Prostate cancer detection and treatment remain very controversial subjects. However, there are two earth-shattering books packed with facts that will empower you so you don’t become another sorry statistic injured during the prostate cancer testing and treatment journey.
“The Rise and Fall of the Prostate Cancer Scam” by Anthony H. Horan MD. This book is a revision of previous edits that went by different titles, i.e. “The Big Scare – the Business of Prostate Cancer” and, “How to Avoid the Overdiagnosis and Overtreatment of Prostate Cancer.”
And,
“The Great Prostate Hoax” by Richard J. Ablin Ph.D. and Ron Piana. St. Martin’s Press. (2014)
Dr. H. Horan (recently deceased) was a urologist working on the front lines of prostate cancer management. It didn’t take him long after starting practice to realize that the prevailing so-called standard-of-care dogma about prostate cancer testing and treatment was at great odds with the clinical evidence before him. Eventually, he felt compelled to write a book detailing the many misrepresentations and fabrications in the prostate cancer arena that were passed off as being scientific facts.
Dr. Horan’s book describes in detail that:
> The transrectal ultrasound-guided needle biopsy was not only risky with the complications of bleeding and septicemia but associated with a significant false-negative rate.
> The origins of the radical prostate surgery treatment and Dr. Young’s claims that his patients’ conditions were “excellent ” post-operatively contradicted the results published. In fact, the radical prostatectomy was neither safe nor effective. Young performed the first radical prostatectomy on April 7, 1904, at Johns Hopkins Hospital.
> Life extension has not been demonstrated by radical surgery or radiation in properly randomized, controlled, prospective studies.
> The prostate cancer cell has a generally slow doubling time taking years to grow.
> Bone marrow aspiration studies along with sophisticated staining techniques have shown that many aggressive cancers have cells already spread into the bone marrow when the cancer is barely detectable within the prostate.
> Radiation is generally ineffective, associated with significant bladder and rectal complications as well as carcinogenic effects. He claims that radiation has its only role at the end-game of palliation.
Richard Ablin Ph.D., the discoverer of the PSA, teamed up with Ron Piana, an investigative science reporter after Ablin became increasingly disturbed by the politics and fraud behind the PSA story. Furthermore, Ablin maintained that the PSA was never meant to be used for screening prostate cancer. Ablin and Piana also record how:
> The robotic prostatectomy was FDA approved without scientific evidence for safety or benefits.
> The FDA’s MAUDE (Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience) website showed a marked jump in adverse events concerning the robotic device.
> Studies comparing open surgery and robotic prostatectomy showed no difference in cancer recurrence rates, urinary incontinence, and impotence.
Both books recorded:
> The origins of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and its lack of specificity. In particular, the PSA was unable to discriminate between BPH, prostatitis, and cancer. In fact, PSA testing was no better than a lottery. And, the more malignant prostate cancers can lose the ability to make PSA so they are no longer trackable through PSA monitoring. Ablin and Piana also had the benefit of access to the transcripts of the Immunology Devices Panel meetings of the Medical Advisory Committee (an FDA advisory committee) so that they were able to determine how the PSA test garnered FDA approval. Some panelists had concluded that the PSA studies delivered suffered from serious design flaws. Additionally, PSA testing was associated with an incredible 78% false positive rate.
> Concerns about the blatant financial conflicts of interest in the business of prostate cancer.
More prostate cancer nuggets
> Piana also interviewed Jonathan Oppenheimer MD about the current state of prostate pathology. The quote from Dr. Oppenheimer, “for instance by calling the 3+3 = 6 Gleason score cancer pathologists are doing a disservice to patients by scaring them into having conditions treated that will not harm them.”
> In 2009 results from PSA studies run by urologists came to the conclusion that PSA-based screening results in a small or no reduction in prostate-specific mortality.
> In 2011 the USPSTF (United States Preventive Services Task Force) used the PSA studies conducted by urologists that revealed little or no benefit to instituting a D grade recommendation against PSA screening.
> Another stunning revelation from a well-regarded study, “Radical Prostatectomy versus Observation for Localized Prostate Cancer”, concluded that radical prostatectomy did not significantly reduce all-cause or prostate cancer mortality, as compared with observation through at least 12 years of follow-up.
> In 1993 economists calculated that routine PSA screening of men 50 years and older along with the tests and procedures costs the U.S. healthcare system some $28 billion per year.
Both books are supported by hundreds of scientific references underscoring the concern that the prostate cancer narrative is based mostly on pseudo-science.
Summary
These two books should be required reading for anyone stepping into the prostate cancer arena – especially urologists. Clearly, the general acceptance of PSA testing and robotic prostatectomy as standard practice by the prostate cancer industry is in serious need of review. This is especially true as urologists’ own clinical studies have concluded that both PSA testing and prostate cancer surgery fail to save significant numbers of lives. Every step in the patient’s prostate cancer journey should be able to withstand the challenge – where is the irrefutable and reproducible scientific data supporting that recommendation?
A simple question desperately waiting for solutions since Ablin and Piana have concluded that “Big medicine hijacked the PSA test and caused a public health disaster.”
Read more:
PSA Testing, Active Surveillance and More Damned Lies
Is Robotic Prostatectomy Bad Medicine?
Seeking clarity on the PSA story
Written by Bert Vorstman MD and first published in Substack on July 10, 2022