Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Bert Vorstman MD's avatar

Good job Howard.

Yes, this fact is well known - if you have been diagnosed with one type of cancer you are at greater risk for developing another different type of cancer. Not counting the G6 of course as this is a bogus cancer because it's biological pathways for cancer development and spread are INACTIVE. Therefore, this Gleason 6 pseudo-cancer does NOT need diagnosis, monitoring or treatment.

And, your reader Matt is absolutely correct. The business of prostate cancer is about exaggerating cancer risks, exploiting false hope and exploiting false promises. Instead, the recycling of prostate cancer misinformation is a $23.2 billion industry that steers countless men only towards harm with so-called "testing" and "treatment".

Sadly, the prostate cancer community is fully aware that PSA testing FAILS to save significant numbers of lives.

And, they are also fully aware that - when the 15 year treatment survivals were compared for prostate cancer surgery, radiation and NO treatment - survival was the same for all 3 groups. That is - NO treatment is as good as the debilitating surgery for prostate cancer.

Physicians and government healthcare oversight agencies would do well to challenge their healthcare recommendations with a simple question - where is the irrefutable and reproducible data supporting this recommendation?

Expand full comment
Clyde R.'s avatar

I was diagnosed with prostate cancer in July 2023 beginning with a DRE. I am 74. My PSA had never been above 2.7 and I have been testing it regularly. It is still within normal range. A targeted TRUS biopsy tested 2 lesions that had shown on the MRI and my urologist performed 12 other random biopsies at the same time. One targeted lesion was Gleason 3+4 and the other one was less than 7. The other random biopsy samples were all negative. The Gleason 7 was determined to be intermediate favorable and I had a Prolaris test done that came back with an indication I was in the active surveillance range. My urologist and I agreed to go that route, which I was thankful for. I had done a lot of research, mainly through PCRI videos with Mark Scholz. I had also read some of your helpful information. This summer I had an MRI done, which was part of my active surveillance protocol. It came back with high suspicion for lymph node metastasis in the groin area and two osseous metastases on the clavicle. Naturally, I was somewhat stunned that the prostate cancer could possibly have spread this much in a year, knowing that I had chosen, properly, active surveillance the summer before. A biopsy on a groin lymph node (the most enlarged one) showed metastasis. And a PET scan showed groin lymph node metastasis and two small clavicular metastatisized lesions. However, based on the lymph node biopsy tissue sample and analysis, the indication was the metastasis was nearly impossible to have originated from the prostate cancer. So at this point the oncologist has been unable to determine a primary origin cancer causing the metastasis. She has sent the biopsy tissue in for Next Generation Sequencing test to see of that will help locate a primary cancer. I write all this to indicate that the active surveillance seemed to work in the first year of testing as was indicated in all the tests from last summer. But coincidentally and unfortunately, the MRI protocol for prostate cancer surveillance revealed a metastasis almost certainly from another undetermined primary cancer. Have you (or any of your followers) ever known of a situation like mine where the active surveillance protocol MRI showed metastasized cancer? At least the protocol MRI showed a cancer I was unaware of so I can work on that, even though it has metastasized in apparently a very short time without me knowing of any primary cancer other than prostate. I am seeking a second opinion at a large NCI cancer center. I’ll even go for a third if I think it necessary. Thanks and all best wishes on your very meaningful and helpful service.

Expand full comment
6 more comments...

No posts