I take your point and later in my response I did say that that "Information is important ... occasionally (and rarely) because it allows him [a newbie] to critique the information his doctor provides.
So I admit that it does happen that a patient needs to second-guess his doctor. I don't think such bad advice is as endemic as you do but I agree that it is a factor that a prudent man will consider.
And in the part you quoted me as saying you dropped some context in a way that made my statement more categorical than I intended.
...when we have a new guy like I was -- too scared to think and only hard-headed because my skull is bone clean through -- I am not sure we are doing him a favor if we can convince him to second-guess his doctor.
That is the more qualified statement that I am prepared to defend. When I get the sense that a man is scared out of his wits I am a bit leery of giving him too much information. I try to get him calmed down first. If I can't understand what he reports his doctor as saying I may try to get him to talk to another doctor, not so much because I think his current doctor is incompetent, but because a different doctor might have the right bed-side manner to get him calmed down enough to understand what he is being told. Sometimes I may point him to a research study he can talk to his doctor about
. That way maybe I can educate the man *and* his doctor. Doctors have big egos and they find it less threatening if a patient brings them a study and asks them to explain it. That way the doctor stays firmly in the comfortable role of doctor, helping his patient understand what some other doctors have said. It doesn't put the doctor in the unreceptive position of trying to defend himself against something that some random yahoo on the internet has told his patient.
<edit>Read your post again. Maybe I jumped the gun. I'm not talking about
suggesting a man get a second opinion from, you know, a doctor
. I just think we should couch our suggestion of a second opinion in term of prudent due-diligence on the part of the patient, not as expressions of doubt about
his current doctor.</edit>
Slow PSA rise 2007-2012: 1.4=>8
4 bxs 2010-2012:
1)neg (some inflammation),
3)positive 1 of 14 GS6(3+3) 3-4%, 2nd opinion GS7(3+4)
Mild Pre-op ED
DaVinci RRP 6/14/12. left nerve spared
Path: pT3a pN0 R1 GS9(4+5) Pos margins on rt
Start 24 mo ADT3 7/26/12
Adjuvant IMRT 66.6 Gy 10/17/12 - 12/13/12
Leaky but better, Trimix, VEDForum Moderator - Not a Medical Professional
Post Edited (PeterDisAbelard) : 2/20/2013 7:58:40 PM (GMT-7)