Re: New Member Introduction

[Guest guest]

Welcome Christie!!!!!

I look forward to getting to know you! I'm sure you will find this group extremely informative and supportive (and often: funny as heck)

Sensitivity to meds is yet another typical Fibro symptom (one which i fortunately DONT have - but many others here do and can relate)

What kind of work do you do?

aloooooha!

jaana

[Norton AntiSpam] New Member Introduction

Hello Group,

My name is Christie and am a new member to this group. I was told by my primary doctor about 4 weeks ago that all of my issues I've been telling her about seem to all fall under the Fibromyalgia syndrome. I've been through many blood tests, xrays, etc. I am now being sent to a Rheumatologist. I have reacted very badly to the anti-depressants normally given to Fibro patients and my doctor has ruled out the use of such medications as treatment for me, personally, due to my bodies' intollerance for them. So, this is very new to me and I have a lot to learn and am still very green to all of this. I do have a family that I provide for, and a long commute to work, as well as a high stress job. Many of the things they say to remove from your life are in my life in a big way and I am finding out that I am going to have to find alternate ways to handle some of them. Anyway, I joined this group for 2 reasons. 1, to have others I can talk to that understand and 2, to learn. I am always interested in learning new things.

On a lighter note....I am a self proclaimed computer geek and spend a lot of time on my computer. I enjoy many activities, mostly outdoors. I love the beach and since I live in Florida I visit there frequently.

Thanks for having me in the group. I look forward to learning and sharing along the way.

Best Regards,

Christie

[Guest guest]

> Greetings, I am Stan in Tucson, AZ,

> USA, age 58. A few weeks ago I got results of a biopsy

> showing prostate cancer with a Gleason's score of 6 (grades

> 3+3). In one of 10 specimens, about 1% in 1/2 core of

> submitted tissue was involved. The analysis was by Dianon

> Systems. Last week I got a bone scan for background and will

> get a background CT scan this week. I am sure that

> consultations and decisions regarding treatment will

> follow.

>

> Another issue is that I have been fighting a prostate

> infection since last November. The other 9 of the 10 biopsy

> specimens were listed as having " chronic inflamation, no

> evidence of malignancy. " It seems that it is resistant to

> antibiotics that readily penetrate the prostate and is

> sensitive to ones that do not penetrate. My urologist thinks

> that the high PSA (around 12.5?) was caused by the

> infection, and not so much by the malignancy. I take it that

> with whatever treatment is taken for prostate cancer, future

> monitoring of PSA is important. I probably will not decide

> on any treatment until the infection is somehow dealt with.

>

> I look forward to being a part of this group.

> Regards,

> Stan

Hello Stan,

Reading what you've posted, I am prompted to make a couple of

comments:

First, it is my understanding that not all prostatitis is caused

by bacterial infection. In fact, I have read that *most* cases

are not caused by bacterial infection. " Prostatitis " just means

" inflammation of the prostate " . It can be caused by bacterial

infection but often is not. No one knows what all of the

potential causes are, and no one knows how to treat the cases

that are not due to bacterial infection. I know that in my own

case I have suffered from painful prostatitis from time to time

but a course of antibiotics did me no good at all, and probably

some harm since I was vaguely nauseous during the entire 28 day

treatment - presumably because the antibiotic killed off

beneficial bacteria in my stomach, and perhaps allowed antibiotic

resistant bacteria to multiply without competition from the

others. Eventually the prostatitis went away on its own. I did

try saw palmetto, which may have helped, or may not. It's

impossible to say.

Secondly, if I were you, I wouldn't rush into treatment for your

cancer. If 1% of 1/2 of a core of 10 cores was cancerous, that

means that, as a percentatage of the total samples, you only have

firm evidence of:

.01 * .5 / 10 = .0005, or 1/20th of one percent showing cancer.

It's entirely possible that you could go another 10 or 20 years

before this cancer became anything more than microscopic. So you

have to consider whether you really want to risk impotence,

incontinence, or other possible side effects of treatment to

address what may be an inconsequential problem.

Here's a quote from the Wikipedia:

" Autopsy studies of Chinese, German, Israeli, Jamaican,

Swedish, and Ugandan men who died of other causes have found

prostate cancer in thirty percent of men in their 50s, and in

eighty percent of men in their 70s. "

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_cancer)

These are men who never knew they had cancer, and died of

something else before it could ever become any kind of problem

for them.

I'm not a doctor and not qualified to give medical advice. But I

suggest you discuss " active surveillance " with your doctor as one

of your options.

Also, if I were you, with such a low grade of cancer, I would not

be anxious to be getting tests that expose significant parts of

your body to x-rays when they really have a vanishingly small

chance of detecting cancer. See:

http://www.prostatevideos.com/prostate-cancer/grading-and-staging-of-prostate-ca\

ncer/bone-scan-for-assessing-cancer-spreading-to-the-bones/

or: http://tinyurl.com/8rlmoa

But, these are all thoughts from an unqualified layman. They're

just for you to think about. They aren't established truths.

Good luck.

Alan

[Guest guest]

Let me second Alan's sentiment. I have a Gleason of 6 with only

one of 12 biopsies indicating malignancy and a PSA of 5.7. I'm looking at

brachytherapy down the road. I had a Lupron shot in preparation for

brachytherapy and don't seem to have any effects yet after three weeks. But

perhaps my worst decision was to agree to have a microwave procedure done to

prevent urinary retention problems after the seeds are implanted. I'd never had

a catheter before and it's been horrible. I'm in constant pain even though it

was removed three days ago, and I seem to urinate every ten minutes. I'm

regretting my decision but feared urinary retention. If I had it to do over

again, I might choose to roll the dice on urinary retention. I hate to base my

ultimate choice of therapy on the catheter issue but can't stand the thought of

another several weeks of pain in addition to the potential side effects of

brachytherapy. Any thoughts?

Tom Lauterback

From:

ProstateCancerSupport

[mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of Alan Meyer

Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2009 9:49 PM

To: ProstateCancerSupport

Subject: Re: New member introduction

On Sun, 7/5/09, Stan

wrote:

> Greetings, I am Stan in Tucson, AZ,

> USA, age 58. A few weeks ago I got results of a biopsy

> showing prostate cancer with a Gleason's score of 6 (grades

> 3+3). In one of 10 specimens, about 1% in 1/2 core of

> submitted tissue was involved. The analysis was by Dianon

> Systems. Last week I got a bone scan for background and will

> get a background CT scan this week. I am sure that

> consultations and decisions regarding treatment will

> follow.

>

> Another issue is that I have been fighting a prostate

> infection since last November. The other 9 of the 10 biopsy

> specimens were listed as having " chronic inflamation, no

> evidence of malignancy. " It seems that it is resistant to

> antibiotics that readily penetrate the prostate and is

> sensitive to ones that do not penetrate. My urologist thinks

> that the high PSA (around 12.5?) was caused by the

> infection, and not so much by the malignancy. I take it that

> with whatever treatment is taken for prostate cancer, future

> monitoring of PSA is important. I probably will not decide

> on any treatment until the infection is somehow dealt with.

>

> I look forward to being a part of this group.

> Regards,

> Stan

Hello Stan,

Reading what you've posted, I am prompted to make a couple of

comments:

First, it is my understanding that not all prostatitis is caused

by bacterial infection. In fact, I have read that *most* cases

are not caused by bacterial infection. " Prostatitis " just means

" inflammation of the prostate " . It can be caused by bacterial

infection but often is not. No one knows what all of the

potential causes are, and no one knows how to treat the cases

that are not due to bacterial infection. I know that in my own

case I have suffered from painful prostatitis from time to time

but a course of antibiotics did me no good at all, and probably

some harm since I was vaguely nauseous during the entire 28 day

treatment - presumably because the antibiotic killed off

beneficial bacteria in my stomach, and perhaps allowed antibiotic

resistant bacteria to multiply without competition from the

others. Eventually the prostatitis went away on its own. I did

try saw palmetto, which may have helped, or may not. It's

impossible to say.

Secondly, if I were you, I wouldn't rush into treatment for your

cancer. If 1% of 1/2 of a core of 10 cores was cancerous, that

means that, as a percentatage of the total samples, you only have

firm evidence of:

..01 * .5 / 10 = .0005, or 1/20th of one percent showing cancer.

It's entirely possible that you could go another 10 or 20 years

before this cancer became anything more than microscopic. So you

have to consider whether you really want to risk impotence,

incontinence, or other possible side effects of treatment to

address what may be an inconsequential problem.

Here's a quote from the Wikipedia:

" Autopsy studies of Chinese, German, Israeli, Jamaican,

Swedish, and Ugandan men who died of other causes have found

prostate cancer in thirty percent of men in their 50s, and in

eighty percent of men in their 70s. "

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_cancer)

These are men who never knew they had cancer, and died of

something else before it could ever become any kind of problem

for them.

I'm not a doctor and not qualified to give medical advice. But I

suggest you discuss " active surveillance " with your doctor as one

of your options.

Also, if I were you, with such a low grade of cancer, I would not

be anxious to be getting tests that expose significant parts of

your body to x-rays when they really have a vanishingly small

chance of detecting cancer. See:

http://www.prostatevideos.com/prostate-cancer/grading-and-staging-of-prostate-cancer/bone-scan-for-assessing-cancer-spreading-to-the-bones/

or: http://tinyurl.com/8rlmoa

But, these are all thoughts from an unqualified layman. They're

just for you to think about. They aren't established truths.

Good luck.

Alan

[Guest guest]

Hi Alan,

Thanks for your thoughts on my situation. Regarding your first point, I am

fairly sure that this is (or was) a bacterial infection. Since this began last

November, I have had several urine cultures that were positive, as well as

several that were negative. Most recently, following the biopsy, I began to get

increased symptoms of a UTI. A urine culture came back positive (e. coli?) and I

was given Cephalexin. That antibiotic does not penetrate the prostate well. The

urologist thinks that the symptoms were caused by the bacteria from the prostate

going to the bladder following the biopsy. Following the course of antibiotics,

I still have a dull pain in the prostate area, as I have had for months. Also, I

have had a long history of bacterial prostate infections that have been taken

care of in the past with Doxycycline, or Cipro.

I really appreciate your comments regarding possible treatment or non-treatment

of what is apparently a small amount of cancer. I will look at those links

carefully. I have not made any decisions regarding treatments, but " watchful

waiting " definitely is what I am leaning towards now.

Thanks again,

Stan

[Guest guest]

Tom,

Have you looked into proton beam radition therapy? Very, very low rate of

urinary retention and no catheter. If you have not, and are interested a good

place to start would be at www.protonbob.com

Laurel

>

> > Greetings, I am Stan in Tucson, AZ,

> > USA, age 58. A few weeks ago I got results of a biopsy

> > showing prostate cancer with a Gleason's score of 6 (grades

> > 3+3). In one of 10 specimens, about 1% in 1/2 core of

> > submitted tissue was involved. The analysis was by Dianon

> > Systems. Last week I got a bone scan for background and will

> > get a background CT scan this week. I am sure that

> > consultations and decisions regarding treatment will

> > follow.

> >

> > Another issue is that I have been fighting a prostate

> > infection since last November. The other 9 of the 10 biopsy

> > specimens were listed as having " chronic inflamation, no

> > evidence of malignancy. " It seems that it is resistant to

> > antibiotics that readily penetrate the prostate and is

> > sensitive to ones that do not penetrate. My urologist thinks

> > that the high PSA (around 12.5?) was caused by the

> > infection, and not so much by the malignancy. I take it that

> > with whatever treatment is taken for prostate cancer, future

> > monitoring of PSA is important. I probably will not decide

> > on any treatment until the infection is somehow dealt with.

> >

> > I look forward to being a part of this group.

> > Regards,

> > Stan

>

> Hello Stan,

>

> Reading what you've posted, I am prompted to make a couple of

> comments:

>

> First, it is my understanding that not all prostatitis is caused

> by bacterial infection. In fact, I have read that *most* cases

> are not caused by bacterial infection. " Prostatitis " just means

> " inflammation of the prostate " . It can be caused by bacterial

> infection but often is not. No one knows what all of the

> potential causes are, and no one knows how to treat the cases

> that are not due to bacterial infection. I know that in my own

> case I have suffered from painful prostatitis from time to time

> but a course of antibiotics did me no good at all, and probably

> some harm since I was vaguely nauseous during the entire 28 day

> treatment - presumably because the antibiotic killed off

> beneficial bacteria in my stomach, and perhaps allowed antibiotic

> resistant bacteria to multiply without competition from the

> others. Eventually the prostatitis went away on its own. I did

> try saw palmetto, which may have helped, or may not. It's

> impossible to say.

>

> Secondly, if I were you, I wouldn't rush into treatment for your

> cancer. If 1% of 1/2 of a core of 10 cores was cancerous, that

> means that, as a percentatage of the total samples, you only have

> firm evidence of:

>

> .01 * .5 / 10 = .0005, or 1/20th of one percent showing cancer.

>

> It's entirely possible that you could go another 10 or 20 years

> before this cancer became anything more than microscopic. So you

> have to consider whether you really want to risk impotence,

> incontinence, or other possible side effects of treatment to

> address what may be an inconsequential problem.

>

> Here's a quote from the Wikipedia:

>

> " Autopsy studies of Chinese, German, Israeli, Jamaican,

> Swedish, and Ugandan men who died of other causes have found

> prostate cancer in thirty percent of men in their 50s, and in

> eighty percent of men in their 70s. "

> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_cancer)

>

> These are men who never knew they had cancer, and died of

> something else before it could ever become any kind of problem

> for them.

>

> I'm not a doctor and not qualified to give medical advice. But I

> suggest you discuss " active surveillance " with your doctor as one

> of your options.

>

> Also, if I were you, with such a low grade of cancer, I would not

> be anxious to be getting tests that expose significant parts of

> your body to x-rays when they really have a vanishingly small

> chance of detecting cancer. See:

>

> http://www.prostatevideos.com/prostate-cancer/grading-and-staging-of-prostat

> e-cancer/bone-scan-for-assessing-cancer-spreading-to-the-bones/

>

> or: http://tinyurl.com/8rlmoa

>

> But, these are all thoughts from an unqualified layman. They're

> just for you to think about. They aren't established truths.

>

> Good luck.

>

> Alan

>

[Guest guest]

Tom,

Have you looked into proton beam radition therapy? Very, very low rate of

urinary retention and no catheter. If you have not, and are interested a good

place to start would be at www.protonbob.com

Laurel

>

> > Greetings, I am Stan in Tucson, AZ,

> > USA, age 58. A few weeks ago I got results of a biopsy

> > showing prostate cancer with a Gleason's score of 6 (grades

> > 3+3). In one of 10 specimens, about 1% in 1/2 core of

> > submitted tissue was involved. The analysis was by Dianon

> > Systems. Last week I got a bone scan for background and will

> > get a background CT scan this week. I am sure that

> > consultations and decisions regarding treatment will

> > follow.

> >

> > Another issue is that I have been fighting a prostate

> > infection since last November. The other 9 of the 10 biopsy

> > specimens were listed as having " chronic inflamation, no

> > evidence of malignancy. " It seems that it is resistant to

> > antibiotics that readily penetrate the prostate and is

> > sensitive to ones that do not penetrate. My urologist thinks

> > that the high PSA (around 12.5?) was caused by the

> > infection, and not so much by the malignancy. I take it that

> > with whatever treatment is taken for prostate cancer, future

> > monitoring of PSA is important. I probably will not decide

> > on any treatment until the infection is somehow dealt with.

> >

> > I look forward to being a part of this group.

> > Regards,

> > Stan

>

> Hello Stan,

>

> Reading what you've posted, I am prompted to make a couple of

> comments:

>

> First, it is my understanding that not all prostatitis is caused

> by bacterial infection. In fact, I have read that *most* cases

> are not caused by bacterial infection. " Prostatitis " just means

> " inflammation of the prostate " . It can be caused by bacterial

> infection but often is not. No one knows what all of the

> potential causes are, and no one knows how to treat the cases

> that are not due to bacterial infection. I know that in my own

> case I have suffered from painful prostatitis from time to time

> but a course of antibiotics did me no good at all, and probably

> some harm since I was vaguely nauseous during the entire 28 day

> treatment - presumably because the antibiotic killed off

> beneficial bacteria in my stomach, and perhaps allowed antibiotic

> resistant bacteria to multiply without competition from the

> others. Eventually the prostatitis went away on its own. I did

> try saw palmetto, which may have helped, or may not. It's

> impossible to say.

>

> Secondly, if I were you, I wouldn't rush into treatment for your

> cancer. If 1% of 1/2 of a core of 10 cores was cancerous, that

> means that, as a percentatage of the total samples, you only have

> firm evidence of:

>

> .01 * .5 / 10 = .0005, or 1/20th of one percent showing cancer.

>

> It's entirely possible that you could go another 10 or 20 years

> before this cancer became anything more than microscopic. So you

> have to consider whether you really want to risk impotence,

> incontinence, or other possible side effects of treatment to

> address what may be an inconsequential problem.

>

> Here's a quote from the Wikipedia:

>

> " Autopsy studies of Chinese, German, Israeli, Jamaican,

> Swedish, and Ugandan men who died of other causes have found

> prostate cancer in thirty percent of men in their 50s, and in

> eighty percent of men in their 70s. "

> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_cancer)

>

> These are men who never knew they had cancer, and died of

> something else before it could ever become any kind of problem

> for them.

>

> I'm not a doctor and not qualified to give medical advice. But I

> suggest you discuss " active surveillance " with your doctor as one

> of your options.

>

> Also, if I were you, with such a low grade of cancer, I would not

> be anxious to be getting tests that expose significant parts of

> your body to x-rays when they really have a vanishingly small

> chance of detecting cancer. See:

>

> http://www.prostatevideos.com/prostate-cancer/grading-and-staging-of-prostat

> e-cancer/bone-scan-for-assessing-cancer-spreading-to-the-bones/

>

> or: http://tinyurl.com/8rlmoa

>

> But, these are all thoughts from an unqualified layman. They're

> just for you to think about. They aren't established truths.

>

> Good luck.

>

> Alan

>

[Guest guest]

Tom,

Have you looked into proton beam radition therapy? Very, very low rate of

urinary retention and no catheter. If you have not, and are interested a good

place to start would be at www.protonbob.com

Laurel

>

> > Greetings, I am Stan in Tucson, AZ,

> > USA, age 58. A few weeks ago I got results of a biopsy

> > showing prostate cancer with a Gleason's score of 6 (grades

> > 3+3). In one of 10 specimens, about 1% in 1/2 core of

> > submitted tissue was involved. The analysis was by Dianon

> > Systems. Last week I got a bone scan for background and will

> > get a background CT scan this week. I am sure that

> > consultations and decisions regarding treatment will

> > follow.

> >

> > Another issue is that I have been fighting a prostate

> > infection since last November. The other 9 of the 10 biopsy

> > specimens were listed as having " chronic inflamation, no

> > evidence of malignancy. " It seems that it is resistant to

> > antibiotics that readily penetrate the prostate and is

> > sensitive to ones that do not penetrate. My urologist thinks

> > that the high PSA (around 12.5?) was caused by the

> > infection, and not so much by the malignancy. I take it that

> > with whatever treatment is taken for prostate cancer, future

> > monitoring of PSA is important. I probably will not decide

> > on any treatment until the infection is somehow dealt with.

> >

> > I look forward to being a part of this group.

> > Regards,

> > Stan

>

> Hello Stan,

>

> Reading what you've posted, I am prompted to make a couple of

> comments:

>

> First, it is my understanding that not all prostatitis is caused

> by bacterial infection. In fact, I have read that *most* cases

> are not caused by bacterial infection. " Prostatitis " just means

> " inflammation of the prostate " . It can be caused by bacterial

> infection but often is not. No one knows what all of the

> potential causes are, and no one knows how to treat the cases

> that are not due to bacterial infection. I know that in my own

> case I have suffered from painful prostatitis from time to time

> but a course of antibiotics did me no good at all, and probably

> some harm since I was vaguely nauseous during the entire 28 day

> treatment - presumably because the antibiotic killed off

> beneficial bacteria in my stomach, and perhaps allowed antibiotic

> resistant bacteria to multiply without competition from the

> others. Eventually the prostatitis went away on its own. I did

> try saw palmetto, which may have helped, or may not. It's

> impossible to say.

>

> Secondly, if I were you, I wouldn't rush into treatment for your

> cancer. If 1% of 1/2 of a core of 10 cores was cancerous, that

> means that, as a percentatage of the total samples, you only have

> firm evidence of:

>

> .01 * .5 / 10 = .0005, or 1/20th of one percent showing cancer.

>

> It's entirely possible that you could go another 10 or 20 years

> before this cancer became anything more than microscopic. So you

> have to consider whether you really want to risk impotence,

> incontinence, or other possible side effects of treatment to

> address what may be an inconsequential problem.

>

> Here's a quote from the Wikipedia:

>

> " Autopsy studies of Chinese, German, Israeli, Jamaican,

> Swedish, and Ugandan men who died of other causes have found

> prostate cancer in thirty percent of men in their 50s, and in

> eighty percent of men in their 70s. "

> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_cancer)

>

> These are men who never knew they had cancer, and died of

> something else before it could ever become any kind of problem

> for them.

>

> I'm not a doctor and not qualified to give medical advice. But I

> suggest you discuss " active surveillance " with your doctor as one

> of your options.

>

> Also, if I were you, with such a low grade of cancer, I would not

> be anxious to be getting tests that expose significant parts of

> your body to x-rays when they really have a vanishingly small

> chance of detecting cancer. See:

>

> http://www.prostatevideos.com/prostate-cancer/grading-and-staging-of-prostat

> e-cancer/bone-scan-for-assessing-cancer-spreading-to-the-bones/

>

> or: http://tinyurl.com/8rlmoa

>

> But, these are all thoughts from an unqualified layman. They're

> just for you to think about. They aren't established truths.

>

> Good luck.

>

> Alan

>

[Guest guest]

Laurel:

Thank you. No, I have not, but my radiological oncologist made a

real point of dismissing it. I wonder why. Too much of a threat? Now I'm more

curious than ever.

Tom Lauterback

2820 Edgewater Drive

Elgin, IL 60124

(cell)

From: ProstateCancerSupport

[mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of Laurel

Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 11:14 AM

To: ProstateCancerSupport

Subject: Re: New member introduction

Tom,

Have you looked into proton beam radition therapy? Very, very low rate of

urinary retention and no catheter. If you have not, and are interested a good

place to start would be at www.protonbob.com

Laurel

>

> > Greetings, I am Stan in Tucson, AZ,

> > USA, age 58. A few weeks ago I got results of a biopsy

> > showing prostate cancer with a Gleason's score of 6 (grades

> > 3+3). In one of 10 specimens, about 1% in 1/2 core of

> > submitted tissue was involved. The analysis was by Dianon

> > Systems. Last week I got a bone scan for background and will

> > get a background CT scan this week. I am sure that

> > consultations and decisions regarding treatment will

> > follow.

> >

> > Another issue is that I have been fighting a prostate

> > infection since last November. The other 9 of the 10 biopsy

> > specimens were listed as having " chronic inflamation, no

> > evidence of malignancy. " It seems that it is resistant to

> > antibiotics that readily penetrate the prostate and is

> > sensitive to ones that do not penetrate. My urologist thinks

> > that the high PSA (around 12.5?) was caused by the

> > infection, and not so much by the malignancy. I take it that

> > with whatever treatment is taken for prostate cancer, future

> > monitoring of PSA is important. I probably will not decide

> > on any treatment until the infection is somehow dealt with.

> >

> > I look forward to being a part of this group.

> > Regards,

> > Stan

>

> Hello Stan,

>

> Reading what you've posted, I am prompted to make a couple of

> comments:

>

> First, it is my understanding that not all prostatitis is caused

> by bacterial infection. In fact, I have read that *most* cases

> are not caused by bacterial infection. " Prostatitis " just means

> " inflammation of the prostate " . It can be caused by bacterial

> infection but often is not. No one knows what all of the

> potential causes are, and no one knows how to treat the cases

> that are not due to bacterial infection. I know that in my own

> case I have suffered from painful prostatitis from time to time

> but a course of antibiotics did me no good at all, and probably

> some harm since I was vaguely nauseous during the entire 28 day

> treatment - presumably because the antibiotic killed off

> beneficial bacteria in my stomach, and perhaps allowed antibiotic

> resistant bacteria to multiply without competition from the

> others. Eventually the prostatitis went away on its own. I did

> try saw palmetto, which may have helped, or may not. It's

> impossible to say.

>

> Secondly, if I were you, I wouldn't rush into treatment for your

> cancer. If 1% of 1/2 of a core of 10 cores was cancerous, that

> means that, as a percentatage of the total samples, you only have

> firm evidence of:

>

> .01 * .5 / 10 = .0005, or 1/20th of one percent showing cancer.

>

> It's entirely possible that you could go another 10 or 20 years

> before this cancer became anything more than microscopic. So you

> have to consider whether you really want to risk impotence,

> incontinence, or other possible side effects of treatment to

> address what may be an inconsequential problem.

>

> Here's a quote from the Wikipedia:

>

> " Autopsy studies of Chinese, German, Israeli, Jamaican,

> Swedish, and Ugandan men who died of other causes have found

> prostate cancer in thirty percent of men in their 50s, and in

> eighty percent of men in their 70s. "

> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_cancer)

>

> These are men who never knew they had cancer, and died of

> something else before it could ever become any kind of problem

> for them.

>

> I'm not a doctor and not qualified to give medical advice. But I

> suggest you discuss " active surveillance " with your doctor as

one

> of your options.

>

> Also, if I were you, with such a low grade of cancer, I would not

> be anxious to be getting tests that expose significant parts of

> your body to x-rays when they really have a vanishingly small

> chance of detecting cancer. See:

>

> http://www.prostatevideos.com/prostate-cancer/grading-and-staging-of-prostat

> e-cancer/bone-scan-for-assessing-cancer-spreading-to-the-bones/

>

> or: http://tinyurl.com/8rlmoa

>

> But, these are all thoughts from an unqualified layman. They're

> just for you to think about. They aren't established truths.

>

> Good luck.

>

> Alan

>

[Guest guest]

> Let me second Alan's sentiment. I have a Gleason of 6 with only

> one of 12 biopsies indicating malignancy and a PSA of 5.7. I'm

> looking at brachytherapy down the road. I had a Lupron shot in

> preparation for brachytherapy and don't seem to have any

> effects yet after three weeks. But perhaps my worst decision

> was to agree to have a microwave procedure done to prevent

> urinary retention problems after the seeds are implanted. I'd

> never had a catheter before and it's been horrible. I'm in

> constant pain even though it was removed three days ago, and I

> seem to urinate every ten minutes. I'm regretting my decision

> but feared urinary retention. If I had it to do over again, I

> might choose to roll the dice on urinary retention. I hate to

> base my ultimate choice of therapy on the catheter issue but

> can't stand the thought of another several weeks of pain in

> addition to the potential side effects of brachytherapy. Any

> thoughts?

Tom,

I'm a little surprised that the radiation oncologist suggested

Lupron prior to brachytherapy. Lupron does improve the chances

for a cure, but for relatively low risk disease (Gleason < 7, PSA

< 10), it is not usually given because the odds of success are

pretty high even without it.

I also wonder if " watchful waiting " , also called " active

surveillance " was discussed with you. It seems like a possible

option with only one of 12 biopsy samples positive and with

relatively low Gleason and PSA scores.

Urinary retention is a possibility with any radiation procedure -

whether external beam, brachytherapy, protons, or whatever. The

reason is that the radiation inflames the prostate tissue,

causing it to swell. The swollen tissue tends to clamp the

urethra, which runs through the prostate, thereby restricting the

flow.

My experience may be nothing like yours, but for whatever it's

worth, here it is: I had a combination of two HDR

brachytherapies and intervening 3DCRT external beam therapy.

After the end of the second brachytherapy procedure, I could

hardly urinate at all. The problem was reduced to tolerable

levels with the drug Flomax, however it took about five months

before I returned to normal.

The retention was an inconvenience. At it's worst (about a two

month period), I was getting up every hour at night to urinate.

The restriction was such that I could never fully empty my

bladder, so it filled up again quickly and I had to urinate again

soon after the last one. However I considered it to be one of

life's minor annoyances, not something to get too upset about.

The problem did go away.

There are men for whom it can be a big problem. If the

restriction is such that they can't urinate at all, that can turn

into an emergency need for a catheter, right now! I don't know

what the percentage of men in that category is. I suspect it's a

relatively small minority.

Alan

[Guest guest]

> Let me second Alan's sentiment. I have a Gleason of 6 with only

> one of 12 biopsies indicating malignancy and a PSA of 5.7. I'm

> looking at brachytherapy down the road. I had a Lupron shot in

> preparation for brachytherapy and don't seem to have any

> effects yet after three weeks. But perhaps my worst decision

> was to agree to have a microwave procedure done to prevent

> urinary retention problems after the seeds are implanted. I'd

> never had a catheter before and it's been horrible. I'm in

> constant pain even though it was removed three days ago, and I

> seem to urinate every ten minutes. I'm regretting my decision

> but feared urinary retention. If I had it to do over again, I

> might choose to roll the dice on urinary retention. I hate to

> base my ultimate choice of therapy on the catheter issue but

> can't stand the thought of another several weeks of pain in

> addition to the potential side effects of brachytherapy. Any

> thoughts?

Tom,

I'm a little surprised that the radiation oncologist suggested

Lupron prior to brachytherapy. Lupron does improve the chances

for a cure, but for relatively low risk disease (Gleason < 7, PSA

< 10), it is not usually given because the odds of success are

pretty high even without it.

I also wonder if " watchful waiting " , also called " active

surveillance " was discussed with you. It seems like a possible

option with only one of 12 biopsy samples positive and with

relatively low Gleason and PSA scores.

Urinary retention is a possibility with any radiation procedure -

whether external beam, brachytherapy, protons, or whatever. The

reason is that the radiation inflames the prostate tissue,

causing it to swell. The swollen tissue tends to clamp the

urethra, which runs through the prostate, thereby restricting the

flow.

My experience may be nothing like yours, but for whatever it's

worth, here it is: I had a combination of two HDR

brachytherapies and intervening 3DCRT external beam therapy.

After the end of the second brachytherapy procedure, I could

hardly urinate at all. The problem was reduced to tolerable

levels with the drug Flomax, however it took about five months

before I returned to normal.

The retention was an inconvenience. At it's worst (about a two

month period), I was getting up every hour at night to urinate.

The restriction was such that I could never fully empty my

bladder, so it filled up again quickly and I had to urinate again

soon after the last one. However I considered it to be one of

life's minor annoyances, not something to get too upset about.

The problem did go away.

There are men for whom it can be a big problem. If the

restriction is such that they can't urinate at all, that can turn

into an emergency need for a catheter, right now! I don't know

what the percentage of men in that category is. I suspect it's a

relatively small minority.

Alan

[Guest guest]

> Let me second Alan's sentiment. I have a Gleason of 6 with only

> one of 12 biopsies indicating malignancy and a PSA of 5.7. I'm

> looking at brachytherapy down the road. I had a Lupron shot in

> preparation for brachytherapy and don't seem to have any

> effects yet after three weeks. But perhaps my worst decision

> was to agree to have a microwave procedure done to prevent

> urinary retention problems after the seeds are implanted. I'd

> never had a catheter before and it's been horrible. I'm in

> constant pain even though it was removed three days ago, and I

> seem to urinate every ten minutes. I'm regretting my decision

> but feared urinary retention. If I had it to do over again, I

> might choose to roll the dice on urinary retention. I hate to

> base my ultimate choice of therapy on the catheter issue but

> can't stand the thought of another several weeks of pain in

> addition to the potential side effects of brachytherapy. Any

> thoughts?

Tom,

I'm a little surprised that the radiation oncologist suggested

Lupron prior to brachytherapy. Lupron does improve the chances

for a cure, but for relatively low risk disease (Gleason < 7, PSA

< 10), it is not usually given because the odds of success are

pretty high even without it.

I also wonder if " watchful waiting " , also called " active

surveillance " was discussed with you. It seems like a possible

option with only one of 12 biopsy samples positive and with

relatively low Gleason and PSA scores.

Urinary retention is a possibility with any radiation procedure -

whether external beam, brachytherapy, protons, or whatever. The

reason is that the radiation inflames the prostate tissue,

causing it to swell. The swollen tissue tends to clamp the

urethra, which runs through the prostate, thereby restricting the

flow.

My experience may be nothing like yours, but for whatever it's

worth, here it is: I had a combination of two HDR

brachytherapies and intervening 3DCRT external beam therapy.

After the end of the second brachytherapy procedure, I could

hardly urinate at all. The problem was reduced to tolerable

levels with the drug Flomax, however it took about five months

before I returned to normal.

The retention was an inconvenience. At it's worst (about a two

month period), I was getting up every hour at night to urinate.

The restriction was such that I could never fully empty my

bladder, so it filled up again quickly and I had to urinate again

soon after the last one. However I considered it to be one of

life's minor annoyances, not something to get too upset about.

The problem did go away.

There are men for whom it can be a big problem. If the

restriction is such that they can't urinate at all, that can turn

into an emergency need for a catheter, right now! I don't know

what the percentage of men in that category is. I suspect it's a

relatively small minority.

Alan

[Guest guest]

Alan:

Watchful waiting was discussed but quickly dismissed as the

appropriate solution. I wondered why, and of course the answer was that I'm

relatively young. BUT, I've seen quite a few posters to this site who are

younger than I am, and some of them have chosen not to be aggressive in treatment.

Re: Lupron, I was told that it was essential to get my prostate down to size

and ready for brachytherapy. ly, I haven't seen much effect. But what I

regret the most was the microwave procedure, given to prevent urinary retention,

and the catheter required afterwards. I've had the catheter out for five days

and I'm still in pain and urinating every 20 minutes or so (I'm pushing

fluids). The alternative to the microwave presented was the green laser, and,

frankly, I'd hoped to do without either, but it's a bit late to worry about

that. I've been taking an anti-inflammatory and have been taking Detrol

& Flomax for years, so I assume I'll at least continue with the Flomax.

How would the group compare brachytherapy to proton beam? The

latter was also dismissed as a solution during my deliberations with the

urologist and radiological oncologist.

Thanks for all your help. Thank God this site exists.

Tom Lauterback

From: ProstateCancerSupport

[mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of Alan Meyer

Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 12:58 PM

To: ProstateCancerSupport

Subject: RE: Re: New member introduction

On Tue, 7/7/09, Tom Lauterback

wrote:

> Let me second Alan's sentiment. I have a Gleason of 6 with only

> one of 12 biopsies indicating malignancy and a PSA of 5.7. I'm

> looking at brachytherapy down the road. I had a Lupron shot in

> preparation for brachytherapy and don't seem to have any

> effects yet after three weeks. But perhaps my worst decision

> was to agree to have a microwave procedure done to prevent

> urinary retention problems after the seeds are implanted. I'd

> never had a catheter before and it's been horrible. I'm in

> constant pain even though it was removed three days ago, and I

> seem to urinate every ten minutes. I'm regretting my decision

> but feared urinary retention. If I had it to do over again, I

> might choose to roll the dice on urinary retention. I hate to

> base my ultimate choice of therapy on the catheter issue but

> can't stand the thought of another several weeks of pain in

> addition to the potential side effects of brachytherapy. Any

> thoughts?

Tom,

I'm a little surprised that the radiation oncologist suggested

Lupron prior to brachytherapy. Lupron does improve the chances

for a cure, but for relatively low risk disease (Gleason < 7, PSA

< 10), it is not usually given because the odds of success are

pretty high even without it.

I also wonder if " watchful waiting " , also called " active

surveillance " was discussed with you. It seems like a possible

option with only one of 12 biopsy samples positive and with

relatively low Gleason and PSA scores.

Urinary retention is a possibility with any radiation procedure -

whether external beam, brachytherapy, protons, or whatever. The

reason is that the radiation inflames the prostate tissue,

causing it to swell. The swollen tissue tends to clamp the

urethra, which runs through the prostate, thereby restricting the

flow.

My experience may be nothing like yours, but for whatever it's

worth, here it is: I had a combination of two HDR

brachytherapies and intervening 3DCRT external beam therapy.

After the end of the second brachytherapy procedure, I could

hardly urinate at all. The problem was reduced to tolerable

levels with the drug Flomax, however it took about five months

before I returned to normal.

The retention was an inconvenience. At it's worst (about a two

month period), I was getting up every hour at night to urinate.

The restriction was such that I could never fully empty my

bladder, so it filled up again quickly and I had to urinate again

soon after the last one. However I considered it to be one of

life's minor annoyances, not something to get too upset about.

The problem did go away.

There are men for whom it can be a big problem. If the

restriction is such that they can't urinate at all, that can turn

into an emergency need for a catheter, right now! I don't know

what the percentage of men in that category is. I suspect it's a

relatively small minority.

Alan

[Guest guest]

Alan:

Watchful waiting was discussed but quickly dismissed as the

appropriate solution. I wondered why, and of course the answer was that I'm

relatively young. BUT, I've seen quite a few posters to this site who are

younger than I am, and some of them have chosen not to be aggressive in treatment.

Re: Lupron, I was told that it was essential to get my prostate down to size

and ready for brachytherapy. ly, I haven't seen much effect. But what I

regret the most was the microwave procedure, given to prevent urinary retention,

and the catheter required afterwards. I've had the catheter out for five days

and I'm still in pain and urinating every 20 minutes or so (I'm pushing

fluids). The alternative to the microwave presented was the green laser, and,

frankly, I'd hoped to do without either, but it's a bit late to worry about

that. I've been taking an anti-inflammatory and have been taking Detrol

& Flomax for years, so I assume I'll at least continue with the Flomax.

How would the group compare brachytherapy to proton beam? The

latter was also dismissed as a solution during my deliberations with the

urologist and radiological oncologist.

Thanks for all your help. Thank God this site exists.

Tom Lauterback

From: ProstateCancerSupport

[mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of Alan Meyer

Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 12:58 PM

To: ProstateCancerSupport

Subject: RE: Re: New member introduction

On Tue, 7/7/09, Tom Lauterback

wrote:

> Let me second Alan's sentiment. I have a Gleason of 6 with only

> one of 12 biopsies indicating malignancy and a PSA of 5.7. I'm

> looking at brachytherapy down the road. I had a Lupron shot in

> preparation for brachytherapy and don't seem to have any

> effects yet after three weeks. But perhaps my worst decision

> was to agree to have a microwave procedure done to prevent

> urinary retention problems after the seeds are implanted. I'd

> never had a catheter before and it's been horrible. I'm in

> constant pain even though it was removed three days ago, and I

> seem to urinate every ten minutes. I'm regretting my decision

> but feared urinary retention. If I had it to do over again, I

> might choose to roll the dice on urinary retention. I hate to

> base my ultimate choice of therapy on the catheter issue but

> can't stand the thought of another several weeks of pain in

> addition to the potential side effects of brachytherapy. Any

> thoughts?

Tom,

I'm a little surprised that the radiation oncologist suggested

Lupron prior to brachytherapy. Lupron does improve the chances

for a cure, but for relatively low risk disease (Gleason < 7, PSA

< 10), it is not usually given because the odds of success are

pretty high even without it.

I also wonder if " watchful waiting " , also called " active

surveillance " was discussed with you. It seems like a possible

option with only one of 12 biopsy samples positive and with

relatively low Gleason and PSA scores.

Urinary retention is a possibility with any radiation procedure -

whether external beam, brachytherapy, protons, or whatever. The

reason is that the radiation inflames the prostate tissue,

causing it to swell. The swollen tissue tends to clamp the

urethra, which runs through the prostate, thereby restricting the

flow.

My experience may be nothing like yours, but for whatever it's

worth, here it is: I had a combination of two HDR

brachytherapies and intervening 3DCRT external beam therapy.

After the end of the second brachytherapy procedure, I could

hardly urinate at all. The problem was reduced to tolerable

levels with the drug Flomax, however it took about five months

before I returned to normal.

The retention was an inconvenience. At it's worst (about a two

month period), I was getting up every hour at night to urinate.

The restriction was such that I could never fully empty my

bladder, so it filled up again quickly and I had to urinate again

soon after the last one. However I considered it to be one of

life's minor annoyances, not something to get too upset about.

The problem did go away.

There are men for whom it can be a big problem. If the

restriction is such that they can't urinate at all, that can turn

into an emergency need for a catheter, right now! I don't know

what the percentage of men in that category is. I suspect it's a

relatively small minority.

Alan

[Guest guest]

Alan:

Watchful waiting was discussed but quickly dismissed as the

appropriate solution. I wondered why, and of course the answer was that I'm

relatively young. BUT, I've seen quite a few posters to this site who are

younger than I am, and some of them have chosen not to be aggressive in treatment.

Re: Lupron, I was told that it was essential to get my prostate down to size

and ready for brachytherapy. ly, I haven't seen much effect. But what I

regret the most was the microwave procedure, given to prevent urinary retention,

and the catheter required afterwards. I've had the catheter out for five days

and I'm still in pain and urinating every 20 minutes or so (I'm pushing

fluids). The alternative to the microwave presented was the green laser, and,

frankly, I'd hoped to do without either, but it's a bit late to worry about

that. I've been taking an anti-inflammatory and have been taking Detrol

& Flomax for years, so I assume I'll at least continue with the Flomax.

How would the group compare brachytherapy to proton beam? The

latter was also dismissed as a solution during my deliberations with the

urologist and radiological oncologist.

Thanks for all your help. Thank God this site exists.

Tom Lauterback

From: ProstateCancerSupport

[mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of Alan Meyer

Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 12:58 PM

To: ProstateCancerSupport

Subject: RE: Re: New member introduction

On Tue, 7/7/09, Tom Lauterback

wrote:

> Let me second Alan's sentiment. I have a Gleason of 6 with only

> one of 12 biopsies indicating malignancy and a PSA of 5.7. I'm

> looking at brachytherapy down the road. I had a Lupron shot in

> preparation for brachytherapy and don't seem to have any

> effects yet after three weeks. But perhaps my worst decision

> was to agree to have a microwave procedure done to prevent

> urinary retention problems after the seeds are implanted. I'd

> never had a catheter before and it's been horrible. I'm in

> constant pain even though it was removed three days ago, and I

> seem to urinate every ten minutes. I'm regretting my decision

> but feared urinary retention. If I had it to do over again, I

> might choose to roll the dice on urinary retention. I hate to

> base my ultimate choice of therapy on the catheter issue but

> can't stand the thought of another several weeks of pain in

> addition to the potential side effects of brachytherapy. Any

> thoughts?

Tom,

I'm a little surprised that the radiation oncologist suggested

Lupron prior to brachytherapy. Lupron does improve the chances

for a cure, but for relatively low risk disease (Gleason < 7, PSA

< 10), it is not usually given because the odds of success are

pretty high even without it.

I also wonder if " watchful waiting " , also called " active

surveillance " was discussed with you. It seems like a possible

option with only one of 12 biopsy samples positive and with

relatively low Gleason and PSA scores.

Urinary retention is a possibility with any radiation procedure -

whether external beam, brachytherapy, protons, or whatever. The

reason is that the radiation inflames the prostate tissue,

causing it to swell. The swollen tissue tends to clamp the

urethra, which runs through the prostate, thereby restricting the

flow.

My experience may be nothing like yours, but for whatever it's

worth, here it is: I had a combination of two HDR

brachytherapies and intervening 3DCRT external beam therapy.

After the end of the second brachytherapy procedure, I could

hardly urinate at all. The problem was reduced to tolerable

levels with the drug Flomax, however it took about five months

before I returned to normal.

The retention was an inconvenience. At it's worst (about a two

month period), I was getting up every hour at night to urinate.

The restriction was such that I could never fully empty my

bladder, so it filled up again quickly and I had to urinate again

soon after the last one. However I considered it to be one of

life's minor annoyances, not something to get too upset about.

The problem did go away.

There are men for whom it can be a big problem. If the

restriction is such that they can't urinate at all, that can turn

into an emergency need for a catheter, right now! I don't know

what the percentage of men in that category is. I suspect it's a

relatively small minority.

Alan