Tag Archive for: Menopause Management

Don’t Let Your Housekeeper Repair Your House

Have you ever thought of your medical doctor as a repairman? That’s really what he or she is, you know.

I mean, think about it: You go to your doctor when you’re in need of repair. You’re sick or damaged in some way. Your doctor is not in the business of keeping you well. Those professionals belong to an entirely different industry: the wellness industry. I guess you could say they’re “housekeepers.” They keep you nice and tidy so that you don’t need your doctor to repair you.

So, if doctors are repairmen and wellness professionals are housekeepers, why do so many people expect their housekeeper to repair their house?

Over and over again, I encounter women who consult their naturopath for thyroid dysfunction. Your naturopath is a wellness provider … a housekeeper. He or she has no medical education, no license to prescribe medications, and no business trying to fix your broken thyroid gland. Naturopaths are only capable of keeping your already-healthy thyroid healthy. In other words, they are housekeepers.

It’s not uncommon for women to use their herbalist to treat the symptoms of menopause. Menopause is the result of a hormone deficiency, and estrogen is the deficient hormone. But, herbalists are housekeepers. They can reduce symptoms, but not alleviate them completely. More importantly, they cannot replace the deficiency. That falls into the realm of repairs. And the only professionals who can repair the deficiency are doctors.

This lack of recognition between housekeepers and repairmen is not without consequences.

Just think about it: How would your house fare if you asked your housekeeper to repair your house? If your roof were leaking, it would continue leaking. And the leak would get worse and worse until the roof collapsed. And, when it collapsed, your household belongings would get ruined, making things worse still. The cost of repair would be much greater than it would have been if you’d hired a repairman in the first place.

And the converse is true, too.

If you’re not in need of repair and you consult a repairman, the repairman is either going to roll his eyes at your assumption that you have a large enough problem to warrant their services, or he’s going to repair something that isn’t in need of repair.

Time after time, women tell me that they are appalled at their doctor’s reaction to their desire to manage various disease risks using diet and lifestyle options. They can’t understand why any doctor would say that diet has nothing to do with disease risks. Sometimes, they accuse the doctor of wanting to push drugs.

The fact is that your doctor is a repairman, not a housekeeper. Reducing your risk for diseases falls within the realm of housekeeping, not repairing. And doctors receive no education whatsoever on keeping you healthy (or housekeeping). Their entire education entails learning how to repair you once you’re broken.

In essence, using your medical doctor for your housekeeping will result in failure simply because you are seeking the guidance of the wrong professional.

Successful management of your health and disease both require that you use the proper professional. Use housekeepers in the wellness industry if you’re well. They include naturopaths, herbalists, acupuncturists, and hypnotists. Use repairmen in the medical industry if you’re not well. They include medical doctors, some osteopaths, and some nurse practitioners.

Just don’t confuse keeping your house with repairing your house. And never let your housekeeper repair your house.

There’s a Very Fine Line Between “Ed” and “Ad”

It’s so difficult to get accurate information these days! Of course, the key word is “accurate.” There’s plenty of “information.” But how in the world are you supposed to separate what’s credible and accurate from what’s not?

The Internet was supposed to make information gathering better. But, has it? Historically, if you wanted to learn about something, you went to the library. The library only offered books that had been published by a publishing company, with all the vetting that went with it. To get a book published, an author had to prove his or her credibility to a publisher.

As a result, the number of resources available were limited, but the information in those resources was credible.

Nowadays, there aren’t many publishing companies. That’s because we’ve become primarily a paperless society. And, since there are fewer publishers, there’s more self-publishing.

And self-publishing means that anyone can publish anything … credible or not!

Information gathering from the Internet is even worse. It enables people with no credentials at all to promote any thing at all. So, now you’re exposed to people making false testimonials about products, unreliable people selling products, and uneducated people “educating “ you about the science and facts behind their products.

At the crux of it all is the unfortunate fact that there’s a very fine line between “ed” and “ad.”

“Ed” is educating. It’s what your teachers did when you went to school. Education is purely informational for the sake of knowledge itself. It has no agenda. It consists of principles that you can apply to anything. And education is powerful because it equips you with a knowledge base to assess products on your own. When someone educates you, they do not stand to gain something based on how you utilize that education.

“Ad” is advertising. Advertising is necessary for selling. It’s a means to get people to buy something. It has absolutely nothing to do with educating. It has to do with convincing, regardless of facts. And it includes distortions of the truth and false claims.

So, with all the resources in our Internet-governed, paperless world, you are the target of a whole lot of advertising disguised as educating.

Advertisers start out with a kernel or two of “educational” information. That gets your attention. It’s the hook. But then, they start veering off into information manipulation so that you assume they’re still educating you.

They aren’t.

They’ve switched gears without your knowledge. And now there in the process of advertising.

But, since they’ve gotten you “primed” with the initial educational tidbit, you’re now gullible and ripe for a sale. And you don’t even realize that your “educator” has transformed into a “advertiser”!

An educator’s reward is your understanding. Knowledge is the currency. If you learn, the educator was successful. If you don’t, they failed. Not so for the advertiser. The advertiser cares only about his or her own pocketbook. The goal is the sale. If you buy, it’s a success. If you don’t it’s a failure.

With so many people being much more adept at advertising than educating, you hardly recognize the difference.

Don’t fall for this. Avoiding it is very simple: If there’s a product involved, run!

No person with any product will ever tell you the truth, period. They don’t care about the truth. They care about the sale. And they’ll say whatever they have to say to make the sale. Your knowledge is of no interest to them.

So, get your education from resources that are purely educational. Make sure the educator doesn’t have any biases, doesn’t belong to any company that sells products, and doesn’t stand to gain anything by what you do with your new knowledge.

Any person who has a personal interest in your choice of products is not an educator. They’re an advertiser.

This fine line between “ed” and “ad” is subtle. But once you know how to recognize it, you’ll spot it easily. And when you do, leave the website, turn the channel, or find another YouTube video.

And always remember, if there’s a product involved, run!

Menopause is All About Compensation

What does the word “compensation” mean to you?

As with most things, it probably depends on context.

Read more

Menopause Management Isn’t Political

Have you noticed that things that aren’t political sometimes seem political? You know, when people feel they have to take a side, label themselves this or that, and confine their opinions and choices to what’s consistent for their side?

Opinions about abortion are political … even though abortion itself is really more personal and medical than political.

Opinions about global warming are political … even though geologic effects of climate and ecology are more scientific than political.

Opinions on your health care are political … even though your employer, insurance company, and government are less qualified than you are to decide what’s best for you.

And on and on.

The point is that we tend to take sides and politicize things that really aren’t political.

How you manage your menopause is not political. Despite the fact that there tend to be “two camps” of thought, you don’t have to take a side.

Three’s the “Traditional Medical Camp” which promotes pharmaceutical hormone replacement. People in this camp focus on estrogen, and believe you should replace your estrogen when your ovaries stop producing it at the time of menopause. They don’t “believe in” herbs, acupuncture, hypnosis, or diet for managing menopause. And if you request anything other than pharmaceutical management options, a person entrenched in the Traditional Medical Camp will scoff and dismiss your request. They’re loyal to the Traditional Medical way of doing things.

And then there’s the “Alternative and Complementary Camp,” which promotes non-pharmaceutical options and denounces hormone replacement. People in this camp focus on progesterone, and believe progesterone is the solution for all your menopausal woes. They instill fear of estrogen to persuade you to use progesterone instead of estrogen. And if you request hormone replacement, a person entrenched in the Alternative and Complementary Camp will shame you for failing to remain loyal to the “natural” way of doing things. They’re patriots of Alternative and Complementary Medicine.

As with politics, every person in either camp is absolutely certain that their way is the best way. They’re sure that they’re right and everyone else is wrong.

Fortunately, your menopause management doesn’t have to fall into one camp or the other. You don’t have to choose sides. You can sample offerings from both camps, form your own opinions, and construct your own management technique.

Think of all the options in both camps a one big smorgasbord.

There’s no need to label one camp good and the other bad. Or one right and the other wrong. There’s no need to take a side.

Wouldn’t it be great if un-politicizing other things were this easy?

Non-truth, Half-truth, And Everything But the Truth

You know how you have to swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth … so help you God, in a court of law? Well, I don’t think that should be confined to just the courts. I think it should be a requirement for a lot of things, including public announcements about research findings.

Don’t you feel like you get conflicting information every time you hear a report about a research study? One report says Vitamin E is good for you; another says, maybe not. One day, two glasses of red wine prevent disease; the next day they don’t. One guideline tells you to get a mammogram every year; another says every two years.

How in the world are you supposed to know what’s true when you hear non-truths, half-truths, and everything but the truth?

Wouldn’t it be so much better if all research reporting required that you get the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

One particular study really brings this other-than-the-truth phenomenon to light. It’s the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), which came out in 2002.

Before 2002, women routinely took hormone replacement therapy (HRT) when they began experiencing the symptoms of menopause at about age 51. Most women would continue taking the hormones for the next ten years, or even indefinitely. The belief at the time was that hormone replacement therapy for menopause replaced a deficiency in female hormones. A “deficiency” is absence of anything the body needs to function normally.

Just as insulin deficiency (diabetes) requires insulin replacement, and thyroid hormone deficiency (hypothyroidism) requires thyroid hormone replacement, estrogen deficiency at the time of menopause was viewed as a deficiency state that warrants replacement therapy.

Now, if you have a deficiency state and don’t replace the missing substance, what happens?

You experience a list of about 20 symptoms that make you feel awful. And, eventually, your body breaks down because it lacks something it needed to function properly.

Previous research had shown that, without hormone replacement, women had higher rates of blood clots, stroke, heart attack, breast cancer, osteoporosis, and Alzheimer’s Disease.

So, the WHI set out to discover if taking hormone replacement therapy could prevent these diseases. Now this is a far cry different from using hormone replacement therapy to alleviate the symptoms of menopause … with the added benefit of decreasing your risk for these diseases.

Using hormone replacement therapy to directly, specifically, and primarily prevent these diseases is a whole different story! In other words, that’s using it to do something entirely different from its intended purpose. But, of course, explaining that would constitute telling you the whole truth.

Well, you didn’t hear the whole truth about the purpose of the study. You only heard half the truth.

And that’s not all.

The media report to the public on the results of the study weren’t exactly the truth, either.

Here’s what you heard: Hormone replacement for menopause carries more risks than benefits. For example, in the WHI study, it increased the risk of blood clots 100%. It also increased the risk for strokes, heart attack, and breast cancer.

Before I tell you the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, let me tell you what happened when women heard that media report: They all flushed their hormones down the toilet. They became terrified of taking hormones. Consequently, doctors, seeing the public’s fearful reaction, became unwilling to prescribe hormones. They were concerned about the possibility of litigation that might ensue if a woman developed any of these diseases.

So, in the blink of a single media report about a single research study, women went from taking hormone replacement therapy as a benefit … to condemning hormone replacement therapy as a curse.

Hormone replacement went from being the fountain of youth to being the kiss of death.

So, I ask you: Which is it? What’s the truth? How did something that had been so standard and beneficial become so offensive and risky, just because of one research study?

Here’s how: You heard the non-truth, the half-truth, and everything but the truth.

So, what is the truth?

Non-truths and half-truths take many forms. One form is to make a statement that is essentially “true,” but presented in such a way that makes it sound much more devastating than it really is.

Let’s take one single statement that was included in the WHI media report and reveal all the facts:

The media report stated that “Hormone replacement therapy for menopause increased the risk of blood clots 100% in the study subjects.” In other words, the risk of a blood clot increased 100%.

So, what does a “100% increased risk” mean to you?

Does it mean that 100% of the women who took hormones had a blood clot?

Does it mean that the risk of a blood clot increased 100%?

Does it mean that women who took hormones had a blood clot 100% of the time?

Hmmmm? Makes you think, doesn’t it?

Well, if the media report had given you the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, you wouldn’t be wondering what “100% increased risk” meant. You’d know!

So, now I’ll reveal the truth.

The WHI study examined 10,000 women. That’s a lot of women!

The average age of those women was 63. Hey, that’s a whole lot older than the typical woman who takes hormone replacement therapy for the symptoms of menopause! They’re normally only around 51. And, hey, older women have more blood clots, anyway.

But here’s the shocking part of the truth:

Without hormone replacement therapy, 8 women (out of 10,000) had a blood clot.

And, now for the punchline:

With hormone replacement therapy, 16 women (out of 10,000) had a blood clot!

So, the “100% increased risk” meant that instead of 8 women having a blood clot, 16 women had a blood clot … out of 10,000.

But, of course, no one bothered to tell you that. All you heard was “The risk of a blood clots increased 100%.”

Does “16 women out of 10,00 had a blood clot instead of 8” sound as devastating and drastic as “The risk of a blood clot increased 100%”?

Surprised?

Or maybe you’re a little angry.

If so, you have every right to be. You got the non-truth, the half-truth, and everything but the truth. That’s not fair.

If only you’d heard the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, you would have had the opportunity to evaluate the significance of that study fairly. And I’ll bet a lot fewer women would have flushed their hormones down the toilet.

Either / Or, But Not Both

Don’t you hate it when you can’t have it all? Why do we have to choose one thing or the other. And why is it that, no matter what we choose, we forfeit something else. Why does it always have to be either / or? Why can’t it be both?

Read more