Five reasons to choose removing your prostate for prostate cancer instead of radiation.

men are not prisoners of fate…they are prisoners of their own minds…..FDR- that’s a 1966 Ford Mustang-289-original body style


John…nothing you drive has an airbag…a lot of people depend on you…buy a new car!


The Five Reasons:

  1. You don’t have radiation in your body the rest of your life.
  2. You don’t have radiation in your body the rest of your life.
  3. You don’t have radiation in your body the rest of your life.
  4. You don’t have radiation in your body the rest of your life.
  5. You don’t have radiation in your body the rest of your life.


Tomorrow: Five reasons not to have your prostate removed…see…I am not biased, I am not biased, I am not biased…


8 Replies to “Five reasons to choose removing your prostate for prostate cancer instead of radiation.”

  1. Too often its the Urologist convincing the patient in the UK.
    If either treatment had been an option for me I know which I would have chosen after asking WHO? and HOW?. Comments from others will be interesting.


  2. I was debating and pondering a reply to jq and really did not know where to start. The main reason I chose to have my prostate out was because I thought I would have a better chance at cure, the potential risks did not sway my decsion and not least importantly, I could treat the cancer without having radiation in my body. I have seen what it could do over time where the patient choosing it for convenience has not seen what it can do over time, unless their radiation therapist has done a good job discussing the “down side ” of radiation or they have spoken with a radiation patient months to years out from radiation treatment.

    So, I decide to write nothing and then I see this as the very first twitter feed from a prostate cancer message board on my blog today-no joke-the first thing I see after comtemplating your comment….

    It had to do with a guy who had brachytherapy and now is having a year long bout of inability to void requiring self intermittent catherization. He has had repeated UTIs and etc. In this case what happens is that the prostatic urethra swells from the radiation and prevents the free flow of urine and hence the need to catheterize. Here is the kicker…because he has “radiation in his body” the normal ways of correcting the problem wth surgery are fraught with complications and must be done with cuation or in extreme situations. So the treatment is to try to wait out the effects of the radiation without surgery. I have had patients like this and it is a frustrating situation.

    Patients should at least consider the above scenario as part of their “arrows in their quiver” before they make a decision. I call in the book, “does the worst of the worst trump the best of the best” in your decision making process. Hey…it’s tough…I don’t care what folks choose just choose for the right reasons and with the right info.

    How about that book with a title promising no surgery, no this and protection of this and that? Be careful.

    What treatment do you think they are talking about? Is a scenario such as above vetted there? Something to ponder.


  3. I am 63 years old and in good health. I was recently diagnosed with prostate cancer (Gleason 6; low volume; TIC Stage 2). My urologist–a surgeon–went through the options with me and my wife. He also stated that he felt I was a prime candidate for using the new trueBeam radiation method (45 treatments). He set me up to meet with radiology oncologist. I also have an appointment with a surgeon he recommended that performs the daVinici Robotic surgery. After reading your book and the Johns Hopkins book, I was leaning towards the surgery — the “gold standard.” Now after meeting with the radiologist, many of my fears and concerns relative to radiation were “debunked.” Do you have any insight or could you direct me to any studies relative to the trueBeam radiation therapy? Treatments would be done less than six miles from my home — a real plus.


    1. I hope you don’t mind…I want to address this on a post…I have options there that I don’t have on the reply screen. Your question, your research and insight is excellent. Two words jump out…”debunked” and “synchronization.”


  4. Ok, great. You let them take your prostate out, and then they tell you you still have to have radiation. So, then you have radiation in your body for the rest of your life and you have no prostate. Nice, hunh.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: