stellar_muddle (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
stellar_muddle) wrote2006-03-29 10:06 am
stellar_muddle) wrote2006-03-29 10:06 am
Entry tags:
(no subject)
Pill breakthrough runs into conservative backlash
(NZ Herald 29.3.06)
Pill breakthrough runs into conservative backlash
29.03.06
By Maxine Frith
A new contraceptive pill that may reduce the risk of breast cancer and heart disease as well as eliminating monthly periods could be available within the next five to 10 years.
Scientists believe the development could transform the lives of millions of women and would be far safer than current forms of oral contraception, which carry a higher risk of breast cancer and heart problems.
The new pill could also bring an end to premenstrual syndrome and other painful gynaecological conditions such as endometriosis.
But experts warned that progress on developing the contraceptive is being hampered by political pressure from anti-abortion groups and the Bush Administration, which objects to the fact it works in the same way as the controversial abortion pill.
At a conference to mark the 50th anniversary of the development of the pill this year, Professor David Baird, emeritus professor of reproductive endocrinology at the University of Edinburgh, revealed that his team are testing the new compound on small groups of women in clinical trials.
Three other teams - in Sweden, Chile and the US - are working on similar projects involving the same class of compounds.
The current combined pill uses oestrogen and progesterone to stop ovulation and prevent pregnancy. But oestrogen can increase the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular problems, such as deep vein thrombosis.
Studies have shown that women who take the pill have a 24 per cent increased risk of breast cancer, although scientists have pointed out that only a tiny number more will be diagnosed with the disease as a result.
A progesterone-only pill is available but is less effective, has to be taken within a more rigid timeframe and, according to some research, may also carry a slightly higher risk of breast cancer because of the hormone it contains.
The new class of pill being developed by the Edinburgh team contains neither hormone but involves compounds called progesterone receptor modulators (PRMs).
PRMs block the production of the progesterone hormone, which prepares the body for conception and helps to maintain pregnancy.
Because the compound does not contain oestrogen or progesterone and actually blocks the latter hormone, Dr Baird believes that the risks of breast cancer and heart problems will be reduced rather than increased.
The new class of pill also stops periods altogether, in contrast to the current versions, which effectively mimic menstruation with bleeding each month.
Dr Baird said the compound had been tried on two groups of 90 women with "positive" results and few side-effects, although more research was needed.
"If you could develop a pill which significantly reduces the risk of breast cancer, it would be a best-seller," he said. "It is possible that it could also stop PMS, which affects millions of women and results in a lot of morbidity and time off work.
"Although we have got effective oral contraceptives at the moment, they are not ideal or perfect. There is increasing evidence to suggest that women would treat this [the new pill] as a health benefit."
Dr Baird said that a PRM pill would have completed the scientific phases of testing and development within five to 10 years but that pharmaceutical companies appeared reluctant to manufacture and market the compound as a contraceptive because it is based on the RU486 abortion pill.
"There has been a lot of political pressure from the pro-life lobby and also the current Bush Administration on the big pharma companies," he said. "Some of them are looking at these compounds, but they are not talking about it. A striking feature is the lack of funding in these compounds because of the political climate."
A spokeswoman for the charity FPA, formerly known as the Family Planning Association, said: "We welcome all new research that looks to provide safe and effective contraception for women."
- INDEPENDENT
"The current combined pill uses oestrogen and progesterone to stop ovulation and prevent pregnancy."
cf
"PRMs block the production of the progesterone hormone, which prepares the body for conception and helps to maintain pregnancy."
Amazing just that little difference in when/how it takes effect.
It would be very nice to get rid of the PMS/Period component. Spot the fact Bush and the majority of the Bush Admin and those supporting it (and anti-this compound) don't get PMS...
It would also however be a good idea to get a good baseline of data to make sure there aren't long term complications.
And on a completely different note, it is possibly a bad idea staying up til ~2am organizing the Festival to-do list/timeline. Better idea of what needs to be done by when though. It is however really only 2 weeks away... See you in 2 weeks Kiddums:)
(NZ Herald 29.3.06)
Pill breakthrough runs into conservative backlash
29.03.06
By Maxine Frith
A new contraceptive pill that may reduce the risk of breast cancer and heart disease as well as eliminating monthly periods could be available within the next five to 10 years.
Scientists believe the development could transform the lives of millions of women and would be far safer than current forms of oral contraception, which carry a higher risk of breast cancer and heart problems.
The new pill could also bring an end to premenstrual syndrome and other painful gynaecological conditions such as endometriosis.
But experts warned that progress on developing the contraceptive is being hampered by political pressure from anti-abortion groups and the Bush Administration, which objects to the fact it works in the same way as the controversial abortion pill.
At a conference to mark the 50th anniversary of the development of the pill this year, Professor David Baird, emeritus professor of reproductive endocrinology at the University of Edinburgh, revealed that his team are testing the new compound on small groups of women in clinical trials.
Three other teams - in Sweden, Chile and the US - are working on similar projects involving the same class of compounds.
The current combined pill uses oestrogen and progesterone to stop ovulation and prevent pregnancy. But oestrogen can increase the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular problems, such as deep vein thrombosis.
Studies have shown that women who take the pill have a 24 per cent increased risk of breast cancer, although scientists have pointed out that only a tiny number more will be diagnosed with the disease as a result.
A progesterone-only pill is available but is less effective, has to be taken within a more rigid timeframe and, according to some research, may also carry a slightly higher risk of breast cancer because of the hormone it contains.
The new class of pill being developed by the Edinburgh team contains neither hormone but involves compounds called progesterone receptor modulators (PRMs).
PRMs block the production of the progesterone hormone, which prepares the body for conception and helps to maintain pregnancy.
Because the compound does not contain oestrogen or progesterone and actually blocks the latter hormone, Dr Baird believes that the risks of breast cancer and heart problems will be reduced rather than increased.
The new class of pill also stops periods altogether, in contrast to the current versions, which effectively mimic menstruation with bleeding each month.
Dr Baird said the compound had been tried on two groups of 90 women with "positive" results and few side-effects, although more research was needed.
"If you could develop a pill which significantly reduces the risk of breast cancer, it would be a best-seller," he said. "It is possible that it could also stop PMS, which affects millions of women and results in a lot of morbidity and time off work.
"Although we have got effective oral contraceptives at the moment, they are not ideal or perfect. There is increasing evidence to suggest that women would treat this [the new pill] as a health benefit."
Dr Baird said that a PRM pill would have completed the scientific phases of testing and development within five to 10 years but that pharmaceutical companies appeared reluctant to manufacture and market the compound as a contraceptive because it is based on the RU486 abortion pill.
"There has been a lot of political pressure from the pro-life lobby and also the current Bush Administration on the big pharma companies," he said. "Some of them are looking at these compounds, but they are not talking about it. A striking feature is the lack of funding in these compounds because of the political climate."
A spokeswoman for the charity FPA, formerly known as the Family Planning Association, said: "We welcome all new research that looks to provide safe and effective contraception for women."
- INDEPENDENT
"The current combined pill uses oestrogen and progesterone to stop ovulation and prevent pregnancy."
cf
"PRMs block the production of the progesterone hormone, which prepares the body for conception and helps to maintain pregnancy."
Amazing just that little difference in when/how it takes effect.
It would be very nice to get rid of the PMS/Period component. Spot the fact Bush and the majority of the Bush Admin and those supporting it (and anti-this compound) don't get PMS...
It would also however be a good idea to get a good baseline of data to make sure there aren't long term complications.
And on a completely different note, it is possibly a bad idea staying up til ~2am organizing the Festival to-do list/timeline. Better idea of what needs to be done by when though. It is however really only 2 weeks away... See you in 2 weeks Kiddums:)
no subject
There are many articles, I had a really good one that I printed off, but can't find it anymore...
no subject
I'll put up with mild pain which goes away with panadiene and a hot wheat sack overnight, and the standard messiness in return for keeping the bounciness/playfulness component. You would have to ask Z if it is worth the price of the easy irritation/grump...
I will however run them together to avoid inconvenience eg travelling/camping etc.
no subject
I much prefer to only have to put up with period pain 5 times a year, and it's a hell of a lot cheaper on sanitary products!
You'd think that on a same dose pill you wouldn't have mood swings the week before your period, but more from the day you start the sugar pills.
Did you get mood swings in the middle of running two packs together?
no subject
no subject
Manic, bouncy or both?
no subject
Physically, the pain bit is a mild dull ache for an evening and occasional twinges the next day, which only gets worse if I try cycle and run. Easily dealt with using panadeine and worth it for the (interest in) sex:)
I would be curious to know if there is a connection between hormone/bloodsugar/energy/bounce levels...
no subject
no subject
Standard moods swings the week before things would have started .
ie body goes "Right, time to start this lot... hang on, chemicals haven't stopped... right, won't do that but will sulk for a while..."
No mood swings prior to the next actual gap.
It may be to do with how fast my body flushes/processes the hormones and whether without the usual break/gap, levels build up and have various effects.
This is however going on what I remember, and if I am sensible and want something more than my own anecdotal evidence, I shoud write things down...Thus speaks the empirical scientist...
no subject
no subject
150mcg Levonorgestrel, 30mcg ethinyloestradiol.
Substantially lower, though no idea whether you get the same effectiveness per mcg.
As long as it prevents the sproggies...
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
So the break through bleeding is the main indicator that the dosage isn't correct/enough to kick nature into its place/enough to prevent pregnancy?
no subject
Breakthrough bleeding doesn't mean you're not protected against pregnancy, it just means that your estrogen levels are dropping enough to start shedding the endometrium. It normally takes about 3 or 4 months for your body to get used to the hormone levels of whatever pills you are on, so unless it's continuing after that time (or beginning as was my case) then you don't need to worry about it. Higher estrogen pills usually fix it. It's more of an annoyance than a pregnancy worry.