2 ms·

https://www.wsj.com/health/wellness/prostate-cancer-low-risk-treatment-rename-185b6e3f https://www.wsj.com/health/wellness/prostate-cancer-low-risk... > It’s a

https://www.wsj.com/health/wellness/prostate-cancer-low-risk-treatment-rename-185b6e3f https://www.wsj.com/health/wellness/prostate-cancer-low-risk... > It’s an unexpected question that has stirred the world of cancer treatment in recent years, most notably now with prostate cancer. A growing number of doctors are advocating what might seem like an unusual position: That low-grade prostate cancers that grow very slowly or not at all shouldn’t be called cancer or carcinoma. > The reason, they say, is that those words scare men, their families and sometimes even their doctors into seeking more aggressive treatment than patients need—leaving men with debilitating side effects—rather than pursuing a carefully monitored wait-and-see approach.

tsoukase 3y ago
This is not cancer resolution. This is 'You die from another cause before you die from the cancer' (I cannot remove the 'lead to death' from my answer above) For the patient it is the same, for the doctor (definition, surveys) it is different
- strogonoff 3y ago
  If the cancer doesn’t grow or goes into spontaneous remission (which you claimed doesn’t happen yet is documented to happen, with a frequency that we do not have the data to determine, and for reasons we do not have the data to determine—with the implication that we cannot reliably causally connect it to treatment) then claiming “it leads to death anyway but something else gets you first” is not even logically true (let alone the fact that you would have no way to prove it, or that it would have no practical implications except perhaps creating undue agitation, contributing to inflammation and so on). It would lead to death the same way breathing, drinking water, or living leads to death. > For the patient it is the same, for the doctor (definition, surveys) it is different The whole point of the article is that it is different for the patient, leading to worse outcomes if the patient recognizes cancer as cancer.

tsoukase 3y ago

This is not cancer resolution. This is 'You die from another cause before you die from the cancer' (I cannot remove the 'lead to death' from my answer above) For the patient it is the same, for the doctor (definition, surveys) it is different

strogonoff 3y ago
If the cancer doesn’t grow or goes into spontaneous remission (which you claimed doesn’t happen yet is documented to happen, with a frequency that we do not have the data to determine, and for reasons we do not have the data to determine—with the implication that we cannot reliably causally connect it to treatment) then claiming “it leads to death anyway but something else gets you first” is not even logically true (let alone the fact that you would have no way to prove it, or that it would have no practical implications except perhaps creating undue agitation, contributing to inflammation and so on). It would lead to death the same way breathing, drinking water, or living leads to death. > For the patient it is the same, for the doctor (definition, surveys) it is different The whole point of the article is that it is different for the patient, leading to worse outcomes if the patient recognizes cancer as cancer.