View Single Post
Old 28th November 2006, 02:38 PM   #98
fls
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 10,226
Originally Posted by nraden View Post
I'm not sure which idea you're referring to. In point of fact, she has said many times that she isn't sure "synthetic" hormomes are the problem, that it is the administration that matters - timing, dose, rhythm, etc.
That is the idea that I'm referring to.

Quote:
Also, finally, there is a university that is conducting a true clinical trial of the Wiley Protocol. This trial has no connection to Wiley at all. The details will be announced January 3.
Good.

Quote:
There is, however, some "clinical" evidence. Dr. Taguchi did a chart review at ACAM a few weeks ago of her 58 cancer patients who have been on the Wiley Protocol for up to three years. I won't characterize the results, because the flamers here will not believe it. Check with ACAM. I think there will be a release by Dr. Taguchi to the media. Not sure, she is part of a large medical practice, not in private practice, and she is an onocologist. Giving hormones to people diagnosed with cancer is unprecedented.
I did already hear about that review. Without a control, you don't know if the results would have been any different without the Wiley Protocol.

Quote:
Actually, there is no template in nature for ANY OF THE EXISTING HORMONE THERAPIES. Including, especially, birth control pills. Dru8g companies sell pills and patches, compounders prepare all sorts of crazy concoctions and not one of them matches one of the five templates found in humans. The core of the Wiley protocol is the peaks and valleys of the therapy over the course of a month. I can't quite understand why you would single out one. Wiley is the first and only therapy that attempts to mimic a template that exists in nature. Static doses are unnatural.
I single it out because it is the topic of this thread and it has no evidence as to its benefit or risk. The other therapies that you mention do have evidence as to their benefit and risk (excluding other purveyors of "natural" hormones).

Quote:
I think that is a fair statement, but you overlook the favorable experience people, AND SOME OF THE DOCTORS ON THE PROTOCOL, are having. At least some of the disgruntled women on Rhythmic Living were not following the protocol and pursued alternatives that Wiley warned against. On the other hand, there are hundreds of women jsut here in Santa Barbara who have been on the protocol for some time and have no intention of changing.
In addition to the placebo effect, I would also expect some treatment effects with this regimen (you are using ingredients that would be expected to act on estrogen receptors, after all). My complaint is that you are promoting an untested therapy that has a good chance of causing harm.

Quote:
Oh yes they are. Many receive kickbacks one way or the other from the compounding pharmacies they (illegally) direct their patients to. Others, like Erika Schwartz, charge $850 for a 15 minute telephone interview and then prescribe without ever seeing the patient, directing them to a pharmacy THEY OWN which dispenses at inflated prices. Most "wellness" doctors sell supplements directly from their offices. Part of the reason so many of the "natural" BHRT docs are up in arms with Wiley is that she threatens their livelihood. She is down on the supplements and strongly suggests (she can't set) that the registered pharmacies not charge more than $37.50 per hormone per month.

Also, there is a notion in BHRT that each patient needs a "customized" hormone preparation. The doctors charge an arm and a leg to do this, which usually results in a Rx from a short list of templates that they've worked out with their pharmacist.
That information is unsubstantiated and not particularly relevant. The majority of physicians act in a ethical manner and are not compensated. That a few physicians participate in illegal practices does not excuse anything. The relative level of compensation that you and others receive for the pushing of untested and unproven therapies is not the factor that determines whether or not it is okay.

Linda
fls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top