Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: GOP Candidate Chris Collins: 'People Now Don't Die From Prostate Cancer, Breast Cancer' [View all]SunsetDreams
(8,571 posts)48. Oh I see,
I was just going off of your previous post veering into the topic of Breast Cancer and screening for Women.
But hold on. Suppose your doctor tells you a different story. First he explains that a recent, large-scale US study looked at the effect of annual PSA screening on more than 75,000 men, and found no benefit at all. A separate large study in Europe showed a very small benefit, but only in 2 of the 7 countries participating in the study. Suppose your doctor also explained that if you have a positive PSA test, theres an 80% chance that it will be false that you wont have cancer.
Suppose your doctor also explained that PSA-based screening leads to a substantial overdiagnosis of prostate tumors and that treatment usually requires surgery. The effects of treatment are serious: 20-30% of men treated with surgery and radiation suffer from long-term incontinence and erectile dysfunction.
....
Why did the urologists react so strongly? The answer appears to be simple: money. Urologists make a lot of money on prostate cancer treatments. The USPSTF estimated that in the first 20 years of PSA testing, 1 million additional men were treated as a result of screening. And if the surgery is unnecessary, you dont get a refund.
So who are you going to believe? The Preventive Task Force report presents a thorough review, laying all the details on the table. Their members dont make a profit from prostate surgeries. Their report simply more credible than the knee-jerk reaction from the urologists association. Ill let the Task Force have the last word:
Suppose your doctor also explained that PSA-based screening leads to a substantial overdiagnosis of prostate tumors and that treatment usually requires surgery. The effects of treatment are serious: 20-30% of men treated with surgery and radiation suffer from long-term incontinence and erectile dysfunction.
....
Why did the urologists react so strongly? The answer appears to be simple: money. Urologists make a lot of money on prostate cancer treatments. The USPSTF estimated that in the first 20 years of PSA testing, 1 million additional men were treated as a result of screening. And if the surgery is unnecessary, you dont get a refund.
So who are you going to believe? The Preventive Task Force report presents a thorough review, laying all the details on the table. Their members dont make a profit from prostate surgeries. Their report simply more credible than the knee-jerk reaction from the urologists association. Ill let the Task Force have the last word:
The harms of PSA-based screening for prostate cancer include a high rate of false-positive results and accompanying negative psychological effects, high rate of complications associated with diagnostic biopsy, andmost importanta risk for overdiagnosis coupled with overtreatment. Depending on the method used, treatments for prostate cancer carry the risk for death, cardiovascular events, urinary incontinence, erectile dysfunction, and bowel dysfunction. Many of these harms are common and persistent.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2012/06/24/psa-tests-might-hurt-a-lot-more-than-you-think/
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
49 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
GOP Candidate Chris Collins: 'People Now Don't Die From Prostate Cancer, Breast Cancer' [View all]
LynneSin
Jul 2012
OP
Unnecessary to screen EVERYONE. How does showing covered screenings mean they won't be covered?
uppityperson
Jul 2012
#36
Your link goes to 1995 Guide. Here's current info on PSA tests, etc, from uspstf
uppityperson
Jul 2012
#26
"The decision to start regular, biennial screening mammography before the age of 50 should be an...
uppityperson
Jul 2012
#30
You don't like the fact that Obamacare will continue to cover psa and mammograms? Seriously?
uppityperson
Jul 2012
#38
Since it is in the ACA that ins companies cover them, how is it healthcare rationing?
uppityperson
Jul 2012
#39
ummm yeah...but the Topic of the thread was the PSA test for Prostate Cancer
ElizabethB
Jul 2012
#46