zlacker

>>dale_h+(OP)
I don’t understand why PSA levels aren’t included as part of the standard blood work done with check ups.

>>aantix+CA
My understanding is that it's net negative to test too much.

A lot of men die with prostate cancer, because only very few die from it. And if you belong to the former group, knowing about it or doing any kind of intervention means a massive loss in quality of life. So the best course of action overall is to close our eyes and stop looking. And hope you don't belong to the latter group.

>>henrik+dJ
It does depend a bit what the next step is; you can MRI as the 1st step, and that at least is harmless.

>>trebli+IL
MRI machines need to be a) democratized so they're cheaper and everywhere and b) connected to trustworthy clinically-proven radiological AI to identify and watch growths. There's absolutely no rational reason any patients should end up with surprise terminal cancers or surprise coronary artery disease.

(Yes, yes whole body scans exist but these are largely pseudo-medical scams that don't deliver what they promise. I'm saying deliver on it, within reason.)

>>burnt-+YP
> MRI machines need to be a) democratized so they're cheaper

What does this mean?

>>robert+s02
I'd also like to know how one "democratizes" a multi-million dollar machine that's also extremely expensive to maintain.