4 ms·

Not really. You’re probably still better off knowing you have the slow-growing benign prostrate cancer that you can monitor but not treat. Also, you might find

• skybrian 7y ago
  Maybe the problem is that people don't do that? What do you think of this meta-analysis? "Pooled data currently demonstrates no significant reduction in prostate cancer-specific and overall mortality. Harms associated with PSA-based screening and subsequent diagnostic evaluations are frequent, and moderate in severity. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment are common and are associated with treatment-related harms." [...] "Screening resulted in a range of harms that can be considered minor to major in severity and duration. Common minor harms from screening include bleeding, bruising and short-term anxiety. Common major harms include overdiagnosis and overtreatment, including infection, blood loss requiring transfusion, pneumonia, erectile dysfunction, and incontinence. Harms of screening included false-positive results for the PSA test and overdiagnosis (up to 50% in the ERSPC study). Adverse events associated with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsies included infection, bleeding and pain." https://www.cochrane.org/CD004720/PROSTATE_screening-for-prostate-cancer https://www.cochrane.org/CD004720/PROSTATE_screening-for-pro...
  • melling 7y ago
    many people also insist on getting antibiotics when they have a viral infection. We have a more measles cases now than a decade ago because of fake news. You might be right that many people would be better off not knowing but I’d rather we took a step forwards than backwards.