Social media is overselling HRT - not every woman needs it

[Anonymous]

Yep and breast cancer rates will go up and then ppl will says, "I DIDN'T KNOW"!

[Anonymous]

OP WHY DO YOU CARE? Are you a Gyn? Is it just a PSA?

I really want to know why you keep starting new threads on this.

[Anonymous]

I’m grumpy from peri too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We don’t. However it’s helpful to get some support for many of us. Even if it’s the herbal supplements. And seeing info on social media can open a conversation with your doc about lifestyle tuning that can improve middle and later life. I’m not mad about it.

Lol herbal supplements. Come on.

y

Hi. Guess you’ve never taken vitamins or had a cup of mint tea either. Maybe look at nutritional supports before being a snarky pants. Ashwaghanda for your sweet disposition.

no I do not take vitamins or medicinal teas.

[Anonymous]

Omg OP you’re obsessed with social media and how you think social media is making x or y about HRT.

Aside from DCUM (if that counts), LinkedIn and YouTube, I’ve been off social media for years. Got off it when I had my kids bc I’m not going to internet-up my poor kids lives. I think people who have Facebook and Insta are absolute, ABSOLUTE idiots, including you bc apparently you know so much about social media and what’s on it and how it’s impacting lives and culture.

So I’ll agree with you there about social media. It makes people absolutely horrible and unable to think, learn and reason. But also guess what. The best reasons to take HRT have nothing to do with social media or the supplement hocking influencers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I totally agree. Menopause is not a huge medical event, I am so tired of influencers pushing HRT and telling us something is wrong with us for going through menopause.

What about people who legitimately have issues from menopause? If anything, there’s not enough support for women who want to use HRT.

I couldn’t sleep for years, and now HRT helps immensely. I guess I should just take sleeping pills?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a great post by Dr Jen Gunter explaining that no, not every woman needs to take HRT, and that HRT is not a preventative.

https://vajenda.substack.com/p/the-rise-of-misinformation-about

This is just a bad article. It highlights everything wrong with medicine and the hrt problem to begin with.

Here goes. Obgyns take care of certain issues. They are not Alzheimer’s researchers. They are not cardiologists. They are not even primary care docs. It’s 100% unfair (a bit) to make them responsible for providing a therapy that would, 10 years from now, be better for you than a statin. But that’s what papers from top cardiologist journals are saying. Now, will NAMS update its guidance on hot flashes and vaginal dryness as a result? Probably not for years or decades. But docs can/should at least acknowledge the awful, fragmented care we often get running around talking to specialists and never getting anyone that looks at us as while people over a lifetime. And the fact that insurance companies don’t foot the bills for (and thus have no incentive in impacting) our health in our late 60s+ doesn’t help.

Your doc who supposedly is so fact based says there no “guidance” and doesn’t even take the time to define what she’s talking about. I’m only assuming NAMS guidance but it’s highly annoying she’s so flippant.

[Anonymous]

There is a very good book called “It’s Not Hysteria”, by Dr. Karen Tang. Good resource for women’s health. Highly recommend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a great post by Dr Jen Gunter explaining that no, not every woman needs to take HRT, and that HRT is not a preventative.

https://vajenda.substack.com/p/the-rise-of-misinformation-about

This is just a bad article. It highlights everything wrong with medicine and the hrt problem to begin with.

Here goes. Obgyns take care of certain issues. They are not Alzheimer’s researchers. They are not cardiologists. They are not even primary care docs. It’s 100% unfair (a bit) to make them responsible for providing a therapy that would, 10 years from now, be better for you than a statin. But that’s what papers from top cardiologist journals are saying. Now, will NAMS update its guidance on hot flashes and vaginal dryness as a result? Probably not for years or decades. But docs can/should at least acknowledge the awful, fragmented care we often get running around talking to specialists and never getting anyone that looks at us as while people over a lifetime. And the fact that insurance companies don’t foot the bills for (and thus have no incentive in impacting) our health in our late 60s+ doesn’t help.

Your doc who supposedly is so fact based says there no “guidance” and doesn’t even take the time to define what she’s talking about. I’m only assuming NAMS guidance but it’s highly annoying she’s so flippant.

please post the guidance for taking HRT as an Alzheimer’s or heart problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a great post by Dr Jen Gunter explaining that no, not every woman needs to take HRT, and that HRT is not a preventative.

https://vajenda.substack.com/p/the-rise-of-misinformation-about

This is just a bad article. It highlights everything wrong with medicine and the hrt problem to begin with.

Here goes. Obgyns take care of certain issues. They are not Alzheimer’s researchers. They are not cardiologists. They are not even primary care docs. It’s 100% unfair (a bit) to make them responsible for providing a therapy that would, 10 years from now, be better for you than a statin. But that’s what papers from top cardiologist journals are saying. Now, will NAMS update its guidance on hot flashes and vaginal dryness as a result? Probably not for years or decades. But docs can/should at least acknowledge the awful, fragmented care we often get running around talking to specialists and never getting anyone that looks at us as while people over a lifetime. And the fact that insurance companies don’t foot the bills for (and thus have no incentive in impacting) our health in our late 60s+ doesn’t help.

Your doc who supposedly is so fact based says there no “guidance” and doesn’t even take the time to define what she’s talking about. I’m only assuming NAMS guidance but it’s highly annoying she’s so flippant.

please post the guidance for taking HRT as an Alzheimer’s or heart problems.

You raised guidance first, not me. And you want to talk about preventative medicine and didn’t define it. So you should be defining and speaking first and then, yes, I’ll respond.

First, to do your work for you.

Would you accept the definition of preventative medicine that appears on the “About us” page of the task force on preventative medicine? And can we agree most of us understand preventative medicine to be healthy diet, exercise, avoiding or eliminating alcohol and smoking, and getting sleep and having community?https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/about-uspstf

Would you also agree that the typical “guidance” on HRT would/should come from NAMS as reflected here for patient consumption: https://menopause.org/patient-education/the-menopause-guidebook

And here for NAMS 2022 updates statements on HRT:

https://menopause.org/wp-content/uploads/professional/nams-2022-hormone-therapy-position-statement.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a great post by Dr Jen Gunter explaining that no, not every woman needs to take HRT, and that HRT is not a preventative.

https://vajenda.substack.com/p/the-rise-of-misinformation-about

This is just a bad article. It highlights everything wrong with medicine and the hrt problem to begin with.

Here goes. Obgyns take care of certain issues. They are not Alzheimer’s researchers. They are not cardiologists. They are not even primary care docs. It’s 100% unfair (a bit) to make them responsible for providing a therapy that would, 10 years from now, be better for you than a statin. But that’s what papers from top cardiologist journals are saying. Now, will NAMS update its guidance on hot flashes and vaginal dryness as a result? Probably not for years or decades. But docs can/should at least acknowledge the awful, fragmented care we often get running around talking to specialists and never getting anyone that looks at us as while people over a lifetime. And the fact that insurance companies don’t foot the bills for (and thus have no incentive in impacting) our health in our late 60s+ doesn’t help.

Your doc who supposedly is so fact based says there no “guidance” and doesn’t even take the time to define what she’s talking about. I’m only assuming NAMS guidance but it’s highly annoying she’s so flippant.

please post the guidance for taking HRT as an Alzheimer’s or heart problems.

You raised guidance first, not me. And you want to talk about preventative medicine and didn’t define it. So you should be defining and speaking first and then, yes, I’ll respond.

First, to do your work for you.

Would you accept the definition of preventative medicine that appears on the “About us” page of the task force on preventative medicine? And can we agree most of us understand preventative medicine to be healthy diet, exercise, avoiding or eliminating alcohol and smoking, and getting sleep and having community?https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/about-uspstf

Would you also agree that the typical “guidance” on HRT would/should come from NAMS as reflected here for patient consumption: https://menopause.org/patient-education/the-menopause-guidebook

And here for NAMS 2022 updates statements on HRT:

https://menopause.org/wp-content/uploads/professional/nams-2022-hormone-therapy-position-statement.pdf

No, you claimed (with zero support) that Dr Gunter’s article was incorrect to assert the lack of evidence for HRT as a preventative.

The 2022 Menopause Society guidelines you posted do NOT state that HRT should be prescribed for anything other than the FDA approved indications - ie not as a preventative.

[Anonymous]

I like Jen Gunter but she’s not the effing Messiah. Don’t just read her thoughts and no one else’s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a great post by Dr Jen Gunter explaining that no, not every woman needs to take HRT, and that HRT is not a preventative.

https://vajenda.substack.com/p/the-rise-of-misinformation-about

This is just a bad article. It highlights everything wrong with medicine and the hrt problem to begin with.

Here goes. Obgyns take care of certain issues. They are not Alzheimer’s researchers. They are not cardiologists. They are not even primary care docs. It’s 100% unfair (a bit) to make them responsible for providing a therapy that would, 10 years from now, be better for you than a statin. But that’s what papers from top cardiologist journals are saying. Now, will NAMS update its guidance on hot flashes and vaginal dryness as a result? Probably not for years or decades. But docs can/should at least acknowledge the awful, fragmented care we often get running around talking to specialists and never getting anyone that looks at us as while people over a lifetime. And the fact that insurance companies don’t foot the bills for (and thus have no incentive in impacting) our health in our late 60s+ doesn’t help.

Your doc who supposedly is so fact based says there no “guidance” and doesn’t even take the time to define what she’s talking about. I’m only assuming NAMS guidance but it’s highly annoying she’s so flippant.

please post the guidance for taking HRT as an Alzheimer’s or heart problems.

You raised guidance first, not me. And you want to talk about preventative medicine and didn’t define it. So you should be defining and speaking first and then, yes, I’ll respond.

First, to do your work for you.

Would you accept the definition of preventative medicine that appears on the “About us” page of the task force on preventative medicine? And can we agree most of us understand preventative medicine to be healthy diet, exercise, avoiding or eliminating alcohol and smoking, and getting sleep and having community?https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/about-uspstf

Would you also agree that the typical “guidance” on HRT would/should come from NAMS as reflected here for patient consumption: https://menopause.org/patient-education/the-menopause-guidebook

And here for NAMS 2022 updates statements on HRT:

https://menopause.org/wp-content/uploads/professional/nams-2022-hormone-therapy-position-statement.pdf

DP. You used the word guidance with scare quotes. The OP just reposted Gunter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like Jen Gunter but she’s not the effing Messiah. Don’t just read her thoughts and no one else’s.

It’s one thing to disagree with how she goes about her analysis. It’s quite another to take issue because you don’t like her conclusions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like Jen Gunter but she’s not the effing Messiah. Don’t just read her thoughts and no one else’s.

ok … I’m not really interested in “thoughts” but in evidence. So if you have a counter take let me know.