Prostate Cancer Screening -- Necessary or Unnecessary?

I've always heard that the conventional wisdom was that when you turn 40, you should start planning to get a prostate cancer screening.

But my doctor told me today that the conventional wisdom may not be that wise.

I'm fortunate to have a physician that is a no-B.S. professional. He will tell me straight up what's up; he won't treat a patient who is not sick; and he is really skeptical of insurance and pharmaceutical companies to say the least. He's kept me and so many others healthy because of his attitude toward his practice and his patients. Needless to say I've learned to trust the guy with my well-being.

So when I told him I turned 40 recently and that I thought I should get a PSA test, he told me "not so fast" and pointed out to me that getting the test may lead to proper treatment and prevention, but it has just as much chance of leading to overtreatment and unnecessary complication.

My father once had prostate surgery, but my doctor says even if it's hereditary, it doesn't mean I'll be diagnosed with it. Indeed, as I've done my research I'm finding many in the medical community questioning the necessity of constant prostate screening.

I mean, I have no reason to think I may come down with prostate cancer, and if I take a test and they find something that might not even be cancer and take treatment then I may well suffer adverse effects.

On the other hand, if I take it and they do find something, I could either a) live with it and likely die 60 years from now of something else; b) take the treatment and save my life; or c) die of prostate cancer within the next five years.

The doctor's argument did sound reasonable, and he didn't tell me not to get the PSA, he just said I could choose to do it or not to and that it might not really make any difference long term if it don't. But at the same time, if I do, I run the risk of treatment that might be ultimately detrimental.

Those of you who have made the decision to get the screening, what motivated you to do so? Do you wish you hadn't? Do you think the screening made any difference? What might have happened if you chose not to?

Thanks.



Views: 126

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

My father's screening caught his very aggressive prostate cancer before it could kill him. Even though he had it removed, he still has a 50% chance of having it reoccur. It's worth the test.
I recommend this to everyone - go read the book Overtreated and then make the decision for yourself.

Topher is right - it's a screening test, though not a very good one. It produces a lot of false positives.

Screen, if you have it then assess the situation.  Some cancers are so slow as to not be a problem, some are not.  There is a concern about over treatment. 

Trust me on this.  You really need to keep the old body's systems checked.  It's analogous to checking the underhood fluids in your car.

Far, far better to discover that your enlarged prostate (yes, I am that old) is not due to an inoperable cancer.  The one you didn't get diagnosed because you didn't mind peeing half a dozen times a night.

You are wise (and fortunate to be able) to trust your personal physician, but the bottom line is that YOU are ultimately responsible for your health, not your doctor.  Sounds to me like he really cares about his patients.

Learn what the signs of prostate cancer are.  I'm not a doctor, and I don't put myself out there as one.  But 40 does appear to be too young.  Since your dad had it, you might be at increased risk, but your doctor is right: that doesn't mean you'll get it.  Still, know the signs.  Have anything suspicious checked out by a licensed physician.

RSS

Latest Activity

Sir replied to Jake and Shake's discussion How can I be attractive after 50?
7 minutes ago
Jack Bauer replied to Specs's discussion Real Men.
"I was trying to figure out how a pink camera was like a quiche. I prefer fried egg sandwiches to omelets, anyway. Never bothered with quiche. JB"
55 minutes ago
Jack Bauer replied to Specs's discussion Real Men.
"There are choices other than ignoring rules or becoming a slave to them. Men should know when to abide the 'rules' and when to break them. Doesn't make the rules, unspoken or otherwise, less true ... just of varying applicability to…"
59 minutes ago
Jake and Shake replied to Jake and Shake's discussion How can I be attractive after 50?
"Those are excellent questions. I'm really not sure. I would like to think of myself as cool or a musician. But I don't look that way anymore. Classic sounds good but I really have to look it up. lol Scholarly sounds good too. I guess I…"
59 minutes ago
Wild Man replied to Specs's discussion Real Men.
"This is funny bro- so many rules. You also give only two options: take it or leave it. Life is all about options and individuality. I'm wondering why the need to post your masculine criteria on here and how many of these do you live daily. Just…"
5 hours ago
Brandon replied to Specs's discussion Real Men.
"Preachy much? I earn my own money, I know how to defend myself, I stand up for folks that can't stand up for themselves, I'm very educated and well versed in a number of subjects. This makes me a man. Period. There's no dress code to…"
5 hours ago
Sir replied to Jake and Shake's discussion How can I be attractive after 50?
"So:  what style?  Classic, Western, hipster, rugged outdoors, ritzy, scholarly --? You might also post a pic, if you care to.  But the real question I think is what style."
6 hours ago
Sir replied to Jay D's discussion Fun date ideas for the winter
"Ice skating, indoors or out Skiing Caroling Driving around a neighborhood that likes to show off its Christmas lights Packing gift boxes for poor families Streaking"
6 hours ago

© 2016   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service