From: res0rbp6@nospam.verizon.net (ronju99)
Curtis,
Not much of a study. They didn't report the numbers on the patients
going into the study and what was really interesting was they didn't
state what kind of surgery they had. It couldn't have been RRP as they
report that 93% of patients with radiation treatment compared to 63% of
the ones without treatment still had the disease localized in the
(prostate). How dod that happen?
Ron
==========
don't kill the messager - i just find the different studies and bring
them to light.  as leonard and others will point out, when one is doing
studies, you have to look at the base.  from the base, you can produce
the results you want.  for example, if they had patients that were T1c,
the results would be different yet.  if all patients were T3c, again
different results.  and if there were a study that has various staging
in it, different results, all with the same type of treatment.

somebody is funding these studies and are making decisions.  big
decisions.  and these decisions are relayed to the doctors who treat
patients that are dx'ed with pca.  biased??  you betchya, but that is
the trouble with some of this testing and this is just one of many that
proves it.  by bringing it to light just makes us aware of what is going
on and commenting of it makes us even more aware of what these studies
are doing to the society to shape the thoughts in the treatment process.
not all studies are going to be big hits and accepted by the public.

for example, i was tempted to post a spam ad that was in another
newsgroup.......why???   because it was basically a bracelet that you
wear, but the ad gave a big long scientific explanation about how
electricity cures this problem and at the very end of the spam was a
disclaimer.  why post this spam ad when it sounds like something we've
all heard before?  because it was posted in an impotent newsgroup,
claiming for cure impotence, and then the same ad was used, but the
first paragraph changed, only this time, the spam ad claimed to cure
prostate cancer.  how many people will respond to that ad?  and to the
tune of 90 dollars for that bracelet i might add.  

i had my eyes pried open early in life that everything was not always as
they seem.  that if we want to see the world through rose colored
glasses, that's fine.  society will allow this to happened.  but i grew
up in a city and came back to that same city many years later.  i had
seen it through the eyes of a child.  i had seen things that adults
never saw.  they would look straight through the events without ever
registering at the brain.  i came back and worked as a counselor, and i
saw this same city through the eyes of the homeless, the drug users, the
gays, the people down on their luck.  i saw things that were always
there, but failed to actually the event myself.  now, i readily see
them.  having had two different types of businesses in the very same
city, i see and talk with people who on one end, never see or hear of
these events i've described in one business and in the other business, i
would meet people who lived in the hallways and under tables.  in fact,
i was given a handout (2 pages) of places that would give you handouts -
where they were, their phone numbers, what they were looking for to
prove in order to get the handout and for how long you could get the
handout, and it was not just for this city, but cities within 40 miles
around.

one world - no.  one trial study - no.  but when you look at all the
studies that they are doing, it makes you sometimes - rethink.  and
sometimes, you come up with the same answer, and sometimes you don't'.
that is why i posted this particular study.  just an explanation this
time.

~ curtis

knowledge is power - growing old is mandatory - growing wise is optional    
"Many more men die with prostate cancer than of it. Growing old is
invariably fatal. Prostate cancer is only sometimes so."