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.
GW; Sorry to hear about the situation you are in and the apparent failure of the first Urologist. These stories are much too numerous. Competent testing almost always includes the free PSA test if the main PSA number is suspect. A low percentage of free PSA is another indication of cancer, sort of a back-up of the suspicion from the high PSA main number. Clearly he failed to submit to you the importance of pursuing suspicions further or just lacked the knowledge/experience to do so. Perhaps he also botched the biopsy he did on you, clearly missing the suspect area.
It is a situation we can easily blame ourselves for also for feeling we were not diligent enough to "know better". Best not to fall into that trap - it happened and now you are dealing with it and gaining the wisdom to proceed. Very few are knowledgeable about this when it is dropped on us. I, for instance, was in denial for a year before I finally decided I better check it out in more detail and learn the facts. I was more concerned about what damage a biopsy would do to a healthy organ than I was that I might actually have cancer. (That was a year more the cancer had to mature.)
So many seem so complacent about this disease. Hearing statements that say this disease is over diagnosed and over treated and statements that say, more men die with it than from it, lead some to think it is not that serious, when in actuality, it is serious and doing nothing is nothing short of gambling with your life. (If one is an avid gambler, this is the disease to have alright as nothing about it or its treatment is for sure - other than treatment will likely cause you some quality of life issues.)
On the subject of treatment decisions; is sexual ability more important than life itself? (If your hand developed gangrene, would you remove it or elect to live out what is left of your life with your hand until it finally killed you?) These choices SUCK but the answer should be obvious. It is devastating to lose your prostate and all it does but, is keeping it a little longer really worth the risk of that final consequence?
For various reasons doctors often do not accurately give patients needed details. Knowing the details maybe won't change anything and that is probably what they are thinking when they expect us to just follow along like obedient puppies with blind faith in something that is so serious and we are so ignorant of. Doctors need to be straight forward even when it hurts. Knowing details up front can save a lot of disappointment later on even when it doesn't change the outcome. I like facts and find surprises to be very disappointing when unprepared for them. (Read my survivor story.)
Anyway - GW, best of luck on your experience from here on. Keep a positive attitude - what other choice is there? Keep us posted. Jon.
My initial worry was the stories of folk having 3 to 4 biopsies before cancer was found. The risk of long term complications was a factor in my resistance to do additional biopsies.
Plus, I had no symptoms that bothered me so I adopted the "If it isn't broken, don't fix it." approach.
I really wish the MRI guided biopsy procedure was available four years ago. I would have done it back then rather than next week. Also, my syptoms are now bad enough they are driving me to find out what's going on; and any long term side effects of a saturation biopsy probably won't make my life much more miserable. So I may have to wear a diaper... might be better than the fear of dribbling onto my pants. And the prostate is soft enough I can't really enjoy sex. So even complete ED isn't that serious a worry.
Oddly - the symptom of poor ejaculation hints at a transition zone problem (if I understand the anatomy). And that was one of the places my first biopsy didn't sample.
As for attitude, I still take one step at a time; but I can't say I am optimistic at this point. I hope the biopsy finds something, even something bad, because that will end the doubt that is driving me crazy.
