"undent  Here's what IMS says ""However, natural progesterone and some progestogens
have specific beneficial effects that could justify their use besides the expected actions on the endometrium."" and  ""Micronized progesterone or dydrogesterone used in association with oral or percutaneous estradiol may be associated with no increase in risk or lower risk than use of synthetic progestogens for at least 4 years, and perhaps even 8 years, of treatment.""

That seems pretty positive to me. Sorry it's not discussing compounded bioidenticals, but the article makes it clear that it is discussing bioidenticals, as does Boothby when referencing the same data. Compounding does not define bioidentical anywhere but in your mind. Yes, they are associated, but that does not mean that they always go together.

Here's another quote from a NAMS post-graduate course[] - ""BHT is principally a construct within conventional HT that can usually be fulfilled by the use of existing commercial products that are familiar to all practitioners. There are valid reasons for prescribing compounded BHT for an individual patient, including lack of response from conventional manufactured HT, greater dosing flexibility, lack of a commercial equivalent, and especially patient preference.""  They were teaching that almost three years ago. You talk a lot about convergence, and I think that some of these articles are converging on a place that you cannot or will not see, because you are so focused on only what you want to see.   

"