Progesterone

IH-
I notice the Progesterone cream that I have been using has a caution on the back that says "Warning this product contains Progesterone, a chemical know to the state of California to cause cancer." This product is good for lowering estrogen, should I drop it because of the warning or is it OK?

I think, that as long as it is natural progesterone and not the sythetic one it is totally safe. And also you should be using the sufficient dose which is around 12mg per day. If you are using too much you may experience headache...

I've seen this label for at least a few years and it is unfortunate, because only perverted, synthetic progesterone can cause cancer.

as MasterExploder said, the natural progesterone is safe.

So the one that I'm using I think someone on this site recommended it. It's from NOW and it says Natural Progesterone and on the back it has that warning. So it should be OK since its all natural.

Yes it would be safe:

Here is an explanation that makes sense here:

http://www.natural-progesterone-advisory-network.com/state-of-california-proposition-65/

Here is the meat of the article:

"Proposition 65 requires the Governor of California to publish a list of substances that are known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm.

Progesterone, as well as other human hormones, is on this list. As such, products containing any of these substances are subject to carrying an appropriate and specific warning label.

Under California’s Proposition 65 list, progesterone creams manufactured and/or distributed in California are required by law to carry a warning on all labels as follows:

"WARNING: This Product Contains A Chemical Known To The State of California To Cause Cancer."

Proposition 65 imposes certain requirements that apply to chemicals that appear on this list. These requirements are designed to protect California’s drinking water sources from contamination by these chemicals, to allow California consumers to make informed choices about the products they purchase, and to enable residents or workers to take whatever action they deem appropriate to protect themselves from exposures to harmful chemicals.

Currently, there are over seven hundred substances on the Prop 65 list. Many of these substances are naturally or commonly occurring in the environment. They can be found in many natural products - including foods and cosmetics.

Natural progesterone is such a substance.

Although Prop 65 states "known", in practice, substances added to the list are those that could, under certain circumstances, be reasonably thought of as posing a cancer risk based on the interpretation of existing scientific information, such as animal studies, at the time of inclusion.

Substances can be added to or removed from the Prop 65 list by various mechanisms, such as declaration by an “authorative body” or by scientific testing. Whether one of these other sources has engaged in sound scientific practices before designating a substance as a carcinogen or reproductive toxicant is often the subject of much debate.

Delisting progesterone is apparently very costly. So, for the time being, progesterone remains on the Prop 65 list.

Why isn’t synthetic HRT made to carry a Prop 65 warning if estrogens and artificial progestins are on the list? Well, because prescriptions given to consumers are excluded [from carrying warnings] on the grounds your physician and/or pharmacist act as "informed intermediaries".

Peter McGaw, Of Counsel to Archer Norris defends clients in regulatory, remediation, personal injury, and property damage cases arising out of environmental legislation, including California Proposition 65. In his “pull no punches” article ‘Proposition 65: A National Problem‘ he writes, “Although Proposition 65 is intended to prevent harm to individuals, the “enforcer” is not required to demonstrate that any actual harm has occurred.”

According to Mr McGaw, there is substantial concern about the efficacy of the warning. The proliferation of “generic” Proposition 65 warning labels on products and in areas around the state is seen by many as both over-warning (where there is no significant risk) and under-warning (where the user cannot distinguish between a significant risk and an insignificant risk), yet the Bounty Hunters are adamant that adding “qualifications” to the standard language is not permitted.

Proposition 65 does not apply to businesses with fewer than ten employees. Be careful though. “Employees” includes temporary and part-time employees. If, even counting temporary and part-time employees, your business has fewer than ten employees, consider yourself lucky. You get a pass on Proposition 65 liability, for now. Just don’t grow!

Small size is no guarantee of safety: in fact, many of the private enforcers prefer to target the small operation that does not have the financial ability to mount a strong defence.

To add some perspective here:

* Bioidentical progesterone is not listed as a potential carcinogen in any other state in the USA.
* Bioidentical progesterone is routinely used in fertility clinics around the globe to help sustain pregnancy in high-risk situations.
* Bioidentical progesterone is carcino-protective; it helps counteract the carcinogenic effects of estrogen."

IH just got back from the doc and told him about using the Progesterone cream because of the it can help with propecia sides and the 5-A something right. After I told him he said to stop if I don't have sides from propecia but as long as I take propecia it will effect that 5-A and Progesterone helps that right?

chapat - Progesterone inhibits DHT, reduces estrogen and will have some impact on the hair. It's a win win. Most doctors know next to nothing about hormones, so it sounds to me that the doctor is expressing "caution." Irregardless, progesterone is safe.

I've just started using progesterone cream made by biovea. The product says to put it on your thighs, chest, arms etc and to alternate it. If this could help block DHT is it best to put it on my forehead or does it not matter where i apply it?

Petch - I only wish there was a clinical study on the effects of Progesterone for hair loss. We'll probably never see it, since natural hormones cannot be patented.

There's two schools of thought on Progesterone. From only personal experience and the experience of just one other
person, I know that for males using a small dab on the testes can work.

What about on the scalp?

I had tried it this way for a week. Why a week? First thing I noticed is that it immediately took away any inflammation. Minutes later the inflammation would return. I tried this several years ago before when only using a basic phytosterol/DHT blocker.

It occurred to me at the time that Progesterone's half-life was pretty short, at least with its actions in the scalp.

However, to the contrary, Master Exploder mentioned something good about topical use, so given my limited experience,
maybe it is better on the scalp?

I haven't used it long, and I have not tested it under the current regimen.

For women, it is recommended to alternate the areas, such as the thighs, breasts, etc. For males, my feeling (not proven) is the testes, but there's a lot more to learn about this and I just don't know.

Okay, cheers for the reply, guess i'll experiment. Put it on my forehead today with no notice ill effect, i'll try it lower down tomorrow