Over 50 Years Old? Have Your PSA Checked
Over 50 Years Old? Have Your PSA Checked
Pal of mine just turned 50 and developed a pain in his groin area.
He finally went to see the Dr. who informed him he has Stage 4, Prostate Cancer.
Although being a successful Contractor, for some reason, he neglected his health by not having regular check-ups.
One Dr. he was seeing told him to make his final arrangements.
Another Dr. did surgery by implanting some radioactive seeds around and in his prostate gland. He was still told to prepare himself and his family for the imminent.
This is the second one of my friends that have been diagnosed with cancer, one of them being my BEST pal, who passed on a year ago from liver cancer.
Anyhow guys, having your PSA checked is such a simple thing and could possibly save your life and the ones who love you a lot of heartache.
He finally went to see the Dr. who informed him he has Stage 4, Prostate Cancer.
Although being a successful Contractor, for some reason, he neglected his health by not having regular check-ups.
One Dr. he was seeing told him to make his final arrangements.
Another Dr. did surgery by implanting some radioactive seeds around and in his prostate gland. He was still told to prepare himself and his family for the imminent.
This is the second one of my friends that have been diagnosed with cancer, one of them being my BEST pal, who passed on a year ago from liver cancer.
Anyhow guys, having your PSA checked is such a simple thing and could possibly save your life and the ones who love you a lot of heartache.
Thanks for the reminder. Been having the check up at least once a year for about four years now. Also started doing so when I turned 50. And besides a PSA you should have more direct exam done if you have any others symptoms and reason to do so. I haven't had any reason to go further and PSA' are great for me so far. I have been hearing a lot lately that they are even recommending starting at 45.
The psa is means something but it is not that good by itself. I went to a urologist who likes to do biopsies if you have any reading. He said he had found aggressive cancers in prostates when the psa was 2.5. I've read that 50% of men who had their prostates removed were impotent. So, what to do is not that clear cut.
FWIW...My Doc is not a huge fan of the PSA test by itself; he uses it but says it yields false-positive too often to be accurate alone, and an enlarged prostate can false-positive the test without anything serious actually involved. So he does the, ahem, "digital" exam in addition to the PSA, which allows better interpretation of the PSA numbers because he can take the size of the prostate into account against the PSA measurement.
Sorry to hear about yr pals,losing someone like that is not good.
I would expect that my doc will encourage me to have things checked but I doubt it will go any further. My reasoning is that I very much doubt if I could handle the prep. I have a very strong gagg reflex which makes it pretty difficult to drink nasty tasting things. Sometimes just the look or smell of somethings is enough, so I guess for me its not going to happen.
I would expect that my doc will encourage me to have things checked but I doubt it will go any further. My reasoning is that I very much doubt if I could handle the prep. I have a very strong gagg reflex which makes it pretty difficult to drink nasty tasting things. Sometimes just the look or smell of somethings is enough, so I guess for me its not going to happen.
Trending Topics
FWIW...My Doc is not a huge fan of the PSA test by itself; he uses it but says it yields false-positive too often to be accurate alone, and an enlarged prostate can false-positive the test without anything serious actually involved. So he does the, ahem, "digital" exam in addition to the PSA, which allows better interpretation of the PSA numbers because he can take the size of the prostate into account against the PSA measurement.
My doctor keeps getting on me to take this test. But, when I ask him about the number of false positives, he admits there are plenty. Have you any idea what you go through waiting for the results of some other test between the time your PSA says you have the C word, and the time you find out you don't?
I went through a bout of cancer, had hunks of me cut out, the kemo thing, the months of centering my whole life around my bad body parts. Enough! I choose to live joyously and not at the doctors office. When my time comes, it comes.
YMMV
I went through a bout of cancer, had hunks of me cut out, the kemo thing, the months of centering my whole life around my bad body parts. Enough! I choose to live joyously and not at the doctors office. When my time comes, it comes.
YMMV
By the way, I have an EXCELLENT female Dr. who has had her finger up there and she has enough sense to lay you on your side on the table and I can guarantee you it's MUCH easier. Wanta live? It's your choice, and I know those who've made the wrong one, and enjoyed a nice funeral.
I asked the surgeon who did my surgery (excellent outcome, most that do not just don't have the right surgeon) how long he thought I likely had the cancer and he said maybe as long as 10 years!!! (Re-read above!)
I've debated entering this thread, but code, your post pushed me over the line.
Two years ago my PSA was 2.4. Last year it was suddenly 3.4. After a second PSA that was also in the mid 3s, I elected to have a biopsy. I'm a bit more lucky than code was. My Gleason score was in the 5s on half of the samples. As a result, I had several choices:
I've opted for the continued monitoring. So far, things seem fairly "stable", but we'll see on my next visit to the urologist.
I asked about symptoms - He said there are none usually, until you start having chronic backache, which means the cancer is attacking your spine (sounds a lovely way to die, doesn't it)?
Before having the biopsy, I tried to gather as much information as possible. Almost everything I found made a biopsy sound horrible and the procedure sound dangerous. But, nothing I found gave any meaningful alternative. So, the biopsy, while "uncomfortable" was certainly not "painful" and there were no lasting ill effects. I'm glad I had it and though I'm not looking forward to the next one, will have that one too.
Bottom line, in my opinion - If you want to die horribly, don't have your PSA checked and don't submit to the rectal exam. Prostate cancer effects a VERY large number of men as they age (I'm 70 - as Bluejay says, "Really old.") I plan to live for many more years and intend to continue being actively engaged in physical (and mental) activity while doing so.
- Jack
Two years ago my PSA was 2.4. Last year it was suddenly 3.4. After a second PSA that was also in the mid 3s, I elected to have a biopsy. I'm a bit more lucky than code was. My Gleason score was in the 5s on half of the samples. As a result, I had several choices:
1. Continued monitoring - PSAs 4 times per year followed by another biopsy at the end of summer.
2. Surgury - he recommended this only if I was so worried I could not sleep at night.
3. Radiation - The problem with this is that radiated tissue does not really behave like ordinary tissue anymore and it increases your chance of rectal cancer as well as a 4 times risk of bladder cancer.
4. Freezing - He said there is no long term data on this yet, so he couldn't really recommend it. (I wonder how the hell they freeze your prostate?)
5. Reduce testosterone - unfortunately, this increases your risk of heart attack and stroke.
I asked about chemo, but he said that was really only for end-stage, when you wanted to suffer through a month or so longer.2. Surgury - he recommended this only if I was so worried I could not sleep at night.
3. Radiation - The problem with this is that radiated tissue does not really behave like ordinary tissue anymore and it increases your chance of rectal cancer as well as a 4 times risk of bladder cancer.
4. Freezing - He said there is no long term data on this yet, so he couldn't really recommend it. (I wonder how the hell they freeze your prostate?)
5. Reduce testosterone - unfortunately, this increases your risk of heart attack and stroke.
I've opted for the continued monitoring. So far, things seem fairly "stable", but we'll see on my next visit to the urologist.
I asked about symptoms - He said there are none usually, until you start having chronic backache, which means the cancer is attacking your spine (sounds a lovely way to die, doesn't it)?
Before having the biopsy, I tried to gather as much information as possible. Almost everything I found made a biopsy sound horrible and the procedure sound dangerous. But, nothing I found gave any meaningful alternative. So, the biopsy, while "uncomfortable" was certainly not "painful" and there were no lasting ill effects. I'm glad I had it and though I'm not looking forward to the next one, will have that one too.
Bottom line, in my opinion - If you want to die horribly, don't have your PSA checked and don't submit to the rectal exam. Prostate cancer effects a VERY large number of men as they age (I'm 70 - as Bluejay says, "Really old.") I plan to live for many more years and intend to continue being actively engaged in physical (and mental) activity while doing so.
- Jack
Jack, I read almost around the clock (when I wasn't working) from the time I got the biopsy report with the Gleason 6 and 7 till I had the surgery. I chose 6 mo. of hormonal deprivation before surgery to downsize the tumors as much as possible (NOT FUN!). My wife is an RN so I got ALL the technical stuff I could get my hands on (NOT brochures!) and the 6 mo. HD gave me time to think. I chose surgery because that's the ONLY way they could do a "slide" study of the whole gland. I have seen all the slides, gone over and explained by a Pathologist. I have seen quite a few funerals (some had surgery, some not) and most were diagnosed AFTER me. The gland size is an important factor in eventual outcome. The more normal size, the better (mine was 2 gram under normal) and the larger, the worse. HUGE (60-85 grams IS NOT GOOD!) My youngest brother (5 years younger) was diagnosed 1 mo. after I was. It is a disease that has NEVER read the rule book, matter of fact I don't think one exists! Jack, at 70, your chances improve all the time, I was quite a bit younger when diagnosed. But it is still VERY important that you keep on top of it. With a Gleason of 5 (should be a second #, rarely ever both the same #) it would be worth your time to do some current studying on the disease. I was a Medic when in the service, my wife spent a career in nursing and I have one of the best Dr.'s I've ever known and I still am not foolish enough to say "well my Dr. said", and I mean it! She KNOWS I'm going to research whatever she tells me, and has no problem with that.
BTW, seed implants have come a LOOOONG way since I was diagnosed, and my personal opinion is it is possibly the best way yo go for a LOT of men TODAY. There are asterisks beside that, but the advances have been striking. TEMPORARY seeds are also a very good consideration.
BTW, seed implants have come a LOOOONG way since I was diagnosed, and my personal opinion is it is possibly the best way yo go for a LOT of men TODAY. There are asterisks beside that, but the advances have been striking. TEMPORARY seeds are also a very good consideration.
Last edited by code58; May 10, 2011 at 03:31 AM.




