,
Bill
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Walt Stoll on March 20, 1998 at 11:41:39:
Dr. Stoll,
Thank you for all the wonderful information. I am glad I wrote you a second time, because from your first response to me, I had understood you would NOT take the plant estrogens. In your second note clarified that you WOULD.
I understand your point about the drug manufacturer making unreasonable profits. However, I personally still want to take what's best for my body. I don't make health decisions on the basis of cost, or on the basis of anger at a company.
You have frequently advocated Hydroxyapatite with Boron, and since this product is hard to find, I am including a url link to an online source. This link is on the site of a supplement manufacturer called Life Extension. This company also has a plant estrogen product and a number of convincing articles for using plant estrogens. (Of course, since they are SELLING it, the information might be taken with a grain of salt.)
When you speak of the side effects of progesterone, are you referring to progestin or natural progesterone also? I had understood there were no documented side effects to natural progesterone.
In appreciation,
Irene in TX
PS: Bill, thank you for your post. I believe I am getting all the information I need.
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Irene in TX on March 25, 1998 at 12:02:31:
Dear Texas Irene,
Thanks for the resource. I have been getting mine from Metagenics (sold under the Ethical Nutrients lable in health food stores). I think it is called Bone Builder or something like that.
I would like to see the research that says that "natural" progesterone has no sid- effects. The side-effects that most people complain about are just normal effects that progesterone has when it is made in the body. I would be concerned, if those effects were not present, that the stuff was not working. I am always open to learning something new.
SOME of the side-effects of androgen substituted progesterone (synthetic progesterone) are due to the androgenic effects that leak through and are not actual progesterone effects. Most prescribed progesterones are of this origin. Perhaps that is where the confusion lies.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Walt Stoll on March 27, 1998 at 10:32:40:
Dr. Stoll,
If you are interested, John Lee's book has an extensive bibliography (pp 342-343 reference the natural progesterone studies) to support his claim that "there are no known side effects of progesterone" at 20-40 mg a day.
I haven't personally looked at any of these articles, and perhaps they have insufficient sample sizes or other design flaws. I know that sometimes a mainstream book like this overstates the actual conclusions of a study. The Life Extension site also states that the transdermal natural progesterone has no know side effects, but doesn't offer any references.
I value your opinion because, unlike these other sources, you have no vested interest in promoting any specific point of view.
Regards,
Irene
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Irene in TX on March 27, 1998 at 12:33:13:
Thanks, Irene.
I have seen this publication. However, what these studies say to me is that the plant progesterones do not do the same things that the progesterone our bodies makes does.
It will take more than 20 years before we know if this kind of plant progesterone will do the things presently claimed.
ANY physiology text will list the symptoms of the natural production of progesterone in any woman. Weight gain, PMS, irritibility, etc., are all present in "normal" women in relationship to the production of progesterone. How can any effective progesterone NOT have some of these "symptoms" associated?
It IS true that the substituted testosterone that makes up nearly all of the "synthetic" progesterone drugs on the market have many more symptoms associated with them than the plant progesterones do.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Estrogen replacement posted by Walt Stoll on March 17, 1998 at 10:11:09:
My endocrinologist put me on the patch after my triglycerides rose on Premarin. They went back to normal after I was on the patch for a few months. It was worth the try.