No offence taken, or accusation made..
I have seen it in a general attitude, where the patient's age and general health will be considered.
You can almost hear the cogs turning..
He's 55, a productive life still left we need to do this and that....
He's 75, 5 years to the average longevity age, perhaps we wait and see and watch.
Perhaps he will die before he REALLY needs surgery.
At age 60, my first Uro suggested that there was no hurray,
but that anxiety would likely force me to do something within two years.
As it turns out, the cancer was far worse than expected and in 6 mths, it would likely have escaped the capsule.
If I got sore bones, in 6 mths time, would there be a statement "Sorry - We should have taken the PC back then"
I know a 70yo who is on watchful-waiting, and I suspect that his specialist was concerned for his heart, in the beginning.
Problem is that now - he's still here and the cancer must have grown and the UDoc is thinking - "perhaps , I really need to do something now-He's still here !"
You tell a 70yo, that he should be happy to make it to 80 and then die, perhaps needlessly.
I am not saying that Doc's are flippant with life, but they do take all things into account, and sometimes to their regret.
And - dare I say, it has much to do with Govt' policy and their attitudes to health funding... and the Insurance Companies...
<I would say that if you die from un-treated PC, the pathologist isn't going to hide it from your family. He has no motivation to do so.>
BUT - I suspect that it would be just specify -- "Cause of death - Liver Cancer"
I would love to be corrected and told that the Pathologist specifically indicates the exact form of cancer.
ie "Cause of death - AC of the Liver"
Who could ever be so silly to think that the system hides details , let alone facts, from us !
Post Edited (BuiDoi) : 10/8/2010 7:59:10 PM (GMT-6)