Relay for Life

Several years ago, when the local program was in it's infancy and struggling, I became involved in Relay for Life.  I participated for many years and enjoyed every part of this remarkable event.  Then I lost touch...no reason, no conflict...I just drifted away.

Yesterday I encountered Relay on Facebook and thought, “Hey! I'm a survivor, I should reconnect and be a part of it.  So I left a message for the local committee that I'd like to participate...I don't know the date, location, I don't know nothin'!

If you've never attended a Relay for Life, visit this year.  The “Hope Walk” (if that's what it's called...I've forgotten) just after sunset is a touching and beautiful event.   But there's something going on all the time, with lots of celebrating, remembering, laughing, crying, walking, and running.

We have all been touched by cancer.  Relay for Life funds research, celebrates survivors, encourages those currently in the battle, and remembers those for whom the fight is over. It is also one hell of a lot of fun!

How 'bout a quickie?

A friend emailed today and mentioned he was going to visit the Urologist next week.
 My advice,  "Don't turn your back on him!"

Stimulate me

Has anyone got an idea (s) for more on prostate health, my experience, questions or comments?  It's like I achieved the 100 post level and everything stopped; my brain has shut down and is awaiting stimulation.

On turning 100

This is the 100th posting in this series.  Over the course of my diagnosis, biopsy, treatment decision, surgery, and recovery I've tried in these pages to bring my own experience forward as honestly as possible (pretty damn honest if you ask me), in order to assist others, and their significant others, who may be facing the issues I encounteres.

I have met a lot of people through these musings and been humbled when asked for information or just to be a sounding board.

One issue that will not go away (for good reason) is the PSA controversy.  Below is a link leading to an interesting article regarding a study of more than 100,000 men over 11 years published in the New England Journal of Medicine last Wednesday.  The article examines the controversy and demonstrates the difficult position in which many physicians find themselves.

http://on.msnbc.com/wZPWk8

As for me, I'm going to enjoy a glass of wine tonight and celebrate the attainment of 100 (posts, not years...yet). Join me!  Ummmmm...join me metaphorically, don't show up, I can't afford that much wine.

Canadian club for health care

It's Friday and, although this is not specifically about prostate health, I'm passing along this story because, well, because it's my blog!

Two weeks ago, a vendor who works with Lucia was on the phone mentioning she was not feeling well...but was feeling frustrated.

The vendor lives in Canada and she has what she believes to be an ear infection that is causing an ear ache and making her dizzy.  In fact, she has been so unsteady she is missing some work and enduring bouts of nausea.

The Canadian health care system, the same system so many point to as the model toward which we should strive, has responded by offering her an appointment with a physician...in June.  Our suggestion: get on the phone and make an appointment across the border with a US physician.

I am very grateful I was able to receive treatment when I needed it.  I'm concerned about what may happen to our accessible health care when some bureaucrat is deciding who needs care and who can wait.

I prefer to be in charge of my own health care.

Take charge of your life and have a great weekend with family and friends.

On the return to normalcy

In conversation with my friend in Phoenix, who recently had a radical prostatectomy, he noted he was going to be able to return to working out within the next week or two.  That's a big deal, a very big deal!

Milestones, as I've noted before, are important...and the more one is able to return to the routines that existed before surgery, the more one recognizes life is returning to normal.

No longer does one have to concentrate on recovery...it just continues to happen.  Those activities of daily living that recently consumed time and thought once again become simply activities.

In my own case, I no longer think with every step how fortunate I am as I run in the morning...I just run. It's not that I am not grateful for my remarkable recovery, I am indeed.  But I have returned to my life much as it was lived before cancer...and it feels, well, normal.  Has it changed?  Without question...but it's once again what I recognize as my life.

And life is good.

Antibiotics prevent cancer spread?

Apparently whenever I mention something in this blog, the universe responds by sending me more...wish I had known this when I was in high school, I would have mentioned a few young ladies (if I had a blog in high school...and if we had the internet...and computers...uh oh, getting depressed here).

Yesterday I received two more health newsletters I've never seen before, and both were offering breakthrough miracles, one of which had to do with prostate health. I do read any article that mentions prostate cancer and, once again, I learned something, maybe.

One newsletter heralded tetracycline for those with either breast or prostate cancer. The claim is tetracycline prevents these cancers from spreading to bones. A cheap, readily available prophylactic for bone cancer...if valid, that's important information (if not, it's exceedingly cruel offering false hope). I'm certainly eager to hear from anyone who might shed additional light.

A study reported in the media today linked circumcision with reduced likelihood of developing prostate cancer. Within the report, it was mentioned that the number of circumcisions are declining and the reported cases of prostate cancer are climbing. Without seeing the study, I have to wonder if this is correlation rather than cause and effect?

The same study reports males circumcised before having sex are 15% less likely to develop prostate cancer;  I wonder if this means immediately before (ouch)?

A very brief Un-update

Update on my continuing conversation with The American Red Cross:  Last week (see March 6 post "The Red Cross punts") I reported on my experience attempting to discern why I am not permitted to donate blood despite a piece of paper certifying I am cancer free (a certificate I'm willing to bet most people do not have)...no update as I have yet to receive the promised follow-up phone call.  Thus, un-update.

Over the weekend, I received another of the newsletters to which I subscribe (it's not a health newsletter, but carries reports from a number of disciplines).  This edition has a brief article about a study from an internationally known health clinic in Cleveland.  The article refers to the sixteen percent of American men who will develop prostate cancer. The study finds men who take Avodart, Proscar, or Propecia for benign enlarged prostate have a twenty-six percent lower risk of developing prostate cancer...but those who do have a slightly elevated chance of the cancer being of the more aggressive type.  

I'm not sure what to do with this information.

Being held hostage

Several months ago I subscribed to a new health newsletter for two reasons; one, this doctor seemed different than the others, and two, I'm stupid.  Suddenly I'm getting junk mail from every doctor who has the “Unknown Cures” for everything...and I can have access to all of them in the “Free Reports” I'll receive if I subscribe to his newsletter.  Apparently selling a mailing list is another money making opportunity for some author/healers.

The latest received offers “Free Report #6” entitled, What to Do if You Have Prostate Cancer.

It is pointed out, one American man dies of prostate cancer every 15 minutes...more than 40,000 each year. The reader is then teased about a new highly effective treatment available that has no side effects (other than 5% who report brief feelings of nausea).  Thousands of successful procedures have been performed, many insurance plans cover it, and you can have a list of the hospitals providing it...........IF you subscribe.

I don't have a clue, or even a WAG, as to the nature of the treatment, but I do have brief feelings of nausea every time I read a sales piece like this. If you know something available that could be of benefit, but hold it hostage...I've got a great suggestion for what you can do with your newsletter.

Have a great weekend. Hug your family, get outside and play, have a glass of wine (or two).

Good news!!!!

The phone rang last evening, it was my friend who, with his wife, visited one recent evening to talk about his slightly elevated PSA and a nodule detected during a DRE.  An earlier post (see "A friend in need" posted Feb. 15) describes his fears, concerns, and my suggestion he had nothing to fear before the biopsy...and, once known, we would decide what to do with the results.

With a smile that could be heard through the phoneline, he began the conversation saying, “The biopsy came back and there is no cancer. The doctor thinks the nodule is probably just a calcium deposit.”

I congratulated him and told him how happy, and relieved, I felt for him.

Were the PSA test and DRE unnecessary? After all, had neither test been done, no biopsy would have been ordered, no fear would have surfaced, and no medical bill would have been generated.

On the other hand, had the biopsy findings been more ominous, the problem could have been addressed immediately if treatment was his wish.

From our conversation, the assurance of no cancer made the biopsy, concerns, and cost well worthwhile. Did doctors make a few bucks? Yep, but what is the price of peace of mind?

Freedom!

Monday marked fifteen weeks since my surgery and yesterday I returned to the surgeon's office for my first and, as it turned out, last follow-up visit. In preparation for the visit I had some lab work done, specifically a PSA test which should read zero...it did.  The surgeon told me there was no need to return to his office, but I must monitor my PSA every six months for the next five years.

Because I'm not available to pen an article today, I'm presenting a link provided by my dentist-lawyer-author-artist-indian chief and friend, Ken Jones.  Ken is always quick to remind us of the important role our spouse and family play in treatment/recovery. (copy and paste into your browser)

http://www.everydayhealth.com/prostate-cancer/partner-care.aspx?xid=aol_eh-prostc_1_20110227_&aolcat=AJA&icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl7|sec3_lnk3%26pLid%3D139616

The Red Cross punts

 

Just heard from the Red Cross with regard to my email inquiry yesterday...they phoned!  Here was the question:

I was recently denied for donation because I had a radical prostatectomy in November.   I was told I had to be cancer free for one year before I could donate.  My question...with slow growing asymptomatic cancers, how does one know before diagnosis? (writer's note: it seemed to me there could be tens of thousands of people with cancer donating every year)  What is the ARC position on screening for prostate/breast cancers?  Why would I be denied after receiving a clean biopsy post surgery (I'm sure most donors do not have such a report)?

In response to my inquiry, they initially had a new employee speak to me...she quickly handed me off to a supervisor. Apparently the donation policy is an FDA regulation, which the Red Cross could not explain other than “donor safety” (which they also could not explain). I asked for an FDA reference so I could read the regulation myself; the supervisor promised to kick me upstairs for another call from someone else.

So, as it stands, apparently I'm at risk if I give blood until I've been cancer free for 12 months (an undefined risk of...ummm...something), but there is no issue of my blood being unacceptable (I was told no post-donation testing is done for any cancer marker...hell, I don't even know if there is such a marker but I liked the way the question sounded).  If this were not a serious issue (to me), this would be fun!!!

Finally, kudos to the American Red Cross for attempting to answer my questions; many organizations would not bother.  I truly appreciate their attention and look forward to further information.

Blood spilled needlessly

I attempted to give blood last week...and was refused. The worst part was having them stick my finger before going over the questions that would, ultimately, disqualify me as a donor.  I hate that finger prick...it hurts more than donating.   Note to Red Cross: Ask your damn questions before sticking me!!!

The nurse began to review my answers by asking aloud every computer provided question to which I had responded affirmatively. “Do you have any heart or lung problems?”  Yep, asthma. “Do you have, or have you had, cancer?”  Yep. “What kind of cancer?”  Prostate “What was the date of your last treatment?”  I didn't have treatments, I had surgery. “How long ago was your surgery?”  November 21. “I'm sorry, you're not eligible to donate...you need to be cancer free for a year.”

Now this gets interesting...prior to (and following) diagnosis,I had no symptoms; in all likelihood, I had cancer the last time I donated. If one ascribes to the latest fad of no testing...how many people are going to be donating blood who have cancer?  Is that OK with the Red Cross?  If so, why the hell can't I donate after the only (known) cancer in my body has been removed?  I have a piece of paper that certifies no cancer in surrounding tissues or lymph nodes.

In the face of the movement to do away with screenings for prostate cancer, and mammograms for breast cancer, how confident should the public be of the blood supply?  I think I'll address this to the Red Cross and see how they respond...then I'll report back to all y'all (the proper plural of the singular y'all).

Of course, I could have lied....

Of Politics and Prostates

OK, we all know most politicians are dicks...this is not about that.

I run in the early morning hours (I leave the house around 3:45am) when it's quiet...it's when I do my best thinking. This morning as I ran I had a troubling thought.

Lately, I've written several blogs about articles suggesting we're doing too much testing and providing too much treatment for prostate cancer and, yesterday, breast cancer. The argument is we are treating cancers that may not be fatal and risking side effects from what may be unnecessary treatments.

Thinking about what was driving all this discussion while running, I came to the conclusion we are being prepared for the new reality in healthcare insurance (read that...”set up for Obamacare”).

Testing and treatment are expensive, particularly the treatment which, of course, isn't required if one is not tested. Some diagnosed patients may die before treatment can begin, others, undiagnosed, may die of something else not involving expensive treatment (accident, heart attack, etc), still others may present such an aggressive cancer that palliative care is all that can be offered. But at least we won't have all these surgeries, radiation or chemo therapies adding to the huge cost of government healthcare.

What better way to reduce what is arguably going to be a budget busting program than eliminating treatment for all but those cases that progress to the point of presenting obvious symptoms? And, perhaps, beginning treatment at an advanced age (which I've noticed isn't so advanced as I age) will be discouraged. How long should we carry those old folks anyway...after all, that's when healthcare is really expensive and they've already had a full life.

Targeting such prevalent cancers as breast and prostate for reduced diagnosis and, thereby, treatment is an effective way to reduce the costs by assuring everyone they probably don't need regular testing and early treatment anyway. Helps thin the herd as well.  But isn't that the premise of the entire insurance industry?  It's unlikely for everyone, but devastating for the unlucky few.  Of course, I'm sure the doctor who wrote the article suggesting regular PSA screening and mammograms are not required carries malpractice insurance in the unlikely event she makes a mistake.

Am I paranoid...nope, I'm a thinker, a thinker without a prostate and glad of it. Watch 'em folks, hip replacements and heart disease could be next.

Well, I've depressed myself on a Friday, and that ain't easy!  Think I'll go for another run and try to think of something fun!

.357 foreplay

OK, apparently putting something to do with guns in a title does even more than sex to excite the search engines; yesterday's post was a record breaker.  Imagine the two together...well, you don't have to imagine it, after all, you're reading this.

You know those little phony wooden signs with the clever sayings sold in tourist shops everywhere? My favorite read, “It pays to be smart 'cause then you know stuff.” Go ahead, argue with that.

One of the things unsaid is that knowing too much can be an impediment to common sense. I refer to yet another article by a physician advising men against PSA tests and women to avoid mammograms. Once again I read, “...Even though some of the cancers now being treated would never have grown fast enough to cause problems in the first place....We do not know for sure they will develop into harmful cancers.”

I'm sure this all comes as reassuring information to the young widow in our community who recently lost her husband to a prostate cancer he didn't treat.

Isn't the entire insurance industry built upon the premise of protecting against that which is not likely, but devastating to the unlucky few? Insurance coverage seems like a fairly intelligent decision.  In fact, I'll bet the doctor who wrote the article in question carries malpractice insurance in the unlikely event she makes a mistake.

Could I have done without the surgery? Sure. Did I risk incontinence and ED? Yep. Would I do it all again rather than see another young widow in my community (well, I wouldn't see her, but you know what I mean)?  You bet...in fact, you bet your life!