3 ms·

That's early testing, specifically "average-risk men aged 55 to 69 years". E.g. my 82 year old father would be dead or severely suffering today if his routine,

by hga 11y ago

That's early testing, specifically "average-risk men aged 55 to 69 years". E.g. my 82 year old father would be dead or severely suffering today if his routine, over 69 years of age PSA tests hadn't prompted his doctor to order a biopsy 5 years ago.

javadocmd 11y ago
Your father might be dead or suffering today. It is impossible to be certain about the natural course of a disease after you intervene. I'm glad your father is doing well, of course, but we should be cautious: stories like this one tend to bias people towards treatment with what is technically a false representation of facts. I hate to seem pedantic, but accuracy is crucial in discussions like this.
- hga 11y ago
  Given the Gleason score, let's just say would/might -> most likely.
  - javadocmd 11y ago
    I don't doubt that you (or whoever) had additional information and made a sound decision. Point being simply that someone reading your original comment (or such comments generally) doesn't have the full context and might not realize it. I'm not making a point about your situation, but about how the internet is often misused by people seeking to make their own decisions. A subject that fascinates me.
    - hga 11y ago
      Well, all that's after the fact 20/20 hindsight. Initially, all he and his doctor knew was that he was 77 years old and his routine, approved by the powers that be, PSA test results took a worrisome turn, bad enough that a biopsy was indicated. My father's case only supports the Official Word, that starting at age 70 you should get PSA tests. WRT to people making their own decisions, I highly advise that, if you're 70 or older, to get regular PSA tests!
      - nommm-nommm 11y ago
        >My father's case only supports the Official Word, that starting at age 70 you should get PSA tests. WRT to people making their own decisions, I highly advise that, if you're 70 or older, to get regular PSA tests! I highly advise you don't take medical advice from hga on Hacker News based on one anecdote. The Official Word from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is "The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends against prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer." http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/UpdateSummaryFinal/prostate-cancer-screening http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/U... https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/screening-for-disease-in-people-without-symptoms-the-reality/ https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/screening-for-disease-i... Surgery for prostate cancer has some very serious side effects...
      - pessimizer 11y ago
        Before the fact, we know that cancer testing does not reduce mortality, with the possible exception of cervical cancer. PSA tests are the worst offenders. Why cancer screening has never been shown to “save lives”—and what we can do about it http://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.h6080 http://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.h6080

by hga 11y ago

javadocmd 11y ago

Your father might be dead or suffering today. It is impossible to be certain about the natural course of a disease after you intervene. I'm glad your father is doing well, of course, but we should be cautious: stories like this one tend to bias people towards treatment with what is technically a false representation of facts. I hate to seem pedantic, but accuracy is crucial in discussions like this.

hga 11y ago
Given the Gleason score, let's just say would/might -> most likely.
- javadocmd 11y ago
  I don't doubt that you (or whoever) had additional information and made a sound decision. Point being simply that someone reading your original comment (or such comments generally) doesn't have the full context and might not realize it. I'm not making a point about your situation, but about how the internet is often misused by people seeking to make their own decisions. A subject that fascinates me.
  - hga 11y ago
    Well, all that's after the fact 20/20 hindsight. Initially, all he and his doctor knew was that he was 77 years old and his routine, approved by the powers that be, PSA test results took a worrisome turn, bad enough that a biopsy was indicated. My father's case only supports the Official Word, that starting at age 70 you should get PSA tests. WRT to people making their own decisions, I highly advise that, if you're 70 or older, to get regular PSA tests!
    - nommm-nommm 11y ago
      >My father's case only supports the Official Word, that starting at age 70 you should get PSA tests. WRT to people making their own decisions, I highly advise that, if you're 70 or older, to get regular PSA tests! I highly advise you don't take medical advice from hga on Hacker News based on one anecdote. The Official Word from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is "The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends against prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer." http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/UpdateSummaryFinal/prostate-cancer-screening http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/U... https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/screening-for-disease-in-people-without-symptoms-the-reality/ https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/screening-for-disease-i... Surgery for prostate cancer has some very serious side effects...
    - pessimizer 11y ago
      Before the fact, we know that cancer testing does not reduce mortality, with the possible exception of cervical cancer. PSA tests are the worst offenders. Why cancer screening has never been shown to “save lives”—and what we can do about it http://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.h6080 http://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.h6080