This is a great example of another so called 'expert in PCa' saying you "need' chemo and it is your next destination. (hello)- Question everything and all the time in PCa and other cancers, there are agendas, biases, super non-experts whom pass themselves off as knowing exactly what you need which usually happens to be very profittable and usually costs alot (just a coincidence?). There are many options one can try or consider prior to chemo or someother high priced protocols that also have huge side effects to also consider, but hey the doc doesn't get the side effects he gets a nice check for injecting whatevers. It also could be a useful protocol in the correct scenario and setting, perhaps.....but patients have way more choices than they are lead to believe or know about
. (see www.hrpca.org)
Get second opinions and on your own doings, forget the good old boy network referrral they may be playing you for their best interests and not yours. Sorry to be cynical but have lived and seen enough of such to know it exists and goes on. Most patients probably assume any doc with a white coat on is therefore an expert in about
whatever comes out of their mouths, to bad the reality is not the perception. Dr. Strum whom is amongest the most qualified PCa specialists with near 40 yrs. experience, including pathology knowledge sums up the doctors whom treat PCa like this and posted it on PCa forums that he answers free questions for us patients: approx. 10-15% are excellent (not even necessarily experts?), 70-75% of docs are 'average' and the remaining 10-20% are 'dangerous'.
My loving uro-doc endorsed LHRH for life as my protocol, switched me from zoladex to lupron without asking me and I noticed the billing went up $700 more per shot-office visit
(gee was it the money????). I fired him after year 2 of this agenda (I had to demand ADT3 combo and got it for my high stats bad scenario case). I joined a special PCa independently run group and saw a Journal article on another drug protocol, glad I fired the doc and ADT3 showing signs of failing in 2004-2005, the last 8 yrs. have been the best....basically no horrible side effects, much better control and super low costs. Surely, the uro-doc would have informed me of this possible choice? Also, my uro-doc I found out later was a surgeon, but he never offered surgery on me, but referred me to his franchised pal elsewhere
He guaranteed me a cure and wrote in on paper
A couple days later Dr. Menon (reknown surgeon) saw me and denied doing surgery on me (as it would be useless for cure), then I got 6 more opinions and fabulous real world education (not seen in books that I had). All the other 7 docs did not think cure was even possible with my stats (and they were corrrect). So, like I said caveat emptor is likely worth contemplation and also Murphy's Laws can also come into play in some cases. But (lol) you didn't hear this from me.