The information in the article is generally accurate and well balanced.
 But I would question one point that was made, which can seriously
mislead men.

The statement that two thirds to three fourths of men who are diagnosed
with prostate cancer don't need treatment is questionable.  The article
refers to "studies", but I've done a literature search using
Medline/Pubmed, and I never found any articles which made such
estimates.  One study for example estimated that up to 15 percent of men
of European descent and 45 percent of men of African descent had cancers
which would never be a problem during the man's life.  That study was
based on Medicare data, and I wouldn't take the figures very seriously,
but I didn't see any other studies suggesting much higher figures.  Of
course, the vast majority of men who are diagnosed are older, and many
of those men will die of other causes before their cancers can affect
them significantly.  In fact, such men are not usually advised by their
physicians to undergo aggressive treatment.  The danger of statements of
this kind is that younger men may decide that the chances of their being
affected by prostate cancer are small.  All the evidence I've seen
suggests that men under 60, who may live 20 years or more, if diagnosed
with prostate cancer, will have their lives adversely affected by it if
left untreated.

A more general complaint is that the man being interviewed quotes all
sorts of statistics.  But these are at best guesses.  He makes the point
that there is much we don't know about prostate cancer.  Among the
things that are not known too well are just statistics of this kind.

The interviewee claims that only 10 to 20 percent of men with PSA over 4
have prostate cancer.   But I believe that figure is contradicted by the
article describing the study he supposedly took part in.   Even for the
men with PSA less than 4, I believe that about 25 percent with PSAs at
the higher end ended up having prostate cancer.  He should read the article.