Vegi-Caps & Supplements for Prostate

My urologist told me that Saw Palmetto is great for BPH, but does not prevent cancer. Furthermore, he also indicated that when a patient is on Saw Palmetto, he doubles the PSA reading. I was taking a supplement with Saw Palmetto, and even though my PSA is only 3.3, I did come up with 3 positive cores. And I've been taking it for several years.

Be careful.

tom, read the thread titled "my story" to get, well, my story. I'm going to be calling this week to get on the surgical schedule.

Through the years here I've noticed especially with those recently diagnosed a yearning or a desperate hope for a "miracle supplement" or hoping that taking supplements will eradicate the effects of an unhealthy diet decades long, to correct in a few months. There have been numerous ones come and go There was Selenium, Lycopene, Capsacin, Pectin, Mangosteen, Vitamin E, and still out there being sold that old snake oil Saw Palmeto. All these and a few other I've forgot have been disproved to be of any PCa benefit in respected studies. Pomegranate will soon join them. Yeah I know there are always a few here who will swear by a certain one. But in reality all you are doing is making more expensive urine.

Save your money. The best all can do is to go to a heart healthy diet.

Couple of points to consider- PSA is only a crude indicator of PCa - it is simply an indication of how much "irritation" the prostate is receiving. I found out, after having PSA's taken for 3-4 years, that PSA measurements are laboratory and method specific, and subject to variations depending on your sexual activity. My doctor told me to wait 48-72 hours after any "activity" (i.e., self-made or with significant other). Some of the supplements that "improve prostate health" may be OK for BPH, but could masking larger problems for PCa.

In my case, my urologist thought she noticed a small bump on the prostate during a regular DRE, which started me down the rabbit hole. The bump was never found again, but the biopsy that came from it identified PCa, even though my PSA was steady at 3.5 to 3.7. The Urologist/Oncologist who did the biopsy told me up front that there are variations in PCa and some aggressive ones do not generate a significant PSA.

Due to Gleason 3+3, low percentages in cores and low PSA, my doctors agreed that I could go the active surveillance route, which I did (no desire to get cut or glow in the dark) for 2 years (2nd biopsy confirmed Gl 3+3 and percentages).
Third biopsy was performed using an MRI (with contrast) and computer assisted biopsy (UCLA-Artemis system) which focused on the suspected area from the MRI and also included samples from the other areas of the prostate, unlike the prior "random" biopsies. This painted a whole different picture - tumor was larger than thought and Gleason raised to 3+4, with 90+% involvement of several cores.
As a result I had on open RP in December 2014; now dealing with the after effects, which for me have included almost everything possible. QOL has gone from driving an Indy car to driving a Hugo on a wet track (hopefully it gets better...)

Moral of the story is that the low PSA values are no guarantee that you do not have PCa (with or without substances that lower the values), and if you are getting conventional "random" biopsies that do not have any reproducibility or consistency, things may be less under control than you think.

I hope that your low PSA is indicative of good health and do not have to join the rest of us in the "ejaculation-less category)!