Somers, Wiley, & Critics on Larry King Live

Tonight's show: "Why is Suzanne Somers coming under fire from some doctors? Find out why as she goes head-to-head with her harshest critics. Tune in tonight at 9 p.m. ET." (6 PM Pacific.)

According to my sources, Wiley, Diana Schwarzbein, and Erika Schwartz will be on.

You can submit questions by following this link: http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/larry.king.live/

UPDATE: Here's the transcript of the show. The Suzanne Somers / T.S. Wiley segment begins about halfway through.

I've sent my question, one I

I've sent my question, one I posted on my blog very recently. I doubt it'll make air but it'll be interesting to see.

Although I was somewhat

Although I was somewhat familiar with using natural hormones as replacement
therapy, I didn't go for it, as I am an er positive breast cancer survivor.
However, I did watch Larry King Last night and was appalled at the behavior
of Ms Somers and her defender.

If her information is so valid, perhaps, she can earn some respect by
respecting other's opinions and then state why she believes her views.
Her and her friend's behavior brought me to your site where I learned even
more about the dangers of bioidenticals.

Thanks for the info!

Bioidentical hormone

Bioidentical hormone replacement IS very safe. The natural hormones are molecularly identical to what the human body produces, unlike the synthetic drugs which have little in common with our body's hormones. The Women's Health Iniative in 2002 proved without a shadow of a doubt that synthetic estrogen is downright dangerous, so why are we even having this discussion? And if research doesn't sway you, just read the little package insert that comes with the Pill. If all the warnings about possible embolism, stroke, cancer, and heart attack don't alert you than perhaps you need to have that heart attack as a wake up call. Still somehow the pharmaceutical companies have done a wonderful job brainwashing doctors and women across America that synthetic hormones (which are strictly drugs and not really hormones) are safe. No, they're not safe at all, but just very profitable. Since natural hormones can't be patented they're obviously going to be discredited by the pharmaceutical companies and most mainstream doctors.

Personally, I have been using natural progesterone cream for over 2 years. Up until that time, I suffered severe PMS for over 20 years! (My PMS was so severe I wasn't even eligible to participate in a PMS study conducted by a UCLA researcher in l984.) Not one standard care physician had any words of advice on how to end my PMS other than through diet and exercise, which didn't work at all. Year after year I informed my various doctors about my condition, which by the way was rapidly getting worse, but doctors I found didn't and still don't pay any attention to PMS. If they can't operate on it or treat it with chemo it's not worth worrying about in their eyes. But thanks to the natural progesterone I have been free of PMS for 2 years now. I feel serene and cheerful, I sleep deeply, am full of energy, have no more water retention and sore breasts, and the list goes on. It also made a difference in my hair, which was becoming very dry, dull, and thin. My hair is now full and lustrous again like when I was in my twenties. My quality of life has so much improved since I started using natural progesterone that I wouldn't consider discontinuing its use ever.

I read Suzanne's book and it is a very good and comprehensive look at how to stave off aging through BRHT, diet, exercise, sleep, and attitude. It's only flaw at all is the inclusion of T.S.Wiley's (whose credentials are inflated and misrepresented) and her protocol, which has caused numerous serious health problems among women, notably progesterone dominance (immune suppression, kidney problems, weight gain, depression, etc). Suzanne missed the boat entirely on what the criticism was all about, unless she was just trying to protect T.S. Wiley, who in case you didn't notice had hardly anything to say at all in her defense, even though she was the entire reason for the discussion. It was probably wise that she limit her participation since it's pretty hard to defend her protocol and her lack of credentials.

Throughout Suzanne's book, Suzanne maintains the importance of replicating our body's natural hormonal template at optimal levels with BRHT. However, and this wasn't even mentioned by the female doctors who liked the rest of her book: Wiley's protocol doesn't come even remotely close to that natural replication. She recommends some 350mg/day of natural progesterone along with a very high amount of natural estrogen as well. This certainly isn't what happens in nature, and is also contrary to what Suzanne ardently defends in her book: to follow nature's plan. Suzanne shouldn't have been so trusting because all of this can only serve to damage her own credibility as an author and speaker on women's health.

I thought it was a shame that the male doctors were allowed to steer the entire crux of the debate off course. What was supposed to be strictly about T.S. Wiley and her lack of credibility (as well as dangerous protocol), turned into a debate over whether natural hormones are worse or better than synthetic. Hopefully that part of the discussion will at least cause those people who are still ignorant and/or brainwashed about the dangers of synthetic hormones to at least do their own research on the matter and see for themselves.

T.S. Wiley's protocol does

T.S. Wiley's protocol does follow physiological rhythms. There have been a number of very bright and creative people who have dropped out of formal education, educated themselves, and made massive contributions. Is this not so? Why doesn't this site also seek info from people who have had positive experiences on the protocol? BG

How sad that you mainly

How sad that you mainly attack whether or not T.S. Wiley has a degree. There are plenty of people who aren't very bright who have degrees and there are numerous who do not who are extremely bright. I think Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard to start a little company, hmmmm.

I have over the years taken a variety of bio-identitical hormones in a variety of configurations. This included the olive oil concoction you speak of. Not until I began the Wiley Protocol with the carefully controlled formulations and the carefully laid out rhythmic pattern of application have I had such wonderful success, with energy and sense of well-being. In fact, it has given me back my life which has been out of whack since I was a youngster. I am 61. Thank you T.S. Wiley for your innate genius and determination to help all women w/o ego, unlike what is expressed by the individual who operates this site. It is the lives of women and all of us in the long run that is at stake, since women are the basic foundation of society.

If there are women who are not doing well (and I don't know, because your attitude is too vituperative to have credence), then it is likely that they are in generally poor health, and have not detoxified their bodies and made sure that nutrients are on board before they began the protocol. Further they may not have had their physician carefully follow and adjust their dosages as is required on the protocol. One can't just jump on hormones and ignore the other aspects of good health such as rest, moderate (not overdone) exercise and proper nutrition and expect this to work by itself. All of these are laid out in both Wiley's and Somer's books.

It is a shame that people can't appreciate when others are trying to help them. I am sure that Suzanne Somers has plenty of money and does not need to sell books. She's just an energetic individual who is a producer and has the nature of sharing, she is what we call a "winner," that bothers many people.

As you may know, web site

As you may know, web site administrators can examine the logs and determine what pages particular visitors looked at and when. According to the logs, you posted your comment after looking only at this page, Followup on Wiley's Credentials, and Letter to Suzanne Somers. It seems clear to me that in none of these pages do I "attack whether or not T.S. Wiley has a degree." If you were to look more closely at these pages and the other material on this site, you would see that what I consider significant about T.S. Wiley, her protocol, and the other stakeholders in her protocol, ranges far beyond your characterization. This includes such things as falsely claiming to have a degree and systematic harassment of women who did not find success on the Wiley Protocol.

Thank you for sharing your analysis of those women. However, you've provided no indication that you possess the qualifications or the information that would be needed to make such a (blanket) diagnosis.

I can applaud the success some say they've had with the protocol, but not the arrogance and apathy some of them exhibit towards those who found only illness and fright -- even the fear of death. Whatever the motive behind it, that is the sort of thing I consider sad.