Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT)

 

Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) is most commonly known for treating the discomfort associated with menopause. However, more broadly, HRT is any form of hormone therapy that involves a patient receiving hormones to supplement or replace naturally occurring hormones in the body. For this discussion post, research different forms of HRT and choose one type to focus on.

Initial post: In your original post, describe a patient who may benefit from HRT. Explain the risks and benefits to using HRT in the scenario you chose. Be sure to include information on safety.

 

Sample Solution

Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) can be beneficial for a number of patients depending on the situation. For instance, a patient who has been diagnosed with hypothyroidism may benefit from HRT. Hypothyroidism is characterized by an underproduction of the hormone thyroxine which can lead to symptoms such as fatigue, depression and weight gain (De Groot et al., 2019). HRT would involve administering synthetic thyroid medication that replaces the insufficient thyroxine production in order to reduce these symptoms and restore normal functioning.

In terms of risks and benefits associated with using HRT for this particular scenario, it’s important to note that while taking thyroid medications can lead to improvement in general feelings of well-being over time – such as increased energy levels or improved mood – there are potential side effects that should be taken into consideration (Nguyen et al., 2016). These include digestive upset as well as heart palpitations and difficulty sleeping (Finnell & Poehlman 2019). In addition, long-term use of synthetic hormones can cause disruption in other bodily functions so regular blood tests must be taken periodically to ensure proper dosages are being administered at all times (Usher et al., 2018).

In conclusion, although HRT poses certain risks when treating hypothyroidism specifically due to potential side effects from synthetically produced hormones – when used properly under medical supervision it can provide significant benefits for reducing symptoms related this disorder including boosted energy levels and better overall feelings of well being This could greatly improve quality of life for those suffering from this disease if managed safely through closely monitored dosages and frequent checkups with one’s physician.

 

is leads to question of what qualifies to be a combatant, and whether it is lawful to kill each other as combatants. Combatants are people who are involved directly or indirectly with the war and it is lawful to kill ‘to shelter the innocent from harm…punish evildoers (Begby et al (2006b), Page 290).However, as mentioned above civilian cannot be harmed, showing combatants as the only legitimate targets, another condition of jus in bello, as ‘we may not use the sword against those who have not harmed us (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314).’ In addition, Frowe suggested combatants must be identified as combatants, to avoid the presence of guerrilla warfare which can end up in a higher death count, for example, the Vietnam War. Moreover, he argued they must be part of the army, bear arms and apply to the rules of jus in bello. (Frowe (2011), Page 101-3). This suggests Frowe seeks a fair, just war between two participants avoiding non-combatant deaths, but wouldn’t this lead to higher death rate for combatants, as both sides have relatively equal chance to win since both use similar tactics? Nevertheless, arguably Frowe will argue that combatant can lawfully kill each other, showing this is just, which is also supported by Vittola, who states: ‘it is lawful to draw the sword and use it against malefactors (Begby et al (2006b), Page 309).’
In addition, Vittola expresses the extent of military tactics used, but never reaches a conclusion whether it’s lawful or not to proceed these actions, as he constantly found a middle ground, where it can be lawful to do such things but never always (Begby et al (2006b), Page 326-31). This is supported by Frowe, who measures the legitimate tactics according to proportionality and military necessity. It depends on the magnitude of how much damage done to one another, in order to judge the actions after a war. For example, one cannot simply nuke the terrorist groups throughout the middle-east, because it is not only proportional, it will damage the whole population, an unintended consequence. More importantly, the soldiers must have the right intention in what they are going to achieve, sacrificing the costs to their actions. For example: if soldiers want to execute all prisoners of war, they must do it for the right intention and for a just cause, proportional to the harm done to them. This is supported by Vittola: ‘not always lawful to execute all combatants…we must take account… scale of the injury inflicted by the enemy.’ This is further supported by Frowe approach, which

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.