Bioidentical

February 17, 2006

nearly identical is NOT bioidentical-----

The only truly bioidentical hormones are those that our own bodies

manufacture. Most hormones used in TRT, HRT, and birth control pills

are extracted from plant sources, a few from animal sources, but none

from human sources. (Strictly speaking, there are no bioidentical

hormones on the market.) A few others, most notably progesterone,

are synthesized in a lab. Perhaps some do, but personally I've never

noticed a difference between the actions of synthetic hormones and

natural ones.

The biggest disparity in hormone treatment lies in the *means of

administration.* Many men have problems with transdermal

testosterone converting to estrogen or because of absorption

problems. Women taking oral estrogen replacement pills typically do

not realize much benefit because the pills are broken down by the

liver.

There is no difference in the estradiol and testosterone used by

compounding pharmacies to make estrogen and testosterone creams and

gels, and those dispensed by gyns and endos/uros. The compounded

testosterone gel I was prescribed by a compounding pharmacy contained

testosterone proprionate (same T found in injectibles) in an inert

base, and the estradiol creams that compounding pharmacies mix use

the same estradiol found in tablets and patches marketed by big

pharmaceutical cos.

I'm not sure which line of propaganda irritates me more, the money

driven efforts of pharmaceutical cos & medical practitioners to

discredit compounding pharmacies or the mantra of some " alternative

medicine " MDs that their prescribed compounded hormone treatments

are " bioidentical " and thus better and safer. Some compounded

hormone treatments have genuine attributes that could be more

truthfully used to promote them, ie 1)they are less expensive and 2)

parenteral HRT is more effective and safer than oral formulations.

The pronouncement that prescriptions mixed by compounding pharmacists

are created from unrefined plant material containing only unmeasured

amounts of active ingredient is categorically untrue. This is a

classic example of the FDA-AMA-USAPharmaceutical's efforts to mislead

public opinion. They are creating deliberate confusion between a few

products marketed by the supplement industry and medications prepared

per prescription order by compounding pharmacists.

Compounding pharmacists are licensed and trained pharmacists who, in

addition to counting and measuring pills, mix prescription drugs by

order of a medical doctor from FDA approved base medicines (the same

as used by the drug cos to prepare their patented meds) and the exact

amount of active ingredient is clearly ststed by law on the label.

The posted article may be written by an MD but it is crammed full of

half truths and lies (the party line of the FDA). Maybe this doctor

has been fed this BS by the AMA and believes it.

February 17, 2006

Here is what Dr. has to say about this link.

http://www.pharmwatch.org/strategy/bioidentical.shtml

Phil

Here are a few of the nonsensical statements made in this article:

“Compounded " bioidentical hormones " are plant-derived hormones that pharmacists

prepare and label as drugs”

MANY of our medications are derived from plant-based preparations, and

ALL--whether from a compounder or a major drug manufacturer--are " drugs " . What a

nonsensical statement to make. And the author claims to be quaified to speak on

these topics, and is looking out for us?

“the relevant chemicals (steroids) in plants are not identical to those in

humans”

The hormones in the mass-produced preparations are NOT " identical to those in

humans " . The BIOIDENTICAL (which is why they are called that!) ones from

compounders ARE. The very problem with the medications studied, for instance, in

the WHI, is they are estrogens produced by HORSES, and SYNTHETIC progesterones,

known as progestins. Different molecules with SIMILAR (but not exact) effects.

It's the " not exact " effects which lead to the increased risk of morbidity.

Bioidentical hormones produce--as they must, since they are exactly like those

already found in the body--exactly the same effects in the body as endogenously

produced ones. More on the WHI later…but see my follow-up replies in this very

thread for another example of how completely ignorant this " report " is.

The author obviously does not even know what the phrase " bioidentical " means.

“raw materials from the plants must be converted to human hormones

synthetically”

Again, this is the process by which many of our medications--including those by

the major drug manufacturers--are mass produced as well.

“Many promoters of bioidentical hormone products advocate saliva testing to

determine who might benefit from them. In fact, some nonstandard labs encourage

consumers to order tests based on whether they have various symptoms.”

While I do not use them, saliva testing is an emerging science. But what does

this have to do with the intent of the article, other than to try to reinforce

its smear of Compounding Pharmacies? They are two entirely unrelated

topics--except to be included in the same biased, small-minded smear of

compounders.

And aren't " various symptoms " what lead all physicians to draw all initial labs,

doctor?

“The risk involved in prescribing a hormonal product depends on its chemical

composition and biochemical properties, not on how it was made. "

FINALLY, a cogent point! And one which is detrimental to the arguments made in

this article.

“many offbeat physicians are prescribing compounded " bioidentical " products as

though they are safer than standard prescription drug products. "

“offbeat physicians”??? In his day, Dr. ph Lister was nearly driven from

medicine for the “offbeat” notion that Surgeons should wash their hands and

change their blood and feces-soaked gowns between surgeries. Merely washing

hands between deliveries reduced infant mortality by over 90%--in one day! Those

at the forefront have often been deemed “offbeat” (and worse), only to be proven

right later on.

And if the author actually learned a bit of what he is writing, he would know

that bioidentical estrogen and natural progesterone are indeed MUCH safer than

toxic doses of horse estrogen and progestins.

The " offbeat " (what an unprofessional comment to make in the first place)

physicians who prescribe bioidentical hormones that I know are some of the most

intelligent and talented on this earth. Their intellect and superior reasoning

and clinical skils are what led them to appreciate the benefit of replacing

homrones only with those which are exactly like those found in the body

naturally. Doesn't that make sense?

“There is no scientific evidence to support claims of increased efficacy or

safety for individualized estrogen or progesterone regimens prepared by

compounding pharmacies.”

It is a fact that synthetic progesterones, known as “progestins” are

vaso-constrictors. So, is it any wonder they cause an increase in cardiovascular

events? Natural progesterone is a vasodilator—so the effect is the opposite. I’m

not sure where that body did their research, other than listening to Drug Reps.

“Most compounded products have not undergone rigorous clinical testing for

either safety or efficacy. There are also concerns regarding their purity,

potency, and quality. "

Completely untrue. Compounding pharmacies must operate under very strict

criteria. And the components they introduce must be USP Grade pharmaceuticals.

Just more untrue and unfair smear.

“The FDA requires manufacturers of FDA-approved products that contain estrogen

and progestins to include a black box warning that reflects the findings of the

Women's Health Initiative. However, compounded products (including

" bioidentical " hormones) are not approved by the FDA and have been exempt from

having to provide patient package inserts that contain warnings and

contraindications for estrogens and progestins.”

Amongst other issues in this paragraph, compounders do not use “progestins”—they

use natural progesterone. And the Black Box warning applies to the use of

estrogens derived from horses and synthetic progesterones--which bioidentical

hormones are NOT. Therefore the Black Box warning correctly does not apply. Did

th eauthor apply even a whit of critical thinking before publishing this

nonsense?

“Given the lack of well-designed and well-conducted clinical trials of these

compounded hormones, all of them should be considered to have the same safety

issues as those hormone products that are approved by the FDA and may also have

additional risks unique to the compounding process.”

The evidence is overwhelming to those of use who are open-minded, unbiased,

logical and have not sold out to the pharmaceutical giants. On top of that, this

is just more unfair smear of good, ethical compounding pharmacies.

To sum it up, it is obviously the author's belief that hormones derived from

other animal sources, as well as those who are similar to (but not exactly) are

superior than those which are identical to those God naturally put into our own

bodies. Is this REALLY an arguement anyone wants to make?

“Steer clear of anyone who prescribes " bioidentical " hormones or recommends

saliva testing as the basis for evaluating hormone status.”

I would advise to “steer clear” of anyone who is so completely ignorant of

medicine and pharmacology as to make such a ridiculous statement.

Does anyone know who actually funds this website?

A simple point to be made: the testosterone powder mixed into a compounded

product is exactly the same as that which goes into Androgel or Testim.

__________________

www.allthingsmale.com

ANY ADVICE I MAY GIVE DOES NOT SUBSTITUTE FOR A PROPER MEDICAL EVALUATION FROM A

QUALIFIED MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL, NOR DOES IT CONSTITUTE DOCTOR/PATIENT

RELATIONSHIP, OR LIABILITY, IN ANY WAY.

Summers <rsummers@...> wrote: nearly identical is NOT bioidentical-----