Somers: I'm Too Young for This!: The Natural Hormone Solution to Enjoy Perimenopause

Book: I'm Too Young for This!: The Natural Hormone Solution to Enjoy Perimenopause (Kindle)

Why Wait to Feel Good Again?

If you're in your thirties or forties, your body is changing, and so are your moods, sleep, health, and weight. Tired of being at the mercy of your hormones? Armed with the knowledge in this book, you don't have to be. Perimenopause can be enjoyable if you know what to do. I'm Too Young for This! details how you can get your body and mind back on track, safely and without drugs, including:

- How our bodies transition hormonally—from puberty through perimenopause.
- The common complaints of perimenopause—and hidden factors that may keep you symptomatic.
- What are the minor and major hormones, and the important role they play in feeling good and staying vibrant and healthy.
- What to eat—including Perimenopausal Power Foods—as well as other lifestyle shifts that are critical to your successful transition.
- Cutting-edge research that proves the safety and efficacy of bioidentical hormone replacement (BHRT).
- The Symptom Solver: a state-of-the-art guide to immediate relief for your hormonal complaints. Plus, how to find the right doctor as well as get your most frequently asked questions answered by expert hormone specialists.

Your life is about to change for the better. You can feel great, be vibrant, healthy, thin, and sexy! This book shows you how.

Book: Ageless: The Naked Truth About Bioidentical Hormones (Kindle)

Technorati Tags: book,books,hormone replacement,natural hormones,solutions,Perimenopause,Menopause,Suzanne Somers,bioidentical hormones,BHRT

Hormones, Milk & Corruption

Dr. Berg: Check out this video, and you'll see the power of certain companies over the news and our foods.

Video: Hormones, Milk & Corruption

By Dr. Eric Berg DC

Technorati Tags: milk,hormones,Dr. Berg,Fox News

A dose of oxytocin may keep your man from cheating

Examiner:

Men given a dose of oxytocin may be more faithful to their female partners, researchers proclaim.

The new study showed heterosexual men in monogamous relationships who sniffed oxytocin stayed clear of attractive women by keeping their distance from them; literally, a physical distance. The research was accepted in the Journal of Neuroscience on Nov. 14.

The findings strongly suggest men in committed relationships will consciously not get too close to another attractive woman. This suggests oxytocin may be an inner safety net to prevent infidelity.

Oxytocin is a (hormone) neurotransmitter in the brain. It has been dubbed the ‘love’ hormone due to its relationship with social bonding. When couples kiss or embrace a loved one, oxytocin levels rise in the body, giving the feeling of reward and pleasure.

There has been a lot of news regarding what oxytocin does and does not do. Recently, an article was published in Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research by researchers at the University of North Carolina stating that oxytocin may aid in alcohol withdrawal in humans. While this may be promising news for alcoholics, more studies need to be conducted to confirm the validity.

Indeed, in rodents, oxytocin can successfully fight unpleasant alcohol and heroin withdrawal symptoms. And if given before the addiction even occurs, the hormone may even prevent the development of tolerance and symptoms of physical dependence. Time

Now for the bad news:

Before you go shopping for oxytocin for your husband, another recent study found that the “down-regulation” of weaning off of oxytocin may have adverse effects. The experiment on prairie voles showed the voles were less likely to bond with females two weeks after the oxytocin ended.

So, while it may promote 'love' feelings initially, after the oxytocin was stopped, it appeared to drastically ‘go the other way’ and lessen those feelings.

Would you be willing to chance it?

Most surveyed say no… the fidelity had to come naturally~

Technorati Tags: Journal of Neuroscience,studies,oxytocin,hormones,hormone neurotransmitter,relationships,infidelity cure,bonding

Menopausal Belly Fat Linked with Testosterone

In middle-aged women, visceral fat, more commonly called belly fat, is known to be a significant risk factor for cardiovascular disease, but what causes visceral fat to accumulate?

The culprit probably is not age, as is commonly believed, but the change in hormone balance that occurs during the menopause transition, according to researchers at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago.

“Of all the factors we analyzed that could possibly account for the increase in visceral fat during this period in a woman’s lifetime, levels of active testosterone proved to be the one most closely linked with abdominal fat,” said Imke Janssen, assistant professor of preventive medicine and the study’s lead investigator.

The study, which was published early online in the medical journal Obesity, included 359 women, ages 42 to 60, in menopausal transition. They were split evenly between blacks and whites.

Fat in the abdominal cavity was measured with CT scans, a more precise measurement than waist size. Blood tests were used to assess levels of testosterone and estradiol (the main form of estrogen). Medical histories covered other health factors possibly linked with an increase in visceral fat.

Statistical analyses showed that the level of “bioavailable” testosterone, or testosterone that is active in the body, was the strongest predictor of visceral fat.

A woman’s age did not correlate significantly with the amount of visceral fat. Nor did race or other cardiovascular risk factors. The level of estradiol also bore little relationship to the amount of visceral fat.

Visceral fat, surrounding internal organs around the waistline, is metabolically different from subcutaneous fat, located beneath the skin. Research has shown that visceral fat is a source of inflammation that contributes to premature atherosclerosis and risk of acute coronary syndrome.

The study’s findings extend Janssen's earlier research on testosterone’s link with what is called the metabolic syndrome during the menopausal transition, published in the Archives of Internal Medicine in 2008. That study, examining women six years before and six years after their final menstrual periods, found that the rise in metabolic syndrome — a collection of risk factors for heart disease — corresponded with the rise in testosterone activity.

“For many years, it was thought that estrogen protected premenopausal women against cardiovascular disease and that the increased cardiovascular risk after menopause was related only to the loss of estrogen’s protective effect,” Janssen said. “But our studies suggest that in women, it is the change in the hormonal balance — specifically, the increase in active testosterone — that is predominantly responsible for visceral fat and for the increased risk of cardiovascular disease.”

Posted: True Health Is True Wealth

Related Resources:

• The Blue Zones
• Go Granny Go
• Ageless
• Big Red Juice
• TaiSlim - The Weight Is O
• 12 Surprizing Signs You Will Live to 100ver

Why I ‘Prescribe’ Meat to My Patients

Have you see any of these headlines?

• “Too much red meat will kill you” (The National Business Review)
• “Want to live longer? Cut back on red meat” (CNN)
• “Meat-heavy diet linked to early death” (USA Today)

So why in the world would I “prescribe” eating red meat to my patients… when the mainstream media is screaming to the masses that it will kill you?

Because, in my opinion, there’s a huge difference between factory-farm GRAIN-FED beef … and pasture-raised GRASS-FED beef.

Here’s why…

Get The Truth About Grain-Fed Beef

Cattle aren’t supposed to eat grain. They’re natural-born grass eaters. But, factory farmers feed cattle high-calorie, high-octane grain to fatten them up faster… bring them to market faster… and reap higher profits.

Unfortunately, you wind up paying for it. Grain-fed beef has up to three times more fat than grass-fed beef. 1

And grain isn’t the only “unnatural” food these farmers serve cattle, either.

You know the saying, “You are what you eat?”

Well… think about this:

Factory farmers have also been known to feed cattle:

1. Recycled human food, such as stale candy, pizza, potato chips, brewery wastes, and hamburger buns.
2. Parts of our fruits and vegetables that we don’t eat, such as orange rinds, beet pulp, and carrot tops.
3. STUFF YOU DON’T WANT TO KNOW ABOUT… including chicken manure, chicken feathers, newsprint, cardboard, and “aerobically digested” municipal garbage.

And here’s something even more disturbing.

In the mid-1990s, a team of animal researchers conducted a study to see what would happen if they fed cattle stale chewing gum – still in its wrappers.” 2

The conclusion? Here’s a direct quote from the researchers. (I’m not making this up.)

“… gum and its packaging material can safely replace at least 30% of growing and finishing diets without impairing feedlot performance or carcass merit.”

Fatten cattle up on stale bubblegum and aluminum wrappers and pass on the end product to you and your family.

Would you eat something that was raised on stale candy, garbage, bubblegum, aluminum wrappers, cardboard and chicken crap? Or feed it to your family?

I’ll tell you something… the fact that the USDA lets this fly is absolutely insane.

And then there are all the synthetic hormones, low-level antibiotics, and chemicals they pump into factory-farm cattle…

… or how the cattle may “accidentally” get fed cow parts - which leads to the deadly “mad cow” disease,…

… or how the massive, corporate-owned feedlots cram huge numbers of cattle into inhumanely small spaces (which places huge amounts of stress on the animals – and makes them highly susceptible to disease)…

The list of negatives goes on and on and on.

With all this in mind, in my opinion, it’s no wonder that red meat has been linked to certain chronic health concerns. How could any cow that’s raised in such a way remain healthy and produce healthy beef? It’s next to impossible.

The bottom line is factory-farm red meat is simply horrible stuff. And you have every right to be scared to death of it.

However, pasture-raised, grass-fed beef could not be any more different. You have nothing to fear when you make it a part of your diet. In fact, pasture-raised, grass-fed beef is so loaded with health benefits, I’d even go as far as to call it a “super food.”

Seven Health Benefits of
Pasture-Raised, Grass-Fed Beef

For starters, here are seven reasons why making grass-fed beef a regular part of your diet is such a wise health decision.

Health Reason No. 1. Less overall fat and calories than grain-fed beef: A six-ounce loin from a grass-fed cow has, on average, 92 fewer calories than a six-ounce loin from a grain-fed cow. Now, the average American eats 67 pounds of beef per year.3 This adds up to, on average, a 16,642 calorie difference. So if you switched to grass-fed beef… and did nothing else… you’d lose 9½ pounds in two years just by switching to grass-fed!

Health Reason No. 2. More Omega-3s: You need omega-3s to survive. That’s why they’re called “essential fatty acids.” Omega-3s:

• Help promote a healthy heart, brain, and immune system…
• Encourage strong bones, teeth, and nails…
• Support a positive, happy mood…
• Help maintain sharp vision for decades… and more.*

And where do omega-3s originate from? Green plants (including grass… the food of choice of grass-fed cows.) As a result, grass-fed beef has 2 to 10 times more omega-3s than grain-fed beef. 4

Health Reason No. 3. A healthier ratio of omega-6s to omega-3s: Omega-6s and omega-3s are both essential fatty acids. You need them to survive. The problem is when you have too many omega-6s. omega-6s have a pro-oxidation effect if your diet is too heavy in it, which the typical American diet tends to be. This can impact your overall health and wellbeing, including heart and brain health.
Many health experts believe the ratio of omega-6s to omega-3s should be no more than 4:1.5 Grain-fed beef has an omega-6 to omega-3 ratio of 5:1 to 14:1. Way too high. Grass-fed, on the other hand, has a much healthier ratio of less than 1:1 to 3:1.6

Health Reason No. 4. More CLA: Grass-fed beef contains two to five times more CLA than the grain-fed variety.7,8 , CLA is a newly discovered “good fat” that research suggests helps support immune and cardiovascular growth . It also appears to help promote lean muscle mass.9

Health Reason No. 5. More Vitamin E: Vitamin E is an extremely powerful antioxidant. It helps protect you from free radicals… which is considered the leading cause of premature aging. Vitamin E also boosts your immunity and helps promote a healthy heart.
Grass-fed beef contains three to six times more vitamin E than grain-fed beef.10

Health Reason No. 6. More Carotenoids: A diet rich in carotenoids has multiple health benefits… including promoting eye and macular health. Grass-fed beef has up to four times more beta-carotene than grain-fed beef.11

Health Reason No. 7. More B Vitamins, CoQ10, and Zinc (and SAFE!): When you eat grass-fed beef, you are getting more B vitamins, CoQ10, and zinc than you would with grain-fed beef.

Aside from grass-fed beef’s amazing health benefits, there’s one other thing I haven’t mentioned yet.

And I think you’ll like this as much as I do.

It’s The Best Beef I’ve Ever Tasted

One of the biggest misconceptions about grass-fed beef is that it tastes dry or gamey. That because it has no fat… therefore it has no flavor.

This couldn’t be further from the truth.

When it’s raised and finished properly, it’s actually far superior, in my opinion, to grain-fed beef. And I’m not alone in thinking this, either.

Here’s what gourmet critics in several mainstream publications had to say about the flavor of grass-fed beef:

“… superior to the meat harvested from grain-fed animals.”

-- The New York Times

“Grass-fed beef tastes better than corn-fed beef.”

-- The Atlantic Monthly

“… delicious, rich and full-flavored, but without the excessive fattiness on the finish of some prime beef.”

-- Wine Spectator

I’m telling you… it’s delicious!

There is one caveat about grass-fed beef, however. And it’s something you should know about as well.

Because it takes so much more TLC to raise grass-fed cattle, it costs a little more than the cheap grain-fed stuff.

And it hasn’t been that easy to find, either. It requires more effort to get it onto your plate. But I sure think it’s worth it… especially when you consider:

• The welfare of the animals (grass-fed cattle are raised in a natural environment)…
• The well-being of the local farmers that raise grass-fed cattle (supporting local farming benefits the community… instead of massive corporate-owned farms)…
• Your health (Now that you know the facts, what would you rather eat?)…

So in the end, it’s definitely worth it to “go grass-fed.”

And here’s some good news.

I’ve just made it easier than ever for you to give grass-fed beef a try.

Sample Some Delicious Grass-Fed Beef In Your Own Home

Not long ago, a friend put me in contact with a man who owns a cattle ranch in the foothills of Virginia’s Appalachia country.

He’s got about 700 cattle. What’s more:

• The cattle are pasture-raised and grass-fed…
• The beef is “Certified Humane"…
• The feed is free of animal proteins…
• They don’t EVER use hormones or steroids on the cattle…
• They don’t give the cattle unnecessary antibiotics…
• The beef is dry-aged for 14-21 days (to ensure maximum flavor)

But here’s the thing.

Normally, you could only buy a “quarter-beef” (188 pounds) or a “half-beef” (375 pounds).

That’s a lot of beef… even for a large family. And that’s a lot to order at first. Especially if you’ve never given it a try and not sure if “grass-fed” is for you (even though I know you’re going to love it!)

So we worked out a deal where you can bypass ordering hundreds of pounds of grass-fed beef…

… and order a much smaller 20-pound “sampler” pack of tasty cuts of grass-fed beef instead… straight from the ranch. Each sampler pack is different, but you’ll get:

• At least six pounds of steaks
• Approx. five pounds of roast/rib combination
• Approx. nine pounds of burger and stew meat

It’s a great deal… but there’s a catch. When you order a sample pack, you’re not going to receive it “overnight.” In fact, it’ll take about 3-5 weeks before it arrives at your doorstep. Why the wait? Because the ranch guarantees the freshest beef possible.

And it’s well worth the wait.

I strongly encourage you to give grass-fed beef a try. You’ll be glad you did.

Click here for ordering info.

By:  Dr. Al Sears

____________________
1 Robinson, J. Pasture Perfect: The Far Reaching Benefits of Choosing Meat, Eggs, and Dairy Products from Grass-Fed Animals. Vashon Island Press. 2004
2 Robinson, J. Pasture Perfect: The Far Reaching Benefits of Choosing Meat, Eggs, and Dairy Products from Grass-Fed Animals. Vashon Island Press. 2004
3 Robinson, J. Pasture Perfect: The Far Reaching Benefits of Choosing Meat, Eggs, and Dairy Products from Grass-Fed Animals. Vashon Island Press. 2004
4 The “Scientific Research” section of the http://www.eatwild.com website.
5 Simopoulos, A.P. “The Importance of the Ratio of Omega-6/Omega-3 Essential Fatty Acids,” (2002). Biomed Pharmacother 56 (8): 365-79
6 The “Scientific Research” section of the http://www.eatwild.com website.
7 Dhiman, T.R., G.R. Anand, L.D. Satter, and M.W. Pariza. (1999). “Conjugated Linolenic Acid Content of Milk from Cows Fed Different Diets.” J Dairy Sci 82, (10): 2146-56
8 French, P., C. Stanton, F. Lawless, E.G. O’Riordan, F.J. Monahan, P.J. Caffrey, and A.P. Moloney. (2003) “Fatty Acid Composition, Including Conjugated Linolenic Acid, of Intramuscular Fat from Steers Offered Grazed Grass, Grass Silage, or Concentrate-Based Diets.” J Anim Sci 78, (11): 2849-55.
9 Platzman, Andrea, MS, RD, CDN. Crank Up Your Body's Furnace with these Fat-Burning Foods. http://www.healthclubs.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.viewPage&pageID=14230
10 Smith, G.C. “Dietary Supplementation of Vitamin E to Cattle to Improve Shelf-Life and Case-Life for Domestic and International Markets.” Colorado State University. Complete reference not known.
11 Prache, S., A. Priolo, et al. (2003). “Persistence of carotenoid pigments in the blood of concentrate-finished grazing sheep: its significance for the traceability of grass-feeding.” J Anim Sci 81(2): 360-7.

Posted:  True Health Is True Wealth

Are You Eating Cloned Meat?

Are you eating cloned meat? You probably don’t know. It’s becoming common practice ... but the FDA doesn’t require labeling of cloned meat!

Birth defects in clones are quite common. Cloning has been found to produce unhealthy animals who suffer tremendously. Clones often die young, suffer birth defects, and commonly need antibiotics. 1

The Center for Food Safety says that as many as 50% of cow clones have what’s called “Large Offspring Syndrome.” Symptoms include unusually high birth weight that endangers the mother, and a long list of organ and systemic abnormalities, including heart problems and immature lung development. 2

The report also states that there is evidence that clones are not always exact duplicates of their gene donors.3 Clearly, cloning remains an unpredictable science.

And cloning scientists have warned that even small imbalances in these clones could result in hidden food safety problems in the cloned meat.4 A recent study found differences in the composition of the milk and meat of cloned animals. 5

But here’s what’s even more worrisome, the nation’s major cattle cloning companies admit that they have not been able to keep track of how many offspring of clones have entered the food supply. 6

So there’s no way of knowing if you are buying cloned meat or not! I don’t know about you, but I consider this extremely deceptive. We should have the right to choose, especially when it comes to what we eat.

It’s sad to think that the FDA approved cloned livestock food without completely knowing all of the risks involved. But they don’t exactly have a good track record…just look at all the drug recalls they’ve made over the last decade.

The whole idea of cloned meat is frightening if you ask me. That’s another reason why I choose grass-fed beef. I don’t have to worry about whether or not I am eating some science experiment developed in a test tube.

So when choosing meat for your next meal, consider the following two options.

• Cattle raised as nature intended – in an open field free to roam and feast on their natural diet of grass

Or

• Something developed in a scientific experiment that has not been properly researched, not to mention fed an unnatural diet of grain and given massive doses of antibiotics.

This should be an easy one, correct? Choose the grass-fed beef, of course. At least you’ll know exactly what you are getting – something that’s healthy and nutritious with no hidden food safety issues. It’s hormone-free, antibiotic-free, has no preservatives, and has a healthy ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 fats.

I get my grass-fed meats at U.S. Wellness Meats at www.grasslandbeef.com. They ship it right to your door packed in dry ice.

So you can enjoy a nice juicy grass-fed burger or steak any time – clone free and worry free!

To Your Good Health,

Al Sears MD

Al Sears, MD
11903 Southern Blvd., Ste. 208
Royal Palm Beach, FL 33411

Reprinted From: May 2009

True Health Is True Wealth

Suzanne Somers on the Schwarzbein Principle - Bioidentical Hormones

For any of you who have read any of my books on Somersizing, you know the important role Dr. Schwarzbein plays in my life. She is an awesome doctor, cutting-edge, and the first doctor I met who truly understands menopause and its ramifications. As an endocrinologist, her specialty is the chemical makeup of the body. As I struggled to find a doctor who really understood what my body was going through in menopause (before I found the wonderful doctors I have interviewed for this book), it was Dr. Schwarzbein who was finally able to help me find relief. She understands the importance of replacing the hormones lost in the aging process with natural hormones that are exact replicas (bioidentical) of the ones we make in our own bodies. Because of Dr. Schwarzbein, I am enjoying my menopause more than any other passage so far. Here is our conversation.

SS (Suzanne Somers): First of all, I appreciate your giving me time to do this. I know how swamped you are at the office.

Every woman is looking for answers during this confusing passage, and you have made menopause a specialty. So let me first ask you: Because menopause is confusing not only to women but also to most doctors, how did you figure it out?

DS (Dr. Diana Schwarzbein): Most of what I know about hormone replacement therapy in menopause I did not learn in medical school, or in medical training. It was when I was in private practice. I had four years of medical school, three years of internal medicine, then two years of endocrinology, but in nine years of training no one said, This is menopause, this is what you need to be doing.

SS: What made you pay attention?

DS: I started treating diabetic patients back in 1991, and I was noticing that a subset of my diabetic patients who happened to be menopausal women, who were following the exact same diet and exercise program as all the other diabetic patients, were not responding with the same good results. In other words, their sugars were not budging. It was startling. They were eating the same way, doing the same kinds of exercises, but their blood sugars were staying at 300, whereas the men and the premenopausal women had blood sugar levels that were coming down.

SS: What were you missing?

DS: It started to dawn on me that maybe the sex hormones were playing a role in their problem. But initially I made a lot of mistakes.

SS: For instance?

DS: If someone said to you, you can have all the benefits of hormone replacement therapy with or without a period, everyone would probably say, "Oh, without a period, please."

SS: Very understandable. I mean, who wants to have a period if they don't have to?

DS: I agree, and at that point I bought into the current standard of care that believed you could have the benefits of hormones without a period. But I found that when you give hormones that way [continuously combining an estrogen with a progestin on a daily basis], you make the patient more insulin resistant.

SS: But isn't a woman her healthiest when she is pregnant, because her body is making estrogen and progesterone simultaneously?

DS: Actually, no. Pregnancy is not the healthiest state for a woman to be in. In fact, pregnancy is one of the times when you are more insulin resistant. If you are pregnant back to back and you have many children, I guarantee you're going to end up with type 2 diabetes or another form of insulin resistance such as obesity, abnormal cholesterol levels, and/or high blood pressure. Also, we now realize that pregnant women have a higher risk of breast cancer.

SS: Why is that?

DS: I am not sure that anybody really knows, but I'm going to say I think it's because of insulin resistance. Because high insulin levels have been linked to breast cancer. For instance, women with type 2 diabetes have one of the highest risks of developing breast cancer. So do women with metabolic syndrome [an insulin-resistant problem].

SS: Okay, but why would pregnancy make you insulin resistant?

DS: It's complex, but to simplify, physiologically you have many hormonal changes in pregnancy that block the action of insulin. One of them is the high progesterone levels.

SS: But people always think of pregnancy as a high estrogen state.

DS: Actually, pregnancy produces high estrogen levels but much higher daily progesterone levels, and the progesterone blocks the action of estrogen every day. The result of this is a low estrogen effect in the body.

SS: So let's get back to how you started treating your diabetic menopausal patients.

DS: I started treating women with diabetes in 1991, and I prescribed Prempro to those who were in menopause. Luckily, I noticed right away that their blood sugar control worsened. This was a group of patients who were not improving despite how hard they were working at eating well and exercising. In fact, some of them were getting worse. That's when I realized Prempro was the problem. Then I switched these women to estradiol and progesterone, thinking the bioidentical hormones would be the answer. However, I still prescribed them in a continuous combined way (no periods), and their blood sugars remained elevated.

Then I thought about the four rules that I use for the replacement of any missing hormone:

1. Don't take a hormone that's not low or missing.
2. Take only bioidentical hormones.
3. Mimic normal physiology as much as possible.
4. Track the hormone levels and their effects.

Starting with rule number one-in menopause you are low in estradiol and progesterone. Rule number two, give back the same hormone in its bioidentical form. I realized that Premarin was being substituted for estradiol, and Provera was being substituted for progesterone, and this was not the right thing to do. So I prescribed bioidentical estradiol for estradiol and bioidentical progesterone for progesterone.

Then, because of rule number three, I realized that continuous combined therapy was not the way the body made these hormones. To mimic normal physiology as much as possible, these hormones would have to be taken in a cyclical manner, and then women would have to have withdrawal menses [monthly period] again.

Then, rule number four, I followed my patients by tracking their hormone levels through blood work and the effects of these bioidentical hormones.

When I followed my four rules of hormone replacement that I used in treating all types of hormone deficiencies, the blood sugars of the women with diabetes improved and their hormone levels came back into balance. Finally, these women felt well again.

I realized the mistake I was making [ten years ago] treating menopausal women with type 2 diabetes was in giving them continuous combined HRT. Remember, as diabetics they were already insulin resistant, and they became more insulin resistant on continuous combined HRT. Unfortunately, many doctors today still don't understand the link between continuous combined therapy and insulin resistance and are still making the same mistake today that I did all those years ago.

In my opinion, the harm of continuous combined therapy was confirmed in July 2002, when the first results of the Women's Health Initiative was published. There were three groups of women in this study:

1. The observational group. These women were in menopause but were given only a placebo. They were "observed" to check for heart disease, breast cancer, stroke, blood clots, type 2 diabetes, and so forth.

2. Two treatment groups: subdivided by whether the woman had a uterus or did not because of a hysterectomy.

If the woman had a uterus, she was given Prempro, a synthetic drug hormone comprising an estrogen, Premarin, and a progestin, Provera. Progestins block the effect of estrogen, so the women on Prempro did not get a period. In other words, if you take an estrogen and then block the action of it with a progestin, you end up with a low estrogen effect in the body. Hence, no bleeding.

If she didn't have a uterus, she was given Premarin alone. [Premarin is a drug that contains many different estrogens, most of which are not found or made in the human body.] Taking Premarin alone would lead to a higher estrogen effect in the body.

SS: Interesting. And when you have a low estrogen effect because of continuous combined HRT [no period], are you subject to disease?

DS: That's what the WHI study showed. It was going to be an eight-plus-year study. They wanted to compare the outcome of the treatment groups with those of the observational group.

But at 5.2 years, the Prempro study was stopped early.

SS: Why?

DS: They started noticing that the women on Prempro [continuous combined therapy-no period] were having more heart attacks, more strokes, more blood clots, and more breast cancer than the group taking the placebo.

SS: What about the women who were taking Premarin?

DS: They haven't found the same kind of increased risk for disease with Premarin alone; therefore, that part of the WHI study is still ongoing. It is slated to be finished and reported in 2005 after eight years plus.

Last year when the news broke out about Prempro, the initial reaction was to get all women off all HRT, and to this day that is what most physicians are recommending.

SS: Why was the Women's Health Initiative done in the first place?

DS: The idea was to do a long-term prospective study on the possible benefits versus risks of the most commonly used HRT. They studied Premarin and Prempro because these are the most commonly prescribed therapies.

SS: So, when a woman takes these drug hormones, is she getting any good out of it at all, or would she be better off not taking anything?

DS: The WHI concluded that Prempro is worse than not taking anything, and I agree with the conclusion.

SS: That's a pretty strong statement.

DS: Yes, but that's what the study concluded.

As far as Premarin goes, I do not like it because it is not a bioidentical estrogen. However, it hasn't been shown to be more harmful than not taking anything at all. But this part of the study is still ongoing. It's important to know that Premarin has not yet been shown to be of much benefit, either. When it first came on the market, it was only supposed to be used in the short term to treat hot flashes, but then its use got extended (without any studies, I might add) to long-term hormone replacement therapy for menopause. As far as I am concerned, one of the uses of HRT after menopause should be for protection against heart disease. Premarin does not protect against heart disease.

SS: Well, all I know is I am feeling so wonderful that I am going to take bioidentical [natural] hormones for life, or as long as I choose to do so.

DS: And I believe it is safe for you to take bioidentical hormones for the rest of your life as long as we keep monitoring the effects of these hormones and we keep adjusting the amount to match your ever-changing lifestyle.

SS: Now what about Prempro or Premarin? Would a gynecologist put a woman on these drugs for life?

DS: I know many women who have been on these drugs for too long. There are two paralleling concepts going on: One is don't substitute a drug for a hormone; they do not do the same thing in the body. Two, do not think that you are going to come up with a better way to give these drugs than to match the physiology that already exists, as in natural bioidentical hormones.

I learned from my own studies and my treatment of menopausal women that you can approach menopause in two ways: symptomatic relief therapy or bioidentical HRT following the four rules mentioned earlier. Most gynecologists have been approaching it from the symptomatic side. They feel that as long as a woman is not having hot flashes, she is being treated properly. That is not true.

Furthermore, in my experience most gynecologists treat the uterus as the most important organ in the human body. As such, they feel their role is to keep harm from coming to your uterus. The medical literature in gynecology is filled with studies on the amount of progestin needed to protect the uterus from developing cancer. In trying to save the uterus and prescribing continuous combined therapy, gynecologists have increased the risk of breast cancer, heart attacks, and strokes in once-healthy women! Unfortunately, by messing with Mother Nature and giving drug hormones without restoring menstrual bleeding, we have done more harm than good.

SS: Okay, here we are again at having a period.

DS: You have to have a period, because this mimics normal! The normal state is not pregnancy! Prempro mimics pregnancy, so continuous combined therapy is not normal. Having a monthly period is normal. At one point gynecologists understood this concept. Prior to the last ten to fifteen years, most doctors did prescribe Premarin and Provera in a cycling way. That was the standard of care for quite some time.

SS: Then what happened?

DS: Primarily, women weren't feeling good on Premarin and Provera. They were complaining of bloating and irritability and on top of it were getting their period again! Then many women stopped taking HRT because they felt so poorly on it. Instead of treating women with bioidentical hormones, gynecologists tried different ways to give Provera to protect against uterine cancer and came up with continuous combined therapy without thinking about or studying the long-term consequences.

SS: Quite a dilemma. So if rule number three is to mimic normal physiology as much as possible, that would mean having a period, but is having a period all your life normal?

DS: Medically we are altering natural phenomena everywhere. There is nothing natural about immunizations, or open heart surgery, or hip replacement surgery. We have to decide as a society whether we are all going to honor aging or not. If we are, then I would say don't give hormone replacement therapy. But if as a society we choose to alter natural phenomena medically, we have to be consistent. Taking HRT after menopause is not natural, but neither is performing open heart surgery.

SS: Let's talk more about rule number four-tracking.

DS: Tracking means monitoring the effect of the hormone a woman is taking. It is done through assessing hormone levels, assessing how the woman feels on hormones, when and how much bleeding she has on a monthly basis, assessing bones and cholesterol, and evaluating her uterine lining with yearly ultrasounds. It also entails following specific issues pertinent to the woman's personal health history such as blood pressure, insulin, and blood sugar levels.

Menopause is a serious condition. In other words, I don't just prescribe hormones and say, "Have a nice life, call me if you get a hot flash." Menopause needs to be followed just like any other hormone replacement therapy. Dosages of hormones may need to be continuously adjusted around a woman's aging and her changing lifestyle.

SS: What about self-medicating, as in today my breasts are a little more tender, I think I'll take a little more estrogen cream?

DS: I don't feel very comfortable with women self-medicating around symptoms. For instance, let's take breast tenderness . . . it could be from too little estrogen or too much estrogen. So how would a woman know what to do?

I'll tell you something else about estrogen: It can act like an antidepressant, and women can end up taking too much of it if left to determine how much they should be on in relation to how they feel. Then you get into the complications of high hormone effect in the system.

And then there is progesterone. Women cannot tell if they're taking too much progesterone because it is a stimulant and can initially make one feel better. It isn't until later that they can start feeling depressed or gain weight from too much progesterone, and by then they may not realize it's the progesterone because of how long it took before the symptoms occurred.

SS: Oh, so that is why you don't like women to self-adjust their hormones.

DS: Right, you have to be very careful. You do not want too much or too little. It has to be just right, and the only way to do that is through tracking.

SS: Should women and men go only to an endocrinologist who specializes in bioidentical HRT to get their sex hormones balanced?

DS: As an endocrinologist, I have chosen to specialize in sex hormones. But not every endocrinologist has the same training. I wish I could say, "Go to your local endocrinologist and everything will be okay." Unfortunately each person must find the right endocrinologist or doctor for him- or herself. It will require interviewing the doctor to see if he or she has made sex hormones a specialty.

SS: When you do get your hormones in balance (as you have helped me balance mine), life is blissful. It's worth a trip or a drive to another city to get on track. After all, it is a three-hour drive for me to see you, but you are worth it.

DS: Well, thank you. Now that you and I have worked together for all these years, you know that hormone replacement therapy can be complex.

SS: And this is where the concept of synthetic pharmaceutical hormones is screwy to me. How can one pill fit all?

DS: Exactly. Even though we all share the same physiology, we don't all share the same metabolism rate of different hormones. I mean, you and I have completely different body types. Let's look in the mirror at ourselves: Who has more estrogen . . . you or me?

SS: Old friendly me. Curvy body . . . you get to have a long, lean body and slim hips (I hate you, by the way). But I get your point. Every "body" has different needs.

DS: It's also genetics. It's about ratios among different hormones.

SS: Right now the ratio, the match, you have prescribed for me feels good. I'm feeling fantastic.

DS: Great. But it's sometimes a very difficult thing to find the perfect match for women. It takes patience and focus.

SS: How difficult?

DS: Well, it depends on their lifestyle and what is going on.

SS: So if a woman lived by a river and didn't work and didn't have a telephone or a television set and wasn't constantly thinking, Oh, my God, I have to juggle a million things . . .

DS: It would be easier to find a match for that woman. She could probably get away with much less estrogen, because estrogen is the multitasking hormone. But if this same woman smoked, it would make the body rid itself of the estradiol faster.

Another example is you, Suzanne, when you were going through that period where you were so stressed. Your hormone needs kept going up, so I had to keep changing your doses, yet your hormone levels stayed the same, because you were using it up so much. And then abruptly your stress stopped and the dose of your hormones was too much for you. All of a sudden you had a high estrogen effect.

SS: Right, and that was excessive bleeding . . .

DS: Yes, you called me and I decreased your doses and things got on track and in balance again.

SS: What's interesting to me as the patient who has been doing this for several years is that I have become very sensitive to when the doses are not correct. I find this an incredible way to work with you as my doctor. We are doing this in concert together, and it helps me to feel that I am in control of my health and my body.

DS: Yes, and as you recall when we first started working together, I was very clear about the fact that this is a pain in the butt. A "one pill fits all" would be a lot easier, but the rewards of doing it this way, from a health standpoint, a quality-of-life standpoint, and a longevity standpoint, are indisputable.

And it's not just about the hormones. It's about eating well and stress management, and tapering off sugar and other chemicals, and doing the right kinds of exercise. All hormones talk to one another. So you can't take estradiol and progesterone and expect to find balance if your insulin and adrenaline levels are going crazy from poor nutrition and lifestyle habits. Every hormone has to be in balance with the other hormones.

SS: That makes a lot of sense. A woman has to have better habits after menopause to keep her hormones in balance to help keep her prescribed hormones in balance, too. How do you feel about gynecologists giving antidepressants to quell menopausal symptoms?

DS: I think it's a tragedy. We are one of the first generations of women to fully experience this passage. We have much higher stress levels and more anxiety in our lives than ever before, and we are seeing menopause at earlier ages. And all this accelerated aging is due to bad lifestyle and dietary habits! Giving a woman an antidepressant to deal with the suffering of menopause does nothing to replace the hormones she has lost in the aging process. Antidepressants take away the vibration of living and create a host of other problems. Menopause is natural, but dying is natural also! Today we have ways of dealing effectively with menopause or delaying death; why wouldn't we want to take correct advantage of that? Antidepressants are not the answer.

SS: So what is the answer?

DS: Remember this concept . . . she who keeps her hormone levels highest the longest wins. That's the race, dear!

It's got to start with good nutrition. People don't realize that if they want to be busy and run around like a crazy person, and they don't eat well, then they will literally eat themselves!

If a woman of childbearing age wants to make a baby but is under any type of stress, she can end up dealing with infertility. Eggs are dispensable. This is not the time to make a baby, because she needs to use whatever she would use to make an egg for energy instead to fight off the stress.

We have advanced medically so that women no longer need to die prematurely from childbirth or from infectious diseases as they did before we had antibiotics. Women also used to die in perimenopause from infections before proper medicine was available, because we are more susceptible to infections during this phase. Women are their healthiest and strongest during their childbearing years, when they are making a full complement of hormones. The loss of hormones makes you weak.

SS: So the theory is that if I keep my hormones balanced and I continue to eat right, I can expect to stay strong and most likely avoid the diseases of aging?

DS: Right, and we now know that it's not just about menopause. It's about nutrition and stress management and sleep and exercise, and hormone replacement, if needed.

SS: Are we baby boomers the guinea pigs?

DS: I think the women who have been given the chemicals are the bigger guinea pigs. Come on, giving drugs to replace a hormone? These chemicals will cause you to lose the hormones that protect you from heart disease, namely estradiol. Real hormones provide protection from heart disease if given in bioidentical form [exact replicas of the hormones we make in our own bodies]. This was confirmed by the Howard Hodis study at theUniversity of Southern California. He showed that estradiol-not Premarin, not synthetic hormones, not drugs, but the bioidentical estradiol found in human ovaries-will protect a woman against heart disease.

SS: Okay, Dr. Schwarzbein, we're sold, but where am I going to send women to find this kind of excellence and understanding relative to this passage? Women are barraged with bad medical advice and are highly influenced by the drug companies, so where do they go, and what should they ask their own doctor? For instance, the woman says, "I am in menopause, I am having hot flashes, I am irritable, and I am bloating."

DS: First thing to ask your doctor is to get baseline hormone levels through lab work. You want to have your estradiol, progesterone, and follicle-stimulating-hormone levels tested. If you are in menopause, you proceed to rule two.

Tell your doctor that you want to be prescribed bioidentical estradiol and progesterone. You can get the best form of these hormones from a good compounding pharmacy. Next, ask your doctor if he or she knows or works with a good compounding pharmacy. If not, or if you don't have one in your area, have them check the reference guide you have provided in the back of this book. However, some doctors won't know how to use the compounding pharmacy, so ask them to prescribe an estradiol preparation such as Estrace or Gynodiol found in the local pharmacies. There is also a noncompounded form of bioidentical progesterone known as Prometrium.

SS: How would someone know how much to take?

DS: You always want to take the lowest dose and taper up slowly.

SS: And see how you feel?

DS: Yes, and take the estradiol hormone twice a day. Estradiol is in and out of the body very quickly, so you really need to take smaller amounts more frequently to achieve the best balance. Take it twice a day about twelve hours apart, because you want to mimic a steady stream, as if your own body is still making it. The progesterone may be taken once a day or sometimes twice a day if needed.

SS: Okay, they have their estradiol and progesterone preparations. Now what?

DS: They will need to take them in a cycling manner. Take the estradiol every day of the month twice a day and add in one pill of progesterone for fourteen days out of each month. The easiest way to do this is on calendar days one through fourteen of every month.

SS: What dosage should they take?

DS: Start with about 0.5 mg of estradiol twice a day and with 100 mg of progesterone a day, and then track symptoms and levels to determine if a higher or lower dose is needed.

SS: What happens after the fourteenth day of progesterone? Is that when a woman should expect to have her period?

DS: Yes, they are supposed to be having a regular menstrual flow around the end of the progesterone or just after it is finished. . . . If they break through early [bleeding], then they are taking either too much progesterone or not enough estradiol.

SS: How will they know?

DS: They will need to have their blood levels checked to see which one it is.

Now, we are not taking into account that some people would like to be on progesterone 50 mg twice a day, not 100 mg once a day. Unfortunately, we don't have a 50 mg at every drugstore. We only have 100 mg. You have to try to work with it. But if you are able to work with a compounding pharmacy, they will be able to work it out to fit your needs more specifically.

SS: This will be a big help to women who are frustrated and do not live in an area that has an informed endocrinologist or gynecologist. As women, we have to be proactive about our health and our hormonal needs, because there is so much misinformation and lack of understanding about this passage. That is the point of this book, to empower women and men (and believe me, they also lose their hormones) to find quality health care and information about hormones for themselves.

DS: We are in a crisis as far as menopause is concerned. Doctors are going to have to learn something new, because we can't keep allowing women to suffer and become ill due to the lack of understanding that exists.

SS: So what is the future? I agree with you that menopause is a crisis at this time with this lack of understanding among women and doctors, but another generation is coming up right after us, and everyone is still in a state of confusion and frustration. Women my age are suffering, their marriages are falling apart, the divorce rate is going up, men are remarrying young girls to get the fun back in their lives, so what is going to happen? What are your hopes?

DS: Menopausal women have to demand answers. We also have to get them over their fear of breast cancer and of estrogen. One of my hopes is that the right information gets out. Women have to know that the risk of breast cancer is much less than the risk of dying from not taking hormones, or the risk of getting a heart attack or a debilitating stroke.

Let me state that insulin is a much bigger hormone relative to breast cancer than estrogen will ever be, because insulin is a major growth hormone. Insulin is a major growth hormone and estradiol is a minor growth hormone. Breast cancer is not caused because you took estradiol. Breast cancer comes from damage to DNA from the environment and damage caused by unhealthy lifestyle and dietary habits.

SS: Like . . .

DS: Stress, smoking, too much caffeine, high daily doses of progestins, lots of artificial sugar, anything that you put in your body that shouldn't be there. If you damage an area of the DNA that promotes a tumor, then that tumor is going to start to grow. Estradiol is a growth factor for normal breast tissue. So if you have normal breast tissue, but now the DNA of that normal breast tissue gets damaged, estradiol is still going to make it grow, but it didn't cause the damage.

In fact, I am going to stick my neck out and say that when we finally get around to studying bioidentical estradiol, it is going to be shown to be protective against cancers because it is an antioxidant in the human body.

Again, though, it is not about too much or too little of a hormone. The balance has to be just right.

SS: Thank you so much.