Prostate screening may cause more harm than good
- Thread starter yahoo40
- Start date
National prostate screening rejected
Heightened levels of prostate specific antigen – PSA – can indicate the presence of prostate cancer. However, early detection can result in aggressive and unpleasant treatment of tumours that would never have grown or created ill-health.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/4839744/National-prostate-screening-rejected
Heightened levels of prostate specific antigen – PSA – can indicate the presence of prostate cancer. However, early detection can result in aggressive and unpleasant treatment of tumours that would never have grown or created ill-health.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/4839744/National-prostate-screening-rejected
I think you need to define harm. If you mean unnecessary anxiety, then yes it is possibly harmful. If you mean it will kill you that's not what's being intended. It's no different with breast examination as false positives cause a lot of anxiety. There are a number of options for treatment so a blanket statement is the best thing. Some people don't like the option of sitting a waiting and they want something to at least appear to be done. sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. this finding need longer and more careful study before this kind of reaction, using words like 'maybe' and 'possible' when reading the findings.
Here you go
"At the moment the potential harms significantly outweigh the benefits of screening. We will re-assess the evidence for prostate cancer screening against our criteria again in three years, or earlier if new evidence warrants it."
However, this previous trial showed that screening can lead to many men undergoing unnecessary treatment for a harmless prostate cancer. The Prostate Cancer Charity therefore doesn't believe there is enough evidence yet to support a screening programme."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12911174
"At the moment the potential harms significantly outweigh the benefits of screening. We will re-assess the evidence for prostate cancer screening against our criteria again in three years, or earlier if new evidence warrants it."
However, this previous trial showed that screening can lead to many men undergoing unnecessary treatment for a harmless prostate cancer. The Prostate Cancer Charity therefore doesn't believe there is enough evidence yet to support a screening programme."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12911174
My first reaction is they're hedging their bets as it obvious that you weight the pro and cons.
1/3rd of the men in my family, back to uncles and cousins have gone through this ride and it fucks with the head. Why I haven't, is under a study and it might have something I can credit my mom's genes with .
sounds good any time I can skip a test I am all for it. When I think about it.. not being able to ejaculate would be a real bummer. Plus I have noticed once people get their prostate ripped out they age REALLY FAST!!! (very anecdotal of course)
well there are other options besides radical surgery,,radiation actually accentuates the pleasures of sex,,
The first post seriously misrepresents this old news. The point is that PSA screening, not prostate screening which can be variously done, has not been shown to reduce death rates, but has elevated concerns and led to uneeded treatment. Similar to effects of routine mammogram screening of women with no known liklihood of breast cancer.
The first stage in a useful approach to prostate screening would be, "Given my age and history, is the PSA test of use to me, Doctor?" Answer, "No, not yet, given your age, heritage and lack of any symptoms" Screening done.
The first stage in a useful approach to prostate screening would be, "Given my age and history, is the PSA test of use to me, Doctor?" Answer, "No, not yet, given your age, heritage and lack of any symptoms" Screening done.
Kidu read this and know well that PSA is the favored method of screening all over the world and also know that there can a harmless prostate cancer which if treated can have potentially more harm then benefit
At the moment the potential harms significantly outweigh the benefits of screening. We will re-assess the evidence for prostate cancer screening against our criteria again in three years, or earlier if new evidence warrants it."
However, this previous trial showed that screening can lead to many men undergoing unnecessary treatment for a harmless prostate cancer. The Prostate Cancer Charity therefore doesn't believe there is enough evidence yet to support a screening programme.
