The cancer crapshoot

[Guest guest]

" WC Douglass " <realheath

 

The cancer crapshoot

Fri, 08 Oct 2004 09:03:10 -0400

 

Daily Dose

 

Friday October 08, 2004

 

 

Another chink in the PSA's armor

 

It's been a year (Daily Dose, 7/18/03) or so since I railed against

the worthless Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) screening for the

detection of prostate cancer. To recap, in the past I've told you

how this misguided mainstay of the mainstream is useless as a

diagnostic tool because PSA readings can vary dramatically from

test to test in the same person — it's a total crapshoot. However,

that fact doesn't stop a lot of MDs from diving for the scalpel and

anesthesia after just one test even though the odds of a " false

positive " are alarmingly high. But I digress…

 

I'm revisiting the issue now because I've finally found some

backup in the mainstream press for something else I've been

saying for years about what I call the Perniciously Suspect Assay

— that it isn't even very accurate at detecting REAL, BONA-FIDE

CANCER. Here's what I found: An Associated Press article from

earlier this summer summarized a new study (funded by the

National Cancer Institute) that found fully 15% of men over 62

whose PSA readings fell into the " normal " range had cancerous

prostate tumors — some of which were quite aggressive.

 

Now, I've commented about these grossly inaccurate PSA readings

before, but it bears repeating every so often because of what's at

stake: On the one hand (in the common case of a false positive),

there's needless prostate surgery and the likely impotence and

incontinence that follows; on the other (a false negative, like in the

study I just mentioned), a missed diagnosis of advanced prostate

cancer that would have been treatable, if detected.

 

If only the mainstream would adopt the safe, simple, and hyper-

accurate AMAS (Anti-Malignan Antibody Screening) as a follow-

up to an elevated PSA reading — or as a replacement for the test

altogether. Instead, the medical establishment will probably just

lower the " normal " PSA threshold — sending even more of us

needlessly under the knife, while still missing a relatively large

percentage of tumors.

 

At least 16% of American men can expect a diagnosis of prostate

cancer at some point in their lives, yet only around 3% will die of

the disease. This means that for the most part, prostate cancer

tumors are relatively static — unless we go poking at and piercing

them with a bunch of biopsy needles after a higher-than expected

PSA test (evidence shows this actually breaks up tumors and cause

their cancerous cells to spread)…

 

I wonder: Would fewer men die of cancer if we just left their

prostates alone?

 

 

 

 

The end need not be bitter

 

Everyone spends a lot of time talking about " quality of life, " but

no one's talking about the quality of a terminal patient's death.

 

Maybe it's because we're all programmed by the mainstream to

believe we should fight death to the last bullet, even if it causes us

to be miserable and in agonizing pain. Mind you, I'm not trying to

start a debate about physician-assisted suicide or anything so

extreme, but I am saying this:

 

When there's nothing more that can be done for someone,

shouldn't the focus (of both doctors and the victim's loved ones)

shift from last-ditch measures to buy them another week or two to

making the patient's remaining day as comfortable as possible?

 

I touched on this subject last year (Daily Dose, 9/19/03) in an

article about how oncologists that forbade their terminal lung

cancer patients from smoking cigarettes were basically taking

away the only thing that gave these dying souls pleasure in order to

buy them another month or so of misery. And recently, a Reuters

Health online article gave me some ammunition with which to

make my argument stronger.

 

According to the piece, a recent study of survey data reveals that

most people would trade UP TO 7 MONTHS OF THEIR LIVES if

it meant a more comfortable final month before dying. This finding

supports the modern movement toward hospice care for the

terminally ill instead of the beeping, bustling, soulless and sterile

environment of the Intensive Care Unit…

 

As long as it's not abused for profit, this is a concept I can get

behind.

 

 

Never " falsely positive " about the importance of comfort,

 

William Campbell Douglass II, MD