Jennifer Gunter

Thank you.

Thank you so much for having me.

Well, I would say that Marty McCary is an incredible cherry picker and really displays a lack of breadth of knowledge of women's health care in general, or I would say even like health care in general.

Because, you know, if the data were that clear, if it was that thing, you know...

Why do all the professional societies who have people who do the research and who have combed through everything and disclosed their biases, why do they have different conclusions?

And so I think that, yeah, I mean, that was just propaganda.

And primarily, it seemed like it was based on the book chapter he wrote, which was, again, cherry-picked with data from low-quality studies and in the press release and in the JAMA article.

I mean, they referenced...

you know, pre-WHI data.

A 1980 clinical, not even a clinical trial, a 1980 case control study, a 1996 case control study from a retirement community in Southern California, and then a review article from like 1991 of observational data.

So I'm like, dude, if that's what you think is like the state of the art, like let me introduce you to a lot more stuff.

Yeah, well, so as somebody who was practicing menopause care before the WHI and after the WHI and whose care really has not changed at all,

I would say that the Women's Health Initiative gave us a lot of information.

It was, I would say, misconstrued by the press at the beginning based on a bad press release, which is really ironic because that's exactly what McCary did, right?

So he is doing exactly what he accused the WHI researchers of doing.

And I would say that the WHI has given us a lot of data about two hormone regimens.

So one, estrogens.

conjugated equine estrogens, which is an oral form, and about conjugated equine estrogens with medroxyprogesterone acetate, which are regimens that we don't use much now.

And we generally favor transdermal therapy.

So it's very difficult for us to make kind of class-based decisions on one formulation, right?