Are you new here? Do you think people started questioning the issue of HRT for uses other than hot flashes and osteoporosis on 1/22/25? As for limiting who participates, I don’t believe you for a minute when you say things like this: “ You’re still totally unable to engage with the question as to why it concerns you when other women get prescribed HRT. Keep having your fit.” Sorry you would rather fight posters than look at the quality and results of the studies/reviews. |
+1 Hypocrites |
Wow. So much projection.
As has been explained multiple times, no one GAF if you take HRT. It really seems like you’re trolling at this point. |
You have a serious reading comprehension problem issue. Or you’re trolling. |
|
For anyone new to this thread - read from the beginning, and see how posters using HRT, in support of others using it as prescribed, discuss this issue. The posters objecting (rudely, nastily, trying desperately to provoke a reportable response) show up there, too, asserting among other things, that it would have been better for Melania Trump to make this announcement “woman to woman,” making unsupported by cites and statistics and studies generalized claims regarding all cancers, and being generally shitty and offering links to eye doctors and yet somehow failing to link to scientific commentary about this actual topic.
Here’s a relevant link from ASCO - saying that systemic HRT is contraindicated for women with a history of estrogen-responsive cancers. There is no nastiness or attempt to scare other women away. Perhaps the women determined to scream about this here can relax, take a walk, take a note… https://www.asco.org/news-initiatives/policy-news-analysis/statement-HHS-revision-black-box-warning |
More projection. Anyone reading this thread today will not see the unhinged posts from HRT boosters that threatened physical violence and fantasized about the death of posters who questioned RFK Jr or baseless claims about HRT. The unhinged comments were deleted and now the nutjob(s) are pretending to play victim. |
So you can’t talk about the topic at all - the black box warning. That’s the topic, that’s what’s addressed by the oncology professional society as I linked. So — what the issue again? Is “projection” your new favorite word? Why is another woman’s prescribed use of medication your issue or business or problem, if you do not in fact care whether cancer specialists do or do not have a generalized concern about HRT use? |
Projection seems to be your new favorite hobby. We were discussing RFK, etc until the nutters went off on their persecution complex. As you’ve been told countless times, troll, literally no one GAF if you take HRT. |
Do you understand that this is a conversation about the risks and benefits of HRT and the fact that the FDA removed the warning? |
You’re not making sense. Do you want to discuss the black box issue or not? Do you need to keep swearing to settle down, friend? Do you want to discuss whether or not you have more expertise than oncologists regarding the black box warning? |
I posted the link to the ASCO statement regarding the warning and yet not one person is discussing that. You and the other person - assuming a second poster- keep stirring and snapping and…not having a single thing to say about the expert discussion of the removal of the warning. |
I have more expertise than RFK and Marty Makary. |
My dog has more expertise. |
It’s page 19. We’ve discussed it already. |
Happy to move on from the delusions of persecution. 👍 |