Black market hormones
Bootleg prescription drugs put trans folks' lives in danger

By Quinn Albaugh
Published: Mar 15

http://mcgilldaily.com/articles/28604

A couple of summers ago, I met a transwoman in New York City who was planning on ordering estrogen and an anti-androgen over the Internet. She had conducted meticulous research and claimed to have figured out the proper dosage, given her weight, her medical history, and other factors.

My reaction: "Isn't that dangerous?"

Hormones produce sweeping effects on the body. In addition to encouraging the development of secondary sex characteristics, hormones also affect one's libido, alcohol tolerance, and behaviour. Testosterone affects heart functioning and can increase the risk of sleep apnea. Estrogen generally produces sterility in transwomen in under a year.

Yes, they are dangerous and in some cases illegal.  But how many began with them, or stolen ones?  And until there is a proper means for all Transsexuals to begin the journey, the black market will continue to supply them.

It is up to the ones who are doing what they have to by the SOC, it let our brothers and sisters know they must not do the black market drugs.

There are too many wasteful expensive restrictions, people should be free to do whatever they want witht heir own body rather than be manipulated by a corrupt system. I feel I deserve the right, as long as I'm responsible, to take care of my own body, i don't need some BS TS association to look after me.

I'm feeling guilty agreeing with janet here.

One the one hand, she's absolutely right. But on the other, I'm petrified, as I'm sure janet is, about possibly encouraging someone to do this.

It's time to stop treating us as if we don't have the intellect to make rational decisions.

  When I see phrases like "manipulated by a corrupt system" or "BS TS association" I wonder where you are because I would never describe my experience with the medical system here (US midwest) to be corrupt. I take that to mean dishonest and not even following their own established protocols.  I found it to be imperfect for sure and I do understand the frustrations there can be and temptation to find alternate ways. It was hard to find people that had experience or preparation for TS protocols and willingness to help me but I just had to be persistent. The protocols may not be perfect but were not impossible to work with.

  When the medical system is supplying you with services, drugs, and surgery that can be dangerous and irreversible then they are participating with you.  I think it is reasonable for them to ask you to follow protocols that are meant to help them confirm whether you do have the knowledge and responsibility to do what you are asking them to help you with.  It's especially true these days where so many people blame (and sue) those helpers if things don't turn out the way they expected.  Exactly what the protocols should be has been and will be debated more and will change over time.  I learned a great deal about the risks and processes of changes to my body before deciding to transition.  I still know I will never know as much as my doctors, pharmacists, surgeon, therapists, lawyers who helped me with transition even though I also taught most of them a few things so I was glad to have them. By working within the system I help to make it better in the future for others.

Another way of thinking about this for anyone wanting to go outside the system is to ask yourself what is REALLY likely to be the most successful path to reach your ultimate goal. Will trying to bypass the system really get you everything you want?  Ultimately you are responsible for your own body because you have to live with it.

Those people don't have the moral authority to rip into those black market drug dealers.

Simple fact is I told my GP about my feelings when I was *20* I'm 24 next month. They are completely corrupt and utterly useless I don't expect any resources to come from the NHS or the decadent protocol that basically says "leave him to die" The only reason I'm dealing with them at all is to appease my naive friends and family. Thus far I've been proven right the only practical resource I've gotten thus far is a single useless blood test bag with the WRONG name on it. Despite me telling him that isn't my name anymore.

I jump all the hoops am friendly and polite to everyone I meet but I don't expect any of them to give a damn.

So don't rip into the few groups of people who have actually helped me out. Sure I know they are drug dealers and criminal mercenaries who exploit the crap out of me to give me what I need but least they actually helped me and gave me a tiny degree dignity over my otherwise bleak and miserable life.

A claim that the so called Legitimate medical establishment cannot claim to do.

I'd probably use internet stuff...

I research EVERYTHING and can tell my doctor as much or more about all my medications than he can...

and what is NHS?

Quote from: Ashleyjadeism on February 07, 2011, 07:12:54 PM
and what is NHS?

National Health Service.  From the UK

Ah... I hear alot of bad things about that...

Quote from: straycat on February 07, 2011, 08:25:02 AMWhen I see phrases like "manipulated by a corrupt system" or "BS TS association" I wonder where you are because I would never describe my experience with the medical system here (US midwest) to be corrupt... The protocols may not be perfect but were not impossible to work with.

They're impossible if you can't afford three+ months of therapy or if you can't afford an endocrinologist or if you have to drive out of state to find a GP who'll see you just for regular stuff, not to mention anything trans-related. The SOC only works for people with enough money to make it work, and even then, as in pebbles' case, it doesn't work well.

QuoteAnother way of thinking about this for anyone wanting to go outside the system is to ask yourself what is REALLY likely to be the most successful path to reach your ultimate goal. Will trying to bypass the system really get you everything you want?

You're assuming we have a choice.

Well, okay, we do: use whatever means necessary or don't transition medically.

Quote from: Ashleyjadeism on February 07, 2011, 07:21:06 PM
Ah... I hear alot of bad things about that...

Yeah, it terrible.

Universal health care, free at the point of use. Free hospitals. Community care. Fixed price prescriptions.

I really don't know how we cope.

Don't worry spacial, public health care for welfare people in the US is pretty much like NHS, not much, doing less, and we're going to bother you a whole lot about it too.  The only real difference is that a lot of people in the US have real health care, which comes with a job.  But I can see where that is not exactly the Brit policy.

Oh the NHS is brilliant if you ever get Leukemia, Or Need an organ transplanted, or have a heart attack. BIG stuff that will kill you.

They however are completely useless if you have GID an eating disorder, bipolar disorder, a rotton tooth, An impacted wisdom tooth, PCOS, trapped nerve ect

Things that will cripple you but not kill you.

Quote from: Ashleyjadeism on February 07, 2011, 07:21:06 PM
Ah... I hear alot of bad things about that...

Sorry but you heard WRONG then.

The NHS has limitations. It is not so good with certain things, but if you have an immediately life threatening condition it works pretty darned well and a fraction of the cost.

It may not be brilliant at dealing with the initial diagnosis and treatment of Trans folks, but at least they do try... and for people who approach the system in the right way they do eventually fund FREE surgery. The down side is that you do have to be very patient because it can take an age, which is why many of us do go privately.

However I've been fully transitioned as an adult for nearly 30 years and I've been postop for over 25... In all that time the NHS has supplied me with any hormones that I have needed for a very minimal price. So I reckon it has saved me several thousand pounds at least.

In short just bear in mind that whilst the British NHS is not perfect, and as Pebbles said, it has irritating shortcomings, even so the majority of Brits would not want to live without it, because we know that it is a very effective safety net. We can still opt for private care, and like most Americans, many of our jobs come with that, but if we are without, we don't face the same grim prospects that you do.

Oh yeah - and blackmarket hormones. Leaving aside any questions of blood tests and other monitoring, which I found out was important when it was revealed that I had an unsuspected intersex condition which was affecting my blood responses, the problem is being sure that you are actually getting what you are paying for.

I'm not getting on any soapbox, because nearly 30 years ago I did it myself whilst I was waiting for the NHS to catch up. Back then there was no internet so we used to buy stuff from other girls, or out of the back door from sympathetic doctors, so we knew it was the real deal. Now with the net vendors, without access to a lab, you don't actually KNOW for sure if you are buying genuine stuff - or some dodgy fake. That is the real danger. So it's not really about being control freaks. There are some genuine reasons why using the blackmarket is potentially dangerous

I will make one point about the NHS, which may be a criticism.

The priority is always given to those areas that can generate the most outrage and demand among the chatting classes.

Women's health is the top priority. Gynachology and obstetrics take a huge amount of the funds. (Why babies need to be born in hospitals I will never know).

Children's heath tends to come second.

General medicine, fractures, gastro-intestinal surgery and so on.

The elderly come next. This is a huge problem.

Last come any sort of mental health issues. Into this area, so much tends to be lumped.

But the biggest drain of funds is from administration. This is largely because of the endless inititives from central government, which are little more than a sop. Each time, a new set of managers are recruited, they each set up new systems, need a new army of secretaries and administrators, new offices and so on. Existing managers seem to shuffle around, looking busy.

If the US does get a decent health service, I would hope they will look at ours and others and try to identify the problems.

The US normally is quite good at administration, except in your defense departments. I'm pretty sure the US could have a health service that would be cheaper than ours and still be the envy of the world.

It is sad but true that you get what you pay for. If you purchase a car, get a DL, registration, put gas in it, pay for insurance, and cover maintenance on it then you get to work in 15 minutes. If you take a public bus for $2, you get to work in two hours. This is the difference between government systems and private systems.

I've seen time and time again on this board the same problems with people who live in countries such as the UK or Canada. The hormones may be free or extremely cheap, but as Pebbles basically pointed out you spend 4+ years trying to get them.

Neither system is fair but I consider the private system freer. If healthcare (or other things) are mostly public then there is no competition, no incentive to improve care or service. Plus, with whatever little private options there are these won't have competition either (except against the public system) and thus will drive the cost of the private care/services significantly upward forcing practically everyone except the extremely wealthy to choose the crappy public system.

In a mostly private system, you still have the drawbacks that those who basically can't afford anything don't get anything but with the competition that results, most people do get care and get it relatively quickly. My employer gives us options and I chose the more expensive one so that I would have the freedom to go to any doctor, any clinic, etc. and still have part of the care covered. As a result, after less than four months of therapy (which I got an appointment less than a week after I called) I was approved for hormones. When I called the doctor for the hormones I got an appointment in two days and a prescription right then and there. It cost money but it was efficient. A system that is run solely by the government is not going to be an efficient one. Had I been in some of these other countries, I probably would have spent now six months and not even had one therapist appointment.

I feel for those who have to put up with this crap as well as those in the private system who are broke and can't afford it. I'd favor a solution that could get the impoverished people efficient care but that would not punish those who do have money by making it less efficient for them. Someone on this board mentioned something about having to go to months of therapy only to be referred to a government gender clinic only to have to wait more months to even be considered for HRT. That is ridiculous. This is why I'm not a socialist. Most people do or can get jobs so I don't see why a socialist system should be imposed on everyone.

Quote from: Britney_413 on February 09, 2011, 02:17:38 AM
It is sad but true that you get what you pay for. If you purchase a car, get a DL, registration, put gas in it, pay for insurance, and cover maintenance on it then you get to work in 15 minutes. If you take a public bus for $2, you get to work in two hours. This is the difference between government systems and private systems.

I've seen time and time again on this board the same problems with people who live in countries such as the UK or Canada. The hormones may be free or extremely cheap, but as Pebbles basically pointed out you spend 4+ years trying to get them.

Neither system is fair but I consider the private system freer. If healthcare (or other things) are mostly public then there is no competition, no incentive to improve care or service. Plus, with whatever little private options there are these won't have competition either (except against the public system) and thus will drive the cost of the private care/services significantly upward forcing practically everyone except the extremely wealthy to choose the crappy public system.

In a mostly private system, you still have the drawbacks that those who basically can't afford anything don't get anything but with the competition that results, most people do get care and get it relatively quickly. My employer gives us options and I chose the more expensive one so that I would have the freedom to go to any doctor, any clinic, etc. and still have part of the care covered. As a result, after less than four months of therapy (which I got an appointment less than a week after I called) I was approved for hormones. When I called the doctor for the hormones I got an appointment in two days and a prescription right then and there. It cost money but it was efficient. A system that is run solely by the government is not going to be an efficient one. Had I been in some of these other countries, I probably would have spent now six months and not even had one therapist appointment.

I feel for those who have to put up with this crap as well as those in the private system who are broke and can't afford it. I'd favor a solution that could get the impoverished people efficient care but that would not punish those who do have money by making it less efficient for them. Someone on this board mentioned something about having to go to months of therapy only to be referred to a government gender clinic only to have to wait more months to even be considered for HRT. That is ridiculous. This is why I'm not a socialist. Most people do or can get jobs so I don't see why a socialist system should be imposed on everyone.

The point you are missing Britney is that the NHS is NOT a monopoly. Plenty of people in the UK, myself included, opt for private medicine, and those options are no more expensive to us than they are in countries that have no public system. If Pebbles had the money she could have private care. If she doesn't then in our system she gets treated more slowly, but in a pure private system she simply doesn't get treated at all.

So it isn't an either or situation. You can have both as indeed we do. The only difference is that those who simply can't afford it, who in completely private system are basically screwed and can simply shove off and die untreated, in our NHS have an option. Yes they wait, and yes the service they get is VASTLY inferior to those of us who choose to pay, but they DO get looked after, whereas in a completely private system they just get told to shut up and put up with it!

Yes the rest of us pay a small premium - but it isn't than much, and if we didn't pay it towards something worthwhile like universal healthcare the government would probably spend it anyway on something silly like another pointless war.

So overall I know which system I prefer, and its niether the completely private system, nor the completely public one. It is what we in the Uk are lucky enough to have, the best of BOTH.

Quote from: Britney_413 on February 09, 2011, 02:17:38 AMMost people do or can get jobs so I don't see why a socialist system should be imposed on everyone.

Because you don't know what it's like for those who can't get jobs.

Ummmmmm...wasn't this a thread about the dangers of black market hormones? Not the merits of public vs private health care? Which though extremely interesting is probably best left for another thread.

Quote from: Helena on February 09, 2011, 04:20:38 AM
Ummmmmm...wasn't this a thread about the dangers of black market hormones? Not the merits of public vs private health care? Which though extremely interesting is probably best left for another thread.

Sometimes thread topics do evolve just like any conversation - and indeed there is a common theme to the topic - which is easy access to appropriate and relevant care. So in this particular instance I beg to respectfully differ on that point.