What follows is a response to a popular list of claims and arguments made by men’s rights activists.
1. SUICIDE: Men’s suicide rate is 4.6 times higher than that of women’s. [Dept. Health & Human Services — 26,710 males vs 5,700 females]
Not for lack of trying: women attempt it three times as often. [1] Researchers have found that gender differences in socialization is the strongest explanation for men’s relative success in suicide attempts. In the United States, for instance, it has been shown that unsuccessful suicide attempts are considered “feminine” while it is considered masculine to succeed. In other words, the fear of being labeled “feminine” or “weak” in a male supremacist culture encourages men to ensure their attempts are successfully completed. [2] The statistic given here also masks that many of these “suicides” were actually murder-suicides. In the United States, an estimated 1,000 to 1,500 people died in suicide attacks each year. [3] More than ninety percent of the offenders are men; nearly all the victims are female. [4]
2. LIFE EXPECTANCY: Men’s life expectancy is seven (7) years shorter than women’s [National Center for Health Statistics — males 72.3 yrs vs females 79 yrs] yet receive only 35% of government expenditures for health care and medical costs.
This is a curious statement. If women live seven years longer than men, it should be obvious why they receive more health support: because the oldest people in society are those that most need subsidized health support, and the oldest people are predominantly women. Furthermore, the insurance industry charges $1 billion a year more to women in health insurance each year for the same coverage plans men receive [5], and up to 53% more for the same individual coverage plan [6], despite women’s overall better health and despite receiving 23% less income then men. [7]
3. WAR: Men are almost exclusively the only victims of war [Dept. Defense — Vietnam Casualties 47,369 men vs 74 women]
The first thing to say is that if trained soldiers sent to engage in imperial wars of aggression can be called victims at all, then they are victims of those responsible for the wars in which they fought. And those responsible are men. All Presidents and Vice Presidents have been men. All members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have been men. Both branches of Congress have always been dominated by men. Polls since Vietnam show that men have been the ones to support going to war, and the ones most likely to support wars currently in progress. [8] On every level of analysis it is men who are responsible for war, and to somehow blame male combat deaths on women is not only absurd, but insane. If we want to stop these deaths, we need to stop those who are responsible for them: the male politicians, male military personnel, male war contractors, and male warmongers who perpetuate them. The second thing to say is that this is simply a lie. A study by researchers at the Harvard Medical School looking at wars in 13 countries, including the Vietnam War, found that of the 5.4 million people violently killed, more than 1 million were female. [9] This figure does not account for those women killed less measurably through aerial spraying, inflicted poverty, and the use of depleted uranium munitions. This also ignores male sexual violence during wartime. In Vietnam, for instance, it was common and accepted practice for soldiers to gang rape women and young girls, as well to kill a female following a rape. [10] Such was the frequency of the latter that the term “double veteran” was coined to refer to such perpetrators. [11]
4. WORKPLACE FATALITIES: Men account for more than 95% of all workplace fatalities.
The figure is 92% as of 2012. One important reason for this discrepancy is that men are inclined to select work that is dangerous in order to prove their masculinity to women, to other men, and to themselves. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the most dangerous professions in the United States are construction, transportation, and warehousing, all of which are male-dominated professions. [12] Men’s relative risk of danger is further increased through a relative lack of safety compliance. [13] Tellingly, the most common way for a woman to die in the workplace is to be murdered. [12]
5. MURDER: Men are murdered at a rate almost 5 times that of women. [Dept. Health & Human Services — 26,710 men vs 5,700 women]
Men also murder at a rate more than 9 times that of women. That men are often killed by other men is not a problem that women are responsible for. I can hardly imagine why that even needs to be said. In the United States in 2010, 1,095 women were killed by husbands or boyfriends, accounting for 37.5% of female murders. By contrast, only 241 men were killed by their female partners. [14] The smallness of this figure is particularly striking when we consider that 200,000 women in the United States suffer serious violence from male partners each year, justifying a deadly response. [15]
6. CHILD CUSTODY: Women receive physical custody of 92% of all children of separation, and men only 4%. [Department of Health & Human Services]
91% of the time, custody is agreed upon or settled by parents themselves, usually without outside mediation. Mothers are more likely to receive custody because both parents usually understand that it is in the best interests of their children. In married two-partner households, women spend nearly twice as much time doing child care as their male partners. [16] Only 4% of custody cases go to trial and only 1.5% are resolved there. [17] In disputed custody cases, fathers win custody 70% of the time, [18] despite abusive men being among those most likely to fight for custody. [19]
7. JURY BIAS: Women are acquitted of spousal murder at a rate 9 times that of men [Bureau Justice Statistics — 1.4% of men vs 12.9% of women]
This is not a matter of “bias”: women are sometimes acquitted of murdering their husbands because their husbands abused them or their children. It is estimated that 1.3 million women are beaten by male partners in the United States every year, putting them in fear for their lives. [20] Every one of these women would be justified in killing her spouse or partner and receiving an acquittal. It is exceptionally rare for any man to experience a comparable level of terroristic threat from his wife.
8. COURT BIAS: Men are sentenced 2.8 times longer than women for spousal murder [Bureau Justice Statistics — men at 17 years vs women at 6 years]
As per above, many women receive lighter sentences for killing their husbands because their purpose in doing so was to stop physical abuse against themselves or their children. One study of men and women charged with domestic offense, distinguished between five forms of domestic violence in order to gather a better understanding of the circumstances underlying partner violence. What they found was that while women “overwhelmingly” engaged in resistive violence, often linked with substance abuse, 95% of the men charged were batterers, defined as “an ongoing patterned use of intimidation, coercion, and violence as well as other tactics of control to establish and maintain a relationship of dominance over an intimate partner.” [21]
9. JUSTICE SYSTEM BIAS: Women are assessed for Child Support on average at half the rate of men, yet are twice as likely to default on Child Support payments. Ninety Seven (97%) of all child support prosecutions are against fathers. [Census Bureau]
Women are assessed less often than men and default more often because women aged 18-35 have on average $0 in net worth. Many mothers simply have no means to pay child support. By comparison, white men of the same age have a median wealth of $5,600, and men of color have $1,000. [22] This wealth discrepancy also pressures young mothers who care for the welfare of their children to prosecute men for child support.
10. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: Numerous credible studies from independent researchers report that women are the initiators of domestic violence in 58% of all cases, and cause physical abuse in almost 50% of all cases, yet women only account for 6% of all criminal proceedings in such matters.
It’s telling that you speak of “numerous credible studies” and carefully avoid citing any of them. I tried to find studies from any source making such claims, with no success. What I did find is the most recent report by the US Department of Justice, which found women suffer 805,700 physical injuries at the hands of partners each year, compared to 173,960 men. Moreover, the injuries suffered by women were more than twice as likely to be considered “serious”, defined as including sexual violence, gunshot and knife wounds, internal injuries, unconsciousness, and broken bones. To put that another way, partners inflicted 104,741 serious injuries on women, compared with less than 9,400 inflicted on men, a greater than 11:1 ratio. [16] Even those men who have been subject to partner violence have usually not taken it seriously. According to a study by researchers at the Medical College of Wisconsin, they were “significantly more likely than were women to laugh at partner-initiated violence”, while women “reported more fear, anger, and insult and less amusement when their partners were violent.” [23] It’s also worth noting that a number of these male injuries were incurred by male rather than female partners; according to a 2000 Department of Justice report, men living with male partners are at nearly twice the risk of “serious” violence as those living with women. [24] If women really are criminally prosecuted in 6% of domestic violence cases, then that figure sounds eminently reasonable.
11. CHILD VIOLENCE: Mothers commit 55% of all child murders and biological fathers commit 6%. NIS-3 indicates that Mother-only households are 3 times more fatal to children than Father-only households. Despite these compelling figures, children are systematically removed from the natural fathers who are their most effective protectors.
The first sentence is unsourced and not credible. According to one group of filicide [child murder] researchers:
Although some studies have noted that mothers commit filicide more often than fathers, other research has shown that paternal filicide is as common or more common than maternal filicide. Reports of a higher proportion of maternal filicides most likely reflect the inclusion of neonaticides in some studies. [25]
In other words, there is no agreement as to whether mothers or fathers are more likely to kill their own children, but when mothers are seen as more likely, it is likely because infanticides are included in the results. According to the above researchers, the main motivation “may be the undesirability of the child,” and mothers under the age of 20 with a previous child are among those most likely to engage in such a murder. Young mothers without sufficient economic, family, or medical support may find there are no better options for themselves or for their other children. By contrast, fathers who kill their children are “often perpetrators of fatal-abuse filicide”, meaning that they batter their children to death. Some of the most common motivations for father filicide are “attempts to control the child’s behavior, and misinterpretation of the child’s behavior”. [25] I’ve recently obtained a copy of the NIS-3 study, and while Table 5-4 does indeed provide data indicating that “Mother-only households are 3 times more fatal to children than Father-only households,” the provided footnote also says explicitly that the difference is either statistically insignificant or marginal, with p-values above 0.10. What that means is that the numbers, while provided, are statistically worthless and cannot be used to even hint at inferences. Meanwhile, the data from the NIS-3 regarding parental households that is statistically valid paints a very different picture. In every category, father-only households put children at a higher risk of harm than mother-only households. Risk of abuse is 71% higher, including a 68% greater chance of physical abuse. Risk of neglect is 28% higher, including a 32% rise for physical neglect, 67% rise for emotional neglect, and 14% rise for educational neglect. Risk of both moderate or serious injury is 40% higher. That this is true is particularly exceptional when we pair this with data from the more recent NIS-4 study which found that households with a lower socioeconomic status were nearly 7 times more likely to involve neglect, including a nearly ninefold risk of physical neglect. Overall the safety of children in these households was classified as 5.7 times more severe than those of a higher socioeconomic background. [26] Single women with children are far more likely than men to live under conditions of severe poverty: both black and Hispanic women with children under age 18 have an average median wealth of $0, compared to $10,960 for black men and $2,400 for Hispanic men; white women with children have an average median wealth of $7,970, compared to an average of $56,100 for white men. [22] If economic justice for women was sufficiently advanced, we would expect the safety of mother-only households illustrated by the NIS-3 to increase still further. Given this information, to call fathers the “most effective protectors” of children is a hateful turn of phrase, suggesting that mothers wish harm on their children and only fathers can protect them. This in spite of the reality that children are far safer in the custody of their mothers than their fathers.
12. WEALTH: Women hold 65% of the total wealth in the USA [Fortune Magazine]
This is a ridiculous lie, and to their credit I can find no evidence that Fortune Magazine ever made such a claim. Contrary to this claim, one Harvard University researcher found that men have an average net worth of $26,850, compared to an average of $12,900 for women. [27] That is to say, men on average hold more than twice the wealth of women.
References
[1] http://www.afsp.org/understanding-suicide/facts-and-figures
[2] http://mamyers.myweb.uga.edu/DSC%20R%20GenderParadoxSuicide.pdf
[4] http://www.jaapl.org/content/37/3/371.long
[8] http://www.gallup.com/poll/7243/gender-gap-varies-support-war.aspx
[9] http://www.bmj.com/content/336/7659/1482
[10] Nick Turse, Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam, pages 164-171
[11] http://www.waywordradio.org/double_veteran_1/
[12] http://pro.sagepub.com/content/41/2/1283.short
[13] http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfch0011.pdf
[15] http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ipvav9311.pdf
[16] http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/06/15/a-tale-of-two-fathers/
[17] http://www.divorcepeers.com/stats18.htm#fn%201
[18] Joan Zorza, “Batterer manipulation and retaliation compounded by denial and complicity in the family courts” In M.T. Hannah & B. Goldstein (editors), Domestic violence, abuse and child custody: Legal strategies and policy issues
[19] http://www.nnflp.org/apa/issue5.html
[20] http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/ipvbook-a.pdf
[21] http://mhifc.org/Articles/Reexamining%20Battering.pdf
[23] http://vaw.sagepub.com/content/8/11/1301.short
[24] https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/181867.pdf
[25] http://www.jaapl.org/content/35/1/74.full.pdf+html
[26] http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf
This response was written by Owen Lloyd, a stay-at-home dad living on the Oregon coast. Hate mail can be addressed to him at owen.lloyd@protonmail.com
A French translation of this document is also available here: http://scenesdelavisquotidien.com/2014/04/05/demystifier-le-mouvement-de-defense-des-hommes/
Debunking MRAs 
Quite an effort to bring the blame back to the male sex/gender for every imaginable bad outcome for men. Yet no attention is paid to perhaps the single most important factorin how a man turns out the way he does–his childhood experiences, determined by the behaviors of his primary caregiver, which in the vast majority of cases is his mother. Mothers hit children 2-3 times as often as men, and the average mother begins begins physical aggression against her child before the age of 1, hitting them dozens of times a year. Little boys are also more likely to be hit by their mothers than little girls. Statistically, the two biggest predictors in negative outcomes in adulthood for boys such as emotional dysfunction, violent crime, proclivity to rape and sexual assault, etc, are having grown up in a single mother household, and having been subjected to physical and/or emotional abuse at a young age, which is most often perpetrated by mothers.
Where’s your sources? Source or GTFO.
I’ll give you a fucking source.
Warne Farrell has a host of resources and backed by evidence based practices that are supported by credible peer reviewed sources.
One argument you don’t address Francois, is discrimination against men in college selection, hiring and promotions. When an institution installs a “diversity program’ or ‘affirmative action program’, white men are subjected to systematic oppression. That is because when the white male equals or even betters the merit scores of females or minorities (however merit is measured by the institution), while men automatically lose because the system is designed to add points to the hiring, promotion or college entrance score to the favored group.
Now you may say this is justified because of historical oppression of the favored group, or some other reason. While that may lead to a discussion of the pros and cons of this practice, what is also does is acknowledges that there is discrimination taking place. White men get angry about this lack of fairness. As I am sure women would be angry when told “Yes, you were the better qualified applicant but we hired a man instead of you because we wanted a man, not a woman”. So this is just one situation in which the MRA movement has a legitimate argument.
In this case, the solution is simple. Allow everyone an equal opportunity and advance winners based solely on merit. When that does not happen, white men justifiably complain.
And why is the mother the primary caregiver? Where is the father? You blame women for being there…. but not the father for NOT being there?
Where is the father in one-parent household?
PARENTS in general are harder on their baby boy, and expect less of their baby girl.
PARENTS will let baby boy cry a little bit longer then their baby girl.
That is because our society is sexist. Men and women keep using ugly gender stereotype and act accordingly. The only way to fight this is to fight sexism and teach: that men can cry, women are not inferior to men, so having “traditionally’ women traits do not mean being inferior (face it, men use “girl” or “women” as an insult, to mean “weak”)… so you should definetly be a feminist.
LMAO!! What a fucking wanker.
So basically, “Ok, that’s all true BUT IT’S MOM’S FAULT WAAAHHH WAAAAH”
Also, would you be kind enough to provide credible citations for your claims?
You appear to have confused “sources” with “a Youtube video.” An easy mistake. I meant, you know, a study, a survey… anything with any credibility whatsoever.
MRA’s typically think a source is an entry in a diary, like Karen Stringbeanhead thinks.
MRAs think anything written anywhere by anyone or spoken on Youtube that agrees with their narrative is a source.
This is the best comment ever. And here I thought that everything on the internet such as youtube videos are true (sarcasm).
Well yea, but, as Homer Simpson would say, you can use facts to prove anything even remotely true.
that article is a load of biased nonsense. i mean yeah, he makes some valid points here and there, but its so blatantly biased and strupid, its worthless, it seems nobody can defend feminism by using facts and making sense. im not a supporter of MRAs at this point, i dont know enough about them, and i do suspect they may well be guilty of all the same awful things feminists do. gos ive grown to hate feminism, its so utterly pathetic and divorced from reality. wpmen have equality, so why the need for feminism? men and women are different which means that equality for women does not mean having everything that men have. it also does not mean a life free of female exclusive problems, we dont live in an ideal society. equality means- a woman has the same chance at a happy life. women have that
Another feminist, another liar. Always the same nonsense.
Another man, another ignorant, violent genetic reject.
NAMETHEPROBLEM. COM
Oh, yes, Bob who got completely paralyzed from falling off a building was a construction worker because he needed to be masculine, not to feed his wife and children. You’re lucky there is no hell.
No proof just accusations. This article is “lying” because “your feelings don’t like it.” Please show us your evidence that ANYTHING in this article is not 100% true. You can’t. Case closed. This is why MRAs are not taken seriously.
Women are only good for 1 thing, well maybe 2. And once we have the tech required to make you obsolete, you will be hell look at Africa and China where they abort the useless females. Once sexbots and artificial wombs are available why would bother with the obsolete sex.
The question you should be asking, Mr Sandman, is why should we bother with you? What are you useful for? Why shouldn’t we get rid of you instead? And leave women with people who know to appreciate them?
As long as we’re cool with getting rid of people who don’t meet your criteria for usefulness, I mean.
If any sex is eliminated, it would be the male one. Having two X chromosomes is a huge advantage, especially when we unlock how to “activate” genes on the inactive X. Women have stronger immune systems, are less likely to get cancer, and live longer because of the incidental activation of this other chromosome.
If we want to go towards the “eliminating half the world’s population” route, our society could already do well without men. We already have sperm banks, meaning that women can already procreate without men.
That being said, I’m glad we have men in this world, just not men like you
”Society could do without men”?? hahahahahahah The whole progress in the world would be stopped without men. Can you imagine women constructing buildings and skyscrapers, bridges, highways, dams and underwater tunnels? Maybe building and designing new cars, aircraft carriers, high-speed trains and passenger planes or flying jumbo jets, operating construction cranes, welding, working in mines, in police force, working as firefighters or battling natural disasters, building space rockets and colonizing Mars, inventing new drugs, and technology as computer scientists and petroleum engineers?
In fact the society could de well without females. If all women suddenly disapeared the world would continue to develop, if all men disappeared women would return to caves…
What about the fact that women recive shorter sentences for crimes other than spousal murder? Did you conveniently leave that out?
And let’s talk about parental rights Men have virtually none.
A woman can name any man she likes as the father, he gets a letter in the mail, if he does not prove he isn’t the father within 30 days—(suppose the letter gets lost by the USPS?)—he is now the father and must pay. He cannot contest it.
A boy who is the victim of statutory rape must pay child support to his rapist.
A man who is raped while unconscious must likewise pay child support.
A man who fathers a child and wishes to take custody may have his child adopted out against his will and essentially kidnapped
You could try actually reading the article.
What about the fact that women receive smaller sentences for the same crime in offences other than spousal murder?
And what about parental rights?
•A woman can name any man she likes as the father, he gets a letter in the mail, if he does not prove he isn’t the father within 30 days—(suppose the letter gets lost by the USPS?)—he is now the father and must pay. He cannot contest it. ( http://reason.com/archives/2004/02/01/injustice-by-default)
•A boy who is the victim of statutory rape must pay child support to his rapist. (http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-governance-feminism/legally-obscene/)
•A man who is raped while unconscious must likewise pay child support. (http://al.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19961122_0042048.AL.htm/qx)
And as for reproductive rights, just read this. (https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/7x78v/what_do_modern_men_want_in_women/c07omtc)
Bla bla bla smaller sentences. They commit far fewer violent crimes and the circumstances in which the crimes are committed are different. There’s no such thing as “the same crime.” Their sentences (which btw are handed down by 85% MALE judges) make sense on a case by case basis and the aggregate number is not in and of itself an indication of bias against men.
A woman can name any man she likes… bla bla bla… Well your link to the (lol) “reason.com” article comes up with nothing… so you got nothing.
But this link does NOT.
hIn 33 states a RAPIST can FORCE a women to give child visitation rights to her attacker. ttp://www.cnn.com/2013/08/01/us/rapist-child-custody/
Apparently convicted rapists have more rights than mothers. Tell me more about how courts are “bias against men”
And your one-off case from LOL “a vocie for men” (the known hate site where Paul Elam says women going to bars are “begging to get raped” Great source there…) no one was convicted of statutory rape, so legally the guy wasn’t even a rape victim. Nice try “Lies For Men”
Olivas the “victim” said he wants to be a part of his daughter’s life and is willing to pay child support.
So much worse than the laws protecting convicted rapists in most states. Us poor mens boo hoo…so oppressed! Jesus MRAs are full of shit. I can’t even get over how full of shit they are. It’s bizarre how much just sheer amount of bullshit can be packed into one group of people.
And seriously fuck your reddit comments. Read some credible sources for once, honestly it’s embarassing. What’s your next link 4 chan? LOL…
I love that all brodude’s sources are AVFM, MRA websites and fucking Reddit hahahahaha.
A lot of your statements are not factual.
34 states and the District of Columbia have laws that allow for termination of parental rights in the case of rape and sexual assault, the remaining 16 are on the way as well, as per the federal Rape Survivor Child Custody Act; federal STOP funding is tied to such laws. See (http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/parental-rights-and-sexual-assault.aspx)
As. For male victims of sexual assault and rape, see Hermesmann v. Seyer, which found: “a woman is entitled to sue the father of her child for child support even if conception occurred as a result of a criminal act committed by the woman.”
As for falsely naming a father, see http://www.childsup.ca.gov/portals/0/resources/docs/pub244_english.pdf.
See the section titled “Establishing Paternity by Court Order”: The named father will be served (not by in-person-service, but by last known address mail service ) and has 30 days to respond if he believes he is not the father; you read that right, if a woman names any man, then that man is presumed to be the father, and has a very limited time to PROVE he isn’t, and the courts don’t even consider that mail service is very unreliable, and he may never have gotten the notice.
A lot of your statements are not factual.
34 states and the District of Columbia have laws that allow for termination of parental rights in the case of rape and sexual assault, the remaining 16 are on the way as well, as per the federal Rape Survivor Child Custody Act; federal STOP funding is tied to such laws. See (http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/parental-rights-and-sexual-assault.aspx)
As. For male victims of sexual assault and rape, see Hermesmann v. Seyer, which found: “a woman is entitled to sue the father of her child for child support even if conception occurred as a result of a criminal act committed by the woman.”
As for falsely naming a father, see http://www.childsup.ca.gov/portals/0/resources/docs/pub244_english.pdf.
See the section titled “Establishing Paternity by Court Order”: The named father will be served (not by in-person-service, but by last known address mail service ) and has 30 days to respond if he believes he is not the father; you read that right, if a woman names any man, then that man is presumed to be the father, and has a very limited time to PROVE he isn’t, and the courts don’t even consider that mail service is very unreliable, and he may never have received the notice.
A lot of your statements are not factual.
34 states and the District of Columbia have laws that allow for termination of parental rights in the case of rape and sexual assault, the remaining 16 are on the way as well, as per the federal Rape Survivor Child Custody Act; federal STOP funding is tied to such laws. See (http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/parental-rights-and-sexual-assault.aspx)
As. For male victims of sexual assault and rape, see Hermesmann v. Seyer, which found: “a woman is entitled to sue the father of her child for child support even if conception occurred as a result of a criminal act committed by the woman.”
As for falsely naming a father, see http://www.childsup.ca.gov/portals/0/resources/docs/pub244_english.pdf.
See the section titled “Establishing Paternity by Court Order”: The named father will be served (not by in-person-service, but by last known address mail service ) and has 30 days to respond if he believes he is not the father; you read that right, if a woman names any man, then that man is presumed to be the father, and has a very limited time to PROVE he isn’t, and the courts don’t even consider that mail service is very unreliable, and he may never have received the notice.
Click to access Reciprocal%20violence%20AJPH.pdf
Dear Blogger. Why do you hate all men?
Because they suck.
“I have some concerns about MRAs “facts””
“What do you mean you hate men?”
Hey, thanks for writing this article. Thanks especially for citing so well: some of those links led to some pretty interesting reads! A lot of the stats were pretty mind-blowing… I still can’t stop freaking out about the war crimes and violence. LOL I hope one day that MRAs can learn how to defend their views, or at least change their views to ACTUALLY help men. There are so many real problems that men face that they could actually focus on, it seems a waste that such a furious ‘movement’ if it could even be called that, focuses on bringing down a movement that fights for human rights for so many marginalized people, in addition to women.
Yea, us poor oppressed men need someone to talk for us. Because, you know, there’s no one on TV talking about men’s point of view.
Lol! Sorry, when you said ‘furious movement’ I got the mental image of a horrific case of montezumas revenge, which is a good analogy for many of the mra’s I’ve met- in pain and full of sh!t.
I feel for their legit issues, but wish they would quit stinking up my bathroom.
I just think it’s so hilarious that someone on here said men have a legitimate grip when it comes to Affirmative Action programs. HA HA. HA
What’s the greatest affirmative action program of the last, oh, 500 years at least? WHITENESS!!! And of the last 10,000 years or so? MALENESS!!! HA! HA HA!
Let’s promote women and people of color ahead of white men for the next 500-10,000 years (give or take), and then they can start complaining.
Incidentally, I’m glad women’s higher rate of suicide attempts and the real reason women are more often awarded custody (we do almost all of the childcare anyway) were both mentioned. That’s great.
For me one of the most telling facts is that in studies of married happiness, married men are happier than single men and single women are happier than married women (according to self-reporting). Could this be because women do all of the unpaid emotional and physical labor of the household? Have to put their own dreams and desires on the back burner so often? Are expected to put up with more ill treatment, and shut up about it lest they be slapped with the dreaded “nag” label?
I, for one, refuse to marry or even partner with anyone who I don’t think would pull his weight with home and kids and treat me as an equal. That’s definitely a large part of why I’ve chosen to remain single.
MRA dudes are so delusional…wake up and smell the inequality. It doesn’t smell *that* much better than the inside of your ass, but at least it does marginally.
Thank you for giving them what’s for. 🙂 Although it doesn’t usually do any good.
Why do you accept and even endorse a comment that is obviously sexist and racist? Imagine if anyone had said: “HAHAHA, Lets promote men and white people ahead of people of color for the next 500 years” – you would not accept that. Treat people equally.
The fuck are you going on about, “David Garcia”?
Here are links to interesting statistics on partner abuse:
http://www.domesticviolenceresearch.org/pages/12_page_findings.htm
More detailed information:
http://www.domesticviolenceresearch.org/pages/details.htm
The problem with this post is that is does not debunk the statistics that are cited by the MRAs. In almost every case, the text below each quote does not refute the quote. Instead the answers go on to talk about unrelated things, or to only make minor adjustments of the original statement.
Take suicide as an example. Suicide attempts and actual suicides are different. Suicide attempts are typically not meant to succeed, rather they are (very strong) cries for help. Suicide attempters are severely depressed, but not depressed enough to go through with killing themselves. There is a lot of evidence that women seek out more help from others for the same severity in a medical condition. The suicide attempt difference is consistent with that interpretation.
On workplace fatalities, one main reason for the difference is that men have a higher preference for risk than women. Men are also stronger and physical work is more risky. In addition, society values excess deaths or physical harm in men as worth less than when it happens to women: men are more replaceable. ‘Masculinity’ may have something to do with it, but you have to ask yourself why men feel the need to be masculine. The end reason is that women rewards men that are masculine.
MRAs use the suicide rate to silence women because men supposedly “suffer more”. That is simply not true. Men do not “suffer more” than women, they are just more successful in their suicide. There is no way to prove attempted suicides were not meant to succeed, I have no idea how you can decide this. Or how being “more depress” would mean being “more successful at suicide”…
Women seek more help because they are less punish by a sexist society for doing so: it is consider normal for women to be weak and fragile, but men must be virile and strong. This is what feminist fight against: hurtful gender stereotypes. The fact that some women participate in the stereotypes just proves it’s a society / cultural problem.
It’s the same arguments for workplace fatalities. A patriarchal sexist society values those things, not women.
lolnaw
insightful…
“Take suicide as an example. Suicide attempts and actual suicides are different. Suicide attempts are typically not meant to succeed, rather they are (very strong) cries for help. Suicide attempters are severely depressed, but not depressed enough to go through with killing themselves.”
Uh, hi, actual suicide survivor here. I attempted suicide at 14 — swallowed a bottle of pills. Left a note for my folks, and it really wasn’t a “[cry] for help”; I wanted to die. I wanted to stop, to cease, to no longer exist. My folks got me to the hospital soon enough for a response team to work its magic and save my life (let me tell you, activated charcoal ‘slushies’ are GROSS), and I was in a psychiatric hospital under 24/7 for a week afterward. And even after that, I was under close watch and enrolled in regular therapy sessions. I have struggled with intense suicidal ideation at least twice since then, but through luck and a fabulous support network, have never again attempted to kill myself.
Don’t you dare tell me that I “[wasn’t] depressed enough to go through with killing [myself]”. I took the pills; I had the charcoal slushie poured down my throat afterward; I put in the slog work of putting myself back together over these past twelve years; I still put in that work every single day. Don’t you dare tell me that the sheer fact of my survival somehow negates or diminishes my pain and desire for death in that moment! Don’t you dare think that you get to speak for me or any other survivor out there, or for anyone else who is depressed or suicidal, and tell us if we’re “depressed enough” or not.
Get the hell off your high horse.
Yes, it is considered more socially acceptable for women to either reach out for help in the first place or to fail in their suicide attempts. Because of this, we as a society have created a mental space for the emotions of women while sealing the door on men’s emotional expression. By lacking a space for men to be healthily emotional, we as a society force men to choose more violent methods of suicide — methods more certain to result in death –, on top of the emotional secrecy we’ve already forced on them. A gunshot is a lot harder to ‘rescue’ than poison is. A slit throat is a lot harder to staunch than a handful of pills. The methods of suicide that we as a society make available to men and women also has something to do with the differing success rates of suicide, in addition of course to the emotional availability we allow each sex to display.
“In addition, society values excess deaths or physical harm in men as worth less than when it happens to women: men are more replaceable.” Wow, that’s a morbid thought, and I am really sorry to hear that you think that way. No one I know considers men to be “more replaceable” than anyone, and that thought is anathema to me, personally. I certainly don’t see society “[valuing] excess deaths or physical harm in men”, but there is absolutely a higher acceptance of that situation. We expect it to happen, again, because we as a society have created that space for men and not allowed them to step outside of it.
It’s not women that “[reward] men that are masculine”, it’s society. As women are part of society, they do fall into its pressures and expectations, too, both for themselves and how they are to respond to specific presentations and personalities.
Reblogged this on RaFeCaMe.
Who the hell do you think you are! You are a pathetic, bigoted fool and you need to get your head out of your own arse.
Men beware!
Read the sad truth about prostate cancer over testing and treatment dangers and exploitation for profit by predatory doctors.
A prostate cancer survival guide by a patient and victim.
January 8, 2016. Updated December 14, 2017 (With references)
The man that invented the PSA test, Dr. Richard Ablin now calls it: “the Great Prostate Mistake, Hoax and a Profit-Driven Public Health Disaster” [1].
Your life or your quality of life may depend on reading this document.
Prostate cancer dirty secrets, lies, exaggerations, deceptions and elder abuse.
In my opinion:
Read the hard facts about prostate cancer testing and treatment that no one will tell you about, even after it’s too late. Any man over 50 or anyone concerned about cancer in general, dangers from clinical trials, injuries and deaths from medical mistakes, Quality prescriptions at a huge discount from Canada, exploitation and elder abuse, HIPAA laws and privacy issues should read this document. Prostate cancer patients are often elderly, over treated, misinformed and exploited for huge profits by predatory doctors [1, 9, 10, 25]. The testing, treatment and well documented excessive over treatment for profit of prostate cancer often results in devastating and unnecessary side effects and sometimes death. At times profit vs. QOL (quality of life). Low risk Gleason 6 (3+3) is a pseudo-¬cancer mislabeled as a cancer, it does not need detection or treatment [1, 2, 9].
Facts per some studies:
1. Multiple studies have verified more harm and deaths caused from prostate cancer testing and treatment then from prostate cancer itself [1, 9, 10, 25].
2. Extensively documented unnecessary testing and treatment of prostate cancer for profit or poor judgment by some doctors in the USA [1, 5, 9, 10, 25].
3. Medical mistakes are the third cause of deaths in the USA (over 251,000 deaths a year, over one million deaths in 4 years) more then suicide, firearms and motor vehicle accidents combined [13].
4. About 1 man in 6 will be diagnosed with prostate cancer in his life.
5. About 233,000 new cases per year of prostate cancer.
6. 1 million dangerous prostate blind biopsies are performed per year in the USA [5, 11, 22, 23].
7. 6.9% hospitalization within 30 days from a prostate biopsy complication[11].
8. About 1.3 to 3.5 deaths per 1,000 from prostate blind biopsies [5].
9. 0.5% died and 20.4% had one or more complications within 30 days of radical prostatectomy [15].
10. A study of early-stage prostate cancer found no difference in surviving at 10 years whether men had surgery, radiation or monitoring (no treatment) [12].
11. Low risk Gleason 3+3=6 “cancer” lacks the hallmarks of a cancer yet it is often aggressively over treated [1, 2, 9].
12. Prostate cancer patients are at an increased risk for chronic fatigue, depression, suicide and heart attacks.
13. Depression in prostate cancer patients is about 27% and 22% at 5 years, for advanced prostate cancer patient’s depression is even higher [6].
14. 75% to 90% of oncologists would refuse chemotherapy if they had cancer.
15. The National Cancer Institute says approximately 40 to 50% of men with low to moderate grade Prostate cancer will have a recurrence after treatment.
16. 62% to 75% of bankruptcies in America are because of medical bills.
17. Breast cancer receives much more research funding, publicity than prostate cancer despite similar number of victims.
Excuse the generally accurate humor and sarcasm. Its intent is to entertain and educate while reading this possibly laborious text.
$Follow the money$: If a surgeon is financially responsible for operating expenses, a large staff or an oncologist is also responsible for a lease on multimillions of dollars in radiation treatment equipment, do you think they would be more or less honest about the benefits and hazards of treatment? Do you think the profit margin would compromise some doctor’s ethics? Typically, what is the purpose in over testing and treating a cancer that often will not spread and the testing and treatment frequently causes lower QOL (quality of life), ED, incontinence, depression, fatigue, etc if it was not extremely profitable? The medical field is alluding to the fact that prostate cancer testing and treatment may do more harm then good. The U.S. Advisory Panel is now recommending for prostate cancer PSA testing and screening: for men 55 to 69 “letting men decide for themselves after talking with their doctors. For men over 70, no testing at all is recommended.” However this may not protect men from predatory doctors exploiting them. Patients usually follow a doctor’s recommendation. Do you think any regulatory agency will set guidelines for testing and treatment or stop the exploitation of elderly men with a high PSA or prostate cancer or approve new treatments at the risk of financially bankrupting thousands of treatment facilities and jeopardizing thousands more jobs? Prostate cancer patients are often elderly and exploited for profit, the treatments offered has horrible side effects, and newer treatment options are either unavailable or not offered to patients or available outside the USA. Prostate cancer is often slow growing and of low risk and can just be monitored. Often no treatment is the best treatment. Over testing and treatment has been verified by numerous experts, studies and investigations, documentation, etc. [1, 9, 10, 25] It often takes years for new and effective treatments to be approved. If no profit is to be made as in orphan drugs, no approval should be expected.
A 12, 18 or 24 core blind biopsy, holey prostate! One million dangerous prostate blind biopsies are performed in the USA each year and they should be banned. Men with a high PSA tests result are often sent to an urologist for a blind biopsy. Men should be told about other options; Percent free PSA test, 4Kscore test, PCA3 urine test or a MRI, 3D color-Doppler test before receiving a any biopsy. These tests can often eliminate the need for a more risky and invasive blind biopsy. Insertion of 12, 18 or 24 large holes through the rectum into a gland the size of a walnut, a blind Biopsy can result in pain, infections. A high risk of permanent or temporary erectile dysfunction, 22.3% mild ED, 15.5% mild-to-moderate ED, 10% moderate ED, and 13.6% severe ED [22, 23]. Biopsies can cause urinary problems, 6.9% hospitalization within 30 days from a complication[11], sometimes even death from sepsis (About 1.3 to 3.5 deaths per 1,000)[5]. There is also debate that a biopsy may spread cancer because of needle tracking. A blind biopsy can also increase PSA reading for several weeks or months, further frightening men into an unnecessary treatment. Blind biopsies are almost never performed on other organs. One very prestigious hospital biopsy information states “Notice that your semen has a red or rust-colored tint caused by a small amount of blood in your semen”. Another large prestigious hospital states “Blood, either red or reddish brown, may also be in your ejaculate.” These statements are often an extreme exaggeration (mostly lies). Very often after a biopsy a man’s semen will turn into jet black goo. This could be an unpleasant surprise for a man and especially for his unsuspecting partner. However if a biopsy is performed before Halloween or April Fools’ day this may be of some benefit to a few patients. If some very prestigious hospitals are not factual about the color of semen, what other facts are not being disclosed or misrepresented? Never submit to a blind biopsy [5, 11, 22, 23].
Bone scan scam: Prostate cancer patients are often sent for a bone scan. A bone scan has about a 13% chance of having a false positive and only 3 men in 1,000 have bone cancer who have a bone scan. Bone scans may often be unnecessary in lower risk prostate cancer patients.
Low risk cancer patients or patients with advanced age are often sent for aggressive treatment by some doctors when monitoring is usually a better option. An extreme example of overtreatment is one SBRT radiation clinical trial. Prostate cancer patients (victims?) where intentionally treated (fried?) with a huge dose (50Gy total, 5 fractions) of radiation resulting in disastrous long term side effect for some of these men. The typical SBRT dose is 35 to 36.35 Gy, 5 fractions. A large percentage of prostate cancer patients in this clinical trial had low risk prostate cancer and probably did not require any treatment at all [4].
Clinical trials may (or may not) be hazardous to patients. The goal of a clinical trial is to gather information; the intent is not necessarily to help or cure patients. In a clinical trial, if someone is given a treatment that will harm them (as in the above example) or given a placebo in place of treatment or needed treatment is withheld, the patient may be deceived or harmed. Investigate before you participate in any clinical trial. Even if you do get a safe and effective treatment, it may not be available to you after the clinical trial is over. If the trial is for a drug, you will not be told if you are getting a drug or a placebo until after the trial is over.
Your privacy and confidentiality is just an illusion: You may have little or no privacy and confidentiality! Under the HIPAA law all access to your records is allegedly by a “Need to know” basis only. This is another exaggeration (lie). Prostate cancer patients are asked to fill out a series of EPIC questionnaires and other questioners. The EPIC questionnaire asks several intimate details about patient’s sex life, urinary and bowl function. By a prostate cancer patient completing an EPIC questionnaire may be able to assist his doctor, nurse, office workers or database track his progress or decline. By refusing to fill out these questioners and supplying other unnecessary information one can help insure his privacy, dignity and insure he do not unknowingly become part of a study or clinical trial or other collective survey or have his information forwarded to multiple databases. Most of the time a patient has no idea who has access to medical records or why the records are being looked at. Who has access to your medical records? Probably everyone that works in a medical office or building has access to the records, except you (often you the patient may have limited or no access without a formal request). File access may include/however not limited to non-medical employees, office workers, bookkeepers, janitors, insurance companies, temporary high school or college interns, volunteers, etc. This may also include other medical facilities, programmers, hackers, researchers, etc. Usually records are placed on a Health Information Exchange (HIE) or servers. Dozens, sometimes even hundreds or thousands or more people may have access to medical records. Some major databases like SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results) are linked to Medicare records to determine “end results” for researchers, studies, drug companies, clinical trial offers, etc. Servers, both government and privet are sharing information, AKA “health surveillance”. Health information may be shared and downloaded by millions of entities and servers all over the USA and the world to countries that do not have any regulations for privacy. Records may be packaged with others and offered for sale, this does often happen on “the dark web”. If a doctor, patient or insurance company is involved in a criminal or civil case, medical records may become public court or law enforcement records. Financial and medical Identity theft is a growing problem, often expensive and difficult to correct. Ransomware is also a growing problem. Your records can also be accessed by anyone (trainees, volunteers, high school interns, minors and adolescent people as young as 16 years of age) “for training purposes” or any other reason, all without your consent. A list of what a high school intern is allowed to do to patients: “learning simple medical procedures, watching surgeries or procedures, shadowing doctors (including seeing patients), working in hospitals, interacting with patients, and more.” They can also read all records about your prostate problems, your wife’s hemorrhoids and your daughters yeast infections or any files for any patient, all within the HIPAA guidelines. These people do not have to be employed by the facility or have a background check. Would you like to have a high school or college student that possibly lives in your neighborhood or attends school with your children read over your extensive family member’s medical records and personal information? How much curiosity or self control does a high school or college student have? All patients should avoid supplying unnecessary information whenever possible. Supply relevant information only when filling out forms. In the USA identity theft is very common, growing problem and is often financial devastating. Medical forms can be a good source of information for thieves. Drug companies use major databases to solicit people for clinical trials. Numerous exceptions (loopholes) appear within the HIPAA laws regarding you privacy. Even without HIPAA violations, records can be accessed by multiple people and appear in multiple databases. Sometimes medical phone calls are recorded “Calls may be recorded for training and quality purposes”. Calls about a clinical trial, calls to a large clinic, toll free number, calls to drug companies and calls to insurance companies may be recorded. HIPAA laws are deficient and often will not protect your privacy. I believe the medical field has little regard for our privacy, especially if it is in conflict with training, research, studies, profit or other objectives. If you’re a public figure, celebrity, rich or famous you may be subject to numerous people wanting to see your medical records. Also if you are known to or an acquaintance of anyone with access to your records (neighbor, co-workers spouse, etc) they would possibly (or probably) want to have a look at your medical records. On May 6, 2017 Dear Abby did an article on this subject, “Snooping into medical records”. You are naive if you believe otherwise or that your records are secure. The same also applies to pharmacies and labs, etc.
A patient’s dignity (or lack of dignity): Prostate cancer testing and treatment is stressful, degrading, demoralizing and embarrassing. After his surgery one patient stated both his prostate and his dignity was both removed and discarded. EPIC questionnaires can be counterproductive impact a patient’s dignity, privacy, confidentiality and self image. EPIC questionnaires have an increased potential and greater impact on patients for privacy violations because of its format, nature and personal content. Patients may mistakenly believe the EPIC questionnaire is a requirement to be filled out. Also the term “strictly confidential” can be misleading and ambiguous. One patient posted he filled out and turned in his “strictly confidential” EPIC questioners only to have every female office staff member read it and ogle him. Resulting in him not filling out any more EPIC forms or any other forms and he stated that he became very uncomfortable and evasive with the entire office staff. The drawbacks of this form seem to outweigh any potential benefit for some patients. Medical tests and procedures can be degrading and embarrassing for both men and women. Many women prefer or will only see female doctors or gynecologists. Over half of men prefer a male doctor. (Per some respected doctors: “Men stay away from medical care in large numbers because of privacy and dignity. Many men still avoid medical care because of embarrassment. Honest answers will often not be given if asked by a female doctor or nurse.”) Per surveys: nurses and medical staff often laugh at and ridicule patients. What percent of men will feel comfortable consulting a female doctor, nurse or office worker about his prostate problems, ED, etc or would want an invasive test or procedure performed by a female?
Becoming radioactive, a bizarre treatment option: LDR Brachytherapy (permanent radioactive seed implant). This procedure implants about 60 to 120 radioactive seeds in the prostate, sometimes resulting in urinary problems. The patient will literally become radioactive for months and up to 2 years. The patient may set off radiation alarm at airports, seaports and border security checkpoints. He will also be required to use a condom, have no close contact with pregnant women, infants, children and young pets for months or longer. Occasionally he may even eject dangerous radioactive seeds during sexual activity or urination. The patient will become like a walking Chernobyl, having radioactive scrap metal and emitting hazardous radiation from his crotch. He will also be required to carry a card in his wallet stating he is radioactive. If he dies cremation may be a big problem. The videos of this procedure are disturbing and bizarre. A catheter will also be required. Brachytherapy has a high possibility for ED.
ADT Hormone therapy, big profits and devastating side effects: Lupron injections are one of the most common. Men are prescribed hormone therapy (ADT therapy), AKA chemical castration as an additional or only treatment. Hormone (ADT) therapy is sometimes over prescribed for profit, per some studies. Hormone therapy is often very expensive (Profitable for doctors if provided at the doctor’s office and not a pharmacy) and can have horrible, strange and devastating side effects, feminization, hot flashes, fatigue, weight gain, long term or permanent ED, depression, etc. His penis could shrink and his testicles can completely disappear, he may grow breasts. This treatment can have so many mind and body altering side effects that doctors will often not inform patients about all of them. One man stated that ADT therapy turned him into an old menopausal woman. Men are sometimes actually castrated (orchiectomy) as a cancer treatment to reduce testosterone; I just can’t imagine a more barbaric and primitive treatment. Amnesty International calls chemical castration “inhuman”. ADT therapy is often used in sex reassignment surgery, male-to-female transsexuals. Studies (Medicare and financial) have documented doctors do over prescribe ADT therapy for profit (depending on Insurance payout rates/profit margin). When insurance payment reimbursement for ADT decreased so did the number of patients being prescribed ADT therapy! [17, 18] Per Wikipedia: “in patients with localized prostate cancer, confined to the prostate, ADT has demonstrated no survival advantage, and significant harm, such as impotence, diabetes and bone loss. Even so, 80% of American doctors provide ADT to patients with localized prostate cancer.” Overtreatment with ADT is extremely profitable, unfortunate and avoidable.
Major surgery, major side effects: Nerve sparing Robotic surgery is touted as being a better treatment and having fewer side effects, this is usually an extreme exaggeration. The nerves can not always be spared. Robotic surgery can result in a faster initial recovery. Long term risk of incontinence, fatigue, ED, depression, some men will ejaculate urine, shorter penis; etc is about the same as conventional surgery [1, 2, 3, 6, 14]. Patients undergoing surgery are at about a 22% chance of long term or permanent fatigue. A catheter will be required. 0.5% died and 20.4% had one or more complications within 30 days of radical prostatectomy [15]. Patients can have unrealistic expectations about the results. Per some studies radical prostatectomy was associated with more regrets than other treatment options. The ED rates and other side effects are often understated to patients. Men are left limp and leaking after this surgery [1, 2, 3, 14].
Patients should not be naive: Medical mistakes are the third cause of deaths in the USA (over one million deaths in 4 years) [13]. Medical mistakes cause more deaths then suicide, firearms and motor vehicle accidents combined. Countless other patients have been harmed by medical mistakes. If you are having surgery, biopsy or a procedure take precautions if possible. Have someone qualified or knowledgeable monitor you and your medications, etc. Doctors, nurses and technicians can be profit motivated, use obsolete procedures, be lazy, incompetent, make mistakes and be apathetic or rushed. Occasionally harm can be done or not prevented with intent or for profit. Drug abuse is often a problem with some medical workers because of easy access. Doctor’s offices and clinics can see many patients in a relatively short amount of time. This may be a disadvantage to patients, empathy and quality of care can sometimes be compromised. Sometimes a nurse, medical assistant or an office staff member may be the person that overseeing much of a patient’s care. I personally know of or have had contact with at least 12 doctors, nurses and other medical staff that I would consider dangerous; incompetent, dishonest, lazy, abusive, mentally disturbed, sadistic, drug abusers that work in doctor’s offices, labs and hospitals. Most of these people did not have a name tag and supplied me with a first name only when asked for a name. I am now sure modern medicine protects the guilty and incompetent, also victimizes the naive patients. I now understand why medical mistakes are the third leading cause of deaths in the USA. I now believe some or most of the deaths and injuries are preventable or intentional. Medical workers can know everything about a patient, hide behind anonymity and do patients irreversible harm or death. The patient may not even know his or her first name. TV and sometimes the public seem to idolize doctors, nurses and caregivers; however the health care profession has about the same amount of abusive or incompetent workers as other occupations. I have also had excellent doctors and nurses, however this may not protect you from the bad ones. What are the main reasons nurses get fired: 1. Prescription drug abuse (because of easy access to drugs). 2. Too many mistakes. 3. Code of conduct and privacy violations. 3. Bad attitude. 4. No proper licenses 5. Abuse of patients. Often the bad health care workers can just get another job if they get fired, without any repercussions. Patients should be aware that sometimes QOL (quality of life) may be secondary or an absent goal in treatment. Sometimes overtreatment for profit or to prevent an unlikely death or metastization from low risk cancer may be the primary or the only goals of prostate cancer treatment. Many men may not be prepared for or have unrealistic expectations about the outcome, physical and psychological impact of testing and treatment.
Depression in prostate cancer patients is common, 27% and 22% at 5 years [6] and for advanced prostate cancer patient’s depression is even higher. Prostate cancer patients are at an increased risk of suicide. Men are seldom screened for depression after prostate cancer.
The risk of long term chronic and permanent fatigue (that can result in depression) is almost always understated if mentioned at all to many patients. Per some studies and depending on your treatment; the risk of long term or permanent fatigue is about 25% to 60%. Radiation with Hormone therapy has a high risk of fatigue. Long term fatigue also increases the risk of clinical depression and suicide.
Prostate cancer testing and treatment. Quackery and butchery? Castration, ADT hormone therapy (chemical castration), Brachytherapy, cryotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery, chemotherapy and blind biopsies are dangerous, psychically and emotionally brutal, traumatic and disturbing. These types of treatments are primitive and almost beyond belief in today’s world of advanced technology. It seems all of the best treatments for prostate cancer have not been approved and some are only available outside the USA. Newer treatments like, HIFU, hyperthermia, Conexus, IRE Therapy, Boron Neutron capture therapy, Gold Nanoparticles, PARP Inhibitors, Platinum, focal Ablation (only treating the cancer and not the entire prostate) and orphan drugs (dichloroacetate, etc.) should be approved and used when appropriate. Biopsies should be limited to selective MRI guided samples only; blind biopsies should never be performed. Per some studies vitamin D3 may help control PSA and prevent prostate cancer from becoming aggressive [16].
Newer prostate cancer testing and treatment is available in the USA at a few locations. I have no affiliations with any of them. Look for IRE, Laser or focal Ablation and no blind biopsies. I Have listed some as a reference: https://urologyweb.com/ https://vitusprostate.com/
Lipstick on a pig: Approved advances in prostate cancer treatment mostly consisting of newer, faster and more accurate radiation treatments, robotic surgery and new drugs. These advances sound like greater strides have been made. However most of these approved advances are of limited benefit to prostate cancer patients and still have about the same amount of long term side effects. Compared to other technologies, computers, communications, electronics, aviation, etc, cancer treatment approved advances have been dismal. The National Cancer Institute wastes about 3 billion dollars a year on PSA screening that can be used for research and true cures. QOL (quality of life) issues have not been adequately addressed. Profit often outweighs QOL.
Prostate Radiotherapy (EBRT-external beam radiation therapy) for cancer treatment. New technology consists of: IMRT, SBRT, IGRT, VMAT, TrueBeam, Cyberknife, etc. This newer, faster, more accurate and easer to setup radiation equipment is of much benefit for doctors, staff and a good selling point to patient’s. However as far as reducing long term side effects, only small gains have been made with the newer radiotherapy equipment. A patient should be skeptical if exaggerated claims are made about reduced long term side effects, especially fatigue and ED rates. Radiotherapy can cause hip and bone problems later in life. 44% decreased orgasm intensity and multiple forms of sexual dysfunction [8, 21]. Patients should inquire as to the treatment plan: Gy dose and fractions, margins, testicular dose, constraints and age of radiotherapy equipment to insure excessive radiation exposure treatment is not given that can result in additional side effects. Patients should be aware that pelvic shaving, permanent tattoo markers, fiducial marker (small seeds) are sometimes placed in the prostate, MRI, CT scan, photographs, catheters and other procedures may or may not a be required. Radiotherapy can also occasionally result in secondary cancers and damage to “organs at risk” (organs close to the prostate). Radiation has a high probability of sexual dysfunction and fatigue, just as high and sometimes higher with the newer equipment. ED rates estimated at 35% to 75% or higher, 93% at 15 years [8,14, 21]. Sometimes radiation can also cause bowel and urinary problems. Per some studies radiotherapy causes moderate-to-severe gastrointestinal effects in 17%. A 5 day SBRT radiation treatment is now commonly available with about the same results and side effects as a 9 week radiation treatment. A doctor with a multimillion dollar lease and maintenance agreement on radiotherapy equipment and a large staff may or may not be influenced by his or her financial obligations when deciding to recommend over testing and treatment.
Fried nuts, two-: Prostate radiotherapy (EBRT/SBRT) can sometimes result in a 5% to 30% temporary or permanent drop in testosterone levels, excluding hormone therapy. This drop is determined by the testicular radiation dose (treatment equipment and planning) [19, 20]. A below normal drop in testosterone can result in fatigue, depression, sexual dysfunction and other symptoms. Always ask for a printout of testicle dose and constraints before and after prostate radiotherapy to insure your testicles are not over radiated, also include the CT scan exposures. Have your testosterone levels tested before and months after EBRT treatment.
Chemotherapy can be extremely toxic and sometimes deadly: Any cancer patient (man or woman) who are being offered chemotherapy should be particularly cautious. Without genomic testing or proof of the effectiveness of the specific drug being used on the exact cancer type being treated, chemotherapy can often be more toxic to the patient then to the cancer. Chemotherapy may be extremely expensive, profitable for some doctors (if dispensed by the doctor and not by a third party) and can be misused or overused, often for profit. The “chemotherapy concession”: A doctor may purchase a quantity of chemo drugs for $10,000 and charge a patient $20,000. A doctor can also receive a percent kickback from the drug company for prescribing the drug. What is the motive for some doctors to perform Genomic testing and giving a patient a different and more effective treatment at an unknown or no profit versus a guaranteed profit with a probable worthless or harmful treatment? This is a well documented and common practice. 75% to 90% of oncologists would refuse chemotherapy if they had cancer. Chemotherapy fails upwards of 93 and 98% percent per some studies. One Michigan oncologist who committed fraud and gave $35 million in needless chemotherapy (for profit) to patients, some who did not even have cancer is now in jail for 45 years. He was running his own in-house pharmacy. The nursing staff was indifferent and the state regulatory agency initially cleared him of any wrongdoing (a cover up). Many or most chemo drugs are considered a biohazard.
Long term care consists of regular PSA testing for years. Long term care for side effects is often lacking or exploitive or ineffective. Often complaints of side effects are disregarded by nurses, doctors and sometimes referred out to other doctors. The patient is sometimes left to figure out what to do about his side effects with the resources available to him. Long term side effects (devastation) often consist of fatigue, bowel or urinary problems, sexual dysfunction, depression, isolation and sometimes suicide. Patients with complaints of chronic fatigue are often told to exercise, get plenty of sleep, pace your self and eat a healthy diet; this advice is of limited help for chronic fatigue. Often treatments for long term side effects are embarrassing, degrading, unavailable, nonexistent, costly, not effective, not offered or bothersome. Billions of dollars are profited from ED drug and other ED products, catheters, pads and diapers, drugs for depression or pain or insomnia or incontinence, additional treatments and surgeries for side effects. Also treatments for the multiple and bizarre side effects from hormone ADT therapy (chemical castration) is sometimes required.
Men, ageing, exploitation and elder abuse: If any man lives long enough it is very likely he will have a prostate problem, low testosterones or some form of sexual dysfunction. In my opinion modern medicine often has been exploitive, abusive and has provided substandard care for older men in general due to all of the explanation given in this text. I believe much of the attitudes toward older Americans need improvement and they are sometimes viewed as being subhuman and exploitable by various groups and individuals. If documented cases of unnecessary surgery and radiotherapy or blind biopsies on children by doctors for profit were released, the vast majority of Americans would be outraged and this practice would quickly end. However for older men it dose not seems to be of great concern! As defined by some or all state laws, exploitation of elderly men by overprescribing treatment for profit is a crime or an offence of various guidelines and regulations. It is extremely unlikely any doctor will ever be prosecuted or has a medical license suspended for this common and extensively documented abuse or crime. It is well documented that all forms abuse do occur to the elderly and disabled in nursing homes and other facilities including neglect, theft, starvation, torture, harassment, sexual assault, etc. Elderly are being exploited in many ways. One patient after recovering from a brain injury testified that he was repeatedly abused, slapped and hit, forced to drink boiling hot tea by multiple caregivers and sexually assaulted by one female caregiver. I personally know of an elderly lady that is living in an expensive assisted living home that has had all of her possessions (radio, clothes, underwear, shoes, bed sheets) repeatedly stolen and replaced by her family. Scams for profit: Guardian scam; If you are declared incompetent by strangers, they can become your guardian (Guardianships and Conservatorships). You can be forced to move into a nursing home and your property can be sold and your assets can be seized by them. In other words-they can steal your assets and incarcerate you. Some people are becoming very wealthy by using this exploitation method. Make sure you have an estate trust, executor, etc [24].
Drug company rip Off!, no bathtub included: More exploitation of men! Almost all prostate cancer treatments usually result a high percentage of erectile dysfunction. Often claims of prompt effective treatment for ED or other side effects if they occur after treatment are often misleading. Statistics for ED percentages from treatment are usually quoted after treatment with Viagra, Muse or other ED treatments, therefore most statistics are very misleading. ED rated at 5 years may be as high as 50% to 80% or higher for most treatments. ED rated at 15 years may be as high as 90% or higher for most treatments. For cryotherapy, ED rates are extremely high. The cost for ED drugs like Levitra, Cialis, Viagra and Muse are deliberately kept very expensive by drug companies, about $11 to $60 per 1 pill or dose. At these prices Lilly could consider including a free bathtub featured in its advertisements for Cialis. The cost of a 30 day supply of Cialis is usually well over $340 and the cost of an inexpensive bathtub is about $200. Generic PDE5I ED drugs in Canada and other parts of the world sell for about $0.50 to $2 a pill. Many insurance companies will not pay for ED drugs or treatment. Less expensive generic drugs are usually unavailable in the US. Some ED drugs should have already become available in a generic (in the USA) form for about $1 a pill. This is further exploitation by the drug companies of men in general. Men are also exploited by counterfeit mail order ED drug sales. ED drugs are not always effective and may have side effects. ED treatments can also be embarrassing, not offered, not practical, painful, expensive/not covered by insurance. Men will often not seek treatment because or these reasons. You can get safe inexpensive quality generic and brand name drugs from Canada. Just get a prescription from your doctor and make sure the pharmacy is CIPA licensed. Generic or bran name Cialis, Viagra for about $0.50 to $3 a pill and other drugs. Go to https://www.cipa.com/certified-safe-online-pharmacies/ for a list of trusted CIPA Canadian pharmacies. Stop getting ripped off by American drug companies.
The numbers game, you lose: More exaggerations and lies. A doctor may state a patients chances of ED is about 35% with EBRT radiotherapy (or some other treatment). A patient may think, 35% is not too bad and if I do get ED I can always take Viagra. What a doctor may not tell a patient is that the ED rate is 35% at 1 or 2 years for a patient under 65 years old and with an ED drug treatment option. For a patient over 4 years, over 65 years old and no ED drugs the ED rate may be about 75% or higher. After age 70 your chances of ED is over 85% or higher[8] Obviously, a man is more likely to refuse treatment at a 75% ED rate verses a 35% ED rate. Some side effects may not be disclosed at all. If side effects (low libido, chronic fatigue, depression, increased suicide risk, etc) are not disclosed, no percentages will usually need to be quoted. Results are often worse for a surgery option, the main difference in ED results between surgery and radiotherapy is; with surgery ED will start out bad and may or may not get better with time, however with radiotherapy ED will get worse over time. With both treatments together or with ADT hormones also you’re in real trouble with ED percentages. Cure rates are often quoted at the 5 years mark for most treatments. 5 years is not a magic number, anyone can have a treatment failure before or after 5 years. A cure rate for a treatment at 5 years may be quoted at 85%; however the cure rate at 7 to 10 years may be only 70% and 50%. The 85% at 5 year rate was quoted to me. I was never told about my 50% at 10 year cure rate. Always ask what is the “biochemical recurrence” (AKA rising PSA or treatment failure) rate for well beyond 5 years with your computer software simulation and Partin tables. Ask your urologist or radiation oncologist for a 10-year cure Rate. If the physician is unable to provide one, consider finding another doctor. Studies and clinical trials results, side effects percentage claims, etc can be biased. Watch out for terms like “age adjusted” or ambiguous or excluded facts as given in the above examples. ED rates for radiotherapy are usually quoted at under 1 or 2 years and for surgery over 1 or 2 year to give the appearance of a more positive result. I have read and have been given some extremely exaggerated claims (mostly lies) concerning cure rated, side effects, etc.
The walking dead; after a blind biopsy and conventional treatment: Patients are often left impotent, incontinent, fatigued, exploited, embarrassed, demoralized, depressed and sometimes feminized/castrated or suicidal. Loss of libido estimated at about 45%. Excluding hormone therapy, lower libido is almost never disclosed as a treatment side effect and sometimes it is completely denied as a side effect. After testing and treatment your life may be very deferent. Prostate cancer patients are often elderly and exploited for profit [1, 5, 9, 10, 25]. Aftercare for long term side effects is frequently ineffective, expensive, not offered, degrading or nonexistent. Prostate cancer patients are seldom told about chronic fatigue, depression, loss of libido and the true risk of side effects are usually understated. Modern medicine often fails, victimizes and exploits prostate cancer patients.
Often few good choices exist for treatment: A prostate cancer patient treatment choice often ends up being the least worst choice or the choice with the side effects a patient thinks he can tolerate. If a patient has intermediate or high risk prostate cancer and dose not have advanced age he may need treatment. He should consider genomic testing and look into other advanced treatments if available. Also he should try and avoid hormone therapy if possible because of the multiple side effects especially if the cancer is organ confined. If laser or other advanced treatments are not available a 5 day SBRT radiation treatment may be considered (In my opinion SBRT could be the least worst of the bad choices, still a poor option). SBRT seems to be fast, least invasive or traumatic. ED and fatigue is still a high long term risk. Radiation with hormone therapy has a higher risk of ED and long term fatigue. However, I now believe conventional prostate cancer testing and treatment is a big mistake for most men.
My story (my dilemma): I was referred to an urologist by my family doctor after a high PSA test. I will refer to the urologist as Doctor “A”; he used old and dangerous testing technology (18 core blind biopsies), his nurse seemed to have a mental defect exhibiting arrogant, rude, strange, abusive behavior and was intent on inflicting psychological harm to me. Shortly after my Dr. “A” visits ended, his nurse was no longer employed at his office and no person in that office would refer to her employment or her existence. I now believe this nurse was high because of drug abuse being common among nurses (easy access to drugs). I was diagnosed with prostate cancer by Dr. “A”. I refused his surgery and hormone therapy recommendation because of the imminent side effects and his unprofessional nurse behavior, so Dr. “A” referred me to Dr “T”. Dr. “T” was outside of my insurance network; however his office manager stated she was willing to work with my insurance, offered me a doctor consultation and would accept any insurance payment as a full payment. When I arrived in his office the waiting room was empty. Dr “T” also had a large staff. Dr. “T” used older conventional technology, offered me overtreatment, hormone therapy, bone scan (unnecessary procedures and testes). One week after my consultation with Dr. “T” I received an $850 bill, in conflict with what was agreed upon with his office manager. After a recommendation from a friend, I called clinic “O” and met with the nurse. She offered me treatments with a verbal guarantee of “no side effects from the radiation”. However this nurse could not answer any of my basic questions, lacked any credibility and sounded like an unscrupulous used car salesmen. Most of these office visits caused me multiple problems with offices workers processing paperwork for tests, insurance forms and billing, etc. Two of these doctors offered me an unnecessary bone scan. Two of these doctors recommended unnecessary hormone therapy ADT (overtreatment) for my organ confined cancer. After I absolutely and utterly refused hormone therapy, both doctors admitted it probably would not help me in my final outcome because of the computer estimate run on me with my organ confined cancer, PSA, biopsy report, etc. Having no newer treatments (laser, etc) available to me at that time, I decided on SBRT treatment with Dr. “K”, he could answer my questions and had new equipment. Before my treatment could start I was referred to “W” lab for an MRI. “W” lab had a trainee assisting and it took over 2 hours to complete my MRI. 2 days later after receiving a copy of my MRI report, I examined the MRI report; it had my name and some other patient history information. I wasted 2 more days verifying it was the correct MRI of me and not some other prostate patient MRI before my treatment could start. I did receive treatment from Dr. “K”. I did have a relatively fast and noninvasive treatment (SBRT), resulting in several months of fatigue, a large PSA bounce 18 mothers later and some other short term side effects. At this time I am doing okay, however I’m not sure what the future will bring? I also no longer trust modern medicine, doctors, nurses, etc. Modern medicine seems to be more of a gamble then a science. I have wasted hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars. I feel modern medicine has abused and failed me (and others) due to the lack of guidelines and regulation, still approved obsolete technology, better unapproved treatments, exploitation, greed, apathy and incompetence. Hindsight is 20/20. I was never offered Genomic testing. If I could do it over again, I would also consider no PSA testing and treatment or traveling for advanced treatments from a competent provider if practical and available. I believe if I did take the two doctors recommendations and received unnecessary hormone therapy in addition to the radiotherapy my quality of life (QOL) would have been severely impacted for years or permanently and could possibly have resulting in my early death. I did seem to have a lot of bad luck in picking providers or is this just the new standard in medical care?
“Do no harm”, unless you can make a lot of money and get away with it: I was harmed physically and verbally by Dr. “A” 18 core blind biopsy and verbally abused by his nurse. I was potentially exploited and financially harmed ($850) by Dr. “T” and offered unnecessary testing and overtreatment. Clinic “O” nurse attempted to misinform and deceive me about the treatment outcome of “no long term side effects”. I was harmed by “W” lab by mistakes and incompetence. I did also have numerous other billing and paperwork problems probably due to mistakes and apathy. A few of the office staff were incapable of completing some very simple tasks like filling out lab work request or insurance forms. At least 40% (probably substantially more, 50% to 60%) of the health care workers I came into contact with did or attempted to do some form of harm to me or provide substandard care, attempted excessive testing and treatment, mistakes, billing overcharges, blind biopsy, false statements, deception, misinformation, apathy and abusive behavior¬¬¬, as explained in this text. I have also observed several medical facilities do not require workers to wear name tags and when asked for a name most will give a first name only; this may also be a factor in health care workers not acting in an ethical manner. To me, it seems that this prostate cancer nightmare maze was intended for maximum physical, psychological, financial harm and to be of questionable benefit and maximum profit for doctors. My prostate cancer experience has been one of the worst events that has happened to me in my lifetime. Also seeking testing and treatment is one of the biggest mistakes I have ever made. I specifically blame modern medicine for not protecting patients from predatory doctors, substandard technology and a lack of regulations that would protect patients. I would have been much better off going to a Voodoo or witch doctor. I would have saved thousands of dollars, time, had no side effects, no paperwork, more confidentiality and privacy. Also I probably would have received better advice. I could have received a nice amulet or a good luck charm to protect against sorcery or magic (PSA testing and treatment) and evil medicine men (predatory doctors).
My treatment choice: I feel LDR Brachytherapy and hormone therapy (AKA chemical castration) seemed to be completely degrading, disturbing and bizarre. Hormone therapy would not have been an effective treatment for me. Surgery and Brachytherapy are to invasive. Surgery has an imminent danger of incontinence and ED. 9 week EBRT radiotherapy was just too long and laborious. Because castration (orchiectomy), ADT therapy (chemical castration), surgery, Chemotherapy, LDR Brachytherapy and blind biopsies are what I consider “Frankenstein medicine” (outdated, harmful, strange, bizarre, brutal, twisted, degrading or a perverted nightmare) I would avoid all of them. Unfortunately, I was deceived and misguided into having a blind biopsy. I do not believe other conventional treatments like radiotherapy are good or great choices either, just not as horrific. The choice I made was a 5 day SBRT radiotherapy. A 5 day SBRT also has numerous drawbacks and side effects, about the same as a 9 week EBRT radiotherapy. I also had no advanced treatment options available to me. As I have stated above, If I could do it over again I would also consider either no PSA testing and treatment or traveling for advanced treatments from a competent provider if practical and available. I am now sure I made the wrong choice by receiving conventional testing and treatment. With prostate cancer, the testing or treatment is often worse then the disease. I am not implying anyone should make the same choices as I did. I am only giving the motives for my decisions. I was also the victim of profit motivated and substandard providers. 3 years later I now believe my prostate cancer testing and treatment greatly accelerated my ageing (through the stress, testing, treatments and physically from the radiation and was also a financial burden). Per a new SBRT studies my 4+3 Gleason score is considered “unfavorable” [7]. I now have about a 50% chance of a treatment failure in 8 to 10 years. My previous long term cure rate was originally quoted at 85% before my treatment started. I am also sure prostate cancer testing and treatment is mostly smoke and mirrors (lies). The man who invented the PSA test, Dr. Richard Ablin now calls it “the Great Prostate Mistake, Hoax and a Profit-Driven Public Health Disaster”[1]. When asked: “How did you live so long?” A 99 year old woman stated “stay away from doctors and don’t take anything they prescribe for you”. With some exceptions, I now believe this advice to be mostly true.
Always protect yourself: With prostate cancer the common standard in medical care seems to be substandard. Do not let the sterile, friendly and professional environment of a doctor’s office detour you from protecting yourself from overtreatment or any unnecessary life changing tests and treatments. If you are concerned about misuse or privacy issues, refuse to fill out EPIC questioners and limit the information given to relevant information only. If you have a high PSA or prostate cancer, educate yourself. A patient should be extremely skeptical if exaggerated claims are made about minimal long term side effects from conventional treatments or blind biopsies, exaggerated cure rates or the need for immediate treatment. Also claims of effective prompt treatments for side effects. Bring someone educated or astute with you to your consultations and appointments. Insist on Genomic or advanced testing if you have prostate cancer. Avoid doctors that are mostly profit motivated. Do not submit to a prostate blind biopsy. Get a second or third opinion if you are being offered treatment with low risk prostate cancer. Learn about all your treatment options, testing and side effects. Verify everything you are told. Under the HIPAA law you are entitle to a copy of all your medical records and bills. Always ask the name of the person assisting you. Get a copy and keep a file of your test results, biopsy report, Gleason score, PSA, MRI report, treatment plan, bills, insurance payouts, etc. Carefully monitor your PSA. Expect a temporary increase (for weeks or months) in PSA after some procedures. Verify the accuracy of paperwork. If treatment is necessary talk to your doctor in advance about side effect management, chronic fatigue, ED, etc. Doctors that provide treatments often have computer software to predict the outcome using test results and different treatment options. Ask to see your computer predicted cure rate outcome with your treatment options if available. This may give you some insight to your options, cure rate and also to avoid overtreatment. Always ask what is the “biochemical recurrence” (AKA rising PSA or treatment failure) rate for well beyond 5 years, 5 years is not a magic number. For help contact a good prostate cancer support group without a conflict of interest. A wise man once told me “you need to learn to think like your doctors (nurses or other providers)”. What are the motives of your providers?
A medical holocaust: Multiple studies have verified more deaths and harm caused from prostate cancer testing and treatment then from prostate cancer itself. Medical mistakes are the third leading cause of deaths in the USA, over 251,000 deaths a year or over one million four thousand (1,004,000) deaths in 4 years. More then suicide, firearms and motor vehicle accidents combined [13]. These statistics do not include many more people that have had their lives destroyed or shortened by modern medicine or a reduction in QOL (quality of life). Per the FDA, 106,000 deaths per year (Over one million people in 10 years) from prescription drugs. Very often men are not told about all of the true risks and side effects or they are downplayed for both a blind biopsy and treatments. I personally know of 2 patients killed from medical mistakes, one got hepatitis from a colonoscopy and the other death from an upset ER nurse forcing a tube down his throat causing lethal damage.
No national guidelines: Strict guidelines for cancer testing and treatment need to be created and enforced because of the extensive and documented abuses of prostate cancer patients: 1. Blind biopsies should be banned. 2. Strict standards and gridlines for testing and treatment need to be created. 3. Full mandatory industry standard disclosure need to be created for tests and treatment to include realistic risk factors. 4. Newer testing and treatments need to be created and approved. 5. Dignity, privacy and confidentiality need to be standardized and enforced in addition to the HIPAA laws. 6. Mandatory aftercare needs to be available, standardized and regulated. 7. The cost for drugs needs to be regulated to end financial exploitation by drug companies. 8. Medical workers should be identifiable and be required to wear name tags with first, last names and job title. 9. A new standard “Ethical Code of Conduct” needs to be created and enforced to end patient exploitation and abuse. 10. Genomic or genetic testing should be required before any patient is sent for treatment to avoid overtreatment and insure the correct treatment. 11. A truthful and accurate standardized educational book or PDF needs to be created and distributed to all high PSA and prostate cancer patients. 12. Ban for profit ADT therapy and the “chemotherapy concession”. 13. A database needs to be created to track and ban dangerous or incompetent health care workers to break the cycle of abuse. It is unlikely any of the above recommendations will be implemented unless prostate cancer affected a larger percent of the population or enough prominent people are affected. Prostate cancer patients must protect themselves as the only alternative!
Clarification: This text may anger and upset some people for various reasons. The intent of this document is not to imply all doctors are dishonest or to condemn all medical providers. The intent is to educate men of the consequences and dangers that may await them so they can take appropriate action and to inform patients of real world, typical or worst case scenarios. I have also tried to include most scenarios a prostate cancer patient should be cautious of. Would some health care providers harm a patient for profit or by accident or some other reason? Yes, absolutely! Shockingly, for me it was will over 40% (probably 50% to 60%) that intended to do me some form of harm or provided substandard care as explained in my story. Are some other doctors and nurses exceptional? Yes! I have also had excellent doctors and nurses, however this may not protect you or I from the bad ones.
Disclaimer: I have no conflict of interest. I do not represent any support group or other organizations. I am not a doctor. I do not prevent, treat, diagnose, cure or advise on medical matters. The information in this document is for educational purposes only. If you need treatment or medical advice, consult a competent and trustworthy medical doctor.
Anyone may copy, email or distribute parts of or this entire document without changing or modifying it.
I have been extensively criticized by some for creating this document and its blunt content. In order to insure my privacy and avoid any potential reprisals, further abuse or exploitation, I will remain Anonymous.
References:
1. Hardcover book, The Great Prostate Hoax: How Big Medicine Hijacked the PSA Test and Caused a Public Health Disaster. by Richard J. Ablin (Inventor of the PSA test).
2. https://urologyweb.com/prostate-cancer-treatment-the-disturbing-facts/
3. World J Mens Health. 2017 Apr; 35(1): 1–13. Published online 2017 Apr 26. Orgasmic Dysfunction after Radical Prostatectomy. Paolo Capogrosso.
4. R. Timmerman. Phase I dose-escalation study of stereotactic body radiation therapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011 May 20;29(15):2020-6.
10.1200/JCO.2010.31.4377. Epub 2011 Apr 4.
5. Medscape Urology WebMD: Mortality Risk With Prostate Biopsy Raises Concern – Medscape – Jun 17, 2013.
6. British Journal of Cancer (2006) 94, 1093 – 1098 & 2006 Cancer Research UK. Anxiety and depression after prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment: 5-year follow-up.
7. Alan Katz. Original research published: 08 July 2016.. Predicting Biochemical Disease-Free survival after Prostate stereotactic Body radiotherapy: risk-stratification and Patterns of Failure.
8. C. KING. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.07.1748. SEXUAL FUNCTION AFTER STEREOTACTIC BODY RADIOTHERAPY FOR PROSTATE CANCER: RESULTS OF A PROSPECTIVE CLINICAL TRIAL.
9. L. Klotz. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2013 Jun;20(3):204-9. Prostate cancer overdiagnosis and overtreatment.
10. Loeb, S. Eur Urol. 2014 Jun; 65(6): 1046–1055. Overdiagnosis and Overtreatment of Prostate Cancer.
11. Loeb, S. J Urol. 2013 Mar; 189(3): 867–870. Is Repeat Prostate Biopsy Associated with a Greater Risk of Hospitalization? Data from SEER-Medicare.
12. The new England journal of medicine. October 13, 2016 vol. 375 no. 15. 10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer.
13. BMJ 2016; 353 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i2139 (Published 03 May 2016) Cite this as: BMJ 2016;353:i2139. Medical error—the third leading cause of death in the US.
14. Matthew J. Resnick. N Engl J Med 2013; 368:436-445 January 31, 2013 Long-Term Functional Outcomes after Treatment for Localized Prostate Cancer
15. JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Volume 97, Issue 20, 19 October 2005, Pages 1525–1532. 30-Day Mortality and Major Complications after Radical Prostatectomy: Influence of Age and Comorbidity.
16. Rev Urol. 2004 Spring; 6(2): 95–97. Vitamin D for the Management of Prostate Cancer
Masood A Khan.
17. Reimbursement Policy and Androgen-Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer Vahakn B. Shahinian, M.D., Yong-Fang Kuo, Ph.D., and Scott M. Gilbert, M.D. N Engl J Med 2010; 363:1822-1832November 4, 2010
18. Medicare Reimbursement and Prescribing Hormone Therapy for Prostate Cancer Nancy L. Keating. JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Volume 102, Issue 24, 15 December 2010, Pages 1814–1815.
19. Testicular Dose in Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy. Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie • April 2005.
20. J Hematol Oncol. 2011; 4: 12. 2011 Mar 27. Low incidence of new biochemical and clinical hypogonadism following hypofractionated stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) monotherapy for low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer.
21. International Society for Sexual Medicine. Prevalence and Predicting Factors for Commonly Neglected Sexual Side Effects to External-Beam Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. Anders Frey.
22. Murray KS and Thrasher JB. “Have We Underestimated Erectile Dysfunction after Prostate Biopsy?” AUANews. 2015; 20(12): 11.
23. BJUI. A prospective study of erectile function after transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy. Katie S. Murray, Volume 116, Issue 2 August 2015 Pages 190–195.
24. How seniors can prevent the legal seizure of all their assets. Business Insider. Áine Cain10/9/2017
25 Epidemic of overtreatment of prostate cancer must stop By Otis Brawley, CNN Contributor. Fri July 18, 2014
Internet search or Google: prostate cancer overtreatment or dangers or scam or hoax. Prostate biopsy sepsis or ED or dangers. Medical mistakes, etc, etc. The evidence and references are to massive and overwhelming too list them all in this document.