I really don't agree with your statement that all the P.R. is just great. I agree that heightened awareness of prostate cancer is a good thing, but if what passes as information about this disease and its treatment is misleading, that is certainly not good. Good public relations enlightens. It doesn't mislead.
For example, the press release that started all this discussion casts the first surgeon in a very bad light. It blames him for arbitrarily stopping the surgery, when it almost certainly would not be the surgeon who would declare a breathing problem; it would be the anesthesiologist, and such a decision would certainly indicate that the patient was in significant distress. You earlier excused Dr. Samadi on this point saying that it was Steve's account of what happened. Unfortunately, this is Dr. Samadi's piece of propaganda, not Steve's, and Sr. Samadi has ownership and responsibility for everything that's in it. A world-renowned surgeon can't walk away from something like this, saying, "Well, that's what the patient told me." If it's in his release, it's his word and his reputation.
The same applies to the later statistics about "cures" and potency that we've already discussed ad nauseum.
I've read enough about Dr. Samadi to realize that he must be a very, very talented surgeon. It's not his surgical skill that causes me any concern, and it's not your high regard for him, which I fully understand.
It's his willingness to use patiient testimony to present opinions and facts that don't stand up to scrutiny and which can lead newly-diagnosed individuals to make important medical decisions based on misleading testimony that bothers me. Again, I don't know why a surgeon of his special skill would use such a public relations strategy, or sign off on it.
As a public relations professional with 30 years experience, I am really bothered by this approach.