Don't you get tired of hearing that something is safe to eat and then the next study says it isn't? Or that something is effective and then the next study says it is not?
One of the latest about-faces in the medical community comes because of a prostate study. Two screening tests that doctors are performing millions of times a year - a PSA test and a digital rectal exam - apparently now are thought not to be especially effective and, in fact, may lead to more problems than they cure. Seems most men who show an elevated PSA and have a biopsy do not have cancer. And some men with a low PSA level do have cancer. Some cases of prostate cancer are so slow-growing that they never cause symptoms, much less death. In addition, surgery and radiation treatment for prostate cancer can cause incontinence and impotence. So for some men, detecting prostate cancer early through screening can do more harm than good.
The newspaper article that announced the results of this new study suggests that for the time being, until the results of two very large studies of prostate cancer screening appear in a few years, doctors should simply tell men that these test are not perfect, tell them the risks and the benefits and the "what ifs," and then let them choose.
Last month when I saw one of my doctors he asked me why I was taking Vitamin E. I said because of that big study several years ago that said it was found to be of value in warding off Alzheimer's. He said, "Oh well, a later study said it didn't have any effect at all." I told him I'd keep taking it and take my chances!
The first year I took statistics in college my professor jokingly said, "Give me a set of numbers and I'll make them say anything you want them to say." I think he wasn't kidding.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment