Originally Posted by
goldfinch
Their conclusion isn't bs. It makes a lot of sense when you look at an entire population and the risks and benefits. The risk isn't just the false positive, it is what you do with the positive results. Wait and see is stressful. Biopsies have risks. And when tumors are found there can be incredible anxiety, even when those tumors may be slow growing and never life threatening. People don't like having cancer growing in them. But men have to decide for themselves and recommendations are for the test to be an individualized decision based on things like age and risk factors rather than an across the board decision.
I'm tending to agree with Goldfinch, at least partially. Patients should be counseled on the risks of false positives. Today, any stay in a hospital or rehab center carries some risk of MRSA, among other things. Watchful waiting may be a pain in the neck and unsatisfying, but as someone who saw my dad die both of the complications of a less-than-necessary surgery (successful otherwise) combined with MRSA, I think even great hospitals are not reliable enough to trust with excessive treatments.
But I wouldn't want to eliminate PSA screens for younger folks, like me. If it's like with colonoscopies, docs would like to be able to compare risk assessment procedures (such as at my 58 yo) with "good" test results taken on the same patient when at a younger age. That means at least one young-age PSA test per male when in his 30's or so.