Is it harmful to withhold this information?

The short answer is “yes”. Natural Progesterone is not natural to Nature. This must be understood. It is a human hormone that can be safely introduced into the body because it is identical to the progesterone molecule found ‘naturally’ occurring in your body (ovaries).

Just remember, it is a hormone and any hormone used incorrectly can create an endocrine disturbance in the body.

It is definitely wise to work cooperatively with a doctor who knows exactly what you are using, otherwise, if he doesn’t have the full story, how can he treat you correctly?

If your doctor refuses to support you, it may be wise to change to a doctor who will. Ask your doctor for a copy of your complete medical history and test results so that you can take your file along to your new doctor. Some women continue on with their doctor out of obligation, or perhaps because of family / peer pressure.

Over and above being detrimental to your health, withholding information is a disservice to your GP and yourself. Even though natural progesterone is a relatively safe hormone, out of balance or outside physiological dosages it has the potential to disturb the ebb and flow of other hormones.

Further, your doctor may prescribe a treatment that is not recommended in conjuction with progesterone therapy. In other words, it may be contraindicative of your progesterone.

This has happened in many, many situations with our women. For example, your doctor may put you on the Contraceptive Pill or implant into your body a synthetic progestogen, or give you a cortisone injection, all of which basically negate the effectiveness of your natural progesterone. We have seen this happen many times over, simply because women withheld information. They very quickly discover they have become severely hormonally imbalanced once the actual drug administered negated progesterone’s positive impact on the body, and consequently compromised the benefits of progesterone over many months.

A woman may go to her doctor complaining of fluid retention in the first few weeks of progesterone use, not understanding that sodium retention is a result of estrogen build-up/estrogen dominance which can be exacerbated with the reintroduction of progesterone. As we have stated previously, when progesterone is reintroduced into the body, it can actually increase the symptoms of estrogen dominance, purely because it is sensitising estrogen receptor sites. Progesterone ‘wakes up’ estrogen receptors, encouraging estrogen to work more effectively. Progesterone stimulates estrogen, and estrogen stimulates progesterone. Each hormone is intrinsically linked to the other, but out of balance they can cause havoc in the body. When estrogen receptors wake up, often women will find they have increased headaches and intracellular oedema (sodium moves through the cells into the inner cell, bringing water with it). Your doctor, seeing this problem and not knowing you have just started progesterone, could prescribe a diuretic that can not only create electrolyte imbalances, but also retard progesterone efficiency in the body.

We have seen women prescribed anti-depressants after they became teary-eyed and depressed on progesterone supplementation, not realising that these symptoms are part of estrogen dominant wake-up. In prescribing anti-depressants, the doctor has inadvertently stalled an opportunity for progesterone - a mood enhancing hormone - to relieve hormonally induced depression naturally once the body has had time to adjust, and estrogen dominance has been defeated.

The Natural-Progesterone-Advisory-Network.com website has contacted by many women experiencing increased intensity of joint and muscle pain at some stage of their progesterone therapy. One such case was Susan who reported significant discomfort around the seventh month. Susan went racing off to her rheumatoidologist who wanted to put her on cortisone-based anti-inflammatory drugs which would have counteracted progesterone benefits long term and perhaps impaired her hormonal health.

We now believe, based on women’s collective input, that the incidence or exacerbation of joint and muscle pain while taking progesterone is a result of receptor activitity in those areas. When women complain of this insidious yet common theme, we encourage them to “hang in there” because it is an experience a good many women connected to our website have gone through.

It occurs on different levels at various stages (7-8 months average), however, more importantly, the incidence of pain and increased discomfort does not appear to be suggestive of progressive degeneration of any pre-existing
disease. Rather, we have to conclude based on women’s experiences that it’s an indication cell receptors are waking up; in most cases, a sign the body is responding favourably.

Many women with arthritic or inflammatory problems find that after about two years on progesterone they are reporting significant joint and muscular mobility, and their pain has dramatically reduced, allowing them to resume physical activities that were once restrictive or beyond them.

We encourage women who are arthritic, battling autoimmune problems, or residual joint damage and subsequent long term pain to avoid pain killers that are harsh on the liver. Instead we suggest they take a premium bone and joint supplementation formula that will nourish joints, bones, cartilage and muscles with essential minerals to compliment progesterone therapy to ensure they derive the full benefits from their hormone balancing.

We have a case which we would like to share with you here. June approached us after being diagnosed with breast cancer and her mastectomy was scheduled in 3 weeks time. June was referred to the Natural-Progesterone-Advisory-Network.com website seeking information on natural progesterone by a concerned friend. She began progesterone replacement therapy along with nutritional supplementation with her husband’s full support . Progesterone therapy began immediately on prescription from a local GP without her endocrinologist’s consent. This was contrary to any advise provided by the Natural-Progesterone-Advisory-Network.com website. In fact, we suggested she go back to the doctor whom we knew had written the progesterone script and, incidently, was operating a woman’s clinic. It was up to her doctor, in our opinion, to liaise with June’s specialist and relay this vital information. This did not happen. And June was too frightened to open her mouth, perhaps intimidated by both doctors.

Prepping herself for surgery, she started applying progesterone in high doses to saturate her body prior to her mastectomy. She had read a medical article supporting the theory that if women ovulated (producing progesterone) prior to surgery that the likelihood of metastases would be reduced. June wanted to cover all her options. Following surgery she underwent chemotherapy. Her doctor, however, was concerned because her periods had remained cyclic, with no signs of hormonal disruption after completing her course of chemo. This demonstrated to the Natural-Progesterone-Advisory-Network.com website the positive impact progesterone was having on June’s body under extreme conditions, possibly supporting and/or protecting ovarian function.

Tragically, to June’s detriment, she did not inform her specialist that she was still using progesterone. In response to this unusual occurence, her specialist scheduled June in for more chemotherapy because, in her opinion, June’s periods should have stopped. Her justification for this decision may have been based on the premise that while June continued to menstruate, her estrogen levels were too high which could jeopardise further risk of cancer. This would have been a high probability without progesterone in the equation to oppose estrogen.

Had June been upfront with her specialist, or had the GP who prescribed progesterone (who to this date still continues to treat her with progesterone) informed the endocrinologist that she was treating June in such a manner, then perhaps the second lot of chemo may not have been necessary. And June may not have entered menopause so abruptly. If this information had been revealed at the onset, perhaps the endocrinologist would have been forced to look at the possibility that the second lot of chemo many not have been warranted. And possibly viewed progesterone’s place in June’s treatment, recovery and outcome more favourably.

We last heard that June was continuing Tamoxifen against her bettter judgement while also continuing with progesterone therapy in secret. June’s doctor continues to keep this information from her specialist. June’s case demonstrates the plight of women not only here in Australia, but around the world.

So, we say, if you are going to go to your doctor and withhold information, make sure you understand the symptoms of estrogen dominance and the progression of progesterone therapy before your doctor starts treating you, if only to avoid unnecessary conflict of interest. And we advise women to undergo any tests your doctor may recommend to rule out anything sinister.