Bioidentical Hormones - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging
Bioidentical Hormones - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging
Bioidentical Hormones - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
BIOIDENTICAL HORMONES: SOUND SCIENCE<br />
OR BAD MEDICINE?<br />
THURSDAY, APRIL 19, 2007<br />
U.S. SENATE,<br />
SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING,<br />
Washingt<strong>on</strong>, DC.<br />
The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Committee</str<strong>on</strong>g> met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in room<br />
526, Dirksen <str<strong>on</strong>g>Senate</str<strong>on</strong>g> Office Building, H<strong>on</strong>. Gord<strong>on</strong> H. Smith presiding.<br />
Present: Senators Smith and Craig.<br />
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR GORDON H. SMITH,<br />
RANKING MEMBER<br />
Senator SMITH. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. With the<br />
permissi<strong>on</strong> of the Chairman, Senator Kohl-he has asked us to proceed.<br />
We thank you for attending today's hearing, "<str<strong>on</strong>g>Bioidentical</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Horm<strong>on</strong>es</str<strong>on</strong>g>:<br />
Sound Science or Bad Medicine?"<br />
As the title suggests, we are here today to closely examine the<br />
c<strong>on</strong>troversy surrounding the producti<strong>on</strong> and use of bioidentical horm<strong>on</strong>es<br />
as an alternative to c<strong>on</strong>venti<strong>on</strong>al horm<strong>on</strong>e therapy..<br />
The intent of this hearing is not to endorse <strong>on</strong>e therapy over another.<br />
Rather, it is to ensure that the Federal Government is providing<br />
the informati<strong>on</strong> and oversight necessary so that c<strong>on</strong>sumers,<br />
women specifically, are able to make safe and well-informed decisi<strong>on</strong>s<br />
about their individual health-care needs.<br />
From my review, it seems that the Federal Government and<br />
medical practiti<strong>on</strong>ers are playing a guessing game with women's<br />
health in the prescribing of horm<strong>on</strong>e therapies. Today's hearing reflects<br />
my belief that women deserve better. I hope to get some answers<br />
today regarding the state of the science and the Federal Government's<br />
oversight role in this arena.<br />
Over a decade ago, the Nati<strong>on</strong>al Institutes of Health set out to<br />
shed some light <strong>on</strong> the effect of horm<strong>on</strong>e therapy <strong>on</strong> preventing<br />
heart disease in women through the largest research initiative ever<br />
undertaken of this kind: the Women's Health Initiative.<br />
When evidence indicated that the health risks of the therapies<br />
studied in the WHI exceeded the benefits, the study was prematurely<br />
ended, scaring thousands of women away from traditi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
horm<strong>on</strong>e therapy.<br />
As an alternative, bioidentical horm<strong>on</strong>es have become a popular<br />
and c<strong>on</strong>troversial opti<strong>on</strong>, not <strong>on</strong>ly for aging women, but for men<br />
and women of all ages seeking a route to the fountain of youth.<br />
(1)