AARP says over 50 can skip the PSA test?

[Tony Crispino]

This is on the AARP website...

AARP says skip the PSA...

I don't think this is very responsible. They say you can probably Nix the PSA test.

Sound like roulette again...

Tony

[Kathy Meade]

The headline says no but then they seem to say more mushy things in the details.

Remember they are a major seller of insurance and this is probably the driving force behind the piece.

I wonder if they are thinking about limiting paying for PSA tests and under what circumstances.

What actions do people think are appropriate in response to this?

[Tony Crispino]

You know my response,
And you know how many people will read this publication thinking it's ok to skip it. It sure is not very helpful on the awareness front! I posted it out there so it can be discussed. When people ask me, I would tell them to ask a doctor, not an insurance publication.

[E. Michael D. ("Mike") Scott]

I would suggest that if you are a member of AARP you wrote and complained. This is a membership organization and it will respond to its members views if they are expressed loudly enough.

I have to say that I think they are correct about a lot of what is in the piece, which is focused primarily on the generally excessive use of imaging tests -- primary driven by defensive medicine. We all seem to be under the impression that we should get MRIs and CT scans at the drop of a hat -- and I am NOT referring to people with cancer diagnoses.

[Terry Procter]

that is NOT what this article says...
http://www.aarp.org/health/conditions/articles/harvard__prostate-di...
???????

[John Farrow]

I must admit that I have very little faith in the PSA test without a DRE. I had PSA and DRE for 5 years prior to my biopsy and diagnosis, by then my cancer was inoperable, leaving me with the only options of Radiation and Hormone treatment. At no time was my PSA over 5 and hasnt been until this day.

My PCa is now untreatable with any current medication.

I dont know what to advise those people that do not show any symptoms and whose PSA is in the low range. Often, like me, by the time symptoms occur, it can be to late. We really need another more reliable test, but at this stage the PSA and DRE seem to be the only ones we have. So in my opinion it is very importand to at least undergo these tests when you are in the age group and for those who have a history of PCa in the Family.

[Tony Crispino]

John,
DRE is not a reliable test either. I have advanced prostate cancer but all my DRE's were unremarkable. But my seminal vesicles were bilaterally involved. Not only should someone get a PSA and a DRE, they should also get a PCA3 test. This is a much more accurate test (albiet imperfect as it is.)

[John Farrow]

Hi Tony,
I agree with you, you are in the same situation as I was, but all these tests cost money and a lot of people just cant afford to go from test to test, so they accept what their MD says. My first DRE indicated lumps in my prostate, but my MD said they were caused by age, so like a fool I accepted what he told me without question. Now I'm paying the price

[Tony Crispino]

Terry,
The article I posted stating AARP's position on PSA is much newer than the one you posted. And in the table at the bottom stating "Tests you (probably) can nix" is PSA. Additionally, under the category called Bottom Line it says "Consult your doctor, especially if you have symptoms, such as painful urination or blood in the urine". It certainly at very least shows that AARP is down playing screening, and that they are a bit confused as to why someone should be screened.

[John Farrow]

Mate, I can tell you that if they wait that long, when they eventually have a byopsy, unless the symtoms are caused by BHP or an effection, then the news will be all bad.