Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if they
can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save the yearly
appointment (we're all busy people after all).

This question is brought to you by the same bloke who asked if you could
DIY the Heimlich Maneuver, BTW.


--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 17:01:22 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:


Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if they
can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save the yearly
appointment (we're all busy people after all).

This question is brought to you by the same bloke who asked if you could
DIY the Heimlich Maneuver, BTW.

I believe some people pay large sums of money to non-doctors with no
clothes on to perform this service :-)

On Sunday, 24 September 2017 18:01:25 UTC+1, Cursitor Doom wrote:
Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if they
can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save the yearly
appointment (we're all busy people after all).

Possibly by the time you're old enough to need one you can't reach round far enough to DIY it.

Or you could buy yourself a

http://www.adam-rouilly.co.uk/products.aspx?cid=412

(I don't know why they have black and white versions; I'd have thought the anatomy was similar).

Instructables will probably have a 3D printed one sometime soon.

This question is brought to you by the same bloke who asked if you could
DIY the Heimlich Maneuver, BTW.

Yes

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2...ust-effective/

https://www.thisiswhyimbroke.com/uk/...manuever-tool/

Owain

Cursitor Doom grunted in
news

Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if
they can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save the
yearly appointment (we're all busy people after all).

If this is even a vaguely serious question, the simple answer is that even
if you can reach, you'd need to have felt a good number of prostates to be
able to distinguish a healthy one from a dodgy one. So unless you're up
for that prospect, I'd stick with having a doc do it for you...

Lobster wrote in
. 236:

Cursitor Doom grunted in
news

Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if
they can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save
the yearly appointment (we're all busy people after all).

If this is even a vaguely serious question, the simple answer is that
even if you can reach, you'd need to have felt a good number of
prostates to be able to distinguish a healthy one from a dodgy one.
So unless you're up for that prospect, I'd stick with having a doc do
it for you...


Why not a PSA Test?

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 22:06:07 +0000, DerbyBorn wrote:

Lobster wrote in
. 236:

Cursitor Doom grunted in
news

Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if
they can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save the
yearly appointment (we're all busy people after all).

If this is even a vaguely serious question, the simple answer is that
even if you can reach, you'd need to have felt a good number of
prostates to be able to distinguish a healthy one from a dodgy one. So
unless you're up for that prospect, I'd stick with having a doc do it
for you...


Why not a PSA Test?

They are complementary tests. Neither is definitive. Even a biopsy isn't
definitive!



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 24/09/2017 23:06, DerbyBorn wrote:
Lobster wrote in
. 236:

Cursitor Doom grunted in
news

Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if
they can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save
the yearly appointment (we're all busy people after all).

If this is even a vaguely serious question, the simple answer is that
even if you can reach, you'd need to have felt a good number of
prostates to be able to distinguish a healthy one from a dodgy one.
So unless you're up for that prospect, I'd stick with having a doc do
it for you...


Why not a PSA Test?

They don't work that well. As my doctor said to me, if you want to know
more use google.


--
Michael Chare

On 24/09/2017 23:31, Bob Eager wrote:

They are complementary tests. Neither is definitive. Even a biopsy isn't
definitive!




They are definitive if they find something, but they do miss as I now know.

Actually they mentioned mine after an ultrasound they did and as it had not
changed in several years I was spared any invasive procedures in this
direction.

Asfor your comment, well not sure this is true except for those into sexual
release without the pleasure bit.They do it with bulls using an electric
probe.

Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 17:01:22 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:


Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if they
can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save the yearly
appointment (we're all busy people after all).

This question is brought to you by the same bloke who asked if you could
DIY the Heimlich Maneuver, BTW.

I believe some people pay large sums of money to non-doctors with no
clothes on to perform this service :-)

DerbyBorn wrote in
2.222:

Lobster wrote in
. 236:

Cursitor Doom grunted in
news

Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if
they can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save
the yearly appointment (we're all busy people after all).

If this is even a vaguely serious question, the simple answer is that
even if you can reach, you'd need to have felt a good number of
prostates to be able to distinguish a healthy one from a dodgy one.
So unless you're up for that prospect, I'd stick with having a doc do
it for you...


Why not a PSA Test?


PSA discovered mine. The finger test did not reveal anything - but the
biopsy did. I had no symptoms. It was caught early due to me just asking
for a PSA Test after talking to a friend who had been through the problem.
I believe all men should have the PSA test every year. Ask your GP. Don't
wait for symtoms.

"Cursitor Doom" wrote in message
news

Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if they
can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save the yearly
appointment (we're all busy people after all).

what yearly appointment would that be then?

tim (not a disinterested party)

"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 24/09/2017 23:31, Bob Eager wrote:

They are complementary tests. Neither is definitive. Even a biopsy isn't
definitive!




They are definitive if they find something, but they do miss as I now
know.

no

it has a high percentage of false positives

tim

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
news
On 24/09/2017 23:06, DerbyBorn wrote:
Lobster wrote in
. 236:

Cursitor Doom grunted in
news

Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if
they can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save
the yearly appointment (we're all busy people after all).

If this is even a vaguely serious question, the simple answer is that
even if you can reach, you'd need to have felt a good number of
prostates to be able to distinguish a healthy one from a dodgy one.
So unless you're up for that prospect, I'd stick with having a doc do
it for you...


Why not a PSA Test?

They don't work that well.

but then neither does the finger test

As my doctor said to me, if you want to know more use google.

On 25/09/2017 09:21, DerbyBorn wrote:
DerbyBorn wrote in
2.222:

Lobster wrote in
. 236:

Cursitor Doom grunted in
news

Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if
they can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save
the yearly appointment (we're all busy people after all).

If this is even a vaguely serious question, the simple answer is that
even if you can reach, you'd need to have felt a good number of
prostates to be able to distinguish a healthy one from a dodgy one.
So unless you're up for that prospect, I'd stick with having a doc do
it for you...


Why not a PSA Test?


PSA discovered mine. The finger test did not reveal anything - but the
biopsy did. I had no symptoms. It was caught early due to me just asking
for a PSA Test after talking to a friend who had been through the problem.
I believe all men should have the PSA test every year. Ask your GP. Don't
wait for symtoms.


Google it. The *current* view is that it used to lead to unneccessary
surgery leading to little or no net benefit. The best option is MRI
which can pick up the more dangerous forms which are often inaccessible.
But that of course costs an arm and a leg.

On 25/09/2017 09:53, tim... wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 24/09/2017 23:31, Bob Eager wrote:

They are complementary tests. Neither is definitive. Even a biopsy isn't
definitive!




They are definitive if they find something, but they do miss as I now
know.

no

it has a high percentage of false positives

PSA 100 means you definitely have cancer, but what do you do about a
PSA of 7 or 8? Retest in a couple of months, and see if it's going up?

In my case, a digital exam showed something, so did MRI, but the biopsy
was clear. I hated the biopsy.

On 25/09/2017 10:08, newshound wrote:
On 25/09/2017 09:21, DerbyBorn wrote:
DerbyBorn wrote in
2.222:

Lobster wrote in
. 236:

Cursitor Doom grunted in
news

Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if
they can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save
the yearly appointment (we're all busy people after all).

If this is even a vaguely serious question, the simple answer is that
even if you can reach, you'd need to have felt a good number of
prostates to be able to distinguish a healthy one from a dodgy one.
So unless you're up for that prospect, I'd stick with having a doc do
it for you...


Why not a PSA Test?


PSA discovered mine. The finger test did not reveal anything - but the
biopsy did. I had no symptoms. It was caught early due to me just asking
for a PSA Test after talking to a friend who had been through the
problem.
I believe all men should have the PSA test every year. Ask your GP. Don't
wait for symtoms.


Google it. The *current* view is that it used to lead to unneccessary
surgery leading to little or no net benefit. The best option is MRI
which can pick up the more dangerous forms which are often inaccessible.
But that of course costs an arm and a leg.

The PSA test doesn't lead to unnecessary surgery. That arises from what
people do with the results.

I had an MRI before surgery - and a CT Scan. The NHS is great!

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 10:59:45 +0100, GB wrote:

On 25/09/2017 09:53, tim... wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 24/09/2017 23:31, Bob Eager wrote:

They are complementary tests. Neither is definitive. Even a biopsy
isn't definitive!




They are definitive if they find something, but they do miss as I now
know.

no

it has a high percentage of false positives

PSA 100 means you definitely have cancer, but what do you do about a
PSA of 7 or 8? Retest in a couple of months, and see if it's going up?

It's the trend that matters. I graphed mine going slowly upwards, then it
accelerated.

In my case, a digital exam showed something, so did MRI, but the biopsy
was clear. I hated the biopsy.

I've had three of those. The last one (2010) landed me in hospital for
ten days with sepsis.

They wanted to do one in January this year (PSA was going up faster), but
decided a template biopsy would reduce the risk of infection (oh, I'm
allergic to some antibiotics too). Because I has to go to a different NHS
trust, they did an initial consultation. Consultant said my flow rate was
rubbish, and they could fix that and do the biopsy at the same time. It
would also reduce my PSA and make subsequent changes easier to see.

It was great. Went in 7am, 3 hour procedure(s), and went home lunchtime
the next day. Catheter for 5 days, went back for removal, tested me and
flow rate had increased by a factor of 6!

Procedure was a HoLEP - look it up.

And the biopsy was clear. Two cancers now...

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

newshound grunted in
o.uk:

On 25/09/2017 09:21, DerbyBorn wrote:
DerbyBorn wrote in
2.222:


Why not a PSA Test?


PSA discovered mine. The finger test did not reveal anything - but
the biopsy did. I had no symptoms. It was caught early due to me just
asking for a PSA Test after talking to a friend who had been through
the problem. I believe all men should have the PSA test every year.
Ask your GP. Don't wait for symtoms.


Google it. The *current* view is that it used to lead to unneccessary
surgery leading to little or no net benefit.

It's not just that, the unnecessary surgery is very likely to cause
impotence and incontinence.

If I already had risk factors like a family history of the disease, being
Afro-Carribean, I'd go for the PSA test but in the absence of those; no
thanks.

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 13:35:29 +0000, Lobster wrote:

newshound grunted in
o.uk:

On 25/09/2017 09:21, DerbyBorn wrote:
DerbyBorn wrote in
2.222:


Why not a PSA Test?


PSA discovered mine. The finger test did not reveal anything - but the
biopsy did. I had no symptoms. It was caught early due to me just
asking for a PSA Test after talking to a friend who had been through
the problem. I believe all men should have the PSA test every year.
Ask your GP. Don't wait for symtoms.


Google it. The *current* view is that it used to lead to unneccessary
surgery leading to little or no net benefit.

It's not just that, the unnecessary surgery is very likely to cause
impotence and incontinence.

If I already had risk factors like a family history of the disease,
being Afro-Carribean, I'd go for the PSA test but in the absence of
those; no thanks.

- the finger test basically tells if it is enlarged
- the PSA test tell if it is enlarged and/or possible tumours
- the biopsy mostly detects tumours
- the MRI detects nearly all tumours

If either of the last two show positive, time for the surgery. Mine gave
no ill effects.

Failing to have the surgery will mean you either die a bit sooner, or a
lot sooner (if it's the aggressive type)



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 10:59:45 +0100, GB wrote:

On 25/09/2017 09:53, tim... wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 24/09/2017 23:31, Bob Eager wrote:

They are complementary tests. Neither is definitive. Even a biopsy
isn't definitive!




They are definitive if they find something, but they do miss as I now
know.

no

it has a high percentage of false positives

PSA 100 means you definitely have cancer, but what do you do about a
PSA of 7 or 8? Retest in a couple of months, and see if it's going up?

It's the trend that matters. I graphed mine going slowly upwards, then it
accelerated.

In my case, a digital exam showed something, so did MRI, but the biopsy
was clear. I hated the biopsy.

I've had three of those. The last one (2010) landed me in hospital for
ten days with sepsis.

They wanted to do one in January this year (PSA was going up faster), but
decided a template biopsy would reduce the risk of infection (oh, I'm
allergic to some antibiotics too). Because I has to go to a different NHS
trust, they did an initial consultation. Consultant said my flow rate was
rubbish, and they could fix that and do the biopsy at the same time. It
would also reduce my PSA and make subsequent changes easier to see.

It was great. Went in 7am, 3 hour procedure(s), and went home lunchtime
the next day. Catheter for 5 days, went back for removal, tested me and
flow rate had increased by a factor of 6!

anybody who can't notice an immediate improvement in their flow rate is an
idiot

it is the degradation that's the problem. It's gradual

Procedure was a HoLEP - look it up.

That's the laser treatment

I though that was available as day surgery

"Lobster" wrote in message
. 236...
newshound grunted in
o.uk:

On 25/09/2017 09:21, DerbyBorn wrote:
DerbyBorn wrote in
2.222:


Why not a PSA Test?


PSA discovered mine. The finger test did not reveal anything - but
the biopsy did. I had no symptoms. It was caught early due to me just
asking for a PSA Test after talking to a friend who had been through
the problem. I believe all men should have the PSA test every year.
Ask your GP. Don't wait for symtoms.


Google it. The *current* view is that it used to lead to unneccessary
surgery leading to little or no net benefit.

It's not just that, the unnecessary surgery is very likely to cause
impotence and incontinence.

no-one argues that there isn't a problem with the surgery and that it may be
unnecessary

the argument is that the unnecessaryness is NOT caused because your GP has
found you have a raised PSA.

It's caused because the Consultant you are referred to does not detail the
choices to you correctly.

A well informed patient can challenge that.

If I already had risk factors like a family history of the disease, being
Afro-Carribean, I'd go for the PSA test but in the absence of those; no
thanks.

It's just a blood test FFS

tim

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 15:06:19 +0100, tim... wrote:

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 10:59:45 +0100, GB wrote:

On 25/09/2017 09:53, tim... wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 24/09/2017 23:31, Bob Eager wrote:

They are complementary tests. Neither is definitive. Even a biopsy
isn't definitive!




They are definitive if they find something, but they do miss as I
now know.

no

it has a high percentage of false positives

PSA 100 means you definitely have cancer, but what do you do about a
PSA of 7 or 8? Retest in a couple of months, and see if it's going up?

It's the trend that matters. I graphed mine going slowly upwards, then
it accelerated.

In my case, a digital exam showed something, so did MRI, but the
biopsy was clear. I hated the biopsy.

I've had three of those. The last one (2010) landed me in hospital for
ten days with sepsis.

They wanted to do one in January this year (PSA was going up faster),
but decided a template biopsy would reduce the risk of infection (oh,
I'm allergic to some antibiotics too). Because I has to go to a
different NHS trust, they did an initial consultation. Consultant said
my flow rate was rubbish, and they could fix that and do the biopsy at
the same time. It would also reduce my PSA and make subsequent changes
easier to see.

It was great. Went in 7am, 3 hour procedure(s), and went home lunchtime
the next day. Catheter for 5 days, went back for removal, tested me and
flow rate had increased by a factor of 6!

anybody who can't notice an immediate improvement in their flow rate is
an idiot

it is the degradation that's the problem. It's gradual

Yes, but they like to see how much it's improved in case they missed
something. Some people take months for swelling to go down and get a good
flow.

Procedure was a HoLEP - look it up.

That's the laser treatment

The newer laser treatment, in fact.

I though that was available as day surgery

It is...but I had the biopsy too.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 13:35:29 +0000, Lobster wrote:



- the finger test basically tells if it is enlarged
- the PSA test tell if it is enlarged and/or possible tumours
- the biopsy mostly detects tumours
- the MRI detects nearly all tumours

If either of the last two show positive, time for the surgery. Mine gave
no ill effects.

but that's just luck

many do suffer ill effects and wish that they had never had the surgery

Failing to have the surgery will mean you either die a bit sooner, or a
lot sooner (if it's the aggressive type)

In most cases the aggressive type it too late to treat when discovered
(blame that on the patient not reporting the symptoms soon enough)

tim

On 25/09/2017 14:35, Lobster wrote:

It's not just that, the unnecessary surgery is very likely to cause
impotence and incontinence.

If I already had risk factors like a family history of the disease, being
Afro-Carribean, I'd go for the PSA test but in the absence of those; no
thanks.


I disagree REALLY strongly!

Get the PSA test done every year. Just don't rush into surgery if the
PSA test and any subsequent tests indicate possible cancer. Take advice,
but most probably follow a policy of "watchful waiting".

https://prostatecanceruk.org/prostat...tchful-waiting

The reason is that an astonishing proportion of men (30%) die with, but
not from, undetected and non-symptomatic prostate cancer. Many of these
cancers are so slow growing that you'll die from other things before
they do you any harm.

On the other hand, if the cancer you have is aggressive, it needs to be
treated before it becomes symptomatic.

It's very difficult to tell aggressive cancers from slow growing ones
just from biopsy. Watchful waiting saves you having unnecessary surgery,
removing slow growing cancer.

Bob Eager wrote:
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 13:35:29 +0000, Lobster wrote:

newshound grunted in
o.uk:

On 25/09/2017 09:21, DerbyBorn wrote:
DerbyBorn wrote in
2.222:


Why not a PSA Test?


PSA discovered mine. The finger test did not reveal anything - but the
biopsy did. I had no symptoms. It was caught early due to me just
asking for a PSA Test after talking to a friend who had been through
the problem. I believe all men should have the PSA test every year.
Ask your GP. Don't wait for symtoms.


Google it. The *current* view is that it used to lead to unneccessary
surgery leading to little or no net benefit.

It's not just that, the unnecessary surgery is very likely to cause
impotence and incontinence.

If I already had risk factors like a family history of the disease,
being Afro-Carribean, I'd go for the PSA test but in the absence of
those; no thanks.

- the finger test basically tells if it is enlarged

It can do more than that. Enlargement is pretty much normal as we age. A
prostate that is harder and lumper than normal is what really matters.

- the PSA test tell if it is enlarged and/or possible tumours
- the biopsy mostly detects tumours
- the MRI detects nearly all tumours

If either of the last two show positive, time for the surgery. Mine gave
no ill effects.

Failing to have the surgery will mean you either die a bit sooner, or a
lot sooner (if it's the aggressive type)

A friend of mine went from diagnosis (with no urinary symptoms but pain in
his hip) to dead in under 11 months.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 25/09/2017 15:13, tim... wrote:

In most cases the aggressive type it too late to treat when discovered
(blame that on the patient not reporting the symptoms soon enough)

What symptoms, until it spreads or causes major blockages or bleeding?
Then, you're practically dead. I don't think there's any way for the
patient to report symptoms early enough to make a difference.

Get the PSA test done! If it's positive (or the trend is strongly
upwards from one year to the next), get follow up tests done. Then, stop
and decide what to do next.

Watchful waiting or active surveillance are options that may avoid
unnecessary treatment, whilst giving you a good chance at getting
necessary treatment done in time.

tim... wrote:


"Lobster" wrote in message

If I already had risk factors like a family history of the disease, being
Afro-Carribean, I'd go for the PSA test but in the absence of those; no
thanks.

It's just a blood test FFS

Um, no. It's also a potential trigger for a cascade of potentially
unnecessary investigation, treatment and anxiety.

As my mother would have said if she had actually said it, "Never ask a
question that you don't want to know the answer to".

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 25/09/2017 15:21, Tim+ wrote:

A friend of mine went from diagnosis (with no urinary symptoms but pain in
his hip) to dead in under 11 months.

Sorry, Tim. So, the first symptoms he noticed were after it had spread
to his bones?


Tim

"GB" wrote in message
news
On 25/09/2017 15:13, tim... wrote:

In most cases the aggressive type it too late to treat when discovered
(blame that on the patient not reporting the symptoms soon enough)

What symptoms, until it spreads or causes major blockages or bleeding?
Then, you're practically dead. I don't think there's any way for the
patient to report symptoms early enough to make a difference.

well not having the aggressive form, or even cancer at all I have no idea
how early the symptoms appear in that case

but I had the symptoms of prostate enlargement for at least 3 years before
it was discovered

and that was at as the result of a routine test not because I reported any
applicable symptoms

tim

On 25/09/2017 15:25, Tim+ wrote:
tim... wrote:


"Lobster" wrote in message

If I already had risk factors like a family history of the disease, being
Afro-Carribean, I'd go for the PSA test but in the absence of those; no
thanks.

It's just a blood test FFS

Um, no. It's also a potential trigger for a cascade of potentially
unnecessary investigation, treatment and anxiety.

It's certainly a potential trigger for a cascade of absolutely necessary
investigation.

Treatment should be carefully considered.

Anxiety. I'd be even more anxious not having my annual PSA done.





As my mother would have said if she had actually said it, "Never ask a
question that you don't want to know the answer to".

Die from ignorance.



Tim

On 25/09/2017 15:28, tim... wrote:


"GB" wrote in message
news
On 25/09/2017 15:13, tim... wrote:

In most cases the aggressive type it too late to treat when
discovered (blame that on the patient not reporting the symptoms soon
enough)

What symptoms, until it spreads or causes major blockages or bleeding?
Then, you're practically dead. I don't think there's any way for the
patient to report symptoms early enough to make a difference.

well not having the aggressive form, or even cancer at all I have no
idea how early the symptoms appear in that case

but I had the symptoms of prostate enlargement for at least 3 years
before it was discovered

Benign prostate enlargement gradually builds up, until it becomes a
nuisance. But you can't compare that to cancer.



and that was at as the result of a routine test not because I reported
any applicable symptoms

What routine test?



tim

If I already had risk factors like a family history of the disease,
being Afro-Carribean, I'd go for the PSA test but in the absence of
those; no thanks.


It is only a blood test! What is to loose? It establishes a likelyhood or
otherwise. It is an indicator.
Better than putting up with getting up in the night a lot and then finding
that cancer has spread.

"Tim+" wrote in message
news
tim... wrote:


"Lobster" wrote in message

If I already had risk factors like a family history of the disease,
being
Afro-Carribean, I'd go for the PSA test but in the absence of those; no
thanks.

It's just a blood test FFS

Um, no. It's also a potential trigger for a cascade of potentially
unnecessary investigation, treatment and anxiety.

As my mother would have said if she had actually said it, "Never ask a
question that you don't want to know the answer to".

so you die of something knowing that if you had acted sooner you could have
lived

your/his choice

tim

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 13:35:29 +0000, Lobster wrote:

newshound grunted in
o.uk:

On 25/09/2017 09:21, DerbyBorn wrote:
DerbyBorn wrote in
2.222:


Why not a PSA Test?


PSA discovered mine. The finger test did not reveal anything - but the
biopsy did. I had no symptoms. It was caught early due to me just
asking for a PSA Test after talking to a friend who had been through
the problem. I believe all men should have the PSA test every year.
Ask your GP. Don't wait for symtoms.


Google it. The *current* view is that it used to lead to unneccessary
surgery leading to little or no net benefit.

It's not just that, the unnecessary surgery is very likely to cause
impotence and incontinence.

If I already had risk factors like a family history of the disease,
being Afro-Carribean, I'd go for the PSA test but in the absence of
those; no thanks.

- the finger test basically tells if it is enlarged
- the PSA test tell if it is enlarged and/or possible tumours
- the biopsy mostly detects tumours
- the MRI detects nearly all tumours

If either of the last two show positive, time for the surgery. Mine gave
no ill effects.

Failing to have the surgery will mean you either die a bit sooner,

Nope, with plenty it has no effect at all on their lifespan.

or a lot sooner (if it's the aggressive type)

"tim..." wrote in message
news


"Lobster" wrote in message
. 236...
newshound grunted in
o.uk:

On 25/09/2017 09:21, DerbyBorn wrote:
DerbyBorn wrote in
2.222:


Why not a PSA Test?


PSA discovered mine. The finger test did not reveal anything - but
the biopsy did. I had no symptoms. It was caught early due to me just
asking for a PSA Test after talking to a friend who had been through
the problem. I believe all men should have the PSA test every year.
Ask your GP. Don't wait for symtoms.


Google it. The *current* view is that it used to lead to unneccessary
surgery leading to little or no net benefit.

It's not just that, the unnecessary surgery is very likely to cause
impotence and incontinence.

no-one argues that there isn't a problem with the surgery and that it may
be unnecessary

the argument is that the unnecessaryness is NOT caused because your GP has
found you have a raised PSA.

It's caused because the Consultant you are referred to does not detail the
choices to you correctly.

A well informed patient can challenge that.

If I already had risk factors like a family history of the disease, being
Afro-Carribean, I'd go for the PSA test but in the absence of those; no
thanks.

It's just a blood test FFS

The problem is that a raised PSA can see some agree to surgery
or even just biopsys which wouldn't otherwise have happened
and with plenty, they would have died of something else.

"tim..." wrote in message
news


"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 13:35:29 +0000, Lobster wrote:



- the finger test basically tells if it is enlarged
- the PSA test tell if it is enlarged and/or possible tumours
- the biopsy mostly detects tumours
- the MRI detects nearly all tumours

If either of the last two show positive, time for the surgery. Mine gave
no ill effects.

but that's just luck

many do suffer ill effects and wish that they had never had the surgery

Failing to have the surgery will mean you either die a bit sooner, or a
lot sooner (if it's the aggressive type)

In most cases the aggressive type it too late to treat when discovered
(blame that on the patient not reporting the symptoms soon enough)

Thats why the PSA test is done routinely. Fortunately mine are always fine.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 24/09/2017 23:31, Bob Eager wrote:

They are complementary tests. Neither is definitive. Even a biopsy isn't
definitive!




They are definitive if they find something,

Nope, not even then. They dont always distinguish
between the slow growing cancers that can be safely
ignored and the fast growing ones with cant be.

but they do miss as I now know.

On 25/09/2017 20:03, Rod Speed wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 24/09/2017 23:31, Bob Eager wrote:

They are complementary tests. Neither is definitive. Even a biopsy isn't
definitive!




They are definitive if they find something,

Nope, not even then. They dont always distinguish
between the slow growing cancers that can be safely
ignored and the fast growing ones with cant be.


That's the real problem. That's the point at which people panic and have
unnecessary surgery.



but they do miss as I now know.

On 24/09/2017 20:54, Tim+ wrote:
Cursitor Doom Wrote in message:

Anyone know if doctors can DIY their own prostate exam? Obviously if they
can, the rest of us can learn to do it for ourselves and save the yearly
appointment (we're all busy people after all).


As someone who has performed rectal examinations, I would say no.
Unless you've got the arms of a gibbon and extraordinary
flexibility, you're not going to be able to do an adequate
physical examination.

Definitely a job to "outsource".


If you are so squeamish why become a doctor. (assuming that's what you
were and not a sex worker.)