I saw this post this morning.
Again Mike puts a great reply to a study. Clearly, the biggest confusion is using "averages" instead of individual cases. With an average 12 year life expectency after diagnosis at the average age of 64, and a US life expectancy for males at 78, you can see how a general statement on the benefits might discount traditional therapy. But each case is NOT the same. Thise that are younger than the median age point, or with more aggressive cancers clealy benefit from therapy. And the watchful waiting argument is seriously flawed as it is based on averages as well.
In time, I remain hopeful to see a test that determines the differences between indolent and aggressive prostate cancer. Until then, each case should be dealt with individually.
Every cancer is different and I think we are getting to the point where watchful waiting becomes a good alternative, taking into consideration all of the variables---age, GS, psa, biopsy results. Borderline cases should not opt for WW unless one's age is very advanced.