Image not available

656x392

1729102721680666.jpg

🗑️ 🧵 Does HRT really cause cancer?

Anonymous No. 16434908

Is picrel true or is it just more anti-HRT propaganda?

raphael No. 16435240

>>16434908
if you are on hrt you are admittedly a retard

Anonymous No. 16435290

>>16434908
Let's be scientific here /sci/.....veterans are a piss poor subject pool for this type of thing as many(most) are exposed to multiple top tier carcinogens while in the service. If they aren't on the official list of known exposures like burn pits or Agent Orange that just means the way they were poisoned by Uncle Sam just hasn't been discovered yet.

>From google AI faggot SkyNet thing

Veterans have higher rates of cancer than civilians, particularly for certain types of cancer:

Lung cancer
Veterans are 25% more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer than civilians. The Department of Veterans Affairs says this may be due to exposures during and after military service.

Melanoma
A 2023 study found that air crew members had an 87% higher rate of melanoma than the general population.
Prostate cancer
A 2023 study found that men in the military were 16% more likely to get prostate cancer than the general population.
Breast cancer
A 2023 study found that women in the military were 16% more likely to get breast cancer than the general population.
Brain and nervous system cancers
A 2023 study found that ground crews had a 19% higher rate of brain and nervous system cancers than the general population.
Thyroid cancer
A 2023 study found that ground crews had a 15% higher rate of thyroid cancer than the general population.
Kidney or renal cancers
A 2023 study found that ground crews had a 9% higher likelihood of kidney or renal cancers than the general population.

>Start with known clean rats, rerun the tests, report back

Anonymous No. 16435291

>>16434908
Anything that manipulates your hormones is going to raise your risk of cancer. The question is how much of an increased risk there is and is it a worthwhile tradeoff.

Image not available

904x1024

r a y p.jpg

Anonymous No. 16435310

>>16434908
TQ answers itself

Anonymous No. 16435629

>>16434908
HRT is absolutely a cancer risk. You can know this is obviously the case because it's literally listed as one of the primary risks for a lot of these treatments in their non-transgender related prescription uses.

Taking TRT (for example) significantly increases your risk of cancers (with the primary cancer risks in males being prostate and testicular, followed by bone and blood cancers) and it would be silly to think this risk isn't also present in trans-men who take exogenous test in their transition.

If depo-provera is known to increase breast cancer risk for natal females, why would we think that suddenly the cancer risk vanishes when it's prescribed in the context of testosterone suppression/puberty blocking?

Anonymous No. 16435706

>>16434908
do they explain how hrt drugs modify dna?

Anonymous No. 16435846

>>16434908
Of course it isn’t true.
Titty skittles are just candy for your testes.
There is no provable reason anyone would have any negative effects taking enodrine disrupters or hormones way above what their body normally produces.
Anyone who says otherwise is a bigot and doesn’t trust science.
Remember it’s all just benzene rings all the way down, a simple branch chain tweak and those Y chromosomes become an x, it’s science.

Image not available

717x587

CEM2348723_152832....png

Anonymous No. 16437360

Image not available

500x375

va.png

Anonymous No. 16437373

>>16434908
>gender affirming

Anonymous No. 16437441

>>16434908
LGBT is eugenics and the jews give kids the same drugs that they give pedophile to sterilize them.

They want you sick, weak, and effeminate. Which is why they pollute the water and food with garbage like soi and why the 4kike mods still censor "onions".

Image not available

562x446

johnson-coolidge.png

Anonymous No. 16437491

>>16434908

>The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, Volume 100, Issue 12, 1 December 2015, Pages 4472–4480

>https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/100/12/4472/2536324


>increased quartiles of LH/T and estradiol increased the risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06–1.43; HR, 1.23; 95% CI 1.06–1.43). No association to T levels was found.

Bryanna Johnsons says she "started 17aE2, non feminizing estradiol (Rx), based upon male longevity evidence. 4mg wk, transdermal."

>inb5 she dies from some cause secondary to the sequelae of chronic estrogen poisoning.

Image not available

230x311

captain_obvious.jpg

Anonymous No. 16437697

>>16434908

Wow, who would have thought that altering a person's hormonal cycles would be detrimental to their health.
This is fucking unbelievable!

Anonymous No. 16438021

>>16434908
The drugs used in tranny hormone therapy were banned for their original purpose, that is hormonal regulation in menopausal women, due to increased cancers. This is Big Pharma finding a second market for their poison.

Anonymous No. 16438314

>>16437697
>altering a person's hormonal cycles
>detrimental to their health.

Not a level 99 endocrinology wizard detected. It really depends on what hormones are being altered with what drugs.

>t. had IHH with low T, LH & FSH, high E, did A.I.s and normalized my hormones.

Anonymous No. 16438316

>>16438021
>This is Big Pharma finding a second market for their poison.
They want to do that not to sell the poison, but because cancer is their biggest moneymaker and they want to cause cancer as much as possible

Anonymous No. 16438690

>>16438316
It's both. They get to keep the HRT production lines they spent billions developing open while selling the cure to the diseases they created.

Anonymous No. 16439271

>>16438021
No, this is a myth because those studies were dogshit. Many more have shown that women receiving supplementary estrogen are protected against cancer or the risk is statistically insignificant. It would basically kill the female beauty product market because it's far more effective than anything else available.

Anonymous No. 16439280

>>16439271
>Many more have shown that women receiving supplementary estrogen are protected against cancer
>women receiving supplementary estrogen
I'm pretty sure it's flipping the natural hormone environment that's going to cause problems within the body. Although, here's a .gov stating that increased testosterone in a woman helps combat breast cancer, so maybe the real answer is that it's complicated and more or less hormones will cause more or less problems in given areas
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8025725/

Anonymous No. 16439318

>>16434908
people who take hrt might be more likely to engage in cancer-inducing lifestyles
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XOB5syfDOB0

Anonymous No. 16439337

>>16434908
>veterans
>got cancer
Yeah I don't like troons much but this is probably just another attempt by the military to cover up the fact that they recklessly and frequently exposed soldiers to toxic environments (such as burn pits) without protection. They DO NOT want to have to pay damages to the veterans and their families for making them breathe carcinogenic fumes almost 24/7.

Anonymous No. 16439407

>>16435290
>let's just be scientific
You came to the wrong place bucky boy.

Anonymous No. 16439422

>>16434908
Living a normal life can cause "cancer"

Anonymous No. 16439431

>>16434908
>take estrogen
>have increased risk for breast cancer
woooow

Anonymous No. 16439974

>>16439422
theres nothing normal about being a tranny, its a severe mental illness

Anonymous No. 16440722

>>16439974
Severe mental illness is unfortunately quite common these days

Anonymous No. 16440749

>>16439422
this 100%. there is already a lot of reasonably effective chemoprophylaxis out there though, like bromelain.