黑料吃瓜群网

Maybe, seems to be the consensus from the medical community.
said he was diagnosed with 鈥渕id-range aggressive cancer鈥� on June 13, 2014. He underwent surgery and was declared cancer-free three months later.
鈥淚t came out of the blue for me. I had no idea,鈥� Stiller, 50, said. 鈥淎t first, I didn鈥檛 know what was going to happen. I was scared. It just stopped everything in your life because you can鈥檛 plan for a movie because you don鈥檛 know what鈥檚 going to happen.鈥�
Stiller said he has finally opened up about his secret cancer battle to encourage other men to get tested early. He underwent a Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) test when he was 46 鈥� a preventive health exam he says saved his life.
Stiller's declaration has been met with mixed reactions. So why the controversy?

'While a PSA test is not dangerous in itself in any way, it is definitely not foolproof,' writes Ben Stiller in his blog published on . 'The criticism of the test is that depending on how they interpret the data, doctors can send patients for further tests like the MRI and the more invasive biopsy, when not needed.'

'Physicians can find low-risk cancers that are not life threatening, especially to older patients. In some cases, men with this type of cancer get 鈥渙ver-treatment鈥� like radiation or surgery, resulting in side effects such as impotence or incontinence. Obviously this is not good; however it鈥檚 all in the purview of the doctor treating the patient', writes Stiller.

Oncologist Vinay Prasad told the that there were many flaws in Stiller鈥檚 logic. 鈥淗is strong faith that the PSA test 鈥渟aved his life鈥� is incompatible with a true understanding of overdiagnosis; no person whose cancer was found by PSA screening can say 鈥渢he test saved my life鈥濃�� say Prasad.

Health News Review contributor, Dr Douglas Campos-Outcalt, says Stiller has 鈥渙ver a 95 per cent chance of being wrong鈥� in his analysis of the PSA test. 鈥淪creening does more harm than good in these men, (there are people) who are killed by the treatment and a large number who are left impotent and incontinent鈥�.

This wrap up comes from Saurabh Jha, MD,聽 from an article published in . 'Some say (Stiller's) spreading by advocating PSA screening. I'd argue that it's not possible to spread misinformation about screening because we don't have a clue. Screening is an information problem; some benefit, some are harmed, but we don't know who will benefit or who will be harmed. This has a name. It's called "uncertainty." Ben Stiller has increased the public uncertainty about PSA screening. I think that's a good thing.'