Dear Curtis,

Understand your frustration, but your leaving would be a terrible loss
to this group.  Not only do you have such a solid grasp of the issues,
but also an ability to explain them clearly.  Add to that that you are
a wonderful human being . . .

I very much appreciated your support, but please don't leave on acct.
of me:  I'm a tough broad from Brooklyn -- I can handle things.

Leah

Unless, of course, thy name is Sy or Safire. That, and repeatedly
savaging people who initially tried hard to help them, are the reasons
many of us no longer care a whole lot whether they're just trolls or
trolls with PC. Because they reject anything we offer, our presence will
not improve their cancer outcome. Their presence, however, is dragging
this group down the toilet in the eyes of new people who might actually
*benefit* from our help. Forced to choose between the two groups, I'll
cast my lot with the several we may actually help rather than the two we
cannot.

So do scores of millions of people irreconcileably lodged at the
opposite ends of the U.S. and global political spectra. Facts matter not
to many of them.

Yes, I submit. If we must ignore one or two trolls to avoid driving away
 2, or 4, or maybe 6 PC patients we may actually be able to help, we
bring less overall harm. The only help I see us giving these two is
psychological, much like the glow of a warm fire on the face of the
arsonist who set it.

If you feel you're making progress, maybe e-mail dialogs with these two
will better serve both them and the others here now and in the future.
Maybe you can establish better rapport with them than the rest of them
have. Without apology or guilt, I'm going to help the golden retriever
before I help the alligator trying to eat it.

And we, you and your wife. You are always eagerly invited to return. You
have been a blessing to this group. I've always wished I had more time
to respond to more of your communications.

I.P.

Curtis, my friend, I understand your feeling, but please do not let two
trolls influence you. Your expertise and experiences are needed. I remember
when I first posted here with PCa and then a year later my DX was APCa. Your
kind words soothed the soul.

The best thing to do is ignore and to continually broadcast the fact that
they are trolls.  We do not have to defend ourselves one bit; all anyone has
to do is google their alias and will plainly see them for what they are.

Take care, hang around, and take care of the wife.

Gourd Dancer

My comments are at the bottom........
~ curtis

------

From: slobodon2007@gmail.com (Slobodon)

When you respond to this garbage, you become part of the problem. These
people would wither on the vine were it not for their enablers....

ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff==================================

"c palmer" <PALMER_ENT@webtv.net> wrote in message
I.P. Freely wrote:
(snip)
If the biopsy reveals cancer, you've probably caught it very early and
can be cured. It's a win/win scenario unless you count little things
like having a leaky, limp thing ... both unlikely. I.P.
From: safire@tele-net.com (safire) penned:
This is extremely misleading advice from someone whose physicians
recommended rapid lead infusion (look it up). Read his posts: he's
always arguing with his doctors and tells you he's proud ignoring their
advice. The typical example of an obnoxious patient, that did some web
reading, can't place it in context but thinks he knows better than his
physician. Which probably explains why he has this leaky, limp thing and
many other problems, both mental and physical. If your biopsy - if
you'll have one - reveals cancer it's not at all a win/win scenario to
"cure" it. Depending on your age, psa value, gleason score and some
other factors state of the art advice may very well not to treat the
cancer but watch its development, in your case while you take
tamsulosin. Small non-aggressive, non-life threatening cancers don't
need to be treated. See http://www.nccn.org/ and look for the treatment
guidelines for prostate cancer. You'll see that standard practice is to
apply "expectant management" (i.e.no treatment) for T1-T2a low (2-6)
Gleason Score cancers where PSA < 10 ng/ml. A couple of months ago
someone like you decided not to "cure" the cancer like IP said you
should. A Vietnam like month long bomb attack followed. Just ignore IP,
he's a frustrated grumpy old man.
----------------------------------------------
=> don't you find it interesting that someone is quoting scripture and
verse while damning a poster for giving their opinion and then ends it
with, "The typical example of an obnoxious patient, that did some web
reading, can't place it in context but thinks he knows better than his
physician. Which probably explains why he has this leaky, limp thing and
many other problems, both mental and physical."?????
i'll stay for facts. here's the facts.
safire stated, "Small non-aggressive, non-life threatening cancers don't
need to be treated. See http://www.nccn.org/ and look for the treatment
guidelines for prostate cancer."
safire is quoting the guidelines for one organization. how many
different non profit cancer organizations have guidelines different that
what this organization states? that's a fact - look it up. see the
difference.
it is a fact that safire is making a prejudical (look up the word -
prejudice) statement about someone who has never met, hasn't talk to,
does not know the poster's background in this field, nor his medical
expertise.
now, this group is about support, not anti-support. if you are going
to disagree with what another poster says, you have the right to do so,
but please remember this............. are you really helping the person
who has been dx'ed with pca and came to this newsgroup looking for help
only to fight a group of people squabbling about who thinks they know
more about prostate cancer or treatments.
but to focus back and address the facts of this post, if you go to
http://www.nccn.org/ and go to their disclosure information, here's some
of what they said....
they admit that some of the people have active relationships with
interested parties such as pharmaceutical companies, medical device
companies, insurance companies, patient advocacy groups and government
agencies.
and they state further that a panel may decide to exclude a panel member
from discussions in areas where s/he may have a perceived conflict of
interest, but that doesn't mean that it will exclude a panel member.
while the concept may be a good one, it is one of many thoughts on what
guidelines should be.
below is part of the NCCN Disclosure of Organizational Relationships for
your reading pleasure......
~ curtis
------
NCCN Disclosure of Organizational Relationships
The development of NCCN information is based upon the independent
evaluation of available scientific evidence integrated with the expert
judgment of leading clinicians. The NCCN is dedicated to the provision
of sound, evidenced-based, authoritative recommendations that serve the
best interests of patients with cancer.
A complete description (Winn, 2003) of the process for the development
of the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in OncologyT is available for
review.
Notwithstanding the above, it is critical to all who use the NCCN
Clinical Practice Guidelines in OncologyT, the NCCN/ACS Treatment
Guidelines for Patients, The NCCN Drugs and Biologics CompendiumT, Task
Force Reports and other information products to understand any potential
sources of bias introduced into the development of NCCN information that
is trusted by physicians, patients and other interested parties.
NCCN Guideline Panel Members contribute their time and expertise on a
pro bono basis. Volunteer contributions from our 750 Panel Members
account for more than 10 thousand hours per year. However, the NCCN
recognizes that as leading experts and faculty members of prestigious
academic cancer centers, most Guideline Panel Members are involved in
clinical research and may have other active relationships with
interested parties such as pharmaceutical companies, medical device
companies, insurance companies, patient advocacy groups and government
agencies. It is important that these relationships be disclosed and
readily available to the end user of the information to incorporate into
that person's decision-making process.
The major components of such disclosure are financial support to
individual panel members by entities outside the NCCN and financial
support to the NCCN itself.
As to Guidelines Panel Members, the NCCN requires at the beginning of
each panel meeting, a disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest,
including, but not limited to, research support, service on advisory
boards or speakers bureaus, consultancies, and equity holdings. A panel
may decide to exclude a panel member from discussions in areas where
s/he may have a perceived conflict of interest. Aggregate panel
disclosures are published with each guideline.

ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

===>hi Slobodon - i do not see your post in the same light as you do,
but i do respect the right that everyone is entitled to their opinion.

after much thought, i've decided that i will  drop out for awhile
because it appears that my help is not needed at this time.

while i've been attacked myself, i have went to the aid of leah and bev
and firmly stood by them as others said that a female should not be
here.  it's a man's disease they said.

in fact - i've went to the aid of everyone else who has been attack by
this poster and other posters who have played troll.

i did not get down into the name calling gutter type attitude as the
trolls, but approached it from a mental side of facts.  you can't argue
with a solid fact.

that is what i did in this case.  he was quoting something that he
believed to be a fact and on his behalf, i truly believe that safire
thinks he's right.

in my 16 years of studying pca, and working with doctors and the medical
staff in the pca field, NEVER, have i seen such resistance by some, to
dramatize and to defame others, all in the name of making people think
that they are coming to the aid of helping others with cancer.

the oath says, "bring no harm to the patient"  can we honestly say that
right now in this newsgroup?

it is better that i fade away at this time  until such time that i feel
that i can help someone who is truly seeking advice about their pca
condition.

i thought that i would take this time to explain the reason for my
vacating the newsgroup for awhile.

i'll still be availbe to those who want to contact me by private email.

those who know me,  know of my wife's medical condition.  i shall be
devoted to that for the next few months to do more research and study.

to all,  i wish the best of luck,

bye, bye....

~ 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."
http://community.webtv.net/PALMER_ENT/doc

in my 16 years of studying pca, and working with doctors and the medical
staff in the pca field, NEVER, have i seen such resistance by some, to
dramatize and to defame others, all in the name of making people think
that they are coming to the aid of helping others with cancer.

the oath says, "bring no harm to the patient"  can we honestly say that
right now in this newsgroup?

it is better that i fade away at this time  until such time that i feel
that i can help someone who is truly seeking advice about their pca
condition.

i thought that i would take this time to explain the reason for my
vacating the newsgroup for awhile.

i'll still be availbe to those who want to contact me by private email.

those who know me,  know of my wife's medical condition.  i shall be
devoted to that for the next few months to do more research and study.

to all,  i wish the best of luck,

bye, bye....

~ curtis
--------------------------

'Tis a sad day for the NG.  Curtis was one of our most prolific and
knowledgeable contributors.  I wish he and Betty my best wishes and hope
that his absence is but a pause.

Curtis, you are one of those posters who I always read, no matter the
subject line. You always have something of value to say or pass on to
the group, and I like your quotes at the end!! Your posts provide either
facts, or food for thought. There are now a number of posters who never
get read. As circumstances allow at home, I do hope that you come back,
or at least lurk now and then and comment when you feel you have
something of value to contribute. You and your wife are in my prayers.

You mustn't go, Curtis.  Your leaving would be a big gesture but I'm
afraid, as Mike points out also, completely counter-productive.
Diminishing numbers of good folk here raises the proportion of bad.
But no need to fret, reference to any one of their angry fits of lies,
abuse or willful disruption immediately discredits everything they
say.  We can all help to alert newbies to that fact via the google
archive.
No need to read the troll posts - just filter them out.  If you don't
know how to do that, say what you're using as a newsreader and I'm
sure someone will help.  I set up my filter early this week and now
it's as if safire and sy never existed.  Very pleasant!

If you see a troll post quoted in a newbie's response, just make it
clear what's going on and point them to the archive.

While I regret Curtis's decision and even though his departure will be
a major loss to this newsgroup, I can sympathize with his decision.  I
rarely contribute much of import but I do lurk every day and the
recent trolls, the M15's and others have made this group less than it
used to be and more like some groups where the majority of
contributions are garbage.  I too have considered taking a hike but
there are still many contributers and contributions that are too good
to miss.

Unfortunately, two of my wife's colleagues, both doctors - one an
oncologist, have both been diagnosed with PCa within the last six
weeks.  One got his prostate yanked yesterday and the other will get
seeds in another month or so.  Three years ago I would have directed
them to this newsgroup with no hesitation but instead I didn't mention
the group since I have no doubt their first exposure would be all the
bickering and non-cancer specific stuff.  It would have been
embarrassing to me and an insult to these two fine men.  It's too bad,
we could have used their input.
Dave Perry

Curtis,

You leave and the troll wins, plain and simple. Regardless, best
wishes with taking care of your wife and I hope you choose to return
at some point.

Curtis, I will be very disheartened to see you leave this group,
although I really understand your reasoning.  The trolls, and those
who feed them, have made this group less than enjoyable recently.

I wish you and your wife the very best.  I hope to see you back here
soon.

Burney

RP in 1995 (age 52)
RT in 2000
ADT (Casodex) 10/06 - 8/07

burney dot huff at mindspring dot com

--------------

Like Curtis, I have become disgusted at the damage done by a handful of
relatively new participants in this newsgroup.

A suggestion:  when one of these ego-deficient snipers attempt to start a
flame war, ignore them. The first guy to see the message should respond with
a snipped summary followed by "TROLL" and leave it at that.

No one else should make any further comment at all, no matter how
inflammatory or moronic the original posting.

A few days ago a colleague told me he had been diagnosed, and was looking
for information. A year ago I would have suggested he come here. Because of
the hostile comments by these few, I did not. In effect, those few have
robbed a man with cancer of the opportunity to get the support this
newsgroup is supposed to provide.

The poor MI5 guy is probably just psychotic. But there are men in this NG
who do have cancer, yet who treat this resource as a playpen for anonyomous,
vicious taunts. They are not crazy, just selfish, nasty -- and pitiable.

Let's ignore them, and in doing so salvage this newsgroup.

Alex