Discussion:
Danish study says HRT is good for your heart
(too old to reply)
Chak
2012-10-10 02:05:20 UTC
Permalink
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-10/bmj-htf100812.php


(press release quoted in full)
HRT taken for 10 years significantly reduces risk of heart failure and
heart attack
Without any increased risk of cancer, deep vein thrombosis or stroke

HRT therapy has been subject to much discussion due to both positive
effects (reduced risk of cardiovascular disease) and negative effects
(increased risk of breast cancer). A paper published in the BMJ Group's
Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Healthcare back in January
cast doubt on the "unreliable" Million Women Study which associated HRT
with an increased risk of breast cancer.

Conflicting results have led clinicians to believe that time since
menopause until HRT is initiated can account for differences in
cardiovascular outcome. So authors from Denmark carried out a randomised
trial over 10 years with additional six years of follow-up to establish
whether HRT can reduce cardiovascular risk if it is started early after
menopause.

1006 women (504 in HRT group and 502 in non-HRT group) were included in
the study and all were white, healthy, recently menopausal and aged 45-
58 years old. Women who'd had a hysterectomy were only included if they
were aged 45-52. Exclusion criteria were if they had a history of bone
disease, uncontrolled chronic disease, previous or current cancer,
current or previous use of HRT within the past three months and alcohol
or drug addiction. All data on diagnoses or death were taken from the
Danish Civil Registration System and National Hospital Discharge
Register. The primary end-point was a combination of death and
hospitalisation for a heart attack or heart failure.

After 10 years of randomised treatment the women were encouraged to
discontinue the use of HRT due to the results from the Women's Health
Initiative and the Million Women Study. During this period, 26 women in
the non-HRT group died and 33 died or experienced a cardiovascular end-
point, compared to 15 deaths and 16 deaths or cardiovascular end-points
in the HRT group.

The women were followed for another six years. During this time, the
primary end-point was seen in 53 women in the non-HRT group (40 deaths,
eight heart failures and five heart attacks) and 33 in the HRT group (27
deaths, three heart failures and three heart attacks).

Causes of death were 23 cardiovascular deaths and 17 non-cardiovascular
deaths in the non-HRT group and six cardiovascular deaths and 21 non-
cardiovascular deaths in the HRT group.

The study also found that women who had undergone a hysterectomy and
younger women taking HRT had a significantly reduced risk of death or
breast cancer.

The authors conclude that women treated with long term HRT early after
menopause "had significantly reduced risk of mortality, heart failure,
or myocardial infarction [heart attack], without any apparent increase
of cancer, venous thromboembolisms [DVT] or stroke." However, they
stress that "due to the potential time lag longer time may be necessary
to take more definite conclusions."
(end of press release)

I don't really know what to say about this. Anybody?

Chak
--
I say, if your knees aren't green by the end of the day, you ought to
seriously re-evaluate your life.
--Calvin, Calvin and Hobbes
Keera Ann Fox
2012-10-11 15:57:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chak
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-10/bmj-htf100812.php
(press release quoted in full)
HRT taken for 10 years significantly reduces risk of heart failure and
heart attack
Without any increased risk of cancer, deep vein thrombosis or stroke
HRT therapy has been subject to much discussion due to both positive
effects (reduced risk of cardiovascular disease) and negative effects
(increased risk of breast cancer). A paper published in the BMJ Group's
Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Healthcare back in January
cast doubt on the "unreliable" Million Women Study which associated HRT
with an increased risk of breast cancer.
Conflicting results have led clinicians to believe that time since
menopause until HRT is initiated can account for differences in
cardiovascular outcome. So authors from Denmark carried out a randomised
trial over 10 years with additional six years of follow-up to establish
whether HRT can reduce cardiovascular risk if it is started early after
menopause.
1006 women (504 in HRT group and 502 in non-HRT group) were included in
the study and all were white, healthy, recently menopausal and aged 45-
58 years old. Women who'd had a hysterectomy were only included if they
were aged 45-52. Exclusion criteria were if they had a history of bone
disease, uncontrolled chronic disease, previous or current cancer,
current or previous use of HRT within the past three months and alcohol
or drug addiction. All data on diagnoses or death were taken from the
Danish Civil Registration System and National Hospital Discharge
Register. The primary end-point was a combination of death and
hospitalisation for a heart attack or heart failure.
After 10 years of randomised treatment the women were encouraged to
discontinue the use of HRT due to the results from the Women's Health
Initiative and the Million Women Study. During this period, 26 women in
the non-HRT group died and 33 died or experienced a cardiovascular end-
point, compared to 15 deaths and 16 deaths or cardiovascular end-points
in the HRT group.
The women were followed for another six years. During this time, the
primary end-point was seen in 53 women in the non-HRT group (40 deaths,
eight heart failures and five heart attacks) and 33 in the HRT group (27
deaths, three heart failures and three heart attacks).
Causes of death were 23 cardiovascular deaths and 17 non-cardiovascular
deaths in the non-HRT group and six cardiovascular deaths and 21 non-
cardiovascular deaths in the HRT group.
The study also found that women who had undergone a hysterectomy and
younger women taking HRT had a significantly reduced risk of death or
breast cancer.
The authors conclude that women treated with long term HRT early after
menopause "had significantly reduced risk of mortality, heart failure,
or myocardial infarction [heart attack], without any apparent increase
of cancer, venous thromboembolisms [DVT] or stroke." However, they
stress that "due to the potential time lag longer time may be necessary
to take more definite conclusions."
(end of press release)
I don't really know what to say about this. Anybody?
Chak
More info here: http://www.health24.com/news/Menopause/1-928,77139.asp

Money quotes: "The mean age of the Danish trial group was 50 compared to 64 for the WHI, and its members started HRT within a year of menopause, compared to 10 years."

And: "The two studies also used different drug types."

I.e. the two studies aren't the same two studies. That's why different results. So, we still don't have a conclusion.

BTW, everybody should see this Tom Naughton video about how studies are conducted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=y1RXvBveht0
--
Keera in Norway
http://kafox.blogspot.com/
Chak
2012-10-12 02:44:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keera Ann Fox
BTW, everybody should see this Tom Naughton video about how studies are conducted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=y1RXvBveht0
Have you heard about _Bad Pharma_, Ben Goldacre's new book? It will raise
your blood pressure, big time.

But it's okay, there's a drug for that. :-p

Chak
--
I say, if your knees aren't green by the end of the day, you ought to
seriously re-evaluate your life.
--Calvin, Calvin and Hobbes
Keera Ann Fox
2012-10-12 18:15:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chak
Post by Keera Ann Fox
BTW, everybody should see this Tom Naughton video about how studies
are conducted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=y1RXvBveht0
Have you heard about _Bad Pharma_, Ben Goldacre's new book? It will raise
your blood pressure, big time.
But it's okay, there's a drug for that. :-p
Chak
I like the design of the book cover! :-)

I already have an idea of how misguided (or mislead) modern Western medicine is through all my reading about the low-carb diet. In spite of study after study proving the diet fixes a lot of ills (and there is no study that proves grains must be eaten), there are still so many personal trainers, doctors and dieticians who insist otherwise.

I am told that it takes one generation to learn a new paradigm, and four to unlearn it. :-(
--
Keera in Norway
http://kafox.blogspot.com/
Chak
2012-10-13 00:37:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keera Ann Fox
Post by Chak
Post by Keera Ann Fox
BTW, everybody should see this Tom Naughton video about how studies
are conducted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=y1RXvBveht0
Have you heard about _Bad Pharma_, Ben Goldacre's new book? It will
rais
e
Post by Chak
your blood pressure, big time.
But it's okay, there's a drug for that. :-p
Chak
I like the design of the book cover! :-)
I already have an idea of how misguided (or mislead) modern Western
medicine is through all my reading about the low-carb diet. In spite
of study after study proving the diet fixes a lot of ills (and there
is no study that proves grains must be eaten), there are still so many
personal trainers, doctors and dieticians who insist otherwise.
I am told that it takes one generation to learn a new paradigm, and four to unlearn it. :-(
I feel that way about fat. When I was young everybody said, Oh! Dont'
eat fat! Now I realize that that talk was part of what turned us into
an obese nation. I still have that knee-jerk reaction to fat, even
though I've low carbed for about ten years now.

Chak
--
I say, if your knees aren't green by the end of the day, you ought to
seriously re-evaluate your life.
--Calvin, Calvin and Hobbes
Keera Ann Fox
2012-10-13 11:00:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chak
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-10/bmj-htf100812.php
(press release quoted in full)
HRT taken for 10 years significantly reduces risk of heart failure and
heart attack
Without any increased risk of cancer, deep vein thrombosis or stroke
HRT therapy has been subject to much discussion due to both positive
effects (reduced risk of cardiovascular disease) and negative effects
(increased risk of breast cancer). A paper published in the BMJ Group's
Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Healthcare back in January
cast doubt on the "unreliable" Million Women Study which associated HRT
with an increased risk of breast cancer.
Conflicting results have led clinicians to believe that time since
menopause until HRT is initiated can account for differences in
cardiovascular outcome. So authors from Denmark carried out a randomised
trial over 10 years with additional six years of follow-up to establish
whether HRT can reduce cardiovascular risk if it is started early after
menopause.
1006 women (504 in HRT group and 502 in non-HRT group) were included in
the study and all were white, healthy, recently menopausal and aged 45-
58 years old. Women who'd had a hysterectomy were only included if they
were aged 45-52. Exclusion criteria were if they had a history of bone
disease, uncontrolled chronic disease, previous or current cancer,
current or previous use of HRT within the past three months and alcohol
or drug addiction. All data on diagnoses or death were taken from the
Danish Civil Registration System and National Hospital Discharge
Register. The primary end-point was a combination of death and
hospitalisation for a heart attack or heart failure.
After 10 years of randomised treatment the women were encouraged to
discontinue the use of HRT due to the results from the Women's Health
Initiative and the Million Women Study. During this period, 26 women in
the non-HRT group died and 33 died or experienced a cardiovascular end-
point, compared to 15 deaths and 16 deaths or cardiovascular end-points
in the HRT group.
The women were followed for another six years. During this time, the
primary end-point was seen in 53 women in the non-HRT group (40 deaths,
eight heart failures and five heart attacks) and 33 in the HRT group (27
deaths, three heart failures and three heart attacks).
Causes of death were 23 cardiovascular deaths and 17 non-cardiovascular
deaths in the non-HRT group and six cardiovascular deaths and 21 non-
cardiovascular deaths in the HRT group.
The study also found that women who had undergone a hysterectomy and
younger women taking HRT had a significantly reduced risk of death or
breast cancer.
The authors conclude that women treated with long term HRT early after
menopause "had significantly reduced risk of mortality, heart failure,
or myocardial infarction [heart attack], without any apparent increase
of cancer, venous thromboembolisms [DVT] or stroke." However, they
stress that "due to the potential time lag longer time may be necessary
to take more definite conclusions."
(end of press release)
I don't really know what to say about this. Anybody?
Chak
As a former vegetarian who still has a bag of whole brown rice in her cupboard, I do sometimes hope that everything will change around - again - but my waistline, IBS and peri all say I'm better off without. And I feel so sorry for others struggling with similar issues still getting the bad advice I used to follow.
--
Keera in Norway
http://kafox.blogspot.com/
Chak
2012-10-14 20:27:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keera Ann Fox
As a former vegetarian who still has a bag of whole brown rice in her
cupboard, I do sometimes hope that everything will change around -
again - but my waistline, IBS and peri all say I'm better off without.
And I feel so sorry for others struggling with similar issues still
getting the bad advice I used to follow.
Does basmati rice work better for you? On some of the low-carb sites they
used to say it wasn't as bad as regular rice, either white or brown.

Chak
--
I say, if your knees aren't green by the end of the day, you ought to
seriously re-evaluate your life.
--Calvin, Calvin and Hobbes
Susan
2012-10-14 20:42:03 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Chak
Does basmati rice work better for you? On some of the low-carb sites they
used to say it wasn't as bad as regular rice, either white or brown.
The charming person who used to say that always neglected to mention
that he never tested his bg after eating stuff he suggested. For
financial reasons, I suspect, it was a step he skipped.

IME, rice is rice is rice and it's all bad. Only thing worse is wheat
and white potatoes, and all are pretty much the same as straight table
sugar once your metabolism is off.

Susan
j***@upcmail.nl
2012-10-14 23:15:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Susan
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Chak
Does basmati rice work better for you? On some of the low-carb sites they
used to say it wasn't as bad as regular rice, either white or brown.
The charming person who used to say that always neglected to mention
that he never tested his bg after eating stuff he suggested. For
financial reasons, I suspect, it was a step he skipped.
IME, rice is rice is rice and it's all bad. Only thing worse is wheat
and white potatoes, and all are pretty much the same as straight table
sugar once your metabolism is off.
I don't think thet's true. potatoes have more in them than sugar. It
has (I think it's called) potasium and a bit iroin in it.

R

Ratatosk, Jola
Susan
2012-10-14 23:57:08 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by j***@upcmail.nl
I don't think thet's true. potatoes have more in them than sugar. It
has (I think it's called) potasium and a bit iroin in it.
I was referring to glycemic response and the damage it causes.

You'd be much better off getting potassium and iron from meat, seafood
and non starchy veggies.

If you compare the per calorie nutrient density of starches to veggies,
it's a no brainer. Starches are comparatively devoid of value.

Susan
Keera Ann Fox
2012-10-15 09:58:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chak
Post by Keera Ann Fox
As a former vegetarian who still has a bag of whole brown rice in her
cupboard, I do sometimes hope that everything will change around -
again - but my waistline, IBS and peri all say I'm better off without.
And I feel so sorry for others struggling with similar issues still
getting the bad advice I used to follow.
Does basmati rice work better for you? On some of the low-carb sites they
used to say it wasn't as bad as regular rice, either white or brown.
Chak
All grains are out in my case. Turns out fiber is NOT the cure for IBS but actually a cause. The moment I eat wheat, my stomach rumbles. Rice behaves well but makes me constipated (!).
--
Keera in Norway
http://kafox.blogspot.com/
Loading...