site banner
PaperclipPerfector  9mo ago (text post)   3037 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for March 3, 2024

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I am not a medical doctor.

Prostate screening isn't a bad idea, especially if it will assuage worries or if one is experiencing pain or things like hematuria (blood in urine.. notably hematospermia is less of a concern) but there is debate, as you must know because you've asked this question.

The real issue is what to do if cancer is found, and not just the usual benign dys/hyperplasia that nearly all men will have eventually. If cancer is found, the annoying and counterintuitive best practice is currently watch and wait for most men. Watch for changes, wait for development. This depends on age, severity of symptoms, and the size of the tumor, and so on, of course. Prostate cancer in a man under 50 is more of a concern. Medical information online is almost always generalized to populations, not individuals. Young men shouldn't be getting prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer screening is typically done via DRE and, if abnormalities are detected, ultrasound (There is something called transurethral ultrasound where a tube is inserted) and ultimately biopsy if needed, . meaning part of the suspected tumor is lasered or otherwise cut out and examined for malignancy. But the first step is bending over and singing Moon River.

Treatment can include partial or complete 3 prostatectomy, which obviously isn't ideal and has several rather dramatic effects on the plumbing, up to and including ED and urinary incontinence. This is in addition to chemo and whatever else.

Having written this, I personally am for screening, which is really minimally invasive apart from the embarrassment and discomfort. The reason there's even discussion about it as far as I can tell is that for older men surgery and chemo may seriously hinder quality of life and not ultimately really buy much time. But concurrent with this, catching it early in younger men is better than finding out after it has metastasized.

Edit: Measuring urine PSA is actually step 1 and is no more painful than peeing in a cup.

Why is blood in the ejaculate less of a concern? Just curious.

If it's happening a lot, it's a concern. I wouldn't ignore it. Otherwise it's usually infection or some inflammation and doesn't recur (hematospermia I mean). Particularly if one has no other symptoms. It's apparently not uncommon.

Hematuria is more a predictor of larger or more systemic urinary tract issues or cancer. You'd think there would be a much more robust answer to bloody sperm than "Yeah don't worry about it." I suppose there is, but generally that's the line.

Again though, not a doctor. Part of my job is translating and explaining medical concepts from Japanese into English (and rarely vice versa) so I do more reading on medical issues than any sane non-doctor would.

I see. How does someone even notice hematuria, btw? Is it obvious?

You wouldn't unless you are aware of your usual urine color. Gross (visible) hematuria would be considerably different--brownish, cola colored, or reddish. But what's called occult hematuria or microscopic hematuria is probably more common and your urologist only detects that via microscope (3/4 red blood cells per High powered field is the standard).

Hematospermia is much more noticeable and is characterized by either bright red, brown, or even almost black ejaculate.

Thanks for the info!

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats