Before high-profile figures such as Peter Beattie hit the public stage pushing prostate cancer screening, they could do worse than read up on the subject.
In a column in The Weekend Australian former Queensland Premier Peter Beattie described his decision to get screened for prostate cancer as "an easy choice." But it isn't and he should have known better, says Dr Norman Swan.
Just as interviewing lottery winners is not a sensible way of making informed judgements about the odds of winning, so is it unwise to use the "I’m alive" testimony of post-treatment survivors of prostate cancer as a guide to the value of the test.
The push to present very young women being at significant risk for breast cancer may be lining pockets of private radiography providers, but it will be causing an alarming and avoidable incidence of unnecessary investigation.
With October being the pink-washed month for breast cancer, comes news that some breast and prostate cancers vanish without medical treatment in a medical anomaly. Early detection has meant treatment is occurring on tumours that may disappear naturally.
The prostate cancer debate has taken yet another interesting turn. Just weeks after all Australian men over 40 were urged to get screened, a new major study has thrown another spanner in the works of screening advocates, writes Simon Chapman.
Public health and cancer experts who argue there is insufficient evidence to prove that the benefits of prostate cancer screening outweigh harms, writes Melissa Sweet.