you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I meant more in the realm of TIMs having a potential for breast cancer that they likely wouldn't have had before, TIFs having vaginal atrophy due to lack of estrogin within the vaginal epithelium.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5868281/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4000345/

[–]lefterfield 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Well, breast cancer could fall into the category of increased risk, which is what I was saying. And again, I'm not saying that that is what's going on, I'm saying I don't know if that's what the data shows. In the case of females having vaginal atrophy, that is absolutely a risk they would not otherwise have had.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, I just wanted to throw links up to clarify. We were mostly on the same page anyway. I've somewhat abandoned ship anyway after the thread was pretty much hijacked into a pity party.

[–]lefterfield 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Lol, yes. He's fairly ridiculous, even as TIMs go. Sorry your thread got hijacked, the medical issues are important!

[–]MarkTwainiac 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

TIMs who take exogenous estrogen (and progesterone if they do) have an increased risk of breast cancer over other males, but their risk does not rise to the risk level of female people with intact breasts.