PSA levels not good predictors

January 20, 2004

I have noticed over and over again that prostate cancer patients are

frequently citing PSA level as a reliable indicator of progress in the battle. I

recall reading that PSA is a very unrekiable indicator and may be seen as a mere

tool to funnel more patients into " early treatment " and its less than effective

and safe results. It was not just my recollection and " distrust " of medical

motivations. An article in the Journal of Urology by Stanley,MD

" Postoperative serum prostate specific antigen levels between 2 and 22 ng/l

correlate

poorly with post-radical prostatectomy cancer morphology "

2002:167(1):103-111.The researchers found that PSA from 2 to 9 are " clinically

useless " in

preicting size or severity of the cancer when removed. 0 to 4 are considered

normal.

I also recall a controversy over the real significance of PSA itself. Does it

mean the body is fighting the cancer and more is generated when the immune

system is putting up a fight-in which case it might be good to see a hiher

level.This is all my idea-no hard documentation there, Do any of the patients

with

prostate cancer recall feeling healthier and stronger after the PSA went up?

Since many of you will say- " We have nothing else " I am also posting material

from Dr. V ,MD's newsletter about an alternative test.

arnold

January 20, 2004

I have noticed over and over again that prostate cancer patients are

frequently citing PSA level as a reliable indicator of progress in the battle. I

recall reading that PSA is a very unrekiable indicator and may be seen as a mere

tool to funnel more patients into " early treatment " and its less than effective

and safe results. It was not just my recollection and " distrust " of medical

motivations. An article in the Journal of Urology by Stanley,MD

" Postoperative serum prostate specific antigen levels between 2 and 22 ng/l

correlate

poorly with post-radical prostatectomy cancer morphology "

2002:167(1):103-111.The researchers found that PSA from 2 to 9 are " clinically

useless " in

preicting size or severity of the cancer when removed. 0 to 4 are considered

normal.

I also recall a controversy over the real significance of PSA itself. Does it

mean the body is fighting the cancer and more is generated when the immune

system is putting up a fight-in which case it might be good to see a hiher

level.This is all my idea-no hard documentation there, Do any of the patients

with

prostate cancer recall feeling healthier and stronger after the PSA went up?

Since many of you will say- " We have nothing else " I am also posting material

from Dr. V ,MD's newsletter about an alternative test.

arnold

January 21, 2004

Hello Arnold:

With what I read on this subject I would have to agree with your initial

statement. I have read that if the body undergoes any trauma it will cause

the PSA to rise, but will go down after the trauma has gone. However, it is

a too positive proof, in too many cases of which I am aware, to ignore it

and not having the test taken. Prostate cancer can be slow growing and fast

growing, and it does metastisize into the bones of the pelvic area., when

it does. Then you know something is wrong, because that is very, very

painful, and usually terminal. A biopsy would quicly confirm or deny the PSA

reading.I had a good friend whose Doctor took one test, and said he needed

no more. He died later of prostate cancer which he didn't know he had until

it had metastisized to the bone.

One of the arguments against it is, and I think it justifieable, is that the

following treatment if begun , may be costly, and may, and likely will, make

the patient suffer needlessly from the treatment. The answer to this is, and

this is what was done for another friend of mine, the Urologist took two

more PSA tests about 3 months apart, to confirm the result.

It was General Schwartscof (please excuse the spelling, if wrong ), who, on

TV, after he and another high profile friend were found to have prostate

cancer, warned other men to be sure to get the PSA test. My brother heard

this, and though he was told that he wouldn't be in danger of prosate cancer

because they had taken out his prostate, he thought that maybe he should

just check that out. He did and was found to have cancer, confirmed by

biopsy.

PSA levels not good predictors

> I have noticed over and over again that prostate cancer patients are

> frequently citing PSA level as a reliable indicator of progress in the

battle. I

> recall reading that PSA is a very unrekiable indicator and may be seen as

a mere

> tool to funnel more patients into " early treatment " and its less than

effective

> and safe results. It was not just my recollection and " distrust " of

medical

> motivations. An article in the Journal of Urology by Stanley,MD

> " Postoperative serum prostate specific antigen levels between 2 and 22

ng/l correlate

> poorly with post-radical prostatectomy cancer morphology "

> 2002:167(1):103-111.The researchers found that PSA from 2 to 9 are

" clinically useless " in

> preicting size or severity of the cancer when removed. 0 to 4 are

considered normal.

> I also recall a controversy over the real significance of PSA itself. Does

it

> mean the body is fighting the cancer and more is generated when the immune

> system is putting up a fight-in which case it might be good to see a hiher

> level.This is all my idea-no hard documentation there, Do any of the

patients with

> prostate cancer recall feeling healthier and stronger after the PSA went

up?

>

> Since many of you will say- " We have nothing else " I am also posting

material

> from Dr. V ,MD's newsletter about an alternative test.

> arnold

>

January 21, 2004