HRT, good or bad for menopausal women?

I do wish the medical community could come to some agreement on the benefits and dangers of HRT. Thirty years ago it was being pushed as the miracle preventative for osteoporosis, heart disease and dementia for menopausal women; then it became the kiss of death almost over night; then the waffling began after women lived in fear they'd taken the poison pill. Still arguing. But if it is this difficult to figure out how women, nature and hormones work (over fifty years of research), why in the world do some researchers and academics push the silly and dangerous transgendered woman nonsense. Is it just more money for Big Pharma or more big government grants for the medical schools?

https://www.medpagetoday.com/obgyn/hrt

"For women aged younger than 60 years or who are within 10 years of menopause onset and have no contraindications, the benefit-risk ratio is most favorable for treatment of bothersome VMS and for those at elevated risk for bone loss or fracture. For women who initiate HT more than 10 or 20 years from menopause onset or are aged 60 years or older, the benefit-risk ratio appears less favorable because of the greater absolute risks of coronary heart disease, stroke, venous thromboembolism, and dementia. Longer durations of therapy should be for documented indications such as persistent VMS or bone loss, with shared decision making and periodic reevaluation. For bothersome GSM symptoms not relieved with over-the-counter therapies and without indications for use of systemic HT, low-dose vaginal estrogen therapy or other therapies are recommended." North American Menopause Society statement, 2017

http://journals.lww.com/menopausejournal/Abstract/2017/07000/The_2017_hormone_therapy_position_statement_of_The.5.aspx