DES endometriosis

When Being a Tall Girl Was a Medical Condition: DES and the Tall Girls

18263 views

To treat young healthy prepubescent girls with a known carcinogen to stunt their adult height sounds like a bizarre science fiction experiment, but it is unfortunately true. From 1959 through the 1970s physicians and researchers from the Royal Children’s Hospital and the University of Melbourne, gave adolescent girls of tall stature a powerful estrogenic hormone with a growing list of known side effects called diethylstilbestrol (stilboestrol) or DES.

DES had been used in obstetrics to prevent miscarriage, in farm animals to bulk up livestock before slaughter, and to caponize (castrate) chickens from the 1940s through 1970s. Early on, the drug was found to be ineffective in preventing miscarriage and serious side effects including cancer were noted. Indeed, cancer in farm hands caring for animals treated with DES and concern about the effect DES-infused meat might have on human health caused the FDA to ban its use in poultry farming in 1958, well before banning its use in human women. Despite the risks associated with this drug, clinicians and researchers in Victoria Australia, funded by governmental agencies and throughout the US, Norway, and elsewhere, thought stunting the growth of tall girls, for purely psychosocial reasons, was a good idea.

The rationale behind treating tall girls was so they could do ballet, buy clothes more easily, and find boyfriends and husbands. DES was used on healthy girls for purely psychosocial reasons. Apparently, being a tall girl was reason enough to consider medical treatment with a powerful, largely untested, synthetic estrogen with mounting evidence of carcinogenicity.

Little consideration was given to the psychosocial effects this drug would have on a young girl including nausea, the immediate onset of menstruation, the sudden development of breasts, and sudden rapid weight gain; and, of course, the long-term health outcomes of this treatment were never a consideration. The only long-term outcome considered was adult height. When meeting the tall women who underwent this treatment, it is reasonable to conclude the treatment did not work. Indeed, most of the research suggests only a 4cm reduction in height.

Discovering the Tall Girls: DES Action Australia

DES Action Australia was established in 1979 as the national support and advocacy group for individuals exposed to DES. In the early 1980s, the DES issue was new to us all and we were devouring information about its history and use. One aspect of interest was its use in veterinary practice. One of the first DES “patients” may have been Tricky Woo of the ‘All Creatures Great and Small’ books and TV series. In the late 1930s, kindly Dr. Herriot prescribed the new “wonder drug” stilboestrol for Tricky Woo’s embarrassing problem with incontinence.

Any drug which was thought to prevent miscarriage and result in bigger, healthier babies was of obvious interest to veterinary science. However, as in the earlier laboratory animal experiments, DES was soon shown to be deleterious to the health of the mother animal, to the DES-exposed offspring, and, interestingly, to subsequent litters. Thus, recommended use of DES in veterinary practice was limited to old animals and animals that were never going to breed.

We first heard of DES being used to inhibit the adult height of tall young girls almost by accident. In the early 1980s a sister of DES Action member, Clare Green, was studying veterinary science at Melbourne University. Through her, we learnt of a Melbourne veterinary scientist, Dr. Anne Jabarah, who had researched DES during the 1960s as part of her Master’s and PhD studies. Clare rang Dr. Jabarah and spoke to her at length about her research findings: that administering DES to cattle led to them subsequently developing mammary cancer. Dr. Jabarah commented that the published articles caused a great deal of interest internationally but not in Australia. Almost as an afterthought, she mentioned the Royal Children’s Hospital (RCH) here in Melbourne had requested details of her research, as they were thinking of using DES to inhibit the growth of young girls. She said she had often wondered whether they went ahead with the treatment.

Clare, on behalf of DES Action, wrote to the RCH seeking clarification on the matter. A letter was received from the medical director of the RCH stating that DES had never been used for such a purpose. In addition, Clare was asked to go into the Victorian Health Department to meet with a department spokesperson. The doctor told Clare that the matter had been looked into and there was no evidence that DES was used for this purpose. We were thus reassured, both in writing and in person, that no such trial had taken place.

So it came quite a shock several years later when I was contacted by a young woman who had been part of this nonexistent trial. She had attended the RCH and had been given DES to stunt her growth. She was in her early 20s and had been diagnosed with advanced invasive cervical cancer. As she was a nurse she knew this was very rare, particularly as she had none of the known risk factors for the disease.

When I asked her how she found out about DES Action and obtained my phone number, she said her treating doctor (a well-known Ob/Gyn) had suggested she ring. He had made the connection between her DES exposure as a young girl and the subsequent cervical cancer.

Another letter was sent to the RCH, again requesting clarification on the matter. We received back a very defensive letter in which the hospital distanced itself from the trials. They said that the clinician involved had been a private consultant and what he did in his clinics was in no way connected to the RCH.

Untangling the Tall Girls Trials after Years of Secrecy and Denials

In subsequent years (the mid-1980s to 1997) we received a handful of further inquiries from “tall girls” requesting information. Unfortunately, these were spaced too far apart for us to put the women in contact with each other. The health concerns of these women had an all-too-familiar ring: dysplasia, endometriosis, ovarian cysts, aggressive cancers (cervix and breast), impaired fertility, and premature menopause (i.e. occurring during their 20s).

I can’t really describe my feeling when I opened The Age newspaper on 27 June 1997 and read on page 1: Hormone tests on teenage girls referred to inquiry. I think the main emotion was a sense of relief – that the truth would finally be known – tall girls were given DES to stunt their growth. It also brought back to me the anger and frustration Clare and I experienced in the early 1980s when our inquiries were fobbed off by the medical establishment and health authorities.

And then my phone started ringing. As DES was mentioned in the article, the newspaper must have had me as a contact and referred any inquiries to me. Remembering how previously we were unable to put the women in contact with each other, I made a contact list of every phone call received. I explained to every caller the importance of organizing, of forming a group to share experiences, and offered to give them the list to follow up. From memory, I think Janet Cregan-Wood was about the fifth caller. She rang back the next day and “volunteered” to take on the role. And so the Tall Girls group formed and their DES story emerged.

More about DES and Tall Girls Story

About the author:  Marian Vickers is a DES daughter and, in 1979, was a founding member of DES Action Australia. As the DES story has evolved over the years so her focus has broadened – from issues around DES exposure to the wider issue of safety of pharmaceuticals; and finally to an understanding of endocrine disruptors and the implications for public health, particularly in terms of inadequate drug safety surveillance and reporting systems. In 2008 Marian became a ‘Gardasil mother’ when her elder daughter’s health was severely impacted by the HPV vaccine. Not only did she gain an appreciation of what DES mothers went through, she sees disturbing parallels between the DES and Gardasil stories.

We Need Your Help

More people than ever are reading Hormones Matter, a testament to the need for independent voices in health and medicine. We are not funded and accept limited advertising. Unlike many health sites, we don’t force you to purchase a subscription. We believe health information should be open to all. If you read Hormones Matter, and like it, please help support it. Contribute now.

Yes, I would like to support Hormones Matter. 

This article was published originally on Hormones Matter on April 21, 2014. 

My Journey from DES Advocate to Author

2501 views

My name is Judith Barrow and I am an author. I have been connected with DES Action UK and USA since I heard a programme about Stilboestrol (Diethylstilbestrol in the USA) (DES) on the radio many years ago. I learned several years ago that a relative was affected by this drug.

The damage DES causes is very personal and as private person, she didn’t want anyone to know that she had been exposed to DES. So I became her front person. I did the research for her. I contacted the DES organizations on her behalf. What I found changed my life and led me to write a book. Here is my story.

DES and Endometriosis

I’d known for many years that my relative suffered with chronic endometriosis, and that she had anatomical deformities. Ultimately, it was discovered that she had a narrowing of the cervical canal which resulted in increasingly painful menstruation. Then I heard a Radio Four programme called ‘You and Yours’ which included an article on DES. I realized that a lot of the content applied to my relative.

I made the inquires for her. First to DES Action UK, which was still extant then (they folded last year due to lack of funds and support). I sent for their newsletter and went online. The more we read, the more we were convinced that she had been exposed in utero to Stilboestrol. Like many private families, her mother initially denied it. This caused family problems, so she didn’t pursue the issue any further.

The information she gained from the DES groups made her aware that she needed to have the annual cervical smear (the only specialists for this test for DES Daughters is in Ireland). The more research I carried out, the more aware I became of the damages DES had caused.

After a year of communicating with DES Action UK, I was asked to write an article appealing for DES Daughters and Mothers to come forward and tell their stories. It was hoped that the group would get more members and that, if more voices were heard, then perhaps the British Government would listen.

The stance of the Government is twofold; that those pregnant women who were prescribed the drug were given it so far in the past that to raise it as an issue now would only cause ”unnecessary concern.”  They believed it was a problem to be discussed privately between the mothers and the drug companies. I disagreed.

Following the article, many women contacted me to tell their stories. Some were heartbreaking; one daughter had six miscarriages before giving up the struggle to conceive (she then, happily, adopted a lovely little girl). Another Daughter had too many health problems to list but amongst them she suffered from endometriosis, uterine fibroids, paraovarian cysts. It was no wonder she was depressed. Her mother wrote many letters to the Government. Ultimately the reply came back – “Thank you for your letter, future correspondence will be noted and filed but not responded to…” The mother cried when she told me. I was so angry for her.

But the DES Daughter story; the one I first came across when I knew of Stilboestrol and DES Action UK, that really affected me was from one of the initial members. I enclose part of the interview, and further comment, from the article in The Sunday Independent: Sunday 22 January 2012 (this decided me to self-publish the book; it gave credence and veracity to the story. It reads as follows:

Thousands of women could be at risk from ‘silent Thalidomide’

A drug intended to prevent miscarriage is blamed for causing cancer in the daughters – and possibly even granddaughters – of women who took it decades ago. By Sarah Morrison and Jaymi McCann

The first recorded “DES daughter” in Britain, Heather Justice, 59, from Jarrow, was 25 when she found out she had vaginal cancer and would have to undergo a hysterectomy and partial vaginectomy. Although she found records showing her mother had been given DES in the 1950’s, she was unable to bring a case to court – (in the UK, because she could not identify which manufacturer had produced the drug. However, a US lawyer did help her get some compensation there.

Also, she says –“it is impossible for anyone to find the manufacturer of the drug in this country, not just me, as it was never patented. It was the surgeon who performed my hysterectomy who asked my mother if she knew what she had taken. He knew it must have been DES because of the rare type of cancer I had. He was also the one who found her medical records with the generic name of the drug”:- added after this interview)

After years of fighting the legal system, she says she feels disillusioned. “One of the problems is that unlike Thalidomide, where you see the problem the minute the baby was born, women who took DES had healthy babies,” she says. “Problems were hidden until the teens and twenties, by which point we were forgotten about. When I asked my mum what she had taken, she didn’t even remember the name of the stuff. It is a complete and utter minefield.”…

It took almost nine years to research, to contact women from different countries and piece together a story. Although I am not a DES Daughter – and like many others in the UK still are – I was totally unaware of this drug, until that one radio show on DES. The more I discovered the angrier I became. That these women are still fighting for recognition, acknowledgement from the pharmaceutical companies after so long is a disgrace.

What is DES?

DES, a synthetic oestrogen, was created by Charles Dodds in the UK in 1938. It was expected to help prevent miscarriages. Years later, he raised concerns about DES but by then very few in the medical field were listening. Doctors prescribed Stilboestrol to pregnant women between the nineteen forties and seventies, believing it was safe. The women had no reason to doubt but, too late, they learned the horrible truth. Not only was DES ultimately proved to be ineffectual, it caused drastic damage to their children: An increased risk for infertility, vaginal/cervical cancer in young women and breast cancer in later life are but the start. Scientific studies continue add to the growing list of serious medical problems caused by exposure before birth. Hormones Matter has covered DES here, here and here.

Now researchers are investigating whether DES health issues are extending into the next generation, the so-called DES Grandchildren. Millions around the world were exposed to DES, but this tragedy flies under the radar of general consciousness. I set out to change that. These women and men should not suffer in silence.

From that initial contact with DES UK, my life changed drastically. I have become an advocate for DES education, research and services. I wrote a book to publicize the depth of suffering women, their children and grandchildren exposed to DES experience, often silently. Ten percent of proceeds from the book sales go directly to DES research. I hope that my work will in some small way help change that.

To learn more about my book click: Silent Trauma.

To learn more about DES action groups: DES Action Groups Worldwide

What is DES and Why You Should Care

6739 views

Diethylstilbestrol or DES is synthetic estrogen developed in the late 1930s. It was initially approved by the FDA in 1941 for vaginitis and as an early hormone replacement therapy for menopausal women.  It was later approved a variety of low estrogen indications. In 1947, the FDA approved its use in pregnant women with a history of miscarriage. DES had been used off-label for miscarriage prevention since the early 1940s, despite the fact that little evidence supported its use and animal studies indicated clear carcinogenic and congenital reproductive abnormalities in the offspring.

After 10 years of widespread use and marketing, a double-blind, placebo-controlled study on the efficacy of DES was finally conducted. As one might expect, it was found ineffective in preventing miscarriage. In fact, women on DES had a higher risk of miscarriage. Later studies in the 1960s began detailing the adverse events associated with this drug. Despite mounting evidence of the dangers of diethylstilbestrol, it remained on the market and widely used through the early 1970s in the US and into the 1980s in some European countries.  In the US alone, it is estimated that between 5-10 million women and their children were exposed to DES.  Because the compound was never patented, 287 drug companies sold DES under a multitude of brands  and for an array of low-estrogen conditions.

In addition to diethylstilbestrol use in humans, it was used widely in farm animals to fatten up the chickens and cattle, beginning in the early 1950s and through the 1970s. DES was found to cause cancer and interestingly enough, cause gynecomastia (man boobs) and sterility in the poultry workers. Well before DES was banned in humans, the FDA banned it in poultry under the newly enacted Delaney Clause to the FDA 1958.  It seems man boobs and sterility was all it took to ban the product in chicken farms.  Miscarriage, congenital abnormalities and cross-generation cancer risks, on the other hand, were not sufficient to initiate its ban in large cattle or humans. It was another 20 years before diethylstilbestrol was banned in cattle or humans and many years after before it was removed from the food chain (if it even is now).  “In 1980, half a million cattle from one hundred and fifty-six feedlots in eighteen states were found with illegal DES implants.”  Even upon FDA’s decision to withdraw its approval of DES in cattle and feed, it did so on grounds of the procedural non-compliance of the manufacturers, erstwhile maintaining the safety of diethylstilbestrol, “because there is no evidence of a public health hazard.”  Despite its clear carcinogenic and teratogenic risks, it is still used in veterinary care.

Diethylstilbestrol Risk for Humans

Amongst those suffering the most from DES exposure are men and women who were exposed in utero as developing fetuses.  DES was given to pregnant women from the 1940 through 1971 in the US and into the 1980s in some European countries. If you were born anytime between 1940 and 1980, ask your mom if she was given DES to prevent miscarriage. It was sold under dozens of brand names (click here for brand names).

Sons and Daughters of DES

The range of depth of reproductive abnormalities, endocrine and health issues found in the children and grandchildren of DES moms, is expanding regularly. If your mom or grandmother was given DES, here is a list of health issues to look for:

DES Daughters

In a large cohort study comparing the reproductive health of the daughters of women prescribed DES during pregnancy to the health of women whose mothers had not been given DES, researchers found a 2-8 times higher incidence of the following conditions:

  • Infertility
  • Spontaneous abortion
  • Ectopic pregnancy
  • Second trimester pregnancy loss,
  • Preterm delivery
  • Preeclampsia
  • Stillbirth
  • Neonatal death
  • Early menopause
  • Breast cancer
  • Cervical neoplasia
  • Clear cell adenocarcinoma

The increased risk of miscarriage and adverse pregnancy outcome in DES daughters is overwhelmingly linked to structural abnormalities with uterus. Fully 69% of DES daughters who have had difficult with infertility and miscarriage have an abnormally shaped uterine cavity or structural changes to the cervix (44%).

DES and Endometriosis

Of particular interest to Hormones Matter followers, DES exposure in utero is linked to an 80% increase in endometriosis. We will be digging deeper into the DES – endometriosis connection in the coming weeks.

DES Sons

Sons of women given DES during pregnancy are three times more likely to have structural abnormalities of the genitals including:

  • epididymal cysts
  • undescended testes
  • extremely small testes
  • hypospadias (misplaced urethral opening)
  • micropenis (some, but not all)
  • increased risk of infertility
  • increased risk of testicular and prostate cancer (although the research has just begun)

In the animal research, offspring of DES exposed mothers shows a vast array of structural and morphological changes across multiple physiological systems ranging from sex reversal in male fish to structural and functional changes in pancreatic cells. The full scope of damage from DES is yet to be determined.

DES Grandchildren

Yes, there are third generation effects from this drug. Researchers are just beginning to untangle the third generation effects. In women, menstrual irregularities appear more common as do the various forms of cancer, but the data are unclear. In men, hypospodias may be more frequent, but again the data are mixed.

Endocrine disruptors like diethylstilbestrol impact human health in ways we are only just beginning to understand. The current methods for measuring and calculating risk for endocrine disruptors is out-dated and based on standard, linear, dose-response curves that not only fail to account for how hormone systems work, but also fail to address possible transgenerational effects. Hormones matter and sooner or later we must address the broader endocrine system in pharmaceutical and environmental regulation. As women, we ought to be fighting for sooner.