Too much pushing?

No, that's blatant pushing...

Peter,
You are correct. Some were not afforded much of an option. I am referring to those who did have clear options. But the most discontent that I found is from the guys who never even knew (until after the fact) that there could be another option. I have several very good friends whose uro's did such a great job of scaring the hell out of them that they never even realized there may be numerous ways of successfully dealing with PC. That is why I feel that if there is any 'pushing', it is coming from those who have a financial stake in the outcome.

I agree with the four posts above.

I think that "pushing" is in the eye of the beholder and also needs to be viewed in the historical perspective of this forum.  As others have pointed out, there was a time - not too many years ago - when the posters on this forum were almost exclusively surgery patients who had surgery as a strong bias.  When I joined HW the chorus that frequently met a new member was "get it out and the sooner the better".  There were very few posters who suggested that new members get other opinions from non-surgeons; indeed, anyone who dared to suggest a "new" option was frequently ridiculed.  Our friend Ziggy, who chose TFT, was told that he was crazy for not choosing surgery despite his G6 diagnosis.

I chose brachytherapy as my treatment after considerable research and meetings with multiple doctors.  Over the years I have been described as "pushy" by more than one poster because I have advocated that patients look at brachy as an option.  I have also been more than blunt when members post erroneous information about brachy and I'm sure that annoys some of those posters.  But, honestly, I don't really care about that.  What I do care about, and take as a source of pride, is that a number of current and former active posters on this forum have said that my "pushiness" caused them to take a serious look at their treatment options and many of them chose brachytherapy over the more radical approach.  Sometimes bluntness forces introspection and I think that's good.

Re a couple of recent posts on this thread...Casey, with all due respect - and you bring a great deal of passion to this forum which I truly like - you calling ANYONE pushy is certainly the pot calling the kettle black!  And, JAVGuzzi, I would urge you to ignore the poster who told you to dial it back (he is the one who frequently posts erroneous info about brachytherapy).  I think you are the only active CK patient on this forum and if your "pushiness" helps just one other patient consider this alternative then good for you.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it!

Jim

Is there too much pushing of specific treatments?

True, is in the eye of the beholder.

However, the yes percentage is higher than my eyes

are comfortable with.

It sounds to me like some guys feel that it was not ok to be pushy about surgery in the past ... But it is ok to be pushy about brachy or CK in the present. Double standard?

Tud, Gold Standard? I didn't say anything about a Gold Standard. I think the USA went off of it about 150 years ago! LOL

Peter, I will be more specific.  I was not suggesting that JAVGuzzi push the "ignore" button, rather that he ignore your specific advice about "dialing it back".

And, I understand that you believe that surgery is the "gold standard".  Unfortunately, when some people use that term it frequently implies the "best".  However, I accept your understanding that surgery is not necessarily the "best", rather that it is a long used treatment against which it is convenient to measure other treatments....good assessment and one which I will be sure to use in the future.

Jim

On the other hand – JAVGuzzi is probably just being his usual bubbly self and means well.. Therefore there’s no need to make him feel bad.

Lets move on

  Tudpock18 said... Casey, with all due respect ... you calling ANYONE pushy is certainly the pot calling the kettle black!    Tudpock, you’re darn right.   And thanks for asking… The original poll question was “Is there too much pushing of specific treatments ?” I push hard for HW/PC members—especially newbies, but also vets when appropriate (clearly, time or # of posts here at HW does not necessarily seem to be an accurate indicator of good PC knowledge)—to better understand several aspects of having this disease that appear to be  little known by most but of key importance to the choices (daily choices and long-term) one makes.   At the same time, I deliberately choose not to push an individual’s choice of specific aggressive treatments. Here’s MY list of topics I am very direct on.   I will provide example links, if requested; but if you want to add to MY list, then I only ask that you also provide a link to a specific post example to make your point . ·          Prostate cancer risk (PC progression) is linked to diet and exercise, which are both lifestyle choices—choose wisely; the Standard American Diet sucks for PC; and, there are foods that promote tumor growth, and other foods that inhibit tumor growth—again, choose wisely ·          The medical profession is a business.   There are revenues, expenses, customers, marketing & advertising strategies, sales pitches, industry trends, lobbyists, etc.   ·          The presence of indolent PC is far more common that men realize.   Autopsy studies of men who died in accidents showed that the percent of men with PC that could have been found in a biopsy is roughly equal to the number of decades they have lived—ie., 50% of 50-year olds have PC, 60% of 60-year olds, etc.   Most of these men would have never known they had PC had they lived longer, unless they had encountered the set of circumstances that would have led them to having a biopsy.   Just because a man does find PC after encountering the circumstances which led to biopsy does not mean he needs treatment.   Clearly, many “select” men can live long, full lives with untreated PC (someone once posted here the ridiculous statement regarding AS that "doing nothing was the same as a death sentence"). ·          The PSA controversy has generated a much needed “wake-up call” for well-informed patients and the American health care status quo, and has led the medical community to slowly * “fess-up” (metaphorically) to the realization that an aggressive treatment is not the best choice for all low-risk PC cases, and that many should wait to see whether a deferred treatment or no treatment is a better choice (AS) while modifying their lifestyle choices to slow or stop progression. *I say “slowly” because of the realization, in Upton Sinclair’s words that, “ It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it .” ·          Many men aggressively treat (over-treat) their own personal fears of the word “cancer” rather than treat the disease itself.   A number of the most respected names in urology and pathology have suggested that the same strategy should be used for PC that has been successfully used for other cancer types:   take the word “cancer” out of a well-defined sub-set of lowest risk cases to reduce the over-treatment which exists today and inflicts unnecessary life-altering side effects to those patients who misguidedly believe that their doctors “saved their lives” when their lives were likely never at risk. Don’t like my direct approach?   Tough ****.   What I don't do is push one specific aggressive treatment.  In fact, you may recall that maybe 2 years ago or so, I got asked by several members whether I had really ever been treated or not, and what my case history was.  My comments tend to be agnostic to any one treatment, but what I do often ask is whether treatment is really needed at all...   Post Edited (Casey59) : 1/7/2013 12:47:26 PM (GMT-7)