Contributors to this thread:
I was diagnosed with prostate cancer 2 weeks ago. 6 of 12 biopsy samples cancerous, all on one side. Gleason score 3 + 4. I'm 58 and a fitness fanatic. I've decided to have the seeds inserted followed by radiation treatments instead of surgery. Anyone have experiences with this? Thanks and God bless! John
Nope, I do have BPH (Enlarged Prostate) and take Tamsulosin (Flowmax) and Finesteride daily so I can piss ... my tests have came back negative for cancer ... when caught early enough, Prostate cancer can be beat ......
I had Prostrate Cancer when I was 53. Of 13 tissue samples 10 were good 2 were bad 1 inconclusive. I decided to have mine removed instead of radiation treatments. Was informed radiation elevates risk of bladder cancer. Just had my 6 yr checkup my PSA checked <0.01. Good luck to you.
Best of luck, Jasper. Hoping for a good and speedy return to full speed.
I too was diagnosed with prostate cancer almost two years ago, I'm almost 57. I had the seeds implanted and my PSA level went from 3.6 to 0.7. Just a few minor inconveniences and a blood test every 3 months.
I was diagnosed with PC at the age of 45.
After much consideration and guidance, I opted for the radical prostatectomy, primarily because of my young age at the time and the possible future complications related to the other options. No problems since.
Take care and if you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. If I can help in any way, I surely will.
Good luck with it. My dad is going through this right now... hard "decisions". Keep strong!
In 2008, at 56 I was diagnosed with Prostate cancer. I opted to have it removed. They did it arthorscopicly (sp). Everything intact, and cancer gone. My PSA since then have been .ooo1. Very slow moving cancer, and very survivable. As with most, early detection is key. Good luck.
"seeds" are radiation so to speak, implanted within the Prostate
They are radioactive "seeds" Pat. (brachytherapy)
The seeds are implanted in the prostate near the cancerous growth and the radiation emitted from them kills the cancer.
Not all PC patients are candidates for seed therapy.
I had 67 seeds implanted. I felt this was the best choice for me. I didn't want to do external radiation (5 days a week for 5-8 weeks) or the radical prostatectomy, the possible after effects scared me on that.
There is also the option of freezing the growth as well.
There is also the Cyberknife, its send a very high dose of external radiation to the prostate so you only need to do 5 treatments.
There are so many successful alternative cancer therapies available that people are really making a mistake to automatically jump on the radiation/chemotherapy train. Take the time to research them. Prostate cancer is very slow growing, you may have the time to do this better and save yourself from the ravages of the side effects of some of the medical treatments.
Read "Outsmart your Cancer" by Pierce and also look closely at the Ketogenic diet. Take the time.
As with many things, be VERY careful when it comes to taking advice from people on the internet, especially when it comes to matters of life and death. In a nutshell, don't do it. Your life could depend on it.
Prostate cancers are NOT all the same. Some are slow growing and best treated in certain ways, some are aggressive and best treated in other ways, and there are pretty reliable ways to differentiate between the two.
While it can be informative to elicit other's actual experiences with different treatment options, nobody knows your situation better than your physician, and therefore any decisions made about your specific course of treatment should be make accordingly.
Thanks guys for all the advice and encouragement! I've read several books and done lots of research on this. I had a second opinion this morning and feel good about my brachytherapy decision. Doc said I could even schedule my surgery for late July so I don't have to change vacation plans. Looks like I'll have a normal summer and be done with my 8 weeks of radiation by October so that means good to go for deer season! In spite of my predicament I feel very blessed! God bless y'all! John
Jasper, or others please chyme in, did you have prostrate symptoms and if so what were they or did you go in for a routine physical and caught it that way?
Mine was caught due to my family doctor's concern with my Father also having prostate cancer. I had no symptoms what soever.
Zero symptoms for me. Mine was caught do to a rise in PSA level from one annual physical to another.
No symptoms, discovered when my PSA was high during my annual physical. Referred to a urologist who drew blood for a Prostate Health Index (PHI) test that came back indicating I had a 50% chance of cancer. He then did a biopsy that confirmed it
Thanks for all the thoughts and prayers!
Just so you know Jasper, if you are thinking about milking this for some kind of special treatment, good luck.
Whenever, my family want's me to do something I don't want to do, I often respond with "Hey, I'm a cancer survivor you know..."
To which they basically respond with the equivalent of "BFD."
K Cummings's Link
PC is like most other kinds of cancers. It can be generalized in talk but, there often are very specific types of it. Each one will have a best course. Each one will have its own attributes that outline the best approach.
I do agree with Spike in that diet is very important in this. Cancer has to have fuel. Cancer loves sugar. A good diet not only will help your risks factors, it can substantially inhibit growth rates.
It is a complex thing that deserves a multifaceted plan and course of actions for prevention, for cure, and to minimize future reoccurrence.
Cancer loves sugar. A good diet not only will help your risks factors, it can substantially inhibit growth rates.
WVM: According to the Mayo Clinic (among many other reputable sources) the notion that sugar feeds cancer any more than it feeds every other cell in the human body is a myth. ALL cells need sugar (glucose), without it, we would die.
From the attached link:
"Myth: People with cancer shouldn't eat sugar, since it can cause cancer to grow faster.
Fact: Sugar doesn't make cancer grow faster. All cells, including cancer cells, depend on blood sugar (glucose) for energy. But giving more sugar to cancer cells doesn't speed their growth. Likewise, depriving cancer cells of sugar doesn't slow their growth."
KC, I'll give the ole cancer survivor trick a shot, maybe I'll get a little lucky until they catch on ??
If I remember correctly, I was able to milk if for a couple months.
Remember though, I had a radical prostatectomy (non-laparoscopic) so I had a rather ugly abdominal scar that took a while to heal. That in itself was good for a month or so.
I'm guessing that if you get the seeds, you MIGHT get a couple weeks of pity, but that about it.
In all seriousness, any cancer diagnosis is scary, but caught early, prostate cancer has one of the highest cure rates. Listen to your doctor and live a long healthy life.
KPC, according to the oncologists that treated me, cancer loves sugar because it metabolizes it 30% faster then a normal human cell. So, his first advice to me was eat a low sugar diet. Which I had been doing my whole life.
Ever had a PET scan? What glows on the scan is cells processing sugar. The lead up liquid you drink one hour before the test is composed of a lot of sugar. Since, I have seen those glowing dots on a screen, had my doctor tell me that what it was, and inform me the reason they used a sugar based drink was to stimulate active cancer cells, I'll concede his advice over the internet's. Not being a wise cracker either
God bless men
"Ever had a PET scan? What glows on the scan is cells processing sugar. The lead up liquid you drink one hour before the test is composed of a lot of sugar. Since, I have seen those glowing dots on a screen, had my doctor tell me that what it was, and inform me the reason they used a sugar based drink was to stimulate active cancer cells, I'll concede his advice over the internet's."
Also from the Mayo Clinic:
"This misconception may be based in part on a misunderstanding of positron emission tomography (PET) scans, which use a small amount of radioactive tracer — typically a form of glucose. All tissues in your body absorb some of this tracer, but tissues that are using more energy — including cancer cells — absorb greater amounts. For this reason, some people have concluded that cancer cells grow faster on sugar. But this isn't true.
When the Mayo clinic, or any other medical facility, can CURE cancer, (not just manage it for life at a considerable cost), without side effects which are often as bad or even worse than the cancer, then I will take their word as gospel. Until then, spending a couple minutes a day reading and researching other people's experiences with alternative treatments for 5-6 weeks while waiting for a procedure sounds like a good idea to me.
K Cummings's Link
Some kinds of prostate cancer are very aggressive ! My dad had his yearly check up and 3 months later had back pains , went back to doctor and found he now had prostate cancer and died a year and a half later .
From Johns Hopkins:
The Hoax: Cancers Feed on Certain Foods
The Truth: The premise is that cancer cells feed on certain foods, and if a person refrains from eating these foods, the cancer will die. According to our experts, a poor diet and obesity associated with a poor diet is a risk factor for the development of cancer. However, there is no evidence that certain foods alter the environment of an existing cancer, at the cellular level, and cause it to either die or grow.
"Fact: Sugar doesn't make cancer grow faster. All cells, including cancer cells, depend on blood sugar (glucose) for energy. But giving more sugar to cancer cells doesn't speed their growth. Likewise, depriving cancer cells of sugar doesn't slow their growth."
-Respectfully, this is only half true. Cells can also run off ketone bodies. No cell "depends" on glucose for energy, well, perhaps, cancer cells. In fact there is quite a bit of research that concludes the body runs better off ketones - particularly the brain, without all the detrimental side effects of insulin disregulation.
To me, the primary concern is not whether cancer cells grow on glucose (proven) but if they can exist at all on ketones. I've seen contradictory research but, given we KNOW a high carb diet is bad, if I had a diagnosis of cancer and was eating the SAD, the first thing I would do is jettison that lifestyle for a ketogenic diet. The actual myth is that we require glucose for cellular energy. The truth is there is ZERO daily requirement for carbohydrates.
Talking about diet and cancer, there is a lot of interesting information out there. The biggest problem acknowledging that diet is able to address some of the cancers is that there is no money to be made from it. It is a rather simple concept, build your immunity to fight it rather than attacking your immunity.
After losing 3 of our 4 parents to cancer in 3 years my wife and I decided that there had to be a better way to a healthier lifestyle. Sugars, much like fats are needed by the body. However, there is a huge difference in how your body handles refined sugars compared to natural non-refined Sugars. Good luck
Agreed on the monetary disincentive, sureshot. But, if we are talking about exogenous sugars (of any type) there no daily requirement for it. And that makes sense if you consider the food sources available when we were developing our DNA. Highly fibrous vegetation and tubers -both seasonal. What we had and what we ate the vast majority of the times were animals and insects. Fruits were only available during seasons of increased adiposity. That is, late summer and fall were the times our ancestors had to put on fat to make it through winter. Think about that, we are genetically designed to put on fat in the presence of glucose... Now, given obesity is a marker for so many illnesses, I believe that knocks sugar out of the typical daily protocols.
Humans have been developing for over 2 million years, agriculture has been around for 10-12,000 years. What do you think we are best suited to eat? A fat and fiber diet (including proteins) or grain based, massively glucose biased diet? We are eating ourselves into innumerable diseases. JMHO.
Kevin, call the Masonic Medical Center in Chicago Illinois, ask for Doctor Mebea Aklilu and, play your dumb game's with him. I'm sure your internet stuff will out weigh his advice and information.
What “dumb game” is that WVM?
Having an opinion that differs from yours?
All I did was post the opinions of two respected sources. Is that not allowed?
Kevin, you are allowed to do anything you want. Just Like I am allowed to say what I see. This is the normal course of action for you. So, I'm telling you to take it up with the man that told me that because I was simply passing on the info.
“I was simply passing on the info”
So was I.
A tablespoon or two daily of unprocessed cider vinegar is supposed be good for your body WRT cancer. I have heard and read several times by nutritionists the best diet over the long haul is one that includes all the food groups and colors in moderation. By colors that would be red, green, yellow fruits and veggies.
Since I finished chemo and radiation 5 years ago, I take daily 1 potassium pill, 1 magnesium pill, (both of those for muscle cramps) 1 baby aspirin (to keep the blood viscosity low to aid in preventing clots) and 1 Centron geezer vitamin to make up for what my diet misses and aloepurenol for gout as needed. Everyone's cancer case is different and everyone will come out of it differently. It took a while for the body to stabilize after treatment but those pills seem to have me dialed in for now.
My understanding is that cancers do not do well in a basic system, ie, higher PH body. Conversely, higher acidic bodies are a more comfortable environment for cancers. Does anyone know about this?