Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Get contract in perspective ­ we have never had it better

The HRT consensus statement from the RCOG does not make sense (News, December 6). Short-term HRT is not prescribed with relatively little risk. Less than 12 months of most HRT formulations increased breast cancer risks by 45-63 per cent in the Million Women Study.

Current use of combined HRT doubled the risk of breast cancer. The increase with oestrogen-only HRT was 30 per cent, while current HRT users had at least a 22 per cent increased risk of fatal breast cancers.

All the main HRT randomised controlled double-blind studies have been terminated prematurely to stop current use because of increases in serious life-threatening diseases like strokes, heart attacks, thrombosis and dementia. It makes no sense at all to encourage doctors to prescribe HRT to 75 per cent of menopausal women for temporary non-life-threatening symptoms which are very easily and safely prevented by non-hormonal means.

Is the RCOG consensus statement a refusal to face reality or an attempt at face-saving?

Dr Ellen Grant

Kingston-upon-Thames

Surrey

Rate this article 

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Have your say