What is your true metabolic health?


On 9/21/2015 Dr. Goldstein was interviewed by Dr. Max Gomez on CBS. As many of you are already aware, our Bone Density and Body Composition unit has a new program using the Dexa machine (which uses less radiation than flying on an airplane) to perform Body Composition tests.

This innovative test reports your metabolic health based on your percentage of body fat, sex, and age. This method is far more accurate than using the BMI calculation that is outdated and not a sufficient measure of metabolic health. Many of you have already had this test done and can attest to how beneficial this information is to your health.

Please visit the Body Composition Unit’s website for more valuable information.

Another Front Page Article in Today’s New York Times


There is an extremely interesting article on the front page of today’s New York Times entitled, “Colorado Finds Startling Success in Effort to Curb Teenage Births.” The article talks about a private grant that allowed free IUDs or subdermal implants to prevent pregnancy that was a six-year experiment in Colorado. During this period of time, the birth rate among teenagers plunged 40% and the rate of abortions fell by 42%. Apparently, this was most evident in unmarried women under 25 who had not finished high school. In addition, the article talks about how the changes were “particularly pronounced in the poorest areas of the state… where many young women have unplanned pregnancies.” Understand, from a societal point of view, preventing unintended pregnancy, especially in women who would then have an unintended child, has merit. However, the endorsement of the American Academy of Pediatrics in the use of this type of LARC (long acting reversible contraception) for adolescents as a blanket statement is somewhat distressing to me.


When I trained, we were taught that intrauterine devices (IUDs) were best suited for patients who had had a child (the uterus grows with child bearing) and those in a stable monogamous relationship. If one catches a sexually transmitted disease from a partner, the IUD can serve as a wick helping to spread it up through the uterus and into the fallopian tubes often causing pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and often compromising the future fertility of these patients. Thus, while I agree that in patients who because of their lack of education or socio-economic status or lack of insight cannot be counted on for appropriate contraception without a device like an IUD or an implant that does not require any participation on their part—in such patients this may, in fact, make sense and as evidenced by the Colorado experiment will cut down on unintended births and abortions.


However, recently, I’ve had two young women referred to me from the student health service at NYU downtown (Washington Square) who had two IUDs each that they expelled. Each of these young women was sent to me to evaluate her uterus to see if there was some abnormality causing her to expel the IUD. Evaluation with saline infusion sonohysterogram and 3-D ultrasound revealed they had absolutely normal uteri. However, the width at the top of the uterus was only 2.9 cm in each of them, whereas, the IUD devices are 3.2 cm wide. In other words, each woman’s uterus was too small to accommodate the intrauterine device.


My overall point is that decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis and individualized. Most of my patients do not need to accept even the small risk of future tubal damage from an intrauterine device in order to prevent unintended pregnancy. These forms of LARC may be appropriate for some groups of patients but I have not routinely embraced them for young women in my practice who have not had children and are not in a stable, monogamous relationship. That is not to say that occasionally the rules may be broken, depending on the individual situation.

By |Other, Pregnancy|Comments Off on Another Front Page Article in Today’s New York Times

A Message About Today’s News Concerning Ovarian Cancer and Angelina Jolie


I am writing to you from Orlando where the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM) is having its annual meeting. I am the current president of this 10,000-member society and as most of you know I wrote the second book ever on transvaginal ultrasound and the first book on gynecological ultrasound.


Today’s news about Angelina Jolie’s decision to remove her ovaries necessitates that once again I send you, my patients, an email blast.


Some important facts; first Angelina Jolie carries the BRCA gene and that is why she had double mastectomies. In addition hers is the BRCA1 gene, which tends to cause high-grade ovarian tumors and tends to be premenopausal. The BRCA2 gene is less likely to be high grade and more likely to occur post menopausal. In addition less than 10% of ovarian cancers are related to this genetic mutation. Still, ovarian cancer tends to be a very lethal disease. In the “real world”, 82% of ovarian cancer presents as stage III or IV. The University of Kentucky ovarian cancer-screening program however found just the opposite. By annual transvaginal ultrasound screening, they picked up 82% of ovarian tumors at stage I or II, which is the exact opposite of the rest of the population. Recently a screening program in Britain, also using annual ultrasound screening, picked up ovarian cancer at an earlier stage. Still, they reported on nine women who came in less than one year after a negative ultrasound screen with a belly full of ovarian cancer—yet all nine were between 6–13 months since their negative screen. What does that tell us? If you are going to screen 12 months may be too long an interval. That is why for many years I have suggested seeing patients at six-month intervals, not for Pap tests but for vaginal sonograms. My personal motto has always been “over surveillance, under treat”

As usual if you have any concerns or questions don’t hesitate to call


I remain yours in health

Dr. Goldstein

By |Other|Comments Off on A Message About Today’s News Concerning Ovarian Cancer and Angelina Jolie