Prostate Cancer

[magooch]

On the front page of my morning paper, one of the headlines states that the American Cancer Society is warning that routine screening for prostate cancer is ineffective and can be harmful.  Take my word for it fellas; this is pure unadulterated horse maneur.

I don't know what the hell is going on with the Cancer Society, but believe me they are not looking out for your best interest with their latest thinking.  I believe they are also off base with what they are telling women about breast cancer and maybe even ovarian.

Could it be that this is a move in cooperation with the Obama plan to reduce health-care costs to Medicare etc.  Call me paranoid, but I wouldn't put anything past our present administration.  I don't know what the Cancer Society would have to gain from this idiocy, but it is exactly that.

Is PSA and digital testing perfect?  No, but it has saved so many lives and misery, it isn't even arguable.  I flat out guarantee that without these tests, the incidence of miserable horible deaths from prostate cancer will increase.  Not that the cancers themselves will increase, but a huge number will not be caught early when they can be treated and cured.  I personally know a lot of men who are alive and healthy today, because they got their annual screening.  I am one of them.

[Old Grizz]

Me too!!!!!!!! Agreed with your comments.

[wareagleguy]

No, I don't think Obama is in one this one.  Just follow the M O N E Y.  Who really saves money with less testing?  If I had the guess it is the insurance companies in on it.

[LaOtto222]

They just talked about this on ABC Evening News last night. They said that the rate for men is 3 out of 100 will get prostrate cancer. If they are screened the rate drops to 2 out of every 100. They said that there are nearly as many diagnosed with non-fatal cancers as ones with fatal cancers. Causing people to spend money and get treatments for nothing. They were waffling around as to if you really need to be screened. They basically said that it is an individuals decision to be screened - if the 1 out of 100 is worth the bother. It sounds similar to the breast cancer argument to me.

[Old Syko]

Magooch you are correct.  I'm still here today because of proper testing and early detection.  

Anyone who thinks the insurance companies would save money by eliminating early testing and detection absolutely has no idea how the system works.  Early testing, detection, and treatment is much cheaper than dealing with the later stages of a more advanced disease.  I know well the costs of early detection.  You had better pray you and your insurance company never learn of the costs of a late discovery.

[Matt]

http://www.sharinghealth.com/site%20map.html

and thats all I got to say about that....

[magooch]

Matt, what's your point?  TM7--same question.

[Matt]

Matt, what's your point?  TM7--same question.

why not take a little initiative and click the link and read...

Matt

[Swampman]

I have friends who say the treatment & side effects are worse than the very slow growing cancer.

[wareagleguy]

Old Syko,
My stepfater retired from BC/BS of Alabama.  I am dead on and KNOW what I am saying.  You say it is not insurance companies because treating cancer cost more than testing.  What makes you think the insurance will pay for any cancer treatment?  What you don't understand is the doctors can only apply treatment the insurace company says it will allow.

Trust me.  Screenings are going to be few and far between.

[Old Syko]

Wareagleguy;
My wife is presently in an executive position in the industry.  What you think you KNOW isn't exactly the truth.  Late detection and treatment can result in expenses in excess of 1.4 million for an individual over a 3 year period.  Compare that to the cost of early detection and treatment costs of 40 thousand or less for an affected individual over the same period.  What most don't understand is what insurance will or will not cover is clearly spelled out in their policy from the inception of coverage.  They don't understand it because they don't take the time to do so, they're only concern is how much it is going to cost them at the time, rather than the importance of what is covered.

I've walked the walk and know how it has turned out.  My treatment started 6-11-07 and it has cost me nothing out of pocket aside from premium payments.

BTW;
to all that think the digital exam (the dreaded finger treatment) is the first line of defence.  By the time the problem can be detected this way, the disease is farther advanced than necessary.

Swampman;
Your friends are wrong unless they were in the majority that were late in discovery and treatment.  Early detection is the key.

[magooch]

I absolutely agree that the finger up the rear is not going to detect the problem soon enough, but it might catch it before it is way too late.  However, the PSA test can and does catch it soon enough--maybe not everytime, but nothing in medical science is perfect.

To those who think that early detection and treatment is worse than the disease--it's your choice.  Personally--and it is very personal--I'll take the treatment any time.  That is exactly what I did.  I was one of the lucky ones who was eligible for the operation.  My doctor will not do the operation on men who are not otherwise in very good condition.  It is a very serious procedure that could kill a person who was in bad shape.

It is also possible that new techniques will, to some extent, replace many of the operations to remove the prostate.  Knowing what I know now and primarily because my operation was a complete success in every regard, I would still choose to have the operation over anything else I've heard of.  I would only say that it is so important to have a doctor who really, really knows what he is doing.  Mine is one of the best in the country, so I guess I'm lucky to be in the right place at the right time.

I am also so very grateful to my regular doctor, who was smart enough and diligent enough to recognize a relatively slight change in my annual PSA test, to schedule me for an appointment with a specialist.

[wareagleguy]

First, Magooch, I hope things work out good for you.
Many (including myself years ago) like Old Syko think insurance “pays the bills”.  This is not true.  What people don’t understand is that insurance has become “socialized” years ago.
Let me explain.
BC/BS is THE insurance company in most southeast states and is my insurance provider.  BC/BS uses a system called Preferred Care Providers.  This is every aspect of healhcare from doctors, hospitals, and any other type of patient care.  All of these “Preferred Providers” gets a paycheck each month reguardless of the number of patients.  NOW LISTEN!  If not one single person walks in to a doctor’s office that is a Preferred Care Provider he/she still gets a check!!!
Here is what I found out about this system.  In 1994 I had to have neck surgery in Birmingham, AL.  The total cost for about an 8 hour stay (with the surgery) came to just over $24,000.  I GOT A BILL FOR THIS AMOUNT!  Yes, insurance “paid” all but the $1200 I had to pay.  Sounds like a good deal for me, right?
After the surgery I asked my step dad what exactly did BC/BS pay on the $24,000 bill.  He found out and informed me that BC/BS paid a little under $1,000.  You hear this right!!! LESS THAN $1,000 BUCKS!!!  My deductable was more than what BC/BS paid for the entire bill.
Yes, treatment cost more but that is only on paper.  The actual cost to the insurance company is nothing! 
We are nothing more than sheep.

[Old Syko]

Magooch;
Our stories sound quite similar.  My doctor worked along side the man who perfected the psa tests and consulted with him about my particular case.  I too am lucky to have been able to deal with all the right people including my very young family doctor who was on the ball enough to help point me in the right direction in the beginning.

Wareagleguy;
I don't know what to tell ya.  Seems you got a 24 grand deal for peanuts the way you tell it.  Like I said before, there's a bit more to it than what you want to believe.  If there wasn't we would all be starting our own insurance companies.

[quickdtoo]

I don't often participate in discussions here, but if it saves just one life, it's worth it! I wouldn't be alive today if it wasn't for annual PSA blood testing, when I was 50yrs old my PSA jumped from 3.7 to 4.1, digital rectal exam was negative, subsequent needle biopsy was positive 5 out of 6, I was scheduled for a radical prostatectomy ASAP as recommended by my urologist who had also treated my father for the same. The path report on the removed tissue showed no disease in the surgical margins, so I was real lucky, the Doc called me his poster child for prostate cancer survivors because prostate cancer at this young age is almost always fatal because it's so aggressive. My PSA has been zero since, I'm 62 now.

I've had several friends and know of friends of friends that have gone thru similar experiences since, some at much older ages, some have opted for less aggressive treatments, some are no longer with us because their treatments didn't work, one in particular was 53yrs old when his doc recommended a radical, he declined and died of the disease 18 months later, and he had a good health plan, just didn't want to deal with the consquences of surgery.   

Those are real facts, take it or leave it. I was impotent for a few months, but thru modern medicine there are ways around that from  prescription drugs to prosthetic implants that work excellent, maybe better than the original!! Cost is prohibitive if you don't have a good health plan, so I can understand why many can't afford surgical options, I'm fortunate and have had an excellent health plan with Kaiser since 1952.

Tim