Casey, you state that, "Too often people read the article headlines without actually reading and understanding the article." I certainly agree with that and, frankly, Ithink that is part of the problem with the comments from Brawley and the ACS.
I would like the headline from the ACS to read "Men Should be Screened for Prostate Cancer." That would yield a clear take away to the public and the details that you point out could be in the fine print (does not apply to death bed men over 90, etc.). People would get the general message that testing is good. Instead, the headline reads, "Advantages to Cancer Screening Exaggerated". Unfortunately, that leaves another clear message that, IMO, is can lead to men believing that screening is not necessary because ACS says so.
The details you cite about the article are not untrue, it's just that only a few PCa wonks will read and understand them. The general population will get a broad message that is negative about screening.
The people in management at the ACS are not amateurs. They know how to deliver a message and, IMO, the message they are delivering is purposely one that does not encouraging screening.
So, you have been very articulate about parsing the ACS wording but let me ask you a direct question: Do you believe, as Tony, myself and many others do, that a good broad message from the ACS should be "Men Should be Screened for Prostate Cancer"? If you do we are all in the same boat and the details can come later; if you don't then, as David says, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
P.S. BTW, what is your PCa story and why don't you post a signature?