 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate BPH / February 2004PVP: Recovery and Beyond
At almost 3 months there is significant improvement after a horrid 60 days. However, I am bewildered by the resistance coming up on this NG toward advocating for the regulation of medical advertising on the NET. Even on American television, by law, pharmaceutical companies must mention all the side effects and contraindications of taking promoted drugs. In doing so it sobers up their claims of uncomplicated, health-altering miracles. Only a fool can watch the over-the top ads for say Paxil, then listen to the litany of side effects and not stop to think about the reality of such treatment. The NET seems to be the wild-west when it comes to marketing, and this can be dangerous, whether it be a drug that is being promoted, or the latest breakthrough in prostate surgery. Some of you have mentioned that it's up to the doctor or surgeon to interpret the hype from the manufacturers and marketers and pass those caveats along to the patient. This may be true, but it is perfectly conceivable that even the surgeons get caught up in the hype, especially in a new procedure like PVP, wherein the database and general experience is limited. If this newsgroup just limits itself to individual BPH cases, I think we are missing an opportunity to at least discuss the politics of health care. It is clearly relevant to insurance issues, as well as understanding such matters as cautionary concerns, real recovery time, and a better overall experience for many, albeit perhaps, the minority... who have problematic experiences. Marcus It sounds to me you are trying to rally us to take up your fight. I am not interested nor does it sound as if there are many other readers who are. You might want to search around for a group that has medical reform as its aim. I would recommend to anyone with BPH and considering PVP or any other procedure that they do "due diligence" before proceeding. My Urologist in Denver does TUMT and Targis laser. As I questioned him to determine the best procedure, he told me that when it came time for him he would do have the microwave treatment but he encouraged me to do my own research and make up my own mind. He indicated he had a number of patients who wanted him to tell them what was best, a role he was clearly not comfortable with. Early on I nearly used microwave. My quest for the "right answer for me" took nearly a year of now-and-again research. I lurked on this NG, emailed individuals, did endless Google searches and talked to anyone who I thought might have first hand information. On January 29 I drove 5 hours to get the PVP procedure. I did that knowing full well that no medical procedure is 100% safe and effective and that it was possible that I could awake from the anesthetic worse off than when I walked in. I did not want that outcome but was willing to accept the consequences for the decision I made. It was my decision made after considerable research and deliberation. I based my decision not on the description on the Laserscope web site, nor the advice of Uro 1 nor of Uro 2, nor my brother nor any single source but a compilation of information The outcome exceeded my expectations. As a result of PVP I now can delight in these things: a.. Forming bubbles in the stool from the new found pressure and volume. b.. Sleeping through the night sometimes 6-7 hours and not needing to get up to pee. c.. A total absence of the "0-60 in 3 seconds" urination sensations. d.. Taking long road trips without the frantic searches for a place to stop. e.. Going to a sporting event and being able to once again drink a beer knowing that the line behind me in the restroom will move as fast as the other lines. f.. Not having to sit to pee so I can be confident I am hitting the bottom of the bowl. For anyone who takes the time to look there is plenty of information outlining the risks. It is like any other major purchase, you must search it out for yourself. If you get cheated in during a business transaction, shame on them, but shame on you as well for not being more cautious. You sound like a cheerleader for your own success story. Congratulations. But how can one do "research" on a new procedure when there is little data available? You seem to imply that "trust" need not be a necessary part of medical equation. I prefer to lobby for a system where suspicion is not the energy one must apply to medical necessity. Don't you think that would be preferrable? Marcus > It sounds to me you are trying to rally us to take up your fight. I am not > interested nor does it sound as if there are many other readers who are. You [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > out for yourself. If you get cheated in during a business transaction, shame > on them, but shame on you as well for not being more cautious. Marcus: And you sound like a cheerleader for your own non-success, which based on many of your posts might well be due to your unique medical situation. I don't see why you can't understand that others (most others) simply do NOT agree with you. You have already beaten this argument to death. I would suggest you embrace an idea; not strangle it. Anyway, good luck to you. I am happy that there seems to be some improvement. This is a miserable situation and we all welcome what relief we can get. Mel > You sound like a cheerleader for your own success story. Congratulations. > But how can one do "research" on a new procedure when there is little data [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > shame > > on them, but shame on you as well for not being more cautious. "I don't see why you can't understand that others (most others) simply do NOT agree with you." _________________________________________________________________ Well that's obvious. Since "most" others have apparently had the successful, quick recovery. It's the 'other' others......the ones who Laserscope seems to ignore or claim their problems can be "easily dealt with"... who might see the point of urging regulatory limits on exaggerated marketing claims. Several people on this NG have asked that I continue to post my thoughts and experiences. But whether they do or don't, you can always skip them if you find them annoying. Morever, there are always new folks posting to the group. They might want to hear different points of view, even if they are "minority" reports. Nothing changes easily in a complex society run by the almighty dollar and the interest groups that benefit. I'm not sure where you're writing from, but this here is still the U.S... and freedom of speech is still alive, if not always well. Talk to you later?.......or maybe not? Marcus > Marcus: > [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] > > shame > > > on them, but shame on you as well for not being more cautious. While I don't agree with your proposed remedy, after revisiting the Laserscope website, I will concede that it paints a very optimistic picture. Perhaps they need a few "your mileage may vary" statements so that people realize that "most" does not mean "all." I'm sure the lawyers have reviewed it so that it is not misleading from a legal standpoint. > "I don't see why you can't understand that others (most others) simply do > NOT [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > > > might want to search around for a group that has medical reform as its > > > aim. You got that right! > While I don't agree with your proposed remedy, after revisiting the > Laserscope website, I will concede that it paints a very optimistic picture. [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > its > > > > aim. Yes, Marcus, you do have the right to make the same point over and over again. And, yes, it does appear that MOST people are quite satisfied with the results, especially in light of the (traditional) TURP alternative. I am 100% certain that for ANY surgical procedure, there will be a handful of folks with DISMAL results. Once again, in YOUR case, even you acknowledge that your significant other medical problems might have a bearing on the results. Anyway, feel free to post. Really, I do wish you the best. I've made my point. I'll TRY and refrain from making it ...again... and again! Good luck. Mel > "I don't see why you can't understand that others (most others) simply do > NOT [quoted text clipped - 130 lines] > > > shame > > > > on them, but shame on you as well for not being more cautious. That's cool, Mel.... Let's just not neglect that "handful".........a handful of 10,000 surgeries is still no insignificant matter. stay well, Marcus > Yes, Marcus, you do have the right to make the same point over and over > again. [quoted text clipped - 166 lines] > > > > shame > > > > > on them, but shame on you as well for not being more cautious. > That's cool, Mel.... > [quoted text clipped - 201 lines] > > > >Marcus you have been told over and over again you must realise that significant other medical problems like yours do indeed impact on any kind of surgury or treatment especially when its really all kidney/bladder related Dont blame Laserscope for your own health problems To have needed kidney transplants etc the originating cause must have been serious or self inflicted Superfluous SNIPPED >> >Marcus you have been told over and over again you must realise that >significant other medical problems like yours do indeed impact on any kind [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >To have needed kidney transplants etc the originating cause must have been >serious or self inflicted Marcus is entitled to comment on his experiences, as much as anyone else, without having to endure your offensive remarks. > Superfluous SNIPPED > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Marcus is entitled to comment on his experiences, as much as anyone > else, without having to endure your offensive remarks. The above comment is so true. Marcus' other health problems should have been addressed before the surgery. I believe that the over selling of the procedure put Marcus in harms way. Now let him speak. Burr Marcus, This is a support group and any question is a good question. Some posters write to help, others to feel better, others to correspond to anyone and so on. In my humble opinion you are a counterpointer. I don't think you can be cured of your medical problems with your current attitude. I would suggest you consider some counseling, and this is written in the spirit of being helpful to you. Good luck Fred Henzi > That's cool, Mel.... > [quoted text clipped - 199 lines] > > > > > shame > > > > > > on them, but shame on you as well for not being more cautious. I've got to say, in my humble opinion, that your reference to 'attitude' is mistaken. Attitudes do not cause BPH. Organic realities do. If it was possible to quickly recover from prostate surgery by invoking one's attitude, than only a fool wouldn't appropriate the positive energy and outlook I assume you are implying is lacking in my case. I know what you're trying to get at, but it does not apply here. Every day that I don't have to run to the John, feel minimal pain and discomfort is a day I rejoice....believe me. Marcus > Marcus, > This is a support group and any question is a good question. [quoted text clipped - 235 lines] > > > > > > shame > > > > > > > on them, but shame on you as well for not being more cautious. Marcus, The gist of my post was "counter pointing". Your answer, well written, just reinforces my humble opinion. Frankly, I don't believe you can rejoice without eyeing another problem to lament about. I suspect you are the type that reads the paper until you get your their fill of bad news and then conclude that the world is going to the dogs. Please continue to respond. It obviously makes you feel better and that is important. Maybe, as important as all the medications that you take. Take care your own way. Good luck Fred Henzi asha Gottfried" <sashago@comcast.net> wrote in message news:-pmdnSR3uJLTPqjd4p2dnA@comcast.com... > I've got to say, in my humble opinion, that your reference to 'attitude' is > mistaken. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Marcus Apparently you have never experienced, or forgotten, the tradition of social-political criticism. This country, the U.S., was founded on that principle. Perhaps you are not aware of the crisis in health care here. Exaggerating claims of recovery time and overselling procedures like PVP is just one of many examples where corporate America is running amuk and allowing special interests to corrupt the greater good in the name of higher profits. Check out Laserscope's stock profile. It's hard to believe that their trumped up marketeering is not, at least partially behind their soaring numbers. Be that as it may, your proclivity to make this a personal issue...suggesting some kind of pathological need to see the darker side of things...is puerile, and reveals the fragility of your perspective. Open your eyes dude. The dogs may not have taken over yet, but without the vigilant social critics and activists that keep us on the alert, they (the dogs) probably would have long ago. M > Marcus, > The gist of my post was "counter pointing". Your answer, well written, just [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > > > Marcus Marcus, I totally disagree with your Laserscope bashing. I personally know many of the people who run this company from the President on down to the marketing person and the sales representatives. I know the R&D engineers who designed the product. I can unequivocally say that they are among the most component, most truthful, most concerned, and most dedicated group of professionals in one company that I have ever meet. No one in this company is out to mislead anyone. They very carefully back up their claims with real data, real facts, and real information. They provide medically reviewed technical papers. They listen to patients and help them find qualified and skillful doctors. For over two years now they have provided an effective medical alternative to traditional TURP surgury. Over 11,000 procedures has proven this alternative to be better than anything else available for relief of BPH symptoms. I went back and reread their website and from personal experience find it factual and not misleading. I would recommend this procedure to my friends, my family member and just about anyone who suffers from BPH. Patrick > Apparently you have never experienced, or forgotten, the tradition of > social-political criticism. This country, the U.S., was founded on that [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > > > > > Marcus I'm not surprised to hear that you know the folks at Laserscope.... the way you wax on and on about it. No doubt, you're probably right about most of what you are saying about their competence I'm certainly not bashing the product or the engineers. It's the promotional integrity of their marketing department that I question, and will continue to, until they represent their technology more realistically. Their website is accurate for some of the people some of the time...probably most of the people, most of the time. But if only 10 or 20% of the recipients of PVP have post surgical problems that last longer than the 1 or 2 weeks they claim, then we're talking about thousands of patients and thousands more to come! If more severe problems cannot be "easily dealt with by their doctor," which seems to apply to more than my own experience, then the promotional department ought to tell it like it is. As it was stated just a few days ago by another contributor to the newsgroup, and I quote: "I'm sure the lawyers have reviewed it so that it is not misleading from a LEGAL standpoint." I don't see why they can't simply state that some patients may take up to 3 months or more to fully recover. The ratio of problems and recovery to the other procedures (TURP, TUIP, whatever) would still support the use of PVP as the preferred surgical treatment. Maybe Laserscope should start thinking beyond their quarterly profit profile. Preparing ALL patients for the REALITY of the surgery is not about money! This promotional chicanery may be common practice in the industry, but frankly, it is medically and morally unacceptable. > Marcus, > [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] > > > > > > > > Marcus > I'm not surprised to hear that you know the folks at Laserscope.... the way > you wax on and on about it. No doubt, you're probably right about most of [quoted text clipped - 121 lines] > > > >Marcus have you stopped to wonder just what state you would be in if you had a regular TURP Because I know way too many people who had that done the week I had PVP ......they are still 7 months later in real problems and one of them was a doctor !!!!!!!!! It makes this list much less useful, potentially excluding important data, if list members tell those who have had bad experiences with PVP to go see a shrink. A hostile atmosphere can only skew this list further in the direction of uncritical endorsement of PVP. Jesse Lemisch > Marcus, > This is a support group and any question is a good question. [quoted text clipped - 235 lines] > > > > > > shame > > > > > > > on them, but shame on you as well for not being more cautious. Hi, I agree that the NG would be much less useful without both sides. I respecfully disagree with Fred where he calls this a support group. Most of the support groups start with ALT.SUPPORT... and certainly not SCI.MED... The SCI.MED hierarchy indicates that the purpose of the NG is for posting all scientific medical information relating to BPH. I am happy to report that after more than four weeks post PVP I do not have retro. My flow is much better and most of the post voiding burning is gone. On the negative side I am getting up every half hour at night. Not getting much sleep. I hope this improves with time. > It makes this list much less useful, potentially excluding important data, > if list members tell those who have had bad experiences with PVP to go see a [quoted text clipped - 262 lines] > > > > > > > shame > > > > > > > > on them, but shame on you as well for not being more cautious. > Hi, I agree that the NG would be much less useful without both sides. I > respecfully disagree with Fred where he calls this a support group. Most of [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > > > > > > NOT > > > > > > agree with you." _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > Well that's obvious. Since "most" others have apparently had the > > > > > successful, [quoted text clipped - 225 lines] > > > >You will find the sleep issue will improve .........its simply a hangover effect from the previous "need" to get up After PVP i suffered it too but after a few weeks decided to force myself not to actually get up .......I stayed in bed and it was not long before the sub conscious mind got the message that i no longer "needed" to get up to void Burr, It never crossed my mind that this is not a support group. Up till now I've posted with the intension of sharing my good experience with PVP and to helping new BPH sufferers to make up their minds about taking action. I was helped this way 1 1/2 years ago when just six men posted about PVP. Their experience was more credible than the Laserscope info. I'm afraid I could not have added any scientific value since my background is not in the medical field. But I hope I helped someone with my posts anyway. I just passed PVP+9 month and all is well with me. I can hold 4 hours and 700 ml. I have no sudden urgency anymore and no retro. I enjoy traveling again and to sit in a window seat in planes. Retirement is good again. Take care Fred Henzi > Hi, I agree that the NG would be much less useful without both sides. I > respecfully disagree with Fred where he calls this a support group. Most of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Burr Fred I have no quarrel with your postings. What ever your results from any procedure in my opinion would be relavent here. I was just pointing out that the hierarchy that the NG falls under makes it not technically a support group. I bilieve that posting the results of PVP proceedures do belong here but they need not be supportive of PVP. I am going on 5 weeks post PVP and am getting up several tines per night, much more than before. On the plus side, though I have had retro ever since I had TUMT, it has been reversed by PVP. Go figure. Respectfully, Burr > Burr, > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > > > Burr > f.. Not having to sit to pee so I can be confident I am hitting the bottom >of the bowl. Now, THAT's the definition of a weak stream. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.