New NAMS Position Statement Promotes Hormone Therapy for Those Under 60 & Within 10 Years of the Onset of Menopause

In case you still had any doubts, here's the pull quote: "Hormone therapy remains the most effective treatment for vasomotor symptoms (VMS) and the genitourinary syndrome of menopause..."

Every time I’ve published a story on the benefits of estrogen to alleviate chronic UTIs or to treat the other disabling symptoms of menopause (here, here, and here), I’ve been inundated with readers contacting me to say some version of, “But I thought hormones were dangerous and caused cancer and heart attacks.”

[Insert silent scream here.]

Look, I get it: it’s a perfectly reasonable misunderstanding of the data, considering Matt Lauer went on the Today Show in 2002 to deliver a complete misreading of the Women’s Health Initiative study, dooming my mother’s generation to immediately stop (or never start) taking hormones that could have had lasting benefits to their bones and on their overall health and well-being; my generation to approach menopause hormone treatment (MHT) under a cloud of doubt and mistrust; and our doctors to take this wholly incorrect information into the exam rooms where we sit, silently suffering.

“The media attention surrounding the publication of the initial results of WHI in 2002 led to fear and confusion regarding the use of hormonal therapy (HT) after menopause,” writes The Journal of of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. “Although in 2002 it was stated that the results pertained to all women receiving HT, subsequent studies from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) and others clearly showed that younger women and those close to menopause had a very beneficial risk-to-benefit ratio.”

In a nutshell, what happened was this: