Mike\'s crazy theory on BPH and Bladder cancer

Jim: U crack me up!

KC: Thanks for the info. Score 1 more for the retention issue.

Webs: Yes, I know about that part but have no idea how to prove that with a study. Maybe that's why you ladies pee when you laugh hard...holding it too much.

Karen: You're not late to the party at all. This is just getting started. You are an example of why I included women in my original question. I figure that urethral strictures or just plain constricted urethras would also contribute to the problem. I know my sister and my daughter both needed to have theirs stretched at a young age due to problems. Score another for retention issues.

Mike

Know this is a little late in response to your question. I did have post void urine retention and extreme urgency prior to dx of bc. In fact, urol couldn't do cystoscope in office couldn't get scope in. Had to be done as outpatient cause urethra needed to be stretched and his operative report with first biopsy stated that there was still a lot of urine in my bladder even thoug I had voided prior to procedure and had not had anything to eat or drink since midnight the night before.
After talking with him at followup, I realized that is why I had felt the seemingly almost constant full bladder for quite some time, maybe a year. After the procedure, I realized that the amount I had been urinating was hadn't been the full amount in my bladder for a while.

Mike,

Interesting topic. I had never been to a urologist until a year before I was diagnosed with BC. I went in because of trouble urinating and was diagnosed with an enlarged prostate. 1 year later I had BC.

KC

mmc wrote:
4 Sure. My eyes hurt from reading.................lol

is that wordy or writey

Vi,

Thanks for the kind words. I don't think I'm any smarter than doctors. I have a different perspective than many. Personally, I have tons of respect for doctors. The dedication that it takes to become a doctor and all of things they have to do once they are doctors is amazing to me.

With that said, just as in any profession, there is a bell curve of performance. Some are top of the field and some are the bottom with the majority being in the middle. As patients, our desire is be treated by those at the very high end of exceptional, have them immediately figure us out as people and talk to us in a way that we understand and appreciate while staying absolutely abreast of each and every study in world that has anything to do with our condition.
Of course, we'd prefer to pay them at the bottom end of the spectrum for all these wonderous expections as well.

Kind of not fair when you think about it but that's often a patient perspective and the majority of people look at things from a self interest perspective. Nothing wrong with that as long everyone understands everyone else's perspective.

I can't do a study by surveying people on this site and others because it's not really a study that would have any scientific merit. It would just fall under the category of "anectodal evidence". If a research group picked it up and there was merit, then it could be acted upon and that's my objective. If bladder cancer can be prevented in some, caught sooner in others, that's a good thing.

I only asked the question because I've read of BPH folks on this site and others and the tought came into my head and it made logical sense. Then when I looked at the research study of Swedish men, it was kind of obvious (in my opinion) that they missed the reason for the connection between TURP and higher incidence of bladder cancer.

However, my uro's reponse to my research idea indicated another probable reason for the correlation that I was unaware of. That is, until recent years TURP was the treatment of choice for all sorts of bladder issues and some of those issues may have been presence of bladder cancer.

I still think there is some merit to the idea of retention being a risk factor (as you can tell from my message above). It still makes logical sense to me.

I couldn't be a doctor in a million years. I'd just want to shake some patients until they pass out when they don't follow what I tell them to do. Trying to keep a business running (practice) and dealing with the personnel and equipment issues at the same time as trying to stay on top of current research is just so daunting in my mind that I can't fathom it.

I tell people to get to major bladder cancer centers all the time. Doesn't mean I don't have the utmost respect for local urologists. I do and they fit into the overall treatment hierarchy perfectly. However, just as a GP refers to a specialist, the specialists need to refer to sub-specialists in order to increase positive outcomes.

Besides, how could I be as wordy as I am and still manage to treat enough patients in a day to pay the salaries of my staff, the rent, equipment maintenance, malpractice insurance, etc.???



Mike

Mike,
Thanks for answering my question (that I know was kinda off the topic you are discussing), as I can now put that idea to rest.
Personally, I think you should continue with your thoughts and conduct a study. Sometimes I think you are smarter than many of the doctors. Maybe you could use people from the various cancer forums, decide on the variable you are testing and gather data from them. You could include people on the bladder cancer facebook. However, not many could follow your deep train of thought (me included) or know the answers to what you are testing.