|
Checking your balls
So we had a charity in work yesterday talking about testicular cancer, the signs symptoms and how to examine yourself.
I was blown away by the amount of blokes who had no idea and even more so by the number of them that never check or in a few cases even touch their ball sack.. One guy left the room and fainted when the plastic balls were handed out, another has had a lump and pain for 2 years but refuses to get it checked :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: I mean my god :cuckoo: How many of you chaps don't check your chaps? it's common sense to me. |
Evidence?
|
Originally Posted by john banks
(Post 11824435)
Evidence?
of? |
least you can see what youre doing /have decent health service here
My bro inlaw in zim has been thinner than should be perhaps for last three years , but outwardly normal otherwise , ate well moved around a lot 4 days ago had bit fever and started vomiting blood / being sick , something like this but on much smaller scale happened about 1.5 years ago . He got monthly injections of something to treat paranoia - he had badly adverse reaction to smoking weed in his teens- completely ruined an intelligent bloke Anyway hes dead , some kind undiagnosed digestion problem or deliberate poisoning leading internal bleeding |
Originally Posted by dpb
(Post 11824452)
He got monthly injections of something to treat paranoia
FYI you're stories are really depressing and blunt .. Sorry for your loss though:( |
the depressing ( and bewildering ) part is how hes managed to keep this from everyone including his wife - until it was all too late
iv spent hrs over last day scouring the intenet and read that you can go for years without even knowing you've got a stomach ulcer all the relatives are gathered there now apparently , funeral Monday - absolutely everyone gets buried , and everyone belongs to a club in preparation for the cost They ( the relatives ) all thought was going to be his / girlfriends mother , who will outlast everyone at this rate . A funeral in zim is an excuse for a party though in zim , Iv provided some funds |
Originally Posted by pimmo2000
(Post 11824440)
of?
I don't mean pictures or video, but controlled trials of the effectiveness of checking balls to prevent death from testicular cancer. Public tend to believe emotive campaigns by charities and rarely question the claims. |
Originally Posted by pimmo2000
(Post 11824518)
:Suspiciou
FYI you're stories are really depressing and blunt .. Sorry for your loss though:( Oh, dpb I too am sorry for your loss, sincerely:thumb: |
My apologies , I think it gives a bit of perspective when we complain about our own nhs though :thumb:
|
Originally Posted by dpb
(Post 11824533)
My apologies , I think it give a bit of perspective when we complain about our own nhs though :thumb:
NHS, priceless. |
You did find her though . :)
One the more disturbing stories Zim last year was patients who had been wrongly assigned amputation Sent packing with a "sorry" . :eek: |
Originally Posted by john banks
(Post 11824526)
For checking balls.
I don't mean pictures or video, but controlled trials of the effectiveness of checking balls to prevent death from testicular cancer. Public tend to believe emotive campaigns by charities and rarely question the claims. Do you know what the stats for false positives look like John? |
Might have a paywall but http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e...svYzLzTQ%3D%3D
|
Originally Posted by john banks
(Post 11824631)
Might have a paywall but http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e...svYzLzTQ%3D%3D
|
I agree, check your balls regularly and go to the docs if you notice anything different. Plus think about your prostate too. Affects blokes a lot too.
http://prostatecanceruk.org/prostate...s-and-symptoms |
Originally Posted by Rooneypies
(Post 11824651)
I agree, check your balls regularly and go to the docs if you notice anything different. Plus think about your prostate too. Affects blokes a lot too.
http://prostatecanceruk.org/prostate...s-and-symptoms |
Originally Posted by pimmo2000
(Post 11824417)
So we had a charity in work yesterday talking about testicular cancer, the signs symptoms and how to examine yourself.
I was blown away by the amount of blokes who had no idea and even more so by the number of them that never check or in a few cases even touch their ball sack.. One guy left the room and fainted when the plastic balls were handed out, another has had a lump and pain for 2 years but refuses to get it checked :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: I mean my god :cuckoo: How many of you chaps don't check your chaps? it's common sense to me. |
Originally Posted by john banks
(Post 11824526)
For checking balls.
I don't mean pictures or video, but controlled trials of the effectiveness of checking balls to prevent death from testicular cancer. Public tend to believe emotive campaigns by charities and rarely question the claims. Unless I've been completely mislead my entire life, finding cancer early is a good thing? |
Originally Posted by john banks
(Post 11824526)
For checking balls.
I don't mean pictures or video, but controlled trials of the effectiveness of checking balls to prevent death from testicular cancer. Public tend to believe emotive campaigns by charities and rarely question the claims. Or is the theory that testicular cancer is so rare that all self checking would do is clogg up the NHS with false positives - and use up resources that could be best directed elsewhere My GP friend said something similar about the tests for prostrate cancer - he was against because he felt it was ineffective on both a clinical and resource utilisation level Btw, that BMJ article just looks like an opinion letter - not a peer review study |
The references are behind the paywall hodgy0_2. It is reasonable to summarise evidence in something that looks like an opinion letter if the underlying evidence is referenced.
The idea that detecting all cancers early by screening is appealing, but not evidence based. Even far more common cancers that have a much higher risk of death are borderline which is why we don't screen for everything. Prostate cancer screening is a hot potato for example. It is very easy to identify and treat prostate cancers that need so many men to be screened, investigated and treated that many think the overall burden of the intervention is more than the overall burden of the disease. For example, you can take a man and medicalise the remainder of his life and not prolong it. Yet he might feel grateful for early diagnosis and treatment. Overall you are sometimes doing more harm than good. The following addresses the other points: There is no good evidence that routine testicular self examination is of any benefit.4 5 6 Nor will there ever be: a study of adequate power would require millions of men, simply because testicular cancer is so rare.4 This fact is distorted by all the well meaning evangelism—few consumers of men’s health media would realise, for example, that the average general practitioner will see only one new case every 20 years.7 Another myth is that testicular cancer is a silent killer. In fact, nearly half of patients have testicular pain.8 And, though a painless testicular swelling is described as the typical presentation, this is often symptomatic—through causing a heaviness, a mass effect, or other symptoms.9 10 This may, understandably, prompt self examination, in which case the activity is typically misinterpreted as a life saving triumph. But this is simply a victory for common sense—for taking notice of symptoms and acting on them. It’s a world away from the notion of routine self examination in asymptomatic men, as advocated by the enthusiasts. The chances of discovering something significant from routine self examination of the testicles are minuscule—at least 50 000 men would need to examine themselves for 10 years to prevent one death.11 What will self examination elicit, though? Incidentalomas—because benign scrotal swellings such as varicoceles and epididymal cysts are relatively common.7 These will provoke anything from mild concern to incapacitating anxiety.4 And that anxiety can be infectious, worrying general practitioners into unnecessary ultrasound requests or referral, thereby lengthening the queue for patients who really do need further assessment. It seems odd that there hasn’t been a more critical assessment of routine testicular self examination given that an analogous activity—routine breast self examination in women—has been discredited. There is no evidence that routine breast self examination is of benefit, but it is known to cause harm, through generating anxiety and unnecessary biopsies.12 Medical professionals have been slow to implement this evidence—perhaps because it seems counterintuitive, or because the Department of Health’s current policy of so called self awareness is difficult to understand or convey. Or perhaps the real problem is the public’s confused and disbelieving reaction when the medical profession makes an about face. For example, when Michael Baum, professor emeritus of surgery and visiting professor of medical humanities at University College London, once explained the lack of evidence behind routine self examination of the breast to an audience of women in Miami, “About half the audience stormed out knocking over their chairs in their fury and one shouted out loudly, ‘We don’t need to listen to this crap.’” My own previous attempts to debate the merits of routine testicular self examination have been met, by men’s health groups and charities, with either disbelief or hostility—with the accusation, at one point, that I was “wishing cancer on men.” |
My missus does mine for me with her mouth, shes VERY thorough....
|
Originally Posted by john banks
(Post 11824799)
The references are behind the paywall hodgy0_2. It is reasonable to summarise evidence in something that looks like an opinion letter if the underlying evidence is referenced.
The idea that detecting all cancers early by screening is appealing, but not evidence based. Even far more common cancers that have a much higher risk of death are borderline which is why we don't screen for everything. Prostate cancer screening is a hot potato for example. It is very easy to identify and treat prostate cancers that need so many men to be screened, investigated and treated that many think the overall burden of the intervention is more than the overall burden of the disease. For example, you can take a man and medicalise the remainder of his life and not prolong it. Yet he might feel grateful for early diagnosis and treatment. Overall you are sometimes doing more harm than good. The following addresses the other points: One of my questions was around self checking for Brest cancer and skin cancer Is this in your opinion a waste of time |
On my understanding of the evidence, I do not advise women to perform routine breast self examination.
I have not assessed the evidence for routine skin self examination, but am unaware of any quality guidance suggesting I should encourage it. |
Originally Posted by john banks
(Post 11824968)
On my understanding of the evidence, I do not advise women to perform routine breast self examination.
I have not assessed the evidence for routine skin self examination, but am unaware of any quality guidance suggesting I should encourage it. |
Originally Posted by john banks
(Post 11824968)
On my understanding of the evidence, I do not advise women to perform routine breast self examination.
I have not assessed the evidence for routine skin self examination, but am unaware of any quality guidance suggesting I should encourage it. Is it not better for a woman who finds a lump in her breast to have it checked by a doctor rather than to not check and miss finding the lump? In my direct experience one who did and who had breast cancer is still alive as she caught it early, and one who didn't and had breast cancer is now dead. |
Originally Posted by john banks
(Post 11824968)
On my understanding of the evidence, I do not advise women to perform routine breast self examination.
I have not assessed the evidence for routine skin self examination, but am unaware of any quality guidance suggesting I should encourage it. or is it left for individual GP's to decide what to advise patients I sort of get your point about some charities creating more heat that light about some of these things - and making themselves look good in the process but I must admit I thought the advice re checking Breast and Skin was more than simply charities bandwagoning |
Originally Posted by JGlanzaV
(Post 11824801)
My missus does mine for me with her mouth, shes VERY thorough....
|
Originally Posted by andy97
(Post 11825031)
Isn't it better to advise to check yourself. It certainly can't do any harm and may just save one extra person's life
From the quote earlier, "There is no evidence that routine breast self examination is of benefit, but it is known to cause harm, through generating anxiety and unnecessary biopsies." There is a difference between this and reporting a finding. Additionally, breast cancer has a much worse overall prognosis than testicular cancer and is much more common. There are many evidence based guidelines on many topics in the medical literature, some British, some international, some government/NHS, some independent. Generalists and specialists use them. They have standardised methods of giving grades of evidence. A doctor has a responsibility to act within their knowledge and keep themselves up to date. The things I say on here and everywhere respect those requirements and hopefully if you look at the evidence yourselves, rather than listening to vocal vested interests (including charities, drug companies, pressure groups) you will find that much of medicine is trying hard to be evidence based rather than doing or recommending things because they seem a good idea. Often things that intuitively seem a good idea are not because of unintended consequences. It can be difficult to get your head around when someone like me says the opposite to a charity worker. However, I'm directing you to look at the evidence. The charity worker, whilst meaning well, and probably believing everything they say, has not studied evidence based medicine, and often their livelihood depends on promoting a message. They are less controlled in this than drug companies. |
I completely disagree with discouraging any man to self check. We're bad enough at checking things as it is. The 'let's not talk about it attitude' led my 18 year old brother to be too embarrassed to talk about the testicular lump he found & the first we knew was when he passed out & coughed blood.
He passed away approx a week later. I'd rather be behind 10 men in a queue to see the doctor and ALL be wrong than 1 fail to find it & die. |
I always get my G/F to check mine when she pops them in her mouth. :)
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:41 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands