EDITOR – I have been reading the sad story of Robin Stransham-Ford regarding prostate cancer and could not help but reflect on my own personal experiences.
I would have liked to know if Robin had his regular check-ups from age 40 years onwards as recommended by the medical fraternity for all males to do.
Common checks that were recommended were PSA, cholesterol, glucose, kidney, and so on and to be repeated annually unless changes occurred that were obvious signs of illness related to the aforementioned checks so that the necessary treatment could be diagnosed timeously. In and around my area, I have seen many fatalities of friends relating specially to prostate cancer and have chatted to some of these guys on why they were not on any medication at an earlier stage.
The common reply was an aversion to the prostate examination which is seen to be quite invasive. I had a buddy whose PSA reading was 119,9 when he went for a first time check at age 65, as opposed to a PSA reading under five. He passed a month later as the cancer had already entered his bone marrow, causing severe pain. Surely he must have had symptoms and pain at an earlier stage? Most men in their 60’s that I know have never been for a check-up in that area and still refuse to do so.
My check-up for last year was quite funny actually. Previously I simply went to my local medical centre to get the form for the pathologist from any of the available doctors on duty that day, without having to first make an appointment, and would then take a copy of the results to my regular GP to file. But last year I asked my regular GP for the full test and the pathologist form. I was told in no uncertain terms that the woman GP would not do such a test and that I would have to go to an urologist recommended by her. I was always under the impression that the procedure was simply carried out by all GPs as normal procedure. One such GP informed me that the PSA blood test was all any male required, as it would reveal everything.
Seeing I was going to a specialist I requested a full check-up that included a bladder (cyscoptomy), finger (prostate) urine strength/count and quantity passed and so on. I got an all clear and a report on my chest after theatre to place in my file.
Shouldn’t all men of 40 plus have these done annually?
I read an article in a local paper written by a doctor from the Chatsworth area, saying all men from age 40 should have these tests done and it should always include the finger test as a prostate could be enlarged causing obvious discomfort through pressure on the bladder, causing more frequent than normal visits to the toilet, an obvious sign of an enlarged prostate but not necessary malignant (which the PSA reading would normally reveal).
A finger test could reveal signs on the surface of the gland that may require a sample taken to test for cancer even if the gland wasn’t enlarged. Come on all you ballies out there – you owe it to your grandchildren.
Please respond if I’m wrong or mis-informed on this topic. I wonder when Robin went for his first check-up.
CHRIS DE JAGER
