This forum is for the discussion of anything to do with Prostate Cancer. There are only four rules:
No fundraisers, no commercials (although it is OK to recommend choices of treatment or medical people based on your personal research; invitations to participate in third-party surveys are also acceptable, provided there is no compensation to YANA);
No harvesting e-mail addresses for Spam;
No insults or flaming - be polite and respectful at all times and understand that there may be a variety of points of view, all of which may have some validity;
Opinions are OK, but please provide as much factual evidence as possible for any assertions that you are making
Failure to abide by these simple rules will result in the immediate and permanent suspension of your posting privileges.
Since this is an International Forum, please specify your location in your post.
You've highlighted a number of issues revolving around the problems with the PSA test and why it is so contentious.
Because PSA is NOT prostate cancer specific it is a rather poor guide as to what is happening as far as prostate cancer is concerned. There are other aspects of the human physiology that can and do affect PSA numbers. This is more marked in a man who has his gland than in a man who has had surgery, but there can be odd variances at any time.
It is not my place to ever give specific advice to people because I am not qualified to do so, but I do feel that there is often a reaction that is too early and too large to what may well be nothing that will ever become life threatening. Ultra-sensitive tests are, in my opinion, the cause of much unneccessary stress and concern.
I assume you have read PSA 101 and the links off that page? Even if you have you might lke to re-read it now.
