A new test out there is 300 times more sentitive than commerically available PSA Test
Comments
-
Interesting News
Hi Hilton
Interesting news on Catalona’s group findings. In the last decade we saw an increase on PCa surgeries in guys in their 40th, caused by the advent of PSA. We may expect to see it now in guys on their 30th.
I would suggest that at such earlier stage, adjuvant radiation will become obsolete because surgeries will be mostly replaced by radiation therapy (external or implants) as the prime treatment, for the ones that want to get rid of the “baddies”. Otherwise AS will be the winner.
Wishing you the best in your case.
VGama0 -
Instead of sayingVascodaGama said:Interesting News
Hi Hilton
Interesting news on Catalona’s group findings. In the last decade we saw an increase on PCa surgeries in guys in their 40th, caused by the advent of PSA. We may expect to see it now in guys on their 30th.
I would suggest that at such earlier stage, adjuvant radiation will become obsolete because surgeries will be mostly replaced by radiation therapy (external or implants) as the prime treatment, for the ones that want to get rid of the “baddies”. Otherwise AS will be the winner.
Wishing you the best in your case.
VGama
Instead of saying “increase of surgeries’” I believe it would be more accurate to say the increase of treatments are the results of biopsies the PSA test gave justification for.
Bottom line is that PSA testing is saving lives (but is not perfect) so hopefully the nay slayers of PSA testing will stop spending money on bashing PSA testing and direct it towards more constructive efforts that are focued on developing better diagnostics and treatments...
I have to agree that surgery is “barbaric” but where do you come up with “surgeries will be mostly replaced by radiation therapy…” and that “AS will be the winner”? No matter how you slice it radiation is not good for anyone and has it own set of complications if you live long enough …As far as AS, it is a “crap shoot” right now but I have to agree it would be nice to have the option knowing it was a good option but that will take the ability to identify which PCa’s are aggressive and which are not…BTW my entire family is in a DNA study for this (note some one complained on this board that I posted this information and it was taken down…and this is so critical to the cure and or finding the best management plan for the future)0 -
BHbdhilton said:Instead of saying
Instead of saying “increase of surgeries’” I believe it would be more accurate to say the increase of treatments are the results of biopsies the PSA test gave justification for.
Bottom line is that PSA testing is saving lives (but is not perfect) so hopefully the nay slayers of PSA testing will stop spending money on bashing PSA testing and direct it towards more constructive efforts that are focued on developing better diagnostics and treatments...
I have to agree that surgery is “barbaric” but where do you come up with “surgeries will be mostly replaced by radiation therapy…” and that “AS will be the winner”? No matter how you slice it radiation is not good for anyone and has it own set of complications if you live long enough …As far as AS, it is a “crap shoot” right now but I have to agree it would be nice to have the option knowing it was a good option but that will take the ability to identify which PCa’s are aggressive and which are not…BTW my entire family is in a DNA study for this (note some one complained on this board that I posted this information and it was taken down…and this is so critical to the cure and or finding the best management plan for the future)
RE THE SUBJECT OF REMOVED PCa THREADS/POSTS ON THE CSN PCa FORUM:
We have often agreed to disagree on many issues related to PCa. But I hope we can both agree that we share a sincere passion & desire for learning about PCa and disseminating accurate info (to the best of our ability) in an effort to enhance PCa awareness and help others, especially on this discussion forum, based on our own, very personal, journeys.
As a frequent reader and poster on the PCa forum, I have had the opportunity to read many of your posts, including several that were recently pulled/removed by CSN admin/webmaster staff. I also read many of the comments/reply posts that several other users had written in those threads prior to the entire thread being removed.
Your (removed) threads may have contained valuable info related to your experiences in several clinical studies related to PCa. Clinical trial/study experiences/info is a critical and a key component of shared PCa info on this discussion board and if one reads though recent user posts, it is apparent that there are many posts and threads containing similar experiences/info that have not been flagged or removed. It would appear that NO post or thread would be flagged by CSN PCa members, or removed by CSN admin staff, for that (inoffensive) content ALONE.
However, IMHO and in all honesty, your (removed) threads ALSO contained your blatant donation solicitations for charitable causes/organizations as well as participant recruitment for a clinical study/trial. While those may be valuable solicitations and recruitments for valid & beneficial PCa charities and studies, CSN membership rules indicate that they belong in the proper section of the CSN homepage, and not on the actual PCa discussion board. FWIW, these were the reasons (donation solicitation & clinical trial participant recruitment), and not your personal clinical trial experiences, that the threads were first flagged, and then ultimately removed.
I continue to read subtle, but snide, remarks/complaints scattered throughout several of your current posts, referencing the removed threads, such as: “(note some one complained on this board that I posted this information and it was taken down…and this is so critical to the cure and or finding the best management plan for the future)” This statement is a bit misleading as I’m sure you understand the reality of the way the CSNetwork functions: A CSN member only has the ability to flag (not remove) a thread and/or post that they interpret to be inappropriate and/or inconsistent with CSN membership rules. CSN will not remove every thread/post that has been flagged—only those that violate their membership rules (which we all agreed to when we registered). It is the CSN webmaster & admin staff that make the final decision and actually have the ability/technical power to remove/pull a thread/post that has been flagged--NOT the CSN member(s). Therefore, your continued complaints & innuendo apparently “blaming” unknown CSN members for the flagging & removal of your threads seems to be unfounded. With all due respect and fairness, perhaps your on-going comments/concerns about the real reasons why your threads were removed might best be directed to the CSN staff (via the member feedback option) and not to CSN members.
I personally look forward to reading & learning more about your experiences with, and the results of, any clinical studies or trials that you participated in that are relevant to PCa.
Peace
PS While it may appear to some from the content of this post that I flagged those threads, I assure you it was not me. If I had flagged them, I would not have an issue with admiting it--honest.0 -
Eloquent Postmrspjd said:BH
RE THE SUBJECT OF REMOVED PCa THREADS/POSTS ON THE CSN PCa FORUM:
We have often agreed to disagree on many issues related to PCa. But I hope we can both agree that we share a sincere passion & desire for learning about PCa and disseminating accurate info (to the best of our ability) in an effort to enhance PCa awareness and help others, especially on this discussion forum, based on our own, very personal, journeys.
As a frequent reader and poster on the PCa forum, I have had the opportunity to read many of your posts, including several that were recently pulled/removed by CSN admin/webmaster staff. I also read many of the comments/reply posts that several other users had written in those threads prior to the entire thread being removed.
Your (removed) threads may have contained valuable info related to your experiences in several clinical studies related to PCa. Clinical trial/study experiences/info is a critical and a key component of shared PCa info on this discussion board and if one reads though recent user posts, it is apparent that there are many posts and threads containing similar experiences/info that have not been flagged or removed. It would appear that NO post or thread would be flagged by CSN PCa members, or removed by CSN admin staff, for that (inoffensive) content ALONE.
However, IMHO and in all honesty, your (removed) threads ALSO contained your blatant donation solicitations for charitable causes/organizations as well as participant recruitment for a clinical study/trial. While those may be valuable solicitations and recruitments for valid & beneficial PCa charities and studies, CSN membership rules indicate that they belong in the proper section of the CSN homepage, and not on the actual PCa discussion board. FWIW, these were the reasons (donation solicitation & clinical trial participant recruitment), and not your personal clinical trial experiences, that the threads were first flagged, and then ultimately removed.
I continue to read subtle, but snide, remarks/complaints scattered throughout several of your current posts, referencing the removed threads, such as: “(note some one complained on this board that I posted this information and it was taken down…and this is so critical to the cure and or finding the best management plan for the future)” This statement is a bit misleading as I’m sure you understand the reality of the way the CSNetwork functions: A CSN member only has the ability to flag (not remove) a thread and/or post that they interpret to be inappropriate and/or inconsistent with CSN membership rules. CSN will not remove every thread/post that has been flagged—only those that violate their membership rules (which we all agreed to when we registered). It is the CSN webmaster & admin staff that make the final decision and actually have the ability/technical power to remove/pull a thread/post that has been flagged--NOT the CSN member(s). Therefore, your continued complaints & innuendo apparently “blaming” unknown CSN members for the flagging & removal of your threads seems to be unfounded. With all due respect and fairness, perhaps your on-going comments/concerns about the real reasons why your threads were removed might best be directed to the CSN staff (via the member feedback option) and not to CSN members.
I personally look forward to reading & learning more about your experiences with, and the results of, any clinical studies or trials that you participated in that are relevant to PCa.
Peace
PS While it may appear to some from the content of this post that I flagged those threads, I assure you it was not me. If I had flagged them, I would not have an issue with admiting it--honest.
Mrspjd
I think you’ve outdone yourself with this tactful but to the point post and I agree with your sentiments completely. My fear is that if we are not diligent in ensuring this forum keeps to its primary purpose: the peer-to-peer sharing of experience, support, and advice about our individual battles with prostate cancer then this great source of information and insight will become littered with too many distracting agendas and competing causes.
There are undoubtedly many worthy causes and studies that one can support if they are so moved. If a member here wants to seek support of CSN forum subscribers, there is a clearly stated process to follow and I am more than willing to consider a cause that has been screened by the administrators of this website. Other PCa support forums have similar rules (Healing Well comes to mind). I would imagine that existing rules concerning solicitation to causes or studies also has a legal aspect that the one making the post has failed to consider. (Some of the lawyers who post here may wish to comment on that)
I am sure most here will agree with me that the occasional spammer we see on this site is infuriating, particularly when they seem to have developed some automatic process for dumping dozens of posts for Viagra, sex aids, and even tennis shoes and sun glasses. I don’t consider the recent posts which were pulled to be spam but I do believe they violated the spirit and intent of the guidelines that we agreed to when we joined this forum.
It should come as little surprise to regular readers of this forum that BD and I frequently disagree on various issues. For example, in the post above, BD, I wonder if you meant to say that “radiation is not good for everyone” rather than “radiation is not good for anyone.” But setting that aside for another thread, I don’t believe BD is a spammer but I do agree with the administrator that pulled his thread that the content was in violation of the consent agreement. The study and research funding suggestions in question may very well be worthy endeavors and I still hope that BD tries to get them posted again through the administrator.
And BTW BD, the only thread I’ve ever flagged for an administrator (other than the Viagra spammers) happened to be a CyberKnife commercial from some health salesman posting from India several months ago.
Mrspjd, thanks again for a great post.
Peace II.
p.s. BTW BD, I like your new picture. I think it’s a great improvement over the Cartoon Head but who is the guy standing next to you with his hands in his pockets? (Just kidding)Off to watch Larry King and thanks for that heads up.0 -
It is unclear as to why youKongo said:Eloquent Post
Mrspjd
I think you’ve outdone yourself with this tactful but to the point post and I agree with your sentiments completely. My fear is that if we are not diligent in ensuring this forum keeps to its primary purpose: the peer-to-peer sharing of experience, support, and advice about our individual battles with prostate cancer then this great source of information and insight will become littered with too many distracting agendas and competing causes.
There are undoubtedly many worthy causes and studies that one can support if they are so moved. If a member here wants to seek support of CSN forum subscribers, there is a clearly stated process to follow and I am more than willing to consider a cause that has been screened by the administrators of this website. Other PCa support forums have similar rules (Healing Well comes to mind). I would imagine that existing rules concerning solicitation to causes or studies also has a legal aspect that the one making the post has failed to consider. (Some of the lawyers who post here may wish to comment on that)
I am sure most here will agree with me that the occasional spammer we see on this site is infuriating, particularly when they seem to have developed some automatic process for dumping dozens of posts for Viagra, sex aids, and even tennis shoes and sun glasses. I don’t consider the recent posts which were pulled to be spam but I do believe they violated the spirit and intent of the guidelines that we agreed to when we joined this forum.
It should come as little surprise to regular readers of this forum that BD and I frequently disagree on various issues. For example, in the post above, BD, I wonder if you meant to say that “radiation is not good for everyone” rather than “radiation is not good for anyone.” But setting that aside for another thread, I don’t believe BD is a spammer but I do agree with the administrator that pulled his thread that the content was in violation of the consent agreement. The study and research funding suggestions in question may very well be worthy endeavors and I still hope that BD tries to get them posted again through the administrator.
And BTW BD, the only thread I’ve ever flagged for an administrator (other than the Viagra spammers) happened to be a CyberKnife commercial from some health salesman posting from India several months ago.
Mrspjd, thanks again for a great post.
Peace II.
p.s. BTW BD, I like your new picture. I think it’s a great improvement over the Cartoon Head but who is the guy standing next to you with his hands in his pockets? (Just kidding)Off to watch Larry King and thanks for that heads up.
It is unclear as to why you have issues with anyone saying anything to the contrary of your beliefs in your treatment. Most guys would be “living life” not posting about the evils of surgery vs the prefect treatment of CK (a patented treatment) if they had no issues…
You realize that you and the “mrs” frequently “applaud” each other…… It must be frustrating to you and “mrspjd” (which I believe is all in the same) that I am still posting even after the complaints that someone keeps giving to CNS? You would think they would get the message that perhaps they have an issue…
You and the “mrs” need to realize that this is not your board to post your opinions only...What you are single handily doing is making the board ineffective...
I cannot believe that I am reading that you are making comments about my picture I have had on here for awhile? This is my point and my point exactly about you…this is not your discussion board…I know this might sound foreign to you but I am not looking for your approval....However I will let you know where this “cartoon” comes from…You really seem to be disconnect to your generation but that does not surprise me. That is the back cover to the “Europe ‘72” album for the Grateful Dead…
Regarding my comment about radiation-No, I meant what I wrote that “radiation is not good for anyone” not “radiation is not good for everyone” as I stated. I believe that is pretty much a scientific…but then again you have challenged Wash et al on this board… As mean as this sounds all of this is pretty transparent…I think I will take a break from here for awhile…0 -
my posts speak for themselves and I'm proud of thembdhilton said:It is unclear as to why you
It is unclear as to why you have issues with anyone saying anything to the contrary of your beliefs in your treatment. Most guys would be “living life” not posting about the evils of surgery vs the prefect treatment of CK (a patented treatment) if they had no issues…
You realize that you and the “mrs” frequently “applaud” each other…… It must be frustrating to you and “mrspjd” (which I believe is all in the same) that I am still posting even after the complaints that someone keeps giving to CNS? You would think they would get the message that perhaps they have an issue…
You and the “mrs” need to realize that this is not your board to post your opinions only...What you are single handily doing is making the board ineffective...
I cannot believe that I am reading that you are making comments about my picture I have had on here for awhile? This is my point and my point exactly about you…this is not your discussion board…I know this might sound foreign to you but I am not looking for your approval....However I will let you know where this “cartoon” comes from…You really seem to be disconnect to your generation but that does not surprise me. That is the back cover to the “Europe ‘72” album for the Grateful Dead…
Regarding my comment about radiation-No, I meant what I wrote that “radiation is not good for anyone” not “radiation is not good for everyone” as I stated. I believe that is pretty much a scientific…but then again you have challenged Wash et al on this board… As mean as this sounds all of this is pretty transparent…I think I will take a break from here for awhile…
I believe BH's posts also say alot about him and his character. I stand by what I have written and have no regrets nor do I feel BH's rebuttal and ridiculous accusations are worthy of more than this--my brief response. I will continue to make posts on this forum as I see fit, and do so in a courteous, caring, helpful and tactful way, as has always been my style and intent, and I believe that is also the shared intent and effort of most of the CSN PCa forum members, men and women alike, who continue to post here in a sincere effort to help one another.0 -
WOW !! Took a break for amrspjd said:my posts speak for themselves and I'm proud of them
I believe BH's posts also say alot about him and his character. I stand by what I have written and have no regrets nor do I feel BH's rebuttal and ridiculous accusations are worthy of more than this--my brief response. I will continue to make posts on this forum as I see fit, and do so in a courteous, caring, helpful and tactful way, as has always been my style and intent, and I believe that is also the shared intent and effort of most of the CSN PCa forum members, men and women alike, who continue to post here in a sincere effort to help one another.
WOW !! Took a break for a couple of weeks and came back to a fireworks display !! At least no one can say that the prostate post isn't a lively one, with strong opinions voiced from each and every direction. Although I don't agree or disagree with every post, I do think that opposing views are very helpful and stimulate discussion(often heated) that in the end provides useful information for all. I commend all who participate. Keep it up !!!0 -
Kongo & pjd comradesBRONX52 said:WOW !! Took a break for a
WOW !! Took a break for a couple of weeks and came back to a fireworks display !! At least no one can say that the prostate post isn't a lively one, with strong opinions voiced from each and every direction. Although I don't agree or disagree with every post, I do think that opposing views are very helpful and stimulate discussion(often heated) that in the end provides useful information for all. I commend all who participate. Keep it up !!!
Sincerely, that is of bad taste those words to Hilton’s posts. You may have not been the ones flagging him but your comments are just “The Mother of all Flags”.
And more important is, what has that to do with the principles of this forum?
We are members on the same wagon we should be congratulating any one exposing their experiences. Not dictating ideas. Your signatures of “Peace” are completely full of crap.
VGama0 -
Kongo and MrsVascodaGama said:Kongo & pjd comrades
Sincerely, that is of bad taste those words to Hilton’s posts. You may have not been the ones flagging him but your comments are just “The Mother of all Flags”.
And more important is, what has that to do with the principles of this forum?
We are members on the same wagon we should be congratulating any one exposing their experiences. Not dictating ideas. Your signatures of “Peace” are completely full of crap.
VGama
I would not be worried about bdhilton's posts. In the past few months I have gone back and read many of his posts as well as yours and his long history of personal attacks on Kongo and mrspjd.He is a true AH*** and so prejudged again anything either of you say it pathetic.
Thanks to your many postings I have changed my mind about earlier decision to do davinci. you are both fair and balanced (unlike those who attack you). i may still do surgry but am not rushing into anything and taking my time to look at all your options. please keep posting and ignore those who disagree with you.0 -
BHiltonbdhilton said:It is unclear as to why you
It is unclear as to why you have issues with anyone saying anything to the contrary of your beliefs in your treatment. Most guys would be “living life” not posting about the evils of surgery vs the prefect treatment of CK (a patented treatment) if they had no issues…
You realize that you and the “mrs” frequently “applaud” each other…… It must be frustrating to you and “mrspjd” (which I believe is all in the same) that I am still posting even after the complaints that someone keeps giving to CNS? You would think they would get the message that perhaps they have an issue…
You and the “mrs” need to realize that this is not your board to post your opinions only...What you are single handily doing is making the board ineffective...
I cannot believe that I am reading that you are making comments about my picture I have had on here for awhile? This is my point and my point exactly about you…this is not your discussion board…I know this might sound foreign to you but I am not looking for your approval....However I will let you know where this “cartoon” comes from…You really seem to be disconnect to your generation but that does not surprise me. That is the back cover to the “Europe ‘72” album for the Grateful Dead…
Regarding my comment about radiation-No, I meant what I wrote that “radiation is not good for anyone” not “radiation is not good for everyone” as I stated. I believe that is pretty much a scientific…but then again you have challenged Wash et al on this board… As mean as this sounds all of this is pretty transparent…I think I will take a break from here for awhile…
I for one learn from your posts..........I hope that you keep posting . I'm sorry that you were baited by the comments by one of the above posters who decided to tell you about the rules of this forum on this thread, instead of responsding to your post about prostate cancer that is germaine to us reading at this discussion site. Obviously this person's comment promoted dissention on this board.
Please keep posting for our benefit............look at the donut..........do not respond to negativity.
I hope all will post in a positive way for our greater good, and not cause dissention.0 -
think you got it wronghopeful and optimistic said:BHilton
I for one learn from your posts..........I hope that you keep posting . I'm sorry that you were baited by the comments by one of the above posters who decided to tell you about the rules of this forum on this thread, instead of responsding to your post about prostate cancer that is germaine to us reading at this discussion site. Obviously this person's comment promoted dissention on this board.
Please keep posting for our benefit............look at the donut..........do not respond to negativity.
I hope all will post in a positive way for our greater good, and not cause dissention.
not to beat a dead horse but they weren't baiting. It seemed to me it wasthe other way around and they didn't start the personal attacks. don't think personal attacks are ever right here but he seems to do them a lot if you read some of his back posts.
enuf said.0 -
Just my 2 cents worthRobert1941 said:think you got it wrong
not to beat a dead horse but they weren't baiting. It seemed to me it wasthe other way around and they didn't start the personal attacks. don't think personal attacks are ever right here but he seems to do them a lot if you read some of his back posts.
enuf said.
This forum is common in 1 regard, PC and the various treatments available.. seems that some people on this forum think they have the expertise to coach us on what we should do for our treatment.. since none of us are experts, at least I assume this, then everyone's post is for sharing their personal experience, whether it's been good or bad..
I have learned a lot on here, mainly from people sharing their experience and that has helped me make my decision based on what I believe is the best path for me, not some other poster, after all, whatever choice you make you will either live or die by it and that is what we all face.. as long as I believe this forum is genuinely contributed by PC survivors I will continue to research what is being posted.. if I believe that there is a poster who is from the medical community who is not a PC patient then I will stop reading their posts as they would have a different motivation and goal then a patient.. I thank you all for your sharing and may the blessings be with you and your loved ones..
Stewart0
Discussion Boards
- All Discussion Boards
- 6 CSN Information
- 6 Welcome to CSN
- 121.8K Cancer specific
- 2.8K Anal Cancer
- 446 Bladder Cancer
- 309 Bone Cancers
- 1.6K Brain Cancer
- 28.5K Breast Cancer
- 397 Childhood Cancers
- 27.9K Colorectal Cancer
- 4.6K Esophageal Cancer
- 1.2K Gynecological Cancers (other than ovarian and uterine)
- 13K Head and Neck Cancer
- 6.4K Kidney Cancer
- 671 Leukemia
- 792 Liver Cancer
- 4.1K Lung Cancer
- 5.1K Lymphoma (Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin)
- 237 Multiple Myeloma
- 7.1K Ovarian Cancer
- 61 Pancreatic Cancer
- 487 Peritoneal Cancer
- 5.5K Prostate Cancer
- 1.2K Rare and Other Cancers
- 539 Sarcoma
- 730 Skin Cancer
- 653 Stomach Cancer
- 191 Testicular Cancer
- 1.5K Thyroid Cancer
- 5.8K Uterine/Endometrial Cancer
- 6.3K Lifestyle Discussion Boards