HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

Poll on AUA Screening Guidelines

Support Forums
>
Prostate Cancer
Do you agree with the new AUA screening guidelines?
Yes, I agree. - 23.5% - 12 votes
No, I disagree. - 76.5% - 39 votes
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
12
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 5/8/2013 7:32 PM (GMT 0)
Just out of intellectual curiosity, let's see the percentages of agreement or disagreement with the new AUA guidelines.

Jim

Posted 5/8/2013 7:38 PM (GMT 0)
Guess which way I voted...lol

******NOTE*****
I just released a new poll listing all 5 options that have been on the table over the least few years. This poll only asks if the new AUA Guidelines are acceptable. The new poll let's you choose which is best. Please ket us know by voting on both polls.

www.healingwell.com/community/default.aspx?f=35&m=2728059

****************


I suspect that few have read the guidelines. So maybe before you vote read cover to cover...

www.auanet.org/education/guidelines/prostate-cancer-detection.cfm

I don't suspect it will change the minds in the patient community much as it's still too early for this to have been digested. I knew it was coming a month ago so I just waited to see the final print.

Please read it. It's an excellent document based on evidence.

Tony
Posted 5/8/2013 7:42 PM (GMT 0)
I'm glad we waited a few days before there was a poll so we could fully digest the new guidelines.
Posted 5/8/2013 7:53 PM (GMT 0)
Tony, who knows...maybe only the vocal "no" comments are on the other thread and you might be surprised.  In any case, I am stunned and pleased that we reached 178 (and counting) responses on a thread and it was pretty much without acrimony.  Maybe we're growing up...

I have read and absorbed the new guidelines and they are generally well thought out, IMHO. Unfortunately I still have to vote "disagree" because of reasons I listed on the other thread.

Jim

Posted 5/8/2013 7:59 PM (GMT 0)
I voted that I disagree with the guidelines because I do. I don't agree that over-testing will always lead to over-diagnosis which will always lead to over-treatment. I think there is hope that proper education of men and doctors can break, or at least weaken, those causal linkages.

On the other hand I realize that the AUA was forced by their situation to accept those linkages as immutable laws of nature and I sympathize with their struggle to make the best decision they could under the circumstances.
Posted 5/8/2013 8:03 PM (GMT 0)
Haha...
Judge Judy says men don't grow up until they reach 50, if ever...

I know this is a tough pill to swallow. But so was active surveillance. So was over treatment for the AUA in the first place. This is a marked turn around by them.

The patient community, I think, will probably not embrace it fully but when you see the responses in the coming weeks from the industry I think it will continue to warm the patient advocacy up to it. That will help the patient community as well...

Tony
Posted 5/8/2013 8:35 PM (GMT 0)
75%-25% so far, could tighten up, but so far it looks like "we" disagree mostly...
Posted 5/8/2013 8:46 PM (GMT 0)
Haha,
David I think you are indeed inaccurately speaking for 25% that disagree when you say "we" in that context. But I'll join in the fun...

We that agree all agree to disagree with all of those that disagree...

:-)

Tony
Posted 5/8/2013 9:03 PM (GMT 0)
I disagreed.

If my wife 'followed' the guidelines, I would have an incurable cancer by the time the 'guideline' (if ever) said I needed checked!

Bottom lines is, more and more men are developing this cancer at an earlier age. The medical community can stop that trend by NOT screening, testing, or treating it. Just let them die off, that will reverse the 'over-diagnosing' issue!

Makes me sick that thousands of lives are going to be put into deathly situations.
Posted 5/8/2013 9:23 PM (GMT 0)
Oh, one more thing. What's the point of having a yearly physical at your GP's office? I mean they're obviously looking for something that may be wrong with you. Sounds like 'over-diagnosis' to me.
Posted 5/8/2013 11:39 PM (GMT 0)
I'd also like to see a poll on how many guys feel they were overtreated.  But, the question has to be correctly stated...

 

Posted 5/8/2013 11:47 PM (GMT 0)
We had one way back. I'd like to add a poll that says "How many would like to increase the number of men over treated by 100% by having every man screened annually starting at age 40"?

But I thought better of it...

Tony
Posted 5/9/2013 12:00 AM (GMT 0)
It is all how you ask the question isn't it?
Posted 5/9/2013 12:00 AM (GMT 0)
btw --- I think the spirit of Casey just voted with you Tony...
Posted 5/9/2013 12:09 AM (GMT 0)
No. My views on this are already well posted so no need to repeat
Posted 5/9/2013 1:10 AM (GMT 0)
Voted!
Posted 5/9/2013 5:37 PM (GMT 0)
btw, I recall when the USPTF guidelines came out a few here actually agreed with those as well.
Posted 5/9/2013 5:48 PM (GMT 0)
We use a Greek word here is the south concerning their recommendations, Baloney. I think I'll tell my wife to quit feeling her breasts for lumps, she is over screening!
Posted 5/9/2013 5:51 PM (GMT 0)
Well I think it is at least clear that it is not a consensus to be against the new guidelines. I am actually a bit surprised that as many as 20% in the patient community would be in agreement with them. I would have predicted lower.

@Davidg you are right. There are some men that wished they were never tested so I am certain they might agree with the USPSTF. Even today. So I knew I wasn't ever to be a lone wolf on the topic.

@JerryL. Yes it is how you ask. I think this poll would be different if the question was asked the way I worded it above. How much different is open for debate but it's moot. I think Jim's question is showing us there is diversity in these realms.

Tony
Posted 5/9/2013 6:01 PM (GMT 0)
I wish more people here would vote on this poll, its still a landslide against, even with this smaller pool of responders.
Posted 5/9/2013 6:43 PM (GMT 0)
The poll should have had other categories like "I have not yet formulated an opinion," "the report is meant as a guide for urologists, not patients," or "I haven't yet read the full report." Perhaps that's what's reflected in the relatively low voter turnout.
Posted 5/9/2013 7:22 PM (GMT 0)
Why not?? Well I voted NO although I realize that the AUA had no choice in light of the USPSTF "recommendation"..I'm really starting to get "worn out" on this subject!
Bill
Posted 5/9/2013 10:51 PM (GMT 0)
bump --- just to get more voting perhaps..
Posted 5/9/2013 10:54 PM (GMT 0)
If you vote yes it's free beers at my house.

If you vote no it's free DRE's...but not at my house.

Tony
Posted 5/9/2013 11:34 PM (GMT 0)
An easy no for me...
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
12