heard on the radio this morning
Untreated prostrate tumors wil become more deadly.
DUH!!! Someone spent money on this research?
Why do I think something got lost in translation?
Is this the story?
http://www.cnn.com/2004/HEALTH/conditions/05/26/prostate.cancer.screening.ap/index.html
Radio programs tend not to interpret scientific data too well. That is really oversimplified if that is what they reported. The finding that the main screening test for prostate cancer was missing many men that actually have cancer was a secondary finding of a ten year study looking at a preventative drug for prostate cancer (that is what the money was spent on).
BTW I’m always amazed by the number of people who think the prostate is called the prostrate.
When I ride on my triath-a-lon bike to long my prostrate hurts.
good point!
My grandfather had Prostate Cancer…he died at 82 from Heart Failure.
See, the deal is…what I was told (I may be wrong and dont even play a doctor on TV). If you are older (60+) and have prostate cancer…let it go. You can have it removed, get Chemo, suffer from that, shit in a bag, never get another erection, and have a crap quality of life…screw that.
I would much rather die early with a funcitonal penis than later with out…then again with my heath issues I wont have to worry about either.
A lot of people die with prostate cancer instead of dying from prostate cancer but it depends a lot on the extent of the tumor spread.
I’m a big believer in quality of life issues.
Again – that’s a little oversimplified-- but there is raging debate over which patients shouldn’t have treatment (will probably die from something else) or which patients need aggressive treatment. I’ve seen several guys in their late 30’s and early 40’s diagnosed and are gone within a few years. That’s why it is important to find markers for aggressive disease.