1
1
1
For those of you interested in the actual details of the Newsweek article lies and deceptions, I have itemized a few of them for you below:
1) Newsweek says: "bioidentical hormones are unregulated".
This is an outright falsehood. Compounded bioidentical hormones are highly regulated at all levels. Just walk into a pharmacy and ask the pharmacist in charge about the regulations. There are literally hundreds of them. They are regulated up the Wazoo from start to finish at county, state and federal levels. And yes, compounded hormones ARE FDA approved, and the same hormones, estradiol, progesterone, and testosterone are found at the corner drugstore (examples are estrace, vivelle, prometrium etc.). Just think about this: all prescription medication in the US must be FDA approved in order to be able to sell to the public.
2) Newsweek says: "Somers is simply repackaging the old, discredited idea that menopause is some kind of hormone-deficiency disease, and that restoring them will bring back youth," says Dr. Nanette Santoro, director of reproductive endocrinology at Albert Einstein College of Medicine and head of the Reproductive Medicine Clinic at Montefiore Medical Center."
This is another outright falsehood. Menopause is characterized by hormone deficiency, and this is the absolute truth proven by lab tests I see every day. This idea has not been discredited. Well, maybe Newsweek wants the public to think so.
3) Newsweek says: "Hormone therapy can increase a woman's risk of heart attacks, strokes, blood clots and cancer".
Here we see a typical switch tactic by Newsweek. Newsweek is attempting to confuse the public about two very different types of hormones. Synthetic hormones are the monster hormones. Bio-identical hormones are the good ones that I recommend.
Yes, Newsweek is correct that synthetic monster hormones (such as Provera) are associated with cancer and heart disease. However, Newsweek has not told the public the truth, that bio-identical hormones are safe and are not associated with increased risk of cancer or heart disease. Obviously that would displease their drug industry masters.
3) Newsweek says: "And despite Somers' claim that her non-FDA-approved bioidenticals are "natural" and safer, they are actually synthetic, just like conventional hormones and FDA-approved bioidenticals from pharmacies-and there are no conclusive clinical studies showing they are less risky. "
This is outright deceitful and misleading. Number one, hormone raw materials are all FDA approved. Otherwise, they could not even be marketed in the US.
Number two, Newsweek is trying to confuse the public into believing that synthetic chemically altered hormones (provera) are the same as bioidentical hormones. They are not. Synthetic means chemically altered, and this creates a monster hormone causing cancer and heart disease. Bio-identical Hormones are not chemically altered. They are identical to the hormones in the human body. The medical literature is replete with studies showing that bioidentical hormones are safe and effective, while, on the other hand, the chemically altered synthetic hormones are monsters and should never have been approved for human use.
4) Newsweek says:"Unless a woman has significant discomfort from hot flashes-and most women don't-there is little reason to prescribe them."
Newsweek is wrong again. Hot flashes are only one of many symptoms of estrogen deficiency, Other symptoms include vaginal dryness, sweats, difficulty sleeping, cognitive dysfunction, menopausal arthritis etc. These are all valid symptoms and good reasons for prescribing bioidentical hormones.
5) This Newsweek article also provided misinformation about iodine suplementation, an essential mineral added to table salt since 1924. Supplementation with Iodine is safe and beneficial for health, and highly recommended. See my article on Iodine Supplementation and Breast Cancer Prevention.
Follow the Money: Jake Crosby, a history student at Brandeis University, has this comment about Newsweek:
"Inside Newsweek Magazine, 10 of the 31 pages of ads are for pharma ads, 5 of them for Wyeth, including an inside-cover triple-page ad. Naturally, a failing magazine is going to want to receive more ad dollars by running more articles pleasing to sponsors. It seems practical and makes sense, though unethical, dishonest, defamatory and morally reprehensible all at the same time."
