Again, ad nauseam, applaud you, Howard, lending exposure to and putting a real face on prostate cancer, specifically those public figures courageous "fronting" their walk with this "tag", aka Al Roker. I encourage more of the same in light of the AUA News reporting on the Consortium of Disparities of Urological Conditions (ConDUC) in its December 2023 edition. Mortality as reported, certainly known to you but not commonly known, is 2.5 times that of White PCa patients. While SCOPE registries and SEER data are wonderful, both pale in my judgement to education in its lowest form, "boots on the ground" such as your efforts with the blog. I encourage you not to take on one more challenge but in conversation instill need for voice of minorities both here and at webinars, whose experience may be unlike current reporting, both costly and/or limited by the very nature of tools of statistical research. In 2016 Ken Griffey, Jr. toured with Bayer addressing this cancer among 4 uncles and father. My experience setting booths in 6 cites same year, only Black seniors were interested. Approached, a main-line eastern Black advocacy group showed no interest to reach out at the grassroots. Things have changed within the Black community in regards to urgency of need to reach ALL black males. Let us judge for ourselves.
The numbers overall must be quite high. Today, about 300,000 men are expected to be diagnosed with prostate cancer. About 55% have low-risk to favorable intermediate-risk cancer, 60% chose AS; of course 40% STILL choose to be treated.
Back when I was diagnosed in 2010, about 200,00 men were diagnosed overall with prostate cancer Only 6-10% of us with low-risk "cancer" opted for Active Surveillance. So ~90% opted to be treated and risking side effects.
Back in the 1990s, the availabllity of the biopsy gun, ultrasound, transrectal biopsies, and PSA testing conspired to create a solid income stream for urologists. A famed uro told me urologists mainly were "clap doctors" before then and then were given the golden egg.
In this period, cases of prostate cancer surged--though most were early Gleason 6 previously unknown or ignored--and treatment "cures" climbed resulting in men experiencing incontinence and erectile dysfunction
Also in this period, legendary Dr. Pat Walsh announced his "nerve-sparing" prostatectomy to protect sexual function. Walsh was hero, but many urologists who adopted the approach were less skilled.
As I heard it, Walsh originally suggested a prime group for his surgery were men with low-risk Gleason 6. The thinking was the men could be cured and their sexuality preserved.
But the 1990s into the 2000s have been a time for an epidemic of avoidable incontinence and sexual dysfunction impacting hundreds of thousands of men.
One just has to wonder how many glands were removed, how much pain, suffering and adverse outcomes took place when those men could have been on AS. <sigh>
Again, ad nauseam, applaud you, Howard, lending exposure to and putting a real face on prostate cancer, specifically those public figures courageous "fronting" their walk with this "tag", aka Al Roker. I encourage more of the same in light of the AUA News reporting on the Consortium of Disparities of Urological Conditions (ConDUC) in its December 2023 edition. Mortality as reported, certainly known to you but not commonly known, is 2.5 times that of White PCa patients. While SCOPE registries and SEER data are wonderful, both pale in my judgement to education in its lowest form, "boots on the ground" such as your efforts with the blog. I encourage you not to take on one more challenge but in conversation instill need for voice of minorities both here and at webinars, whose experience may be unlike current reporting, both costly and/or limited by the very nature of tools of statistical research. In 2016 Ken Griffey, Jr. toured with Bayer addressing this cancer among 4 uncles and father. My experience setting booths in 6 cites same year, only Black seniors were interested. Approached, a main-line eastern Black advocacy group showed no interest to reach out at the grassroots. Things have changed within the Black community in regards to urgency of need to reach ALL black males. Let us judge for ourselves.
Harley,
The numbers overall must be quite high. Today, about 300,000 men are expected to be diagnosed with prostate cancer. About 55% have low-risk to favorable intermediate-risk cancer, 60% chose AS; of course 40% STILL choose to be treated.
Back when I was diagnosed in 2010, about 200,00 men were diagnosed overall with prostate cancer Only 6-10% of us with low-risk "cancer" opted for Active Surveillance. So ~90% opted to be treated and risking side effects.
Back in the 1990s, the availabllity of the biopsy gun, ultrasound, transrectal biopsies, and PSA testing conspired to create a solid income stream for urologists. A famed uro told me urologists mainly were "clap doctors" before then and then were given the golden egg.
In this period, cases of prostate cancer surged--though most were early Gleason 6 previously unknown or ignored--and treatment "cures" climbed resulting in men experiencing incontinence and erectile dysfunction
Also in this period, legendary Dr. Pat Walsh announced his "nerve-sparing" prostatectomy to protect sexual function. Walsh was hero, but many urologists who adopted the approach were less skilled.
As I heard it, Walsh originally suggested a prime group for his surgery were men with low-risk Gleason 6. The thinking was the men could be cured and their sexuality preserved.
But the 1990s into the 2000s have been a time for an epidemic of avoidable incontinence and sexual dysfunction impacting hundreds of thousands of men.
Howard
One just has to wonder how many glands were removed, how much pain, suffering and adverse outcomes took place when those men could have been on AS. <sigh>