Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-22-2012, 04:04 AM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,495 posts, read 36,985,044 times
Reputation: 13965

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevxu View Post
My own experience is that my PSA tests go up and down, and that they sometimes go up to incredible levels. There are numerous reasons for this, and my experience is not unique. I do not have any signs of cancer whatsoever.

Certainly I cannot depend upon a PSA test to detect prostate cancer, I must resort to more sophisticated examinations, and do. I doubt that I am alone in this.
As far as I know there are only two tests for prostrate cancer, and I wouldn't call a finger up your butt sophisticated...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-22-2012, 04:36 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,230 posts, read 17,783,848 times
Reputation: 4585
The USPSTF has been around since 1998. It has nothing to do with who is Prez, is not bound to HHS or the WH. So please OP, get a clue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2012, 04:48 AM
 
1,734 posts, read 1,815,951 times
Reputation: 1135
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUTGR View Post
In their honest moments, they admit that Obamacare is just a step in the direction they want to go, which is nationalized healthcare. Almost by definition, nationalized healthcare involves panels of some type making decisions about what will be covered and what will not, i.e. rationing. I'm fine callling them death panels because these decisions will impact life and death.
I think you got that turned around

In America, insurance panels rations ration care and make decisions about life and death, normally with the intention of restricting care as much as possible.

In universal health care systems, doctors make decisions, with the intention of getting as much health care as possible out of their resources.

While neither setup has unlimited resources, universal healthcare is so much more effective that to an American, it often feels like unlimited resources, compared to the death panels of the American system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2012, 05:04 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,279 posts, read 54,030,041 times
Reputation: 40566
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
You can bet your last dollar that if this was taking place with a Republican in the White House, the liberals would be outraged.
And you'd lose, there've been doctors questioning the value of prostate screening long before Obama was in office. It's about the slow growtrh of the overwhelming majority of prostate cancers, not about the fast growth of right-wing lunacy and petty BS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2012, 08:18 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,446,034 times
Reputation: 22471
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
As far as I know there are only two tests for prostrate cancer, and I wouldn't call a finger up your butt sophisticated...
Wrong. There is the PSA blood test, the digital exam to check for enlargement and of course biopsies.

Most likely all of us know someone whose cancer was caught in time because of screening tests.

It's just a good thing this is being done by a radical leftist administration so no one can object. The same radical liberals who cried real tears when ketchup was classified as a vegetable but didn't mind when salsa was also classified as a vegetable for school lunches reacts one way or the other all based on politics.

If the Obama administration wants to eliminate PSA tests and all tests for prostate cancer, fine. The liberals never question anything their politicans do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2012, 08:29 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,035,663 times
Reputation: 9407
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjski View Post
Are you purposely being obtuse?
No. This is why I ask:

PolitiFact | Barack Obama says preventive care 'saves money'

This seems counter to Barack Obama's position on preventitive medicine, which in turn makes one wonder why all of a sudden preventative care is not necessarily needed in this case. The CDC is an arm of the government with political appointees who answer to the President. There's all kinds of reasons to be skeptical....the biggest being that Obamacare is a boondoggle of the highest degree. With every passing day, something is proven/disproven/determined that doesn't quite mesh with what was sold to the public during the legislative debate. In other words, there's all kinds of bait and switch going on. I encourage you to question your government, even when it doesn't seem fair to do so. Falling for their every word....every whim.....is counterproductive to the progress of this country.....especially in an election year when much scrutiny of your government is not only necessary, but imperative.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2012, 08:37 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,035,663 times
Reputation: 9407
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
And you'd lose, there've been doctors questioning the value of prostate screening long before Obama was in office. It's about the slow growtrh of the overwhelming majority of prostate cancers, not about the fast growth of right-wing lunacy and petty BS.
Doctor's questioning the value doesn't equate to the CDC questioning the value. In order to move government one direction or another, there's always a political angle. You don't just show up in the President's office and say "We're the CDC and we're going to change directions whether you like it or not".....especially not in an election year.....and especially when the organization is led by a political appointee. The political benefit is analyzed. If there's no benefit, then it gets shelved. That's the reality of government operations.

I have no doubt in my mind that the next big headline on this subject will be the "cost savings to taxpayers and Obamacare" argument. We're in the "posturing and conditioning" phase right now......the "benefits" phase is right around the corner. Bet on it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2012, 09:07 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,714,136 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
So scientists are wrong? They were completely wrong just a few years ago?
I've heard right wingers claim that they work with an agenda, to make money. Are they idiots?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2012, 09:12 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,209,612 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim Reader View Post
Well, prostrate cancer is something you die with not off. Unless you're an African-american in which case its a real risk.
But cancer treatments generate a lot of revenue, they tend to be high cost. And its pretty rare for people not to want treatment if they've been diagnosed with cancer, even if that cancer is not going to be a problem until they are 120 years old.

Of course, not treating prostrate cancer isn't going to do Americas cancer survival any good, since a significant fraction of the advantage America registers is due to detecting harmless prostrate cancers and then ticking up good five year survival rates.

Still, it sounds like an eminintly sensible policy. As long as you got a program for screening African-americans.
I wouldn't go that far. There are agressive forms and non-agressive forms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2012, 09:15 AM
 
749 posts, read 835,404 times
Reputation: 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Your post proves/disproves/determines what, exactly?
I know what it proves....but if I reveal it, I might get booted out of here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:23 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top