 |
 | 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 / September 2004Meeting of the Minds?
Hey guys, You know it is possible to be a supporter of PVP/Laserscope and still be critical of their marketing process and other issues around their presentation. One does not exclude the other. Marcus Marcus, Given that I believe that the Laserscope PVP is the first things to come around to effectively and completely treat my severe BPH, I believe that Laserscope should do much MORE advertizing of the value of having PVPs earlier, when BPH symptoms get bothersome, well before severe. I also think that they should continue use their website to educate, as they have done the past 3 years. Patrick > Hey guys, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Marcus You are correct but I think your posts indicate a level of animosity towards Laserscope that would make any reader assume you are as down on the process as you are on the company's marketing. I can't recall you writing anything positive about the PVP procedure or outcome. > Hey guys, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Marcus Actually I have tried to make it clear that the process (i.e.: the surgery) is not the problem. It has helped me with my retention to some degree, however it has hardly effected the night-time visits to the ol' latrine, which remain troublesome.....especially in the wee hours of the morning. I am not trying to discourage anyone from getting PVP. It is Laserscope's intentional downplaying of the post surgical problems and length of recovery that I find unacceptable. Admittedly this may effect a minority of patients, but it is a SIGNIFICANT MINORITY. I understand the 'business of business' argument but I don't believe it is a valid justification for not giving UPFRONT FULL DISCLOSURE about the possible post-surgical issues for the minority...(if indeed, we are a minority) of patients who suffer extensive recovery problems. I hope this clears it up for those on this NG who think I'm trashing the technology or the advisability of PVP surgery. Marcus > You are correct but I think your posts indicate a level of animosity towards > Laserscope that would make any reader assume you are as down on the process [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > > > Marcus Marcus, a meeting of our minds? Not likely, for several reasons. First your continuing over the top fixation on Laserscope's advertising far outweights any positive views you may have on the effectiveness of the procedure. My perception is that you are very anti Laserscope and I suspect that is the reality for most who read your posts. You indicated there should be no medical marketing on the Net. Well how about on TV, radio, magazines, newspapers, etc? Would you ban that also? The internet is perhaps the most important diseminator of information since the Gutenberg Press. You want the net stifiled? Are you going to claim that current regs on med advertising don't cover the web? You indicated that "Using the Men's Health Network as a cover for their advertising really is the epitome of arrogance. Laserscope has stooped to new lows." I'm very pleased that Laserscope did it and hope this is only the start of their efforts aimed at the consuming public. PVP is a great procedure which can help lots on men. I suspect Laserscope's initial efforts were to get the equipment placed and Docs trained. Now is the time to let the public know. Lets see more advertising! You castigate Laserscope's website and advertising. But can you name another medical product/procedure site which includes peer reviewed literature for their product? You once mentioned other significant health issues when you had your PVP. What bearing might those other issues have on your PVP outcomes? Your PVP doc apparently didn't mention a recovery period. Did you ask? When you did have problems, another doc told you there could be a three month recovery period. You blame Laserscope for this situation? I don't believe in a caveat emptor approach to health care. But people need to do their own due diligence. Yes that means digging for all the information you can because afterall, it is your health. Its unfortunate you had problems after your PVP. But using Laserscope as the focus of your bitterness is misguided. No, I don't think we have a meeting of the minds. > Hey guys, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Marcus Wow........You know sometimes I feel like I am dealing with devotees of the Church of Laserscope! At least the medical marketing on TV, radio etc. is REGULATED. "The Internet is perhaps the most important disseminator of information since the Gutenberg Press." Yes, and unfortunately it is also a breeding ground for all kinds of outrageous and misleading solicitations. Maybe that will change. But now it's like the wild west. Anyone can try to sell anything to anybody and make all kinds of claims in the process. "Lets see more advertising!".........Right.....let's see more honest advertising. I think Mel and Lee would agree that there should be a disclaimer or a reference to Laserscope's use of the MHN. Yes! I blame Laserscope for their casual presumptuousness. If they're going to market on the net then they damn well better discuss as wide a spectrum of patients, their problems, and potential outcomes as possible. Their hunky-dory scenarios..."a week or two recovery" and so forth, is simply a self-serving hype that does not reflect the reality for many patients....even those without serious medical complications. Check out the posts on this newsgroup for the last 9 months. I have a collection of patients writing about weeks, months or more of post-surgical problems or disappointing results. Yeah, of course, do your homework. We're all responsible for our health But that due diligence includes lobbying for more ethical advertising. I'm not really bitter at this point. Just disgusted that I have to continually defend a basic principle of American life. The freedom to present a different perspective in the hope of bettering the quality of communication and defend one's right to disagree. Frankly I'm getting tired of the whole crusade......on both sides. M > Marcus, a meeting of our minds? Not likely, for several reasons. > [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > > > > Marcus > I'm not really bitter at this point. Just disgusted that I have to > continually defend a basic principle of American life. The freedom to > present a different perspective in the hope of bettering the quality of > communication and defend one's right to disagree. Frankly I'm getting tired > of the whole crusade......on both sides. Yet you sound bitter. But no one is challenging your freedom to present anything, although we may share your fatigue of the crusade ;-) Jim W. Do you actually think Laserscope rewrites their print advertising for internet use because they can make any claim they want in a net ad? Are you saying Laserscope can say whatever they want just because its a net ad? When you stop making dumb inaccurate statements I'll stop responding. > Wow........You know sometimes I feel like I am dealing with devotees of the > Church of Laserscope! [quoted text clipped - 89 lines] > > > > > > Marcus No.....not any claim.......just convenient ommissions........partial truths Apparently you are unable to distinguish between draconian, blatant prevarications and subtle marketing techniques. > Do you actually think Laserscope rewrites their print advertising for > internet use because they can make any claim they want in a net ad? Are [quoted text clipped - 108 lines] > > > > > > > > Marcus Marcus, Please go over the Laserscope material that is in the Men's Health Network and tell us about the "convenient ommissions........partial truths" that you are talking about in this material. Patrick > No.....not any claim.......just convenient ommissions........partial > truths [quoted text clipped - 131 lines] >> > > > >> > > > Marcus Nothing will convince you (Patrick) of the slightest culpability on the part of Laserscope. So let's just forget it. > Marcus, > Please go over the Laserscope material that is in the Men's Health Network [quoted text clipped - 138 lines] > >> > > > > >> > > > Marcus Marcus, Patrick said that he could ask Laserscope if a statement that I've been saying that Laserscope made the summer of 2003 is true. I wonder if its going to be "CONVENIENT" for him to forget about the statement he made!!!!! Laserscope said in this statement that you will be able to sleep threw the night in six weeks. Dean, " Statement made in reply I must have jinxed 9-11-04 11.57 PM" > Nothing will convince you (Patrick) of the slightest culpability on the part > of Laserscope. So let's just forget it. [quoted text clipped - 159 lines] > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Marcus Dean, I will send email asking them about that statement. When I get a response I will post it. Patrick > Marcus, > Patrick said that he could ask Laserscope if a statement that [quoted text clipped - 202 lines] >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > Marcus Thanks Patrick, however if you can get a reply to a question from them it is more than I ever could do. I think you know them a lot better than I do so maybe you can but then again they may not want to answer because it is definitely true and I'm not going to say anything more about this particular subject its dead as far as I'm concerned and is not prevalent to what this news group should be about. Respectfully Dean, > Dean, > I will send email asking them about that statement. When I get a response I [quoted text clipped - 207 lines] > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > Marcus Dean, They have always answered my inquiries quickly, accurately, and honestly in the past. I expect no difference now. Patrick > Thanks Patrick, however if you can get a reply to a question from them it > is [quoted text clipped - 251 lines] >> >> > >> > > > >> >> > >> > > > Marcus Dean, I talked with Laserscope today and asked them specifically about their claims on their website about PVP recovery times and experiences. Here what they said to me: Their website has been evolving the past 3 years and continues to evolve as new factual information is gathered. Yes their claims in their website have softened since last year for the following reasons. In the years 2001 and 2002, their website was mostly informational based on the physics of their new device and the very limited clinical trials that they had at that time. Note that in this time period they had data on fewer than 50 cases and that was with the 60W non-commercial laserscope device. In 2003, (during the time you and Marcus was going to their website for information), the information for the website was based almost entirely on the experience of the 146 men in the six center trial. This was presented at the AUA meeting in 2003. These 146 men (which I am one of) as a group: 1. Had severe BPH symptoms. 2. Had fully functioning bladders based on urodynamic testing. 3. Were in relatively good health otherwise. 4. Had PVPs by world renowned laser surgeons (Dr. Te, Mallory, etc) at world class hospitals (NY Pres, Mayo, Uni of Penn.) As you know the results of this trial was outstanding for all of the 146 men. All of them had complete recoveries in six weeks. They are still being tracked and after 2 to 3 years they are doing well as a group. None of them experience any of the recovery issues that you and Marcus describe. From 2003 to 2004, the Laserscope website claims were based entirely on the collective experience of these 146 men. By the middle of 2004, when the results of the more than 33,000 PVP done worldwide were studied, as can be expected, a wider range of recovery experiences were recorded. The results of the 146 men in the trial remains "typical" of what the 33,000 men have experienced. But there have been some men who haven't recovered as fast or as well as the vast majority. Looking at the experience of this much larger sample size 33,000 several things standout. 1. A person's overall health going into a PVP matters. It is surgury and a fit, healty person will recover better and faster than a person with health complications. In general a younger person will recover faster and better than an older person. 2. The skill of the surguoen DOES matter. There are PVP surgeons that consistantly have better results than other PVP surgeons. 3. The condition of the Bladder prior to PVP given a good idea what the results will be. That is why urodymanic testing prior to a PVP is so important. If the bladder is damaged before a PVP, it will not heal once the blockage is opened. However, if the bladder is still strong the PVP results and recovery will be very good (with a good surgoen and good overall health). In summary, Laserscope is still very open, honest and frank about their claims about the value of PVP. They work hard to provide the latest and best information available to give men suffering with BPH a chance at improved quality of life. Not everybody will have results like mine but most will. PVP is by far a better option than either a TURP or doing nothing. Patrick > Dean, > I will send email asking them about that statement. When I get a response [quoted text clipped - 216 lines] >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > Marcus Patrick - Thanks for your efforts and a great posting. > Dean, > I talked with Laserscope today and asked them specifically about their [quoted text clipped - 282 lines] > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > Marcus Basing a marketing campaign on 146 subjects, carefully screened for likely, successful results is just another example of Laserscope's irresponsibility to the larger population of potential patients. Had they specified on their Web-Site back in 2003 that the pool of patients were selected for their likelihood of complete success, then I would consider that a reasonable caveat. But they ignored that, preferring to promote only the sunny side of surgery. As much as I'd like to stay back on this "netalogue," as long as people post unbridled advocacy of Laserscope's questionable medical ethics, I will continue to respond with a more critical look at their modus operandi. The latest outrage, involving the Men's Health Network, is just another example of what I'm talking about. Marcus > Dean, > I talked with Laserscope today and asked them specifically about their [quoted text clipped - 282 lines] > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > Marcus Marcus, Let me make it clear, the 146 men were not "carefully selected" by Laserscope. The criteria to be in the multi-center 80watt PVP study were: 1. severe BPH - AUA symptom score >15-20 2. no PaC (low PSA or negative biopsy) 3. Confirmed Bladder Outlet Obstruction (BOO) 4. Fully functioning bladder 5. healthy otherwise 6. patient of one of the six doctors in the trial If you met these criteria, you were in the trial, if not you were not. Realize the trial was to show the effectiveness of the PVP, not to show that it can fix every prostate problem in the world! Patrick > Basing a marketing campaign on 146 subjects, carefully screened for > likely, [quoted text clipped - 358 lines] >> >>> > >> > > > >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus My surgeon suggests otherwise. Anyway, I don't see how a "fully functioning bladder" is not a carefully selected criteria.......considering that many men who have BPH over a number of years may not have 'fully functioning bladders.' This is one of my major issues with their presentation. Men who choose prostate surgery are obviously hoping to dramatically reduce retention and nighttime need to void. Once again, no discussion, even now, on the Laserscope site about the fact that previous bladder damage will not be corrected with PVP, and that such expectations may be premature, at best. This ommission is an obvious marketing ploy and doesn't hold up to any standard of full disclosure, nor the best interest of the patient. Marcus > Marcus, > Let me make it clear, the 146 men were not "carefully selected" by [quoted text clipped - 377 lines] > >> >>> > >> > > > > >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus Marcus, If you don't have a fully functioning bladder, you should not have a PVP, or a TURP or anything else. You need to be cathertized. No doctor in his right mine would preform prostate surgury. Patrick > My surgeon suggests otherwise. > [quoted text clipped - 447 lines] >> >> >>> > >> > > > >> >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus If a bladder has been stretched by years of BPH and is retaining too much urine, is that a 'fully functioning bladder'? Just curious. Marcus > Marcus, > If you don't have a fully functioning bladder, you should not have a PVP, or [quoted text clipped - 453 lines] > >> >> >>> > >> > > > > >> >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus Depends on the results of the urodynamic test. If the bladder still produces high pressure while contracting then it is still "fully functional". If the bladder no longer produces high pressure or no longer tightly contracts, well then it is not fully functional and opening the blockage by way of a TURP or PVP won't do much good. Silent bladder damage caused by years of blockage due to an enlarged prostate will eventually become irreversible. That is why waiting and taking medications to relieve the symptoms may not be most prudent course of action. As soon as BPH symptoms become bothersome, time to remove the blockage before permanent bladder damage. Patrick > If a bladder has been stretched by years of BPH and is retaining too much > urine, is that a 'fully functioning bladder'? [quoted text clipped - 519 lines] >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus > If the bladder still produces high pressure while contracting then it is > still "fully functional". If the bladder no longer produces high pressure > or no longer tightly contracts, well then it is not fully functional and > opening the blockage by way of a TURP or PVP won't do much good. Patrick does that mean you wouldn't get any flow rate improvement even if a much better channel was provided or that the flow rate improvement wouldn't translate into improved bladder tonality? Jim W. Jim, To get better flow rate, the channel has to be wide and open. However, contraction of the bladder that produces a high pressure stream is still necessary after the channel is open. Both are needed, i..e. a contracting bladder producing downward pressure and an open channel through the prostate. Patrick >> If the bladder still produces high pressure while contracting then it is >> still "fully functional". If the bladder no longer produces high [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > wouldn't > translate into improved bladder tonality? Jim W. Again, Patrick, my PVP doc is not advocating that. I think if retention is not a problem, then you have time. Mel > Depends on the results of the urodynamic test. > [quoted text clipped - 559 lines] >>> >> >> >>> > >> > > > >>> >> >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus Did you have a urodynamic test before your PVP? What were the results? Was your bladder contracting and producing high downward pressure that was blocked by an enlarged prostrate? Patrick > If a bladder has been stretched by years of BPH and is retaining too much > urine, is that a 'fully functioning bladder'? [quoted text clipped - 519 lines] >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus Well you asked Marcus but I'm going to answer for me. Dr. Te said he was a little confounded by the results of my urodynamics test. He said he wasn't sure there was enough muscle in my bladder to get symptom relief from a PVP but he wanted to do the cystoscopy and sonar tests anyway. After those test showing a moderate sized prostate and median lobe protrusion into the bladder he did recommend a PVP - which I had about 9 weeks ago. At my 2 week post-PVP checkup he was very pleased with the flow rate and "cautiously optimistic" that I would experience bladder symptom improvement by the 3rd or 4th month and if not we could try one of the desensitizing medications (Ditropan?). So far I've experienced moderate improvement in frequency, urgency, and capacity so I'm very hopeful but do you think damaged bladders can still be candidates for PVP for the possibility of a better channel providing benefits in the area of drug usage ( i.e. no more Flomax, possibility of Ditropan, freedom to now use decongestants, antihistamines and other previously forbidden drugs)? Jim W. > Did you have a urodynamic test before your PVP? > What were the results? Was your bladder contracting and producing high [quoted text clipped - 525 lines] > >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > > >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus Jim, I really don't know but if Dr. Te did all the necessary tests and said that PVP might help, I think it is worth a try. I was responding to Marcus, who's doctor apparently didn't do the necessary pre-PVP tests to determine how badly damaged his bladder was. Now the guy is blaming the laser manufacturer for not telling him that his bladder was damaged and couldn't be helpped by a PVP. Patrick > Well you asked Marcus but I'm going to answer for me. Dr. Te said he was > a [quoted text clipped - 622 lines] >> >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus Dude, Don't put words in my mouth, please! If you've read my posts I explicitly said that I was helped SOMEWHAT by the PVP surgery. Now please read carefully: If I had been more explicitly informed about the bladder issue, I would have been prepared for a less than dramatic recovery. Neither my doctor or Laserscope made a point of it explaining it. Had Laserscope specified the importance of understanding the signs of bladder retention, I would have gotten myself to the emergency room 4 or 5 hours earlier than I did the day after surgery and may have avoided additional bladder damage. As it was, never having experienced prostae surgery, I figured it was normal to have difficulty urinating at that point. I can't imagine being in retention for 8 hours can do anything but harm a bladder already compromised BPH. There was nothing, but perhaps a casual mention by my doctor of bladder retention as a possibility after surgery. Nothing in writing form the Laserscope, the surgeon or the hospital. At least their updated website warns of retention and suggests one get their butt to the ER within 4 hours of its onset. (I suspect my experience had something to do with that.) But there was nothing about it on the Laserscope site back in November of 2003. Another half-hour more of that excruciating pain and I could have burst the bladder. Maybe you can now better understand why I am so insistent on erring on the side of caution, instead of profits! Sorry to wring the ol' rag but that information should have been outfront, in plain written English, right from the get go! Marcus > Jim, > I really don't know but if Dr. Te did all the necessary tests and said that [quoted text clipped - 633 lines] > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus It sounds like your doctor didn't explain to you the possible complications of prostate surgury. He doesn't sound to me like he was very thorough in his communications with you before surgury. Did you have any contact with Laserscope before your surgury to ask them what to expect? Didn't the doctor and the hospital give you all those papers to sign that listed all the possible complications of surgury? It sounds like your the kind of guy that doesn't do thorough investigation until after the fact and then complains that he was mislead by a laser manufacturer. Patrick > Dude, > [quoted text clipped - 749 lines] >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus Actually I am quite steadfast and thorough concerning my own medical care. A lot more thorough than Lasrscope or the surgeon was in preparing me for the side effects. Of course you sign all the usual hoopla absolving everyone of all responsibilty etc., etc. Frankly, I must admit, EVERYONE seemed swooped up in all the over-optimistic energy around the procedure...."the new gold standard" and all that ballyhoo. Hey, don't misunderstand. The world is a better place because of PVP. It would be even better if information was presented more responsibly. Live and Learn. Marcus I generally don't take anything for granted. But in this case there was a presumptive carelessness on the part of Laserscope (and my surgeon). After all, they had a limited number of patients to gather information from. All they had to do is warn me specifically, preferrably in writing, about what to be wary of. What was I to do? Call the company and ask for more information Of course you sign all the usual hoopla absolving everyone of all responsibilty etc. > It sounds like your doctor didn't explain to you the possible complications > of prostate surgury. He doesn't sound to me like he was very thorough in [quoted text clipped - 762 lines] > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > > >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus Of course people on this newsgroup were optimistic about Laserscope PVP. The initial experiences were great. It was quickly recognized here that it was the best thing to come around for the treatment of BPH in many years. Btw. I got an email from AARP magazine. They are doing an article on the non-cancerous prostate problems, i.e. BPH and prostatitis. They asked if I would give them an interview on the results of the new "greenlight" laser. I said okay, and they called and I told them that the "greenlight" laser help me a lot and that it had essentially relieved all my BPH and prostatitis symptoms which I had for 17 years and were quite severe. I told them that I got immediate flow improvement and I was jogging a week after surgury. I said that the improvements continue to this day nearly 2.5 years after the procedure. Maybe you can call them and give them your story. Patrick > Actually I am quite steadfast and thorough concerning my own medical care. > A [quoted text clipped - 876 lines] >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus Thanks Patrick, I will reply back as soon as I can, I just got out of the hospital with some heart surgery and after the surgery my urinary track was shutdown for awhile, which was relieved by Hytrin, I will write about this as soon as I can this scenario might be of great interest to the group. Thanks Patrick, I will answer your post to. Dean, > Dean, > I talked with Laserscope today and asked them specifically about their [quoted text clipped - 282 lines] > >>> > >> > > > > >>> > >> > > > Marcus Dean, Take care of yourself. Hope all goes well. Patrick > Thanks Patrick, > I will reply back as soon as I can, I just got out of the hospital with [quoted text clipped - 344 lines] >> >>> > >> > > > >> >>> > >> > > > Marcus Dean, I had spinal surgery for sciatica Tues afternoon, and came home from hospital Fri afternoon. Had weak stream with long pauses in between, thinking I was finished before it would start again and again. This slowly improved on the third & fourth day, but is still (today Sunday) not what it was pre-op. Particularly, the end of the stream is slow and then a slow drip. The anesthesiology assistant said that it couldn't be from the anesthetic. The surgeon said that it couldn't be from the surgery. After two PVP's, and paying the price of retrograde ejaculation, I want my good flow back. Dean, Which part of the operation do you think caused your "shutdown". Ron > From: "Dean" <deanper@allvantage.com> > Reply-To: "Dean" <deanper@allvantage.com> [quoted text clipped - 333 lines] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Marcus Hi Ron, In trying to answer your question. They told me the anesthetic caused it however I think the root cause is still the enlarged prostate. I've had one PVP about a year ago which I'm still trying to get over. This time I was in for a heart pacemaker and cardioversion, which was successful.I'm hoping Ron that your retro grade will get better eventually, mine has improved and from what I hear if there is improvement it will cure itself over time but don't know for sure if this is true, it is encouraging though best of luck to you and good health. Dean, > Dean, > I had spinal surgery for sciatica Tues afternoon, and came home from [quoted text clipped - 346 lines] > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Marcus Dean, We're glad that your operation was a success. What is a cardioversion? My flow has improved in the last 3 or 4 days, but still not as good as before the back surgery last Tuesday. Ejaculate, post 2nd PVP (last December) is still zero, & quality of orgasm is considerably diminished. I thought we could get some more details of your situation. Wishes to you for a quick healing, Ron > From: "Dean" <deanper@allvantage.com> > Reply-To: "Dean" <deanper@allvantage.com> [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > as I >>> can this scenario might be of great interest to the group. Ron, There is two kinds of conversion for a heart that is out of rhythm due to atrial fibrillation, one is chemical and the other is electro conversion where they try and shock your heart back into rhythm. They shocked me three times and it didn't convert it back to a normal sinus rhythm but they have since done it with a drug called "Betapace" Before PVP I had three episodes of total shutdown requiring a catheter which they assured me that PVP would take care of that. After the heart surgery it seemed as if it was the same old scenario all over again I got up numerous times trying to urinate with no success just a couple of drops ,finally in desperation I asked for a 5 mg Hytrin and told them if that didn't work I wanted to be catherized after about an hour I was able to urinate , what a wonderful thing that was. I had already forgot about the pacemaker that had just been installed to much agony in the urinary track but I'm like you I still don't have the good stream I had before , hopefully it will get better, hope yours gets back to where it was before or even better. Dean, > Dean, > We're glad that your operation was a success. What is a cardioversion? My [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > as I > >>> can this scenario might be of great interest to the group. Ron, If your DHT is above the maximum range, it stands to reason that if your meds for DHT was insufficient and if the rest of the hormone blood work did not reveal your alternate causes of the extra-ordinarily high DHT, the prostate would likely keep on growing...and on and on...(But, I'm not a medical doctor...just common sense tells me that.) What did your uro say about all your blood work DHT, Estradiol, DHEA, SBHG, Cortisol, etc. And if he didn't do the blood work or couldn't answer your questions, you likely went to see an endocrinologist so are likely following the regimen laid out by the endo? (I'm not a doctor.) But those are key issues/questions, in my non-medical opinion. Wishing you the best of luck. > Dean, > I had spinal surgery for sciatica Tues afternoon, and came home from [quoted text clipped - 359 lines] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Marcus Dean, That is just one of several overly optimistic statements that they have made....as well as no mention (as of November '03) of urinary retention as a possible consequence of the surgery. But I agree, there's no point in going on and on about it. Good Luck to all BPH patients, Marcus > Marcus, > Patrick said that he could ask Laserscope if a statement that [quoted text clipped - 189 lines] > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Marcus |
Reply to this Message
Signature |
 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.