Originally Posted by donheff

Good post and covers all the bases that we have been discussing. But it doesn't help me with the underlying dilemma: as an individual how do I balance the risk/reward? Your approach appears to rest on the intention to catch any possible cancer and treat ALL cancers. Or, at least, to do so at younger ages. The studies seem to me to be saying that overall the risks outweigh the rewards, i.e. you are individually better off risking a small chance of a bad cancer outcome to avoid a much higher chance of a bad unnecessary side effect of PSA testing/treatment. It is this choice of balance that is so difficult for many of us to sort out. Also, you don't address how (or if) the balance changes with age. For example, if I accept your premise for testing at younger ages what about when I am older. If I stayed low on the PSA scale into my mid 60s, 70s, 75... is there a point at which I should figure everybody starts getting CA at this point and treatment may not be worth pursuing (thus time to stop screening)? It seems to me that at bottom line this is not really a medical question that can be answered for us by a knowledgeable physician. It is more of a personal lifestyle question that includes evaluation of rapidly changing medical facts - I guess that often is the case with cancer. There are a lot of possible approaches to this risk/reward dilemma (test and treat at a relatively low PSA; test and treat only at a very high PSA; test and treat only with rapid acceleration; and possibly cut off testing at a given age). I would like to see more discussion about the impact of those alternatives and the risks/rewards involved.