HOW LOW

Mainly older guys.

There are some of us younger ones around, though. I was diagnosed at 43. Less than one half of one percent of diagnoses are in men my age group (the age I was, that is).

The median age at diagnosis is 68. The majority of diagnoses and 80% of deaths from prostate cancer occur at 70 or later.

prostate-cancer.emedtv.com/prostate-cancer/prostate-cancer-statistics.html

Web demographics are skewed toward younger users, so that probably translates into a younger median age on this board than in the prostate cancer population as a whole.

42. I probably had it at 35. My psa was 2.4 when I was 38. I think the stats. on young men are way off.

Post Edited (ChrisR) : 10/7/2010 5:01:32 PM (GMT-6)

The mean age at diagnosis is one thing. But what is more disturbing to me is the autopsy results for men that were not diagnosed with PCa---about 40% of men over the age of 50 had prostate cancer. I don't know how large the sample is, but that is a shocking statistic (assuming it's true). I heard it from a surgeon last week at the UW Medical School in Seattle. I don't know if similar statistics have been collected for younger men, but I would assume the statistical distribution doesn't fall off too fast with decreasing age.

Also, my uro told me that men have a 1 in 3 chance of having prostate cancer after the age of 50. (My two brothers have already thanked me for being "the one" of three brothers.)

Cheers,

This forum is seeing a lot of the younger guys joining.  I can understand why they lowered the screening age from 50 to 40.  Darn shame.  My doc also referred to me as one of the younger guys.  If I'm one of them, then that means there are more out there.  My sons have started testing at their age because I've now set the protocol for having a history.  I'm soon to be 59(ouch) and was diagnosed at 57.  My sons are 32 and 27.  If you have sons that are over 30 it might be a good idea to suggest testing.  Sad, but well-meaning.

Bob

It is hard to draw conclusions from the sigs on HW, but it is hard not to do.

The younger guys are much more computer savvy, and therefore more likely to find HW than the 60 or 70 year old guys.  So we are seeing more and more younger guys on here.

The other fact is that PC may be growing in us for many years before it reaches a point where the PSA triggers a biopsy.  So even tho I was diagnosed at 58, I could have had microscopic amounts for years.

Finally, as John T so aptly points out, many men will die of natural causes never knowing they had PC, or even if they are diagnosed, may be able to live out their life without taking action.

Hey Paul, do you suppose there is something in the water where you work?

Couple guys I know from when we were all in the same part of a particular building, we've all been diagnosed and treated. But we're all over 50 too. I think I'm the youngest of the group.

The mets would still be adenocarcinoma, which is PC. It doesn't morph to lymphoma or some other type of cancer.

I would say that if you die from unr=treated PC, the pathologist isn't going to hide it from your family. He has no motivation to do so.

The thing I like about this forum is that it's self regulating. Everything is questioned, different viewpoints come out, and errors are revealed. By the end of the thread, there is enough information for the reader to make up their own mind.

I wish that political ads on TV went through the same process. Actually, I wish they would just go away and be replaced by something less mindless.

.
No offence taken, or accusation made..
I have seen it in a general attitude, where the patient's age and general health will be considered.
You can almost hear the cogs turning..
He's 55, a productive life still left we need to do this and that....
He's 75, 5 years to the average longevity age, perhaps we wait and see and watch.
Perhaps he will die before he REALLY needs surgery.

At age 60, my first Uro suggested that there was no hurray,
but that anxiety would likely force me to do something within two years.

As it turns out, the cancer was far worse than expected and in 6 mths, it would likely have escaped the capsule.
If I got sore bones, in 6 mths time, would there be a statement "Sorry - We should have taken the PC back then"

I know a 70yo who is on watchful-waiting, and I suspect that his specialist was concerned for his heart, in the beginning.
Problem is that now - he's still here and the cancer must have grown and the UDoc is thinking - "perhaps , I really need to do something now-He's still here !"
You tell a 70yo, that he should be happy to make it to 80 and then die, perhaps needlessly.

I am not saying that Doc's are flippant with life, but they do take all things into account, and sometimes to their regret.
And - dare I say, it has much to do with Govt' policy and their attitudes to health funding... and the Insurance Companies...

<I would say that if you die from un-treated PC, the pathologist isn't going to hide it from your family. He has no motivation to do so.>

BUT - I suspect that it would be just specify -- "Cause of death - Liver Cancer"
I would love to be corrected and told that the Pathologist specifically indicates the exact form of cancer.
ie "Cause of death - AC of the Liver"

Who could ever be so silly to think that the system hides details , let alone facts, from us !
.
.

Post Edited (BuiDoi) : 10/8/2010 7:59:10 PM (GMT-6)

I would look for a new doctor if I ever suspected for a moment that I wasn't getting high quality health care, regardless of my age.

On the other hand, I would most likely make different treatment choices if I was 70 with a bad heart, and had a G6 cancer with a moderate PSA. Pass the HT I would say before you carve me up, make me pee my pants, and take away any chance I had of sex before I meet my maker.

1984? You mean

War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.