NDR -- PSA screening issues hard even for docs to grasp. In simple terms...,+

[DocVikingo]

.....here is the latest:

Screening for Prostate Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

I'd like to hear from our other docs on this.

 

[Duke Dive Medicine]

The chairperson's statement/editorial:

Prostate Cancer: We Can Do Better: Editorial on Screening for Prostate Cancer from USPSTF Chair Dr. Virginia Moyer

 

[cutlass]

IMO, the controversy over the USPSTF statement is that it exposes the conflict between having known at-risk populations and the principle of "do no harm". What's causing the AUA's (Am. Urological Assoc.) figurative head to explode is that the USPSTF is applying their recommendations even to known at-risk populations; i.e. African-American and those with a family history, apparently including when first-degree relatives are involved. OTOH, under the principle of "do no harm", the USPSTF is correct in pointing out that at best, there is no clear evidence of positive benefit even for at-risk populations, and therefore PSA screening should be discontinued.
　
I would side with the American Cancer Society recommendations for prostate cancer early detection It's a circumspect position that's also echoed in the 6th paragraph of Dr. Moyer's statement:

...Whether or not to be screened for any condition is a decision each person must make with his or her clinician based on individual values and preferences, but we are urging all health care professionals to be forthcoming about the facts around prostate cancer risk, the relatively small benefit of detecting the cancer, and the significant known harms of screening and treatment.

 

[danvolker]

Plenty of Docs here will not like Mercola, but over the last 2 decades he has been proven right on far too many of his "big issues" for a thinking person to dismiss his concerns....

Here is one of his articles on the MISTAKE of getting a PSA test... http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a.../conventional-prostate-cancer-treatments.aspx