Connect
← Return to Dr. Bert Vorstman skeptical of any Pc treatment. What do you think?
Discussion
Dr. Bert Vorstman skeptical of any Pc treatment. What do you think?
Prostate Cancer | Last Active: 54 minutes ago | Replies (37)Comment receiving replies
Very interesting topic. Along with biopsies possibly spreading cancer could all the other tests like cat & pet scans contribute to cancer getting worse? Do these test benefits really outweigh the risk? Have many studies been done with people that have low to intermediate risk PC that decide to do nothing and their survival rate would be? Personally I think the survival rate would be close to treatment. The studies already show that radiation treatments will most likely cause another cancer years after treatment. I wonder if life expectancy would be close to the same avoiding biopsies, numerous scans, radiation treatments, etc,etc... Does anyone ever get "cured" from prostate cancer with current treatments or is it just keep getting PSA tests the rest of your life? And if/when cancer comes back start all over again with biopsies, more dangerous pet/ct scans and treatments. 50+ Years ago when there was no PSA or DRE tests done on men they most likely died with PC not from it living into their 80's. It's really hard to decide what is right once you have cancer and fall into the medical system.
Replies to "Very interesting topic. Along with biopsies possibly spreading cancer could all the other tests like cat..."
@copyman While a biopsy can very rarely pull a few cancer cells out of the prostate and leave them behind, there's no evidence that they actually spread cancer (the isolated cells likely just die). Large studies have shown no negative impact on overall survival from biopsies, and often, a strong positive impact. This is the kind of misleading half-truth that we see so often online: fear-mongers tell about the first part, but skip the second (more important) one.
MRI and ultrasound have no impact on cancer. CT and PET scans use a minuscule amount of ionizing radiation, so there's a small chance (one in thousands) of developing some kind of new cancer, often relatively mild and easily treatable.
They don't order a CT or PET scan, though, unless you have a much bigger risk from something dangerous going undetected, so even then, there's a significant net benefit.
@copyman Well, thousands of men die every year worldwide from PCa - and that’s even WITH treatment. So how many men in years past were dying from undiagnosed PCa? Probably many but the cause of death would be something like ‘heart failure’ or ‘pneumonia’, etc…How many men didn’t even make it into their 80’s from a variety of diseases, including PCa?
There is statistical proof that life expectancy for males in the US is markedly higher than it was 100 years ago and a lot of that is diagnostic screening, testing and treatment.
Is it perfect? NO, and I get where you are coming from on an emotional level. Sometimes this all seems like a con, a remedy in search of a problem and I agree that net, net the results are sometimes discouraging.
It does make you wonder…but please think back to 2012 when routine PSA’s were dismissed as overkill and there was the idea that more men were being harmed than saved. We now know this is NOT the case, as evidenced by the surge in more advanced PCa cases…
It turns out that screening, indeed, does save lives…
Phil
Connect
@copyman
The problem is people do die of prostate cancer.
My father died of it in 2008 at 88 years old. The last few weeks were pretty terrible, He was on morphine and couldn’t communicate he was in so much pain.
I remember when he told me Lupron stopped working and there wasn’t anything else for treatment.
He started off with radiation as his initial treatment.
Some people do go into long-term remission. I don’t know about cure.