Re: Experts: PSA Test Still Valuable for Prostate Can...

[Guest guest]

,

Yes it is a good article, but I noticed Kathy left out important points in the article, for example:-

<SNIP> But as annual screenings have become more commonplace, PSA screening is now detecting much smaller cancers -- many of them slow-growing and worthy of "watchful waiting" rather than more radical prostate-removing surgery.<SNIP>

I think the article in general favours PSA testing but to leave out the salient point above is a little naughty. If surgery really worked to cure prostate cancer wouldn't we all advocate PSA screening for all men? The fact is surgery has failed two controlled studies and it is the failure of surgery that brings the PSA test into disrepute. Remember also that a raised PSA doesn't always mean prostate cancer is present, nor does a low reading necessarily mean that no prostate cancer is present.

In the right hands the PSA test is a good diagnostic tool but I am afraid some urologists have exploited the PSA test for their own ends.

Kathy

What a good article - we in the field have known this, even though we are not professionals. It is good to see a common sense view. We get so many posts from men who are disappointed that they were over treated but there are many of us, some, sadly, no longer with us who wish that our PCa had been spotted and acted on earlier. The DRE and PSA are still good markers - role on the day when we have better recognition of agressive disease that needs early action.

[Guest guest]

We had a comedian in the UK whose catchphrase was "You are naughty, but I like you"

I snipped because I was cross posting to lists that will not allow complete articles posted. I had a difficult time deciding what to cut.

Didn't mean to be "naughty".

Kathy

[Guest guest]

Absolutely . If it's one thing we have on this list it is kindness, coupled with balance :-) Kathy is a gem, I agree.

Thanks, for putting the group in the know.

I must say how much I appreciate the way Kathy keeps us informed and thank her for her rapid explanation.

The kindness she shows is really pleasing.

[Guest guest]

I snipped because I was cross posting to lists that will not allow complete articles posted. I had a difficult time deciding what to cut.

Didn't mean to be "naughty".

Kathy

-----Original Message-----From: coolerking5@... Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 6:20 PMTo: ProstateCancerSupport Subject: Re: Experts: PSA Test Still Valuable for Prostate Can...,Yes it is a good article, but I noticed Kathy left out important points in the article, for example:-<SNIP> But as annual screenings have become more commonplace, PSA screening is now detecting much smaller cancers -- many of them slow-growing and worthy of "watchful waiting" rather than more radical prostate-removing surgery.<SNIP>I think the article in general favours PSA testing but to leave out the salient point above is a little naughty. If surgery really worked to cure prostate cancer wouldn't we all advocate PSA screening for all men? The fact is surgery has failed two controlled studies and it is the failure of surgery that brings the PSA test into disrepute. Remember also that a raised PSA doesn't always mean prostate cancer is present, nor does a low reading necessarily mean that no prostate cancer is present.In the right hands the PSA test is a good diagnostic tool but I am afraid some urologists have exploited the PSA test for their own ends.

Kathy What a good article - we in the field have known this, even though we are not professionals. It is good to see a common sense view. We get so many posts from men who are disappointed that they were over treated but there are many of us, some, sadly, no longer with us who wish that our PCa had been spotted and acted on earlier. The DRE and PSA are still good markers - role on the day when we have better recognition of agressive disease that needs early action.

[Guest guest]

I agree with , and would extend my 'cynicism' to all treatment modalities based on PSA testing alone. That includes Zoladex and Lupron which are chemical versions of the older form of physical castration used by Huggins.

When a world renown UK oncologist is happy to let his patients live with a PSA of 1000 ng/ml (one thousand) one really does have to question all the pretentious nonsense we read about invented PC mutational states (ARM was it ?) and the precious sensitivities of the techno wizzkids who peddle PSA mystery and the myth of the testosterone bogeyman. The object of medicine is to treat the whole person, not an isolated symptom, or worse still a theoretical disease marker.

Next to being diagnosed with prostate cancer my worst day was discovering a "Medical Miranda" for same on the Internet. That was an advertising gimmick, filling in a market gap for men "worried about cancer". I followed the guy who wrote 'Miranda' for a number of years - forcing my PSA to ridiculously low levels at great expense to my health - until I had accumulated enough know-how to work out what was happening to my body.

I am sorry for all you guys out there who are still on the learning curve, you have a long way to go. Quoting catechism has never proven to be a good way of understanding the universe, and it is certainly not "empowerment" in any sense of the word I know.

I have a strong need to move on now, get all this clutter out of my way, so I'll bid you goodbye and good luck in your endeavours.

Sammy.

Re: Experts: PSA Test Still Valuable for Prostate Can...

,Yes it is a good article, but I noticed Kathy left out important points in the article, for example:-<SNIP> But as annual screenings have become more commonplace, PSA screening is now detecting much smaller cancers -- many of them slow-growing and worthy of "watchful waiting" rather than more radical prostate-removing surgery.<SNIP>I think the article in general favours PSA testing but to leave out the salient point above is a little naughty. If surgery really worked to cure prostate cancer wouldn't we all advocate PSA screening for all men? The fact is surgery has failed two controlled studies and it is the failure of surgery that brings the PSA test into disrepute. Remember also that a raised PSA doesn't always mean prostate cancer is present, nor does a low reading necessarily mean that no prostate cancer is present.In the right hands the PSA test is a good diagnostic tool but I am afraid some urologists have exploited the PSA test for their own ends.

Kathy What a good article - we in the field have known this, even though we are not professionals. It is good to see a common sense view. We get so many posts from men who are disappointed that they were over treated but there are many of us, some, sadly, no longer with us who wish that our PCa had been spotted and acted on earlier. The DRE and PSA are still good markers - role on the day when we have better recognition of agressive disease that needs early action.