The Drama Surrounding “the Juice of Youth”: The FDA Weighs in on “Natural Hormones”

The popularity and perceived value of medications prepared by compounding pharmacies—particularly of hormone medications—is nothing new, and over the last several years has generated a tremendous surge in both interest and controversy fueled by endorsement of bioidentical hormones by celebrities such as actress Suzanne Somers, followed by subsequent complaints ranging from doctors to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in which both camps are critical of claims touting the “benefits” of the drugs and manner in which they’re prepared, as unsubstantiated marketing that could endanger the health of women not properly informed.

Somers states she’s only attempted to raise awareness and empower women to analyze and explore alternative HRT therapies available, rather than simply settling for synthetic preparations marketed by big pharma; on the one side, Somers’s supporters praise her courage and conviction, while her detractors are scathingly critical of her endorsement of drugs that they say have not been proven safe—as well as attribution to those they portray as dubious professionals with questionable credentials.

Last week the FDA publicly announced that there was no difference between hormone medications marketed as bioidentical, and prepared by compounding pharmacies, than those marketed as synthetic preparations manufactured by drug companies. The fallout from this stance of course is that compounders are not restricted from claims that their products are better. Many of those who support bioidenticals are convinced that the FDA’s public stance was based more in the drop in sales of commercial prescription HRT medications. Pharma giant Wyeth, no stranger to HRT controversy, has asked the FDA to step in against compounders, who are currently under state regulation, not federal. Again, women are caught in the middle in determining the best course of action.

Details in this blog article from the NY Times

The Real Science Behind Fertility

You are what you eat...and so apparently is your ability to become fertile. That's according to a recent study done by Harvard doctors, whose findings suggest an apparent connection between women's diets and fertility.

Published last month in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology, the study found a growing body of evidence linking diets to hormone levels particularly insulin, which impacts fertility.

This Los Angeles Times article details the study's findings and recommendations.

Anorexia: blame in utero hormone exposure?

NYT reports that initial research findings suggest that anorexia may be influenced by exposure to female hormones in utero.

While there may be some connection between female hormones and the way self-perception and self-criticism in the brain occur, I am skeptical of a specific behavioral influence since ideal standards for body weight have varied so greatly over the years. Perhaps there may be a propensity toward being harder on oneself, regardless of the particular aesthetic standards of the time. I would like to see more research on in utero hormonal ties to other mentally-originating disorders, like OCD and depression to see if there is a more systematic effect.

This would be another interesting area of developmental research - the effects of development due to prenatal exposure to different hormones. Several years ago, there were some articles suggesting a connection between excessive androgen exposure and Autism and Asperger's.

PMS and the Female Brain

This week’s edition of The Economist brings us news of a recently published study from the National Institute of Mental Health, suggesting that women’s brains may respond differently to reward stimuli depending on their oestrus state.

http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8625794

Aside from the lesson that, well, maybe we’ll have less fun gambling when we’re PMS-y, this study importantly demonstrates measurable distinctions in brain blood flow with changing hormone levels in the body. How such information may be interpreted or used in women’s health or broader social assumptions remains to be seen. Thoughts? Predictions?