|
Home > Archive > Prostate > November 2004 > ?? Anyone Trying to Treat Causes??
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
?? Anyone Trying to Treat Causes??
|
|
| Spread deMocracy 2004-11-02, 11:13 am |
| Is ANYONE trying to find the CAUSE of their DHTs and hence what is CAUSING
their prostate to grow??
(I'm excluding cancer and Prostatitis-induced BPH in this query--cancer will
require a specialized regime for treatment; on the other hand, Prostatitis
is known to be caused by bacterial infections and hence CURABLE so does not
need more elaboration.)
It appears that most posts on this board are about SYMPTOMS of BPH. While I
understand that our anxiety is high when faced with BPH, there is next to
no postings dealing with the tougher matter of seeking a cure for BPH,
rather than symptomic relief?
With the power and reach of this newsgroup...we MIGHT be able to make a
serious contribution to this science by pooling our collective experiences
to hunt down the causes. Surely some of you would have gone to an
endocrinologist--one who would have run complete blood work ups, and not
just PSA, glucose and DHT--and was able to answer the question about what
gland(s) is/are CAUSING your prostate to be sensitized to DHT and hence to
grow? If so, please, share that info with this group.
| |
|
| I am just hoping that we don't get socialized medicine in. I think that
would be the end of research for things like that. Bad enough now that the
Americans are paying the high drug costs which is used to fund most medical
research while other countries such as Canada get discounts. Dr. Salk said
that even in 1980 he would not have been able to develop his vaccine due to
government regulations. Can you imagine what it would be if the government
was running everything in the medicine field. A fellow from Norway was
telling me that if a bureaucrat decides that you are not worth an expensive
procedure the doctors are not allowed to treat you for pay either. Then you
would be getting treatment not available to the public!
"Spread deMocracy" <Spread_deMocracy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:KbXgd.43953$rs5.1388400@news20.bellglobal.com...
> ABC, thank you. I am familiar with the data in your link. I am
searching
> for info beyond the theories of high DHT and high estrogen. I'd like to
> know what causes high DHT and high estrogen? Which gland(s) craps out?
> What are the early warning signs? But I am grateful to you for the link
and
> the info, nonetheless. Thank you.
>
>
> "ABC" <DEF@YYY.net> wrote in message > There are theories:
>
http://yourmedicalsource.com/librar...ses.html#sexhor
>
>
| |
| Nelson 2004-11-02, 11:13 am |
| On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 21:23:32 -0500, ABC wrote
(in article
<E0Ygd.46732$OD2.42257@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> ):
> I am just hoping that we don't get socialized medicine in. I think that
> would be the end of research for things like that.
[snip]
Well, I'm not for socialized medicine but it actually might increase
the money for research into the causes of BPH. My perception is that
under the current (market driven) system there is little or no economic
incentive for organizations to focus on this problem. In fact, there
is little economic incentive to "cure" anything. Once X is cured, no
one makes any money on it. However, developing a pill to treat the
symptoms guarantees a perpetual revenue stream :-) Do the math.
The whole Medical-Drug-Insurance Complex makes money from _sick_
people, not well people. You would think the insurance companies, at
least, would have an incentive to keep people well but it seems that
they just react by raising premiums and cutting benefits, so they win
either way- like a stock broker who makes his commission both when you
buy and when you sell. Whether you lose money or make money is not his
concern.
A cure for BPH would probably cause a depression in the yacht market as
well as the luxury car and house market and a crisis in Urology
departments nationwide. We can't have that :-)
Identify who has a significant economic incentive to find a cure for
BPH and you might have a chance. Otherwise, it's TURP City.
--
Nelson
| |
|
|
"Spread deMocracy" <Spread_deMocracy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:NjNgd.30701$Qs6.2109106@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Is ANYONE trying to find the CAUSE of their DHTs and hence what is CAUSING
> their prostate to grow??
>
> (I'm excluding cancer and Prostatitis-induced BPH in this query--cancer
will
> require a specialized regime for treatment; on the other hand, Prostatitis
> is known to be caused by bacterial infections and hence CURABLE so does
not
> need more elaboration.)
>
> It appears that most posts on this board are about SYMPTOMS of BPH. While
I
> understand that our anxiety is high when faced with BPH, there is next to
> no postings dealing with the tougher matter of seeking a cure for BPH,
> rather than symptomic relief?
>
> With the power and reach of this newsgroup...we MIGHT be able to make a
> serious contribution to this science by pooling our collective experiences
> to hunt down the causes. Surely some of you would have gone to an
> endocrinologist--one who would have run complete blood work ups, and not
> just PSA, glucose and DHT--and was able to answer the question about what
> gland(s) is/are CAUSING your prostate to be sensitized to DHT and hence to
> grow? If so, please, share that info with this group.
>
There are theories:
http://yourmedicalsource.com/librar...ses.html#sexhor
>
| |
| Robert E. Yorke 2004-11-05, 2:10 am |
|
Nelson:
Thank you for your very perceptive comments...
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 11:14:32 -0500, Nelson <nelson@nowhere.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 21:23:32 -0500, ABC wrote
>(in article
><E0Ygd.46732$OD2.42257@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> ):
>
>
>[snip]
>
>Well, I'm not for socialized medicine but it actually might increase
>the money for research into the causes of BPH. My perception is that
>under the current (market driven) system there is little or no economic
>incentive for organizations to focus on this problem. In fact, there
>is little economic incentive to "cure" anything. Once X is cured, no
>one makes any money on it. However, developing a pill to treat the
>symptoms guarantees a perpetual revenue stream :-) Do the math.
>
>The whole Medical-Drug-Insurance Complex makes money from _sick_
>people, not well people. You would think the insurance companies, at
>least, would have an incentive to keep people well but it seems that
>they just react by raising premiums and cutting benefits, so they win
>either way- like a stock broker who makes his commission both when you
>buy and when you sell. Whether you lose money or make money is not his
>concern.
>
>A cure for BPH would probably cause a depression in the yacht market as
>well as the luxury car and house market and a crisis in Urology
>departments nationwide. We can't have that :-)
>
>Identify who has a significant economic incentive to find a cure for
>BPH and you might have a chance. Otherwise, it's TURP City.
| |
| Spread deMocracy 2004-11-06, 2:08 am |
| ABC, thank you. I am familiar with the data in your link. I am searching
for info beyond the theories of high DHT and high estrogen. I'd like to
know what causes high DHT and high estrogen? Which gland(s) craps out?
What are the early warning signs? But I am grateful to you for the link and
the info, nonetheless. Thank you.
"ABC" <DEF@YYY.net> wrote in message > There are theories:
http://yourmedicalsource.com/librar...ses.html#sexhor
| |
| Robert E. Yorke 2004-11-10, 4:09 am |
|
Nelson:
Thank you for your very perceptive comments...
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 11:14:32 -0500, Nelson <nelson@nowhere.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 21:23:32 -0500, ABC wrote
>(in article
><E0Ygd.46732$OD2.42257@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> ):
>
>
>[snip]
>
>Well, I'm not for socialized medicine but it actually might increase
>the money for research into the causes of BPH. My perception is that
>under the current (market driven) system there is little or no economic
>incentive for organizations to focus on this problem. In fact, there
>is little economic incentive to "cure" anything. Once X is cured, no
>one makes any money on it. However, developing a pill to treat the
>symptoms guarantees a perpetual revenue stream :-) Do the math.
>
>The whole Medical-Drug-Insurance Complex makes money from _sick_
>people, not well people. You would think the insurance companies, at
>least, would have an incentive to keep people well but it seems that
>they just react by raising premiums and cutting benefits, so they win
>either way- like a stock broker who makes his commission both when you
>buy and when you sell. Whether you lose money or make money is not his
>concern.
>
>A cure for BPH would probably cause a depression in the yacht market as
>well as the luxury car and house market and a crisis in Urology
>departments nationwide. We can't have that :-)
>
>Identify who has a significant economic incentive to find a cure for
>BPH and you might have a chance. Otherwise, it's TURP City.
|
| |
|
|