The Menopause, HRT, and Breast Cancer

I have written about the menopause, hormone replacement therapy (HRT), and breast and cervical cancer many times before. To do so again is certainly deja vu! But headline health news recently provided us with "good" news - at least this is how it has been universally heralded:

HRT Prescription Charges to be Reduced.

       "The cost of repeat HRT prescriptions will be cut in a move set to save women who rely on the treatment 'hundreds of pounds per year', the government has announced. Working with NHS England, the government says it will look to implement longer prescribing cycles 'in line with NICE guidelines', so women receive fewer prescriptions, meaning they pay fewer prescription charges. The government has asked NHS England to review current practice and the barriers to implementing NICE guidance. To further improve access to HRT, the government will also look at the possibility of combining 2 hormone treatments into one prescription, so women only pay a single charge. It says this change would benefit around 10% of women accessing HRT".

Patients in particular were said to be delighted at the outcome - clearly the decision is going to save them money - and this is usually a good reason for delight! But should it be? The history of HRT is closely linked to breast and cervical cancer.

• In the early 2000's, research began to demonstrate the strong link between HRT and cancer, to the extent that the research was stopped because it was considered unsafe, and unethical to continue.

       "....several trials produced results that were so bad they had to be discontinued.  In 2002, trials conducted by the Women’s Health Initiative in the USA, described as 'the largest and best designed federal studies of HRT'  was halted because women taking the hormones had a significantly increased risk of breast  and cervical cancer, heart attacks, stroke and blood clots. More trials were terminated in 2007, when a study of 5,692 women taking HRT raised similar concerns but added 'more definition to the health risks' (WDDTY 9 August 2007, source: British Medical Journal, 2007; 335: 239-44).

• So from 2007, some 5 years too late, HRT was virtually suspended for several years.
• Then, in 2015, like magic, HRT was rejuvenated. The research was discounted, so doctors could began prescribing it again, and so women began taking it again - in large numbers. HRT might cause breast cancer, heart problems and dementia, but (what the hell) women should take it anyway!
• But then, in 2016, just one year later, there was a warning. HRT could cause breast cancer! As I said at the time, it was 'old news' presented as 'new news'. But nothing was done, no action was taken to protect women.
  
• Now, a further 5 years on, we are being asked to rejoice - because these dangerous drugs are to be made available to women far cheaper than they were before.

What this demonstrates, of course, is that medical science has a short memory, even about its own research, and further, that this amnesia places patients at risk of dangerous and harmful drugs. It tells us that the conventional medical establishment is prepared to give patients pharmaceutical drugs, regardless of the harm they are known to cause!

So what does conventional medicine say about the causes of breast cancer? This is just one of the serious adverse reactions to HRT, but this is what the UK's NHS state

        "The causes of breast cancer are not fully understood, making it difficult to say why one woman may develop breast cancer and another may not."

If you persevere, and continue down the page, after causes such as 'age', 'family history', 'previous breast cancer and lumps', 'dense breast tissue' (all of which the patient, nor medicine can do anything about), you get to hormone replacement, and a recognition that "HRT is associated with an increased risk of developing breast cancer". Then it suggests that

        "There is no increased risk of breast cancer if you take HRT for less than 1 year. But if you take HRT for longer than 1 year, you have a higher risk of breast cancer than women who never use HRT."

Yet surely this is what the government has now negotiated for women, cheaper repeat prescriptions for a drug that should not be used for more than one year! What kind of medicine is this? It is more than amnesia. It provides patients with price incentives to take a dangerous drug for longer, against it's own current advice!

The NHS goes on to accept that "the increased risk of breast cancer falls after you stop taking HRT, but some increased risk remains for more than 10 years compared to women who have never used HRT".

The advice for women should surely be not to take HRT. But as pharmaceutical medicine has nothing else, certainly nothing safer to offer, it is prepared to prescribe a drug that has been proven to be lethal for women for many decades - since the 1940's.

And this is done by a medical system whose first principle is supposed to be "First, do no harm".

Yet there is an alternative, a safer medicine available. It is homeopathy. Homeopathy can deal with the menopause, and do so without causing breast and cervical cancer, heart problems, and dementia.

Why Homeopathy? for the Menopause.

Postscript: July 2022

HRT and the Menopause
So HRT was safe until the early 2000's: then it was so unsafe that research was stopped because these drugs were too dangerous; then new research in 2015 (financed by the pharmaceutical industry) 'proved' it was safe...... AND NOW "new evidence" is being considered that NICE guidelines might have to be renewed - because the drug is causing breast cancer.
    * When will conventional medicine learn?
    * When will patients learn that Con Med is not to be trusted?
https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/clinical-areas/womens-health/nice-to-review-menopause-guidance-over-evidence-of-hrt-cancer-risk/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pulse%20daily
 

HRT treatment causes cancer. Old news, but new news!

Listening to the mainstream media reporting on health issues sometimes feels like living in a parallel universe! I awoke this morning (23 August 2016) to BBC News telling me that Hormone Therapy Treatment (HRT) causes cancer. I check the calendar, and it was, indeed, 2016! I thought perhaps I had travelled back on a time warp to the early 2000's.

The pharmaceutical companies have developed several strategies for dealing with failed drugs, when their drugs are discovered to be harmful, when after decades drugs are eventually found to be causing significant harm to patients.

• The new evidence about harm is ignored. This is sometimes not possible, but usually, with the connivance of the conventional medical establishment, the negligence of drug regulation, and a mainstream media who are just not interested in protecting us from medical harm, it can be, and often had been done.
• The drug is quickly and unobtrusively withdrawn, in the hope that no-one notices. This has advantage of avoiding bad publicity for the drug company, but the disadvantage that pharmaceutical profits are reduced. But at least, rather belatedly, patients are protected from a harmful drug.
• Alternatively, the drug companies purchase new 'scientific' research which discovers what they want it to discover - that the drugs are not really as dangerous as the negative research had suggested, and that patients can continue taking the drug. This helps to maintain profits, but harms another generation of patients.
• The drug regulatory system, controlled and dominated as they are by Big Pharma, utilise the arguments (i) that any drug that does good has to do harm, and (ii) that the advantages of the drug outweigh its disadvantages. This is done by exaggerating the benefits of the drug, and discounting its dangers.
• The conventional medical establishment, including our doctors, go along with all this because they have nothing better, and nothing safer to offer women with menopausal problems.

The history of hormone replacement therapy has gone through all these stages, and as a result, doctors are still prescribing to women a treatment that is quite obviously too dangerous.

HRT has been around for a long time, Premarin was first introduced in 1942, over 70 years ago. Yet conventional medicine still cannot decide if it is dangerous, or not! The decision should, and could have been made in 2002.

         "Eventually, several trials produced results that were so bad they had to be discontinued.  In 2002, trials conducted by the Women’s Health Initiative in the USA, described as 'the largest and best designed federal studies of HRT'  was halted because women taking the hormones had a significantly increased risk of breast  and cervical cancer, heart attacks, stroke and blood clots. More trials were terminated in 2007, when a study of 5,692 women taking HRT raised similar concerns but added 'more definition to the health risks' (WDDTY 9 August 2007, source: British Medical Journal, 2007; 335: 239-44).

Note that the scientific evidence against HRT was so bad the studies had to be stopped before they had been concluded! 

So during the 2000's, prescriptions for HRT treatment for the menopause were drastically reduced. The result was that breast cancer rates were significantly reduced. One result of this was that in the USA breast cancer rates fell by 12% in 2003 among women aged between 50 and 69, the most likely to be taking HRT! Conventional medicine took full responsibility for this amazing reduction in breast cancer rates. Breast cancer treatment was successful! In fact, the only thing that happened was that they had virtually stopped a dangerous treatment that had been causing breast cancer! Such is the amazing publicity of the pharmaceutical industry!

So what does the pharmaceutical industry do when a major drug, one of their most profitable, takes such a fall? They resurrect it, of course! Suddenly, an "influential study" led UK regulators to relax their opposition to HRT. It was written by a researcher, Dr Lila Nachtigall, who had been recruited by a major HRT manufacturer! 

          "Her research helped influence the UK’s NICE (National Institute for Healthcare and Excellence) decision to relax their stand on HRT and to put the therapy back on the table as an option for menopausal women. But Dr Nachtigall didn’t reveal that she had been recruited by HRT manufacturer Wyeth in 1999 to put her name to an article that extolled the benefits of the therapy.  Her involvement was reviewed by a US Congress hearing in 2008.

Other studies also appeared, undermining the 2002 research. A review undertaken by Imperial College, and a 10-year study by New York University, found no evidence of a link. And when the evidence is conflicting, the benefit of any doubt is given to the pharmaceutical industry. The drug is allowed. It might cause harm to patients, but the proof is not sufficiently conclusive!

I wrote about this in more detail in my blog "Menopause Issues and NICE guidelines. HRT might cause, heart problems and dementia, but what the hell, women should take it anyway!"

So HRT was back! Women could be prescribed a drug in 2012 that had been virtually (but not quite) eliminated 10 years before.

And now, the new-old evidence re-emerges again! BBC News were referring to articles that have appeared in several British newspapers, including several that are usually slavishly attacked to pharmaceutical publicity. The headline is simple"

• Hormone replacement therapy can triple the risk of breast cancer.
• This was discovered by the biggest ever study.
• And the headlines state that this follows "more than a decade of controversy".

Remember that it was last year, 2015, that NICE, the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence, decided to change its guidance, and to positively encourage doctors to prescribe HRT, claiming that "too many menopausal women had been left suffering in silence". NICE is a government body that should recommend the best treatment for patients. In this case it would appear that rather allowing women to suffer in silence (that is, conventional medicine has no other treatment) their preference was for women to be given a treatment known to cause breast and cervical cancer, heart disease, and dementia!

Remember, HRT is used to treat uncomfortable symptoms of the menopause, such as hot flushes, migraines, disrupted sleep, mood changes and depression; yes, uncomfortable, but not anything that is fatal!

The newspaper articles talked about the 'reluctance' of doctors to prescribed HRT (although many did continue to prescribe it), and they all tdescribed the new-old "study of 100,000 women over 40 years found those who took the combined oestrogen and progestogen pill for around five years were 2.7 times more likely to develop cancer compared to women who took nothing, or only the oestrogen pill."

This risk rose to 3.3 times for women who have taken HRT for over 15 years, and the study also found that 14 in 1000 women in their 50's "were expected to develop cancer" but that this rose to 34 in 1000 for women taking this HRT drug.

The lead researcher, Professor Anthony Swerdlow, of the Institute of Cancer Research, is then quoted as say that "some previous studies ... underestimated the risk of breast cancer". This seems to suggest that there has been doubt about the cancer causing outcomes of HRT. 

This is just not so. As the Telegraph reminds us, the 2002 study published by the British Millennium Women Study clearly and unequivocally found that HRT caused cancer, and that this significantly changed prescribing recommendations.

Did NICE forget this last year? Did it need reminding again? Or has NICE become the creature of the pharmaceutical industry, just as the drug regulator, the MHRA did many decades ago? Swerdlow again sounds optimistic.

          “Our findings provide further information to allow women to make informed decisions about the potential risks and benefits of HRT use.”

Unfortunately it is unlikely to do any such thing. It is perhaps more likely that this study will be forgotten, just as the 2002 study appears to have been forgotten. And will doctors really tell women, honestly, openly, and straightforwardly about the dangers of HRT, and that they have nothing safer to prescribe?

Indeed it is already happening! The Telegraph quotes NICE saying that the new study "should not change how doctors prescribed HRT.

          “The guideline makes clear that menopausal women should be informed that the impact of HRT on the risk of breast cancer varies with the type of HRT used.

NICE went on to say that its guidance to women was clear, to talk about the menopause with your clinician if you need advice on your symptoms. This seems to imply that doctors have not talked to the women they have put on HRT, that the possible side effects, breast cancer, cervical cancer, heart disease, dementia, have not been discussed with them.

The Telegraph also quote Baroness Delyth Morgan, chief executive at Breast Cancer Now, who seems equally laid-back, even unconcerned about the new study, and indeed the 2002 study 

          “Whether to use HRT is an entirely personal choice, which is why it’s so important that women fully understand the risks and benefits and discuss them with their GP. We hope these findings will help anyone considering the treatment to make an even more informed decision."

The Telegraph also quotes 'Experts' who said that for many women the risks (of cancer, et al) would be outweighed by the daily benefits to quality of life.

And yet more! Dr Heather Currie, of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), and the British Menopause Society, is quoted as saying, 

          "HRT is an effective treatment for menopausal symptoms, particularly with the management of hot flushes. Women need clear, evidence-based information to break through the conflicts of opinion and confusion about the menopause. For many women, any change in breast cancer risk is outweighed by the benefit on their quality of life, bearing in mind that there are many other factors that increase the risk of breast cancer, for example lifestyle factors."

So, it is all okay, then, within the conventional medical establishment. The new-old research, published in the British Journal of Cancer, was an unnecessary scare. Everything should continue as before. A balm has been thrown over any doubts or concerns about the drug. As Currie says, "women need clear, evidence-based information" ..... But clearly not this negative evidence! Somehow tnegative evidence does not carry the same weight as studies which show that HRT is not a danger to women's health!

As I wrote, in my previous blog "Cholesterol, Medical Science, RCT's and Statin Drugs", medical science, and the 'Randomised Controlled Testing' used to ensure patients are given safe drugs and vaccines, are a completely useless tool in keeping us safe. Positive evidence, from studies funded by pharmaceutical companies, are acted upon. Negative evidence is sidetracked or ignored. So this situation is yet more evidence that 'medical science' does not protect patients from harm, but instead favours the commercial interests of the pharmaceutical companies.

So what should women do, especially if they suffer from menopausal symptoms. The first thing is to look for a safer, more effective, less harmful medical therapy, such as homeopathy. Homeopathy can be extremely successful with menopausal problems, and I have compared conventional and homeopathic treatment in my 'Why Homeopathy?' website. Perhaps this should be your first port of call!

Menopause Issues and NICE guidelines? HRT might cause cancer, heart problems and dementia, but what the hell, women should take it anyway!

"Women whose lives are being affected by the symptoms of menopause should not feel they have to suffer in silence". This is the guidance of NICE, the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence.

Instead, their guidance to doctors recommends hormone replacement therapy (HRT), which the say is "effective for treating several menopausal symptoms". It recommends that doctors offer HRT for hot flushes and night sweats "after discussing the risks and benefits".

HRT has been around for many years. Premarin was first introduced in 1942. So why has this NICE advice only been brought out today (12th November 2015)? NICE explains.

          "Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is a treatment option for menopausal symptoms, yet over the last decade confusion over its safety has led to a decline in its use and variation in practice" (my emphasis).

So, there has been 'confusion' for the last decade over its safety. What is this confusion? NICE does not bother to tell us. Indeed, in the whole of their guidance article, the word 'CANCER' is mentioned just once, and that tucked away at the bottom of the article! Perhaps they hope that we have forgotten about HRT's safety issues. So if there are women who have forgotten, and might be considering taking HRT, this is something I wrote several years ago.

          "Eventually, several trials produced results that were so bad they had to be discontinued.  In 2002, trials conducted by the Women’s Health Initiative in the USA, described as 'the largest and best designed federal studies of HRT'  was halted because women taking the hormones had a significantly increased risk of breast  and cervical cancer, heart attacks, stroke and blood clots. More trials were terminated in 2007, when a study of 5,692 women taking HRT raised similar concerns but added 'more definition to the health risks' (WDDTY 9 August 2007, source: British Medical Journal, 2007; 335: 239-44).

Note that the scientific studies were stopped before they had been concluded! The results were so bad, HRT was found to be so dangerous, researchers refused to continue with the trials. It should also be noted that other trials had found that HRT caused many other serious illnesses and diseases too, including a significantly increased the risk of dementia.

So during the 2000's, prescriptions for HRT treatment for the menopause were drastically reduced. The result was that breast cancer rates were significantly reduced. One result was that in the USA breast cancer rates fell by 12% in 2003 among women aged between 50 and 69, the most likely to be taking HRT.

Despite this, the drugs were never banned, despite the high probability of significant harm to the women who continued to take them. And now, NICE is trying to rehabilitate them!

It would appear that the new NICE guidelines have been written in the belief that it is possible to ignore this evidence, and encourage women passing through the menopause to take the drug. They actually call the new guidelines 'the Gold Standard'!

• HRT will still cause cancer, and all the other diseases it has been associated with.
• No-one taking HRT will be guaranteed that they won't suffer from one or more of these serious diseases.
• But despite this doctors are now expected to encourage women to take HRT.

One problem is that the pharmaceutical industry has never found an alternative to HRT. However much a woman is suffering from menopausal symptoms, the only treatment the conventional medical system has to offer her is this failed and dangerous drug.

Nor does NICE mention that women do have alternatives, outside conventional medicine, dominated as it is by harmful and dangerous drugs like HRT. For  many years, an increasing number of women are now looking towards Homeopathy as a safer, and more effective treatment for menopausal problems. For a comparison of conventional and homeopathic treatment of menopausal issues, go to this website.

So why does NICE not mention such alternatives to drug-based treatment? Why does their guidance fail to point menopausal women to non-conventional treatments? Would this not extent informed patient choice?

NICE are part of the conventional medical establishment. It is an organisation dominated by people with close links to the pharmaceutical companies. It seems to be intent on encouraging doctors and patients to take more and more drugs. Yesterday, for instance, I wrote a blog about their promotion of Statin drugs. So whilst NICE recognises drug and vaccine dangers it fails to highlight them, and discounts them.

HRT might cause cancer, heart problems, and dementia. But what the hell! Drugs are profitable. They are indeed, the 'gold standard' for the pharmaceutical industry. Homeopathy is not profitable, and using it will reduce those taking drugs. 

And women's health, it would appear, is not really that important at all to the conventional medical establishment!

POSTSCRIPT
It has now emerged (WDDTY 17th November 2015) that it was an influential study by a researcher who had been recruited by a major HRT manufacturer who persuaded NICE to relax their guidelines on using the drug for women. 

          "Her research helped influence the UK’s NICE (National Institute for Healthcare and Excellence) decision to relax their stand on HRT and to put the therapy back on the table as an option for menopausal women. But Dr Nachtigall didn’t reveal that she had been recruited by HRT manufacturer Wyeth in 1999 to put her name to an article that extolled the benefits of the therapy.  Her involvement was reviewed by a US Congress hearing in 2008.

So this is yet more evidence that 'medical science' does not protect patients, but favours pharmaceutical companies.


Postscript
7th March 2019
The "its dangerous, but keep taking it" message about pharmaceutical drugs continues. BBC News is always intent on selling pharmaceutical drugs of all descriptions on behalf of the drug companies.

However, in this article, "HRT. Women told don't be alarmed by Alzheimer's study" it manages to parrot, unquestioningly, the publicity of the conventional medical establishment. It mentions research by the BMJ on data taken from 170,000 women in Finland, over 14 years, that found a 9% to 17% increased risk for Alzheimer's, particularly in women taking HRT for more than 10 years.

So there is further evidence that HRT is a dangerous drug!

But the BBC is willing to dismiss it, reporting that "... HRT is an effective and safe treatment for most women with menopause symptoms and the risk is 'extremely low'."

And the BBC does not feel the need to mention that HRT causes not only dementia, but also cancer and heart problems, as outlined in this blog.

Does the BBC know that HRT causes breast cancer? They have known at least since 2003, as this article proves. Perhaps it's just a case of selective amnesia then!

 

Postscript

July 2022

So HRT was safe until the early 2000's: then it was so unsafe that research was stopped because these drugs were too dangerous; then new research in 2015 (financed by the pharmaceutical industry) 'proved' it was safe...... AND NOW "new evidence" is being considered that NICE guidelines might have to be renewed - because the drug is causing breast cancer.

• When will conventional medicine learn?
• When will patients learn that conventional medicine is not to be trusted?
  

Postscript

February 2025

And so the saga continues! (This information taken from WDDTY). 

Researchers from Uppsala University in Sweden compared the health of 77,512 postmenopausal women taking HRT against 842,102 who weren’t on the drug.  Those given HRT were on one of the seven types of the drug: oral combined continuous, oral combined sequential, oral unopposed oestrogen, oral oestrogen with local progestin, tibolone, transdermal combined, or transdermal unopposed oestrogen. Most of the seven different forms of HRT increased the risk of cardiovascular disease, but one drug, tibolone, has been singled out as the most dangerous.

People taking sequential pill therapy double their risk of thromboembolism, or blood clot, while the risk rises by 57% for those on oestrogen-only pills and by 46% for those on transdermal combined drugs, which include gels, sprays and patches.

Menopause. Why Homeopathy is best!

This blog was first published on the "Why Homeopathy?" website

The menopause represents the gradual process of the end of menstruation for women. It is a natural life-transition although in conventional medicine it is often seen as a ‘disease’ requiring medication. The menopause can produce irregular, heavy or painful periods, and problems such as hot flushes, night sweats, insomnia, mood swings, concentration and memory problems, vaginal dryness, fatigue, depression, headaches, heart palpitations, loss of libido, weight gain, and much else.

CONVENTIONAL MEDICAL TREATMENT

Most women will know that up to about 2007  ‘the Menopause’ was routinely treated by HRT (Hormone Replacement) drugs. These were said to be ‘entirely safe’ - long after many people realised they were linked with caused breast and cervical cancer, heart attacks, strokes and blood clots, and were also to an increased risk of dementia. In 2002, the Women’s Health Initiative, described as “the largest and best designed federal studies of HRT”, began, but were stopped in 2007 when women taking HRT had significantly increased risk of dying from these drug-induced diseases. 

For more information on the history of HRT click on this link.

The NHS Choices website now states that the main treatment for the Menopause, if the symptoms are severe, is - HRT! So the main treatment used in conventional medicine for Menopausal complaints is a drug that has been found to be deadly!

NHS Choices also describe some other treatments, including:

• Tibolone - a synthetic steroid hormone drug that “acts in the same way” as HRT. It should be noted that this is a treatment that  the FDA (the USA drug regulator) has apparently refused to approve. However, despite this, in the UK it only “carries some small risks, including a small increased risk of breast cancer, cancer of the womb, and stroke”. Patients should ask why a treatment in one country is more dangerous than the same treatment in another!

• Clonidine - this drug was apparently designed to treat high blood pressure “but has been found to reduce hot flushes and night sweats in some menopausal women”. However, as NHS Choices continues:

    “Clonidine can cause unpleasant side effects including dry mouth, drowsiness, depression, constipation and fluid retention”.

It is uncertain why the side-effects of Clonidine are described as ‘unpleasant’ whilst those for Tibolone are considered to be just ‘small risks’.

• Anti-depressants - presumably these drugs are used to treat the mental and emotional outcomes of a bad menopausal experience than to treat the condition itself.
• (For an outline of the adverse reactions of Antidepressant drugs, go to this link).

The Homeopathic Treatment of Menopause

Please click here to see the evidence basis for Homeopathy

Whilst conventional medicine over the years has been dominated by men, Homeopathy has always been heavily influenced by women, and perhaps largely as a result has focused quite significantly on ‘women’s ailments’ such as the Menopause. These homeopathic remedy descriptions, for instance, have come from the website “Homeopathy for Women”, one that women should all know about. 

However, whilst these brief descriptions give only a general, outline picture of each remedy, and it is important to state that finding the correct homeopathic remedy, that will work effectively with such a variable condition, is a highly complex professional task, and should be done only by a qualified, registered Homeopath.

Belladonna

This remedy can be useful if flushes of heat during menopause are very sudden and intense. Pulsation or throbbing may be felt in the head, or any part of the body. A heavy flow of blood that feels very hot appears with some periods. Although the woman  may be fairly stable emotionally, short bursts of anger can occur during headaches or in stressful situations. Migraines, blood pressure fluctuations, and a craving for lemons or lemonade are often seen when this remedy is needed.

Calc Carb

This remedy may be helpful to a woman with heavy flooding, night sweats and flushing (despite a general chilliness), as well as weight gain during menopause. People who need this remedy are usually responsible and hard-working, yet somewhat slow or plodding and can be easily fatigued. Anxiety may be strong, and overwork or stress may lead to temporary breakdown. Stiff joints or cramps in the legs and feet, and cravings for eggs and sweets are other indications.

Glonoinum

Women with intense hot flashes and flushing during menopause, along with feelings of pulsation or pounding in the head, may find relief with this remedy. Menstrual flow may start then stop too early, and be followed by a palpitation, surging sensations, or headaches, accompanied by irritability and muddled thinking. Problems can be aggravated if the woman gets too warm or stays in the sun too long, and are often worse from lying down.

Graphites

A woman who is chilly, pale, and sluggish - with trouble concentrating, and a tendency toward weight gain during or after menopause - is likely to respond to this remedy. Hot flushing and sweats at night are often seen. A person who needs this remedy may also have a tendency toward skin problems with oozing cracked eruptions, and be very slow to become alert when waking in the morning.

Ignatia

This remedy is often helpful for emotional ups and downs occurring during menopause. The woman will be very sensitive,but may try to hid her feelings - seeming guarded and defensive, moody, or hysterical. Headaches, muscle spasms, and menstrual cramps can occur, along with irregular periods. A heavy feeling in the chest, a tendency to sigh and yawn, and sudden outbursts of tears or laughter are strong indications. 

Lachesis

Intense hot flushes with red or purplish flushing, palpitations, and feelings of pressure, congestion, and constriction may indicate a need for this remedy. Tight clothing around the neck and waist may be impossible to tolerate. A woman needing this remedy is often very talkative, with strong emotions (often including jealousy and suspicion) - a ‘pressure cooker’ needing an outlet both physically and emotionally.

Lilium Tig

A woman likely to respond to this remedy feels hurried, anxious, and very emotional - with a tendency to fly into rages and make other people ‘walk on eggs’. She often has a sensation of tightness in her chest, and a feeling as if her pelvic organs are pressing out, which can make her feel a need to sit a log or cross her legs.

Nat Mur

A woman who needs this remedy may seem reserved but has strong emotions that she keeps inside. She often feels deep grief and may dwell on the loss of happy times from the past, or brood about hurts and disappointments. During menopause she can have irregular periods accompanied by backaches or migraines. A person who needs this remedy usually craves salt, and feels worse from being in the sun.

Pulsatilla

A person who needs this remedy is usually soft and emotional, with changeable moods and a tendency toward tears. Women are very attached to their families and find it hard to bear the thought of the children growing up and leaving home. They usually feel deeply insecure about getting older. A fondness for desserts and butter can often lead to weight problems. Changeable moods, irregular periods, queasy feelings, alternating heat and chills, and lack of thirst are common. Aggravation from stuffy rooms and improvement in open air may confirm the choice of this remedy.

Sepia

This remedy can be helpful if a woman’s periods are sometimes late and scanty, but heavy and flooding at other times. Her pelvic organs can feel weak and sagging, and she may have a craving for vinegar or sour foods. Women who need this remedy usually feel dragged-out and weary, with an irritable detachment regarding family members, and a loss of interest in daily tasks. Exercise, especially dancing, may brighten up the woman’s mood and improve her energy.

Staphysagria

A person who needs this remedy usually seems mild-manner, shy, and accommodating, but has many suppressed emotions. Women around the time of menopause may become depressed, or have outbursts of unaccustomed rage (even throwing or breaking things). Many people needing this remedy have deferred to a spouse for many years, or have experienced abuse in childhood.

Sulphur

This remedy is often helpful for hot flashes and flushing during menopause, when the woman wakes in the early morning hours and throws the covers off. She may be very anxious, weep a lot, and worry excessively about her health. A person needing this remedy often in mentally active (or even eccentric), inclined toward messy habits, and usually feels worse from warmth.

RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIALS (RCT’s)

RCTs are the third, and decidedly the least important type of evidence supporting Homeopathy as a medical therapy.

There have been a number of RCT tests done on homeopathy and the main symptoms of the menopause.

1. Efficacy of a non-hormonal treatment, BRN-01, on menopausal hot flashes.

This trial used a single homeopathic remedy (not the way homeopathy normally functions)

http://link.springer.com/article/10.2165/11640240-000000000-00000

The finding of the trial were as follows:

“(The remedy) seemed to have a significant effect on the HFS, compared with placebo. According to the results of this clinical trial (the remedy) may be considered a new therapeutic option with a safe profile for hot flashes in menopausal women who do not want or are not able to take hormone replacement therapy or other recognized treatments for this indication”.

This trial is considered here in more readable detail!

http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2012-09-16/homeopathy-works-for-menopausal-hot-flashes-gold-standard-study/

1. Management of distress during climacteric years by homeopathic therapy

This trial, found at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22087613,  came to this conclusion:

“Homeopathic therapy was found to be useful in relieving menopausal distressing symptoms such as hot flashes, night sweats, anxiety, palpitation, depression, insomnia, and so on. Influence on serum levels of FSH, high-density lipoprotein, and low-density lipoprotein was not significant but serum levels of cholesterol, triglycerides, and very-low-density lipoprotein decreased significantly. Effect size of the study was found to be large. The medicines found to be most frequently indicated and useful were Sepia, Lachesis, Calcarea carb., Lycopodium, and Sulphur”.

3. Treating hot flushes in menopausal women with homeopathic treatment - results of an observational study.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18194760

The findings of this study were as follows:

“The results of this observational study suggest that homeopathic treatment for hot flushes in menopausal women is effective. Further studies including randomized controlled trials should be conducted”.

This article was first published on the "Why Homeopathy?" website.

The Menopause and Homeopathy

The Menopause is not a disease, it is a natural life-transition, but it is a condition that many women suffer from quite seriously. It can produce irregular, heavy or painful periods, and problems such as host flushes, night sweats, insomnia, mood swings, concentration and memory problems, vaginal dryness, fatigue, depression, headaches, heart palpitations, loss of libido, weight gain - and much else.

Conventional medical treatment had, prior to 2007, been with Hormone Replacement Therapy drugs (HRT). Doctors had always told women how safe and effective this treatment was, but in 2002, the Women's Health Initiative began 'the largest and best designed federal studies of HRT'. These were stopped in 2007 when it was discovered that HRT significantly increased the risk of dying from cervical cancer, breast cancer, heart attacks, strokes, and blood clots. There were also increase risk of dementia.


Were these findings a devastating or terminal blow for HRT? It would appear not! The NHS Choices website, even now, states that the main treatment for the Menopause "if the symptoms are severe" is non-other than HRT!

So the main treatment used for Menopausal symptoms within the NHS is a drug that has been found to have deadly consequences!

In fairness, NHS Choices also describes some other treatments, but these raise other serious issues for the health of women. One is the drug Tibolone - described as a synthetic steroid hormone drug that “acts in the same way” as HRT - which given HRT's record is not really re-assuring! 

However, it should be noted with some trepidation that Tibolone is a treatment that the FDA (the USA drug regulator) has refused to approve. 

However, in the UK (according to NHS Choices) it is a safe treatment, and “carries some small risks, including a small increased risk of breast cancer, cancer of the womb, and stroke”. Is that okay then? Does that re-assure you that this drug is safe? Why is it that a drug used in one country can be considered dangerous whilst the same drug in another country is safe, and only carries 'small risks'?

Clonidine is another drug used for the menopause, although apparently it was originally designed to treat high blood pressure “but has been found to reduce hot flushes and night sweats in some menopausal women”. However, as NHS Choices continues:

    “Clonidine can cause unpleasant side effects including dry mouth, drowsiness, depression, constipation and fluid retention”.

I remain uncertain why the side-effects of Clonidine are described as ‘unpleasant’ whilst those for Tibolone are considered to be just ‘small risks’.

I discovered this when I was preparing an article on my website, "Why Homeopathy?". I started my research believing that the use of HRT had been practically terminated, and was surprised to find that it was still the main treatment in use for the menopause by the Conventional Medical Establishment.

So, how much safer, and more effective is homeopathic treatment? Well it could hardly be more dangerous - and, of course, like all homeopathic treatment, it is very safe. And homeopathy has a number of key remedies that are known to treat menopausal symptoms successfully, and have been doing so for over 200 years. 

What is more, these remedies relate to the woman's individual experience of the menopause. Homeopathy does not treat women, or the menopause, as a single condition, with a single 'off-the-shelf' remedy for all. Homeopaths are trained to discover the symptoms experienced by the individual, and then to find a remedy that best matches those symptoms.

So, if you want to discover more information about the homeopathic treatment of the Menopause, click here, and look at my 'Why Homeopathy?' article.

It has to be the better option!

Can homeopathy treat any illness?

Homeopaths are often asked this question, and the answer is usually 'Yes. If, together, we can find the right remedy for the patient'. See my e-book, "Why Homeopathy?"

The ability of homeopathy to treat any condition rests with the ability of the homeopath to find a substance (and make a remedy from it) that causes 'similar symptoms' to the illness. Homeopaths don't need a conventional diagnosis - just the symptoms of the illness or ailment. This makes homeopathy a remarkably flexible therapy.

I have gathered together here article about the homeopathic treatment of a multitude of illnesses, to indicate the diversity of the illnesses it can treat.

Labour and Childbirth. The top 14 remedies used in pregnancy and childbirth outlined.

Chicken Pox. Useful quick guide, referencing the main remedies used to treat the condition.

Crying Babies (a great article, with remedy pictures).

Alcoholism. This is a study into the treatment of alcoholism using homeopathy, and it shows that one remedy was particularly useful.

Hayfever and allergies.

The winter blues (SAD).

Psoriasis. A study looking at the value of homeopathic treatment.

Shingles.

Crohns Disease. Interesting case, and information about treating Crohns with homeopathy.

Diabetes Mellitus.

The Menopause.
The Menopause (2).

Warts and all!

And if you have multiple health problems. Look at this article, and see one man's experience; where conventional medicine did little, and homeopathy much!

And this is just a very small collection of articles on homeopathy, and what it can treat - there is much more!