Re: 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

[Guest guest]

Is this not another name for HIFU?

'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effectivehttp://www.cancercompass.com/cancer-news/article/33366.htm?c=NL20100428

[Guest guest]

Sounds very similar to me except that HIFU is usually trans-retal rather than trans-urethral. Struck me however that if the radio wave pulsing (and consequent heat destruction of the cancer cells) is so effective, then why does the treatment also require a hormone blockade? Neither does the article mention how long this hormone 'adjustment' continue during their 10 year follow up.

Malaga,Spain

'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effectivehttp://www.cancercompass.com/cancer-news/article/33366.htm?c=NL20100428

[Guest guest]

Typo - should have read trans-rectal

'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effectivehttp://www.cancercompass.com/cancer-news/article/33366.htm?c=NL20100428

[Guest guest]

Nope. HIFU uses ultrasonic energy.

Louis. . . .

To: ProstateCancerSupport Sent: Fri, April 30, 2010 3:47:19 AMSubject: Re: 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

Is this not another name for HIFU?

[ProstateCancerSupp ort] 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effectivehttp://www.cancerco mpass.com/ cancer-news/ article/33366. htm?c=NL20100428

[Guest guest]



The 100% bothers me

[ProstateCancerSupp ort] 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effectivehttp://www.cancerco mpass.com/ cancer-news/ article/33366. htm?c=NL20100428

[Guest guest]

Whole write-up sounds like an advertisement to me. 100% effective filters down

to 10 year survival with very early detection and treatment of very low grade

tumors.

[Guest guest]

ukfizwit wrote:

> 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100%

> Effective

http://www.cancercompass.com/cancer-news/article/33366.htm?c=NL20100428

I personally believe that when any prostate cancer treatment is

stated to be 100% effective, the only thing you can be 100% sure

of is that the author of the statement is a fool or a liar.

Radical prostatectomy completely removes the prostate. How is it

possible that, if radical prostatectomy does not provide 100%

cure rates that any method that kills the prostate with heat

would provide 100% cures?

The article describes the " cure " of a man who did not have

cancer. According to the article, " a biopsy showed pre-cancerous

cells " , whatever that means.

For a more sober view of the good Dr. Douwes, read this:

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Victims/ksg.html

It is a story written by a real oncologist about what happened to

his wife's sister when she went to Douwes' clinic in Germany on

the promise of an 80% chance of a cure for her terminal breast

cancer. The bottom line is that she lost $70,000 Australian

dollars, spent 7 of the last 10 weeks of her life away from her

husband and children, was retreated with treatments that had

already stopped working for her, suffered great and unnecessary

pain, and died earlier than necessary, in pain, of readily

treatable complications of the cancer that, according to the

author, any competent oncologist would have been able to

diagnose.

I'm very angry about people like Douwe. He lured a sick woman

away from her family with false promises, abused her with ill

treatment and incompetent medical practice, sucked money out of

her that could have been better used to pay for her children's

education, and let her die, at least in part, of medical neglect.

I'd much rather deal with an honest mugger who steal my wallet

than a con man like Douwe who preys on sick people.

I'm going to try to post this as a comment to the article.

Alan

[Guest guest]

I must point out, I didn't say:

> 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

That was the heading of the article. I have no personal opinion.

I find Cancer Compass quite useful, and thought I should pass this on.

Ted

>

> > 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100%

> > Effective

>

> http://www.cancercompass.com/cancer-news/article/33366.htm?c=NL20100428

>

> I personally believe that when any prostate cancer treatment is

> stated to be 100% effective, the only thing you can be 100% sure

> of is that the author of the statement is a fool or a liar.

>

> Radical prostatectomy completely removes the prostate. How is it

> possible that, if radical prostatectomy does not provide 100%

> cure rates that any method that kills the prostate with heat

> would provide 100% cures?

>

> The article describes the " cure " of a man who did not have

> cancer. According to the article, " a biopsy showed pre-cancerous

> cells " , whatever that means.

>

> For a more sober view of the good Dr. Douwes, read this:

>

> http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Victims/ksg.html

>

> It is a story written by a real oncologist about what happened to

> his wife's sister when she went to Douwes' clinic in Germany on

> the promise of an 80% chance of a cure for her terminal breast

> cancer. The bottom line is that she lost $70,000 Australian

> dollars, spent 7 of the last 10 weeks of her life away from her

> husband and children, was retreated with treatments that had

> already stopped working for her, suffered great and unnecessary

> pain, and died earlier than necessary, in pain, of readily

> treatable complications of the cancer that, according to the

> author, any competent oncologist would have been able to

> diagnose.

>

> I'm very angry about people like Douwe. He lured a sick woman

> away from her family with false promises, abused her with ill

> treatment and incompetent medical practice, sucked money out of

> her that could have been better used to pay for her children's

> education, and let her die, at least in part, of medical neglect.

>

> I'd much rather deal with an honest mugger who steal my wallet

> than a con man like Douwe who preys on sick people.

>

> I'm going to try to post this as a comment to the article.

>

> Alan

>

[Guest guest]

Everyone --

Please read the " Comments " to the Cancer Compass article, and refer to this page

(mentioned therein):

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Victims/ksg.html

In summmary:

.. . . No, it's _not_ HIFU -- it uses radio-frequency energy, not ultrasound;

.. . . There's no mention of side-effects -- and any treatment that puts probes

through the urethra, and destroys prostate tissue, _will_ have side-effects;

.. . . There's no mention of how the good doctor locates the _exact position_ of

the cancer that he claims to destroy;

.. . . There's no analysis of how much success is due to the androgen blockage,

and how much is due to the heating of the prostate tissue.

BEWARE !

>

> 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

>

> http://www.cancercompass.com/cancer-news/article/33366.htm?c=NL20100428

>

[Guest guest]

I wondered the hormone thing also. My first...I hope ..is for six months. Others from this site say they have had as many as FOUR! HOLY MOSES> One guy on his fourth got a FAN AIMED AT HIS BED..with a remote control so he does not have to get up....INOVATIVE..but hope I don't have to resort to this...

To: ProstateCancerSupport Sent: Fri, April 30, 2010 5:06:43 AMSubject: Re: 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

Typo - should have read trans-rectal

[ProstateCancerSupp ort] 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effectivehttp://www.cancerco mpass.com/ cancer-news/ article/33366. htm?c=NL20100428

[Guest guest]

ME TOO..100% is TOO good to be true!

To: ProstateCancerSupport Sent: Fri, April 30, 2010 7:46:02 AMSubject: Re: 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

 The 100% bothers me

[ProstateCancerSupp ort] 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effectivehttp://www.cancerco mpass.com/ cancer-news/ article/33366. htm?c=NL20100428

[Guest guest]

Is the HIFU approved for use in the USA YET???? I had a dr contact me...but I had to go FLA...for all treatment.. and elected to NOT LEAVE GOOD OLD WIS...

To: ProstateCancerSupport Sent: Fri, April 30, 2010 7:18:56 AMSubject: Re: 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

Nope. HIFU uses ultrasonic energy.

Louis. . . .

From: Metcalf <bryan.metcalf@ virgin.net>To: ProstateCancerSuppo rtyahoogroups (DOT) comSent: Fri, April 30, 2010 3:47:19 AMSubject: Re: [ProstateCancerSupp ort] 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

Is this not another name for HIFU?

[ProstateCancerSupp ort] 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effectivehttp://www.cancerco mpass.com/ cancer-news/ article/33366. htm?c=NL20100428

[Guest guest]

THANKS....always good to get the latest in tteatments and research...

To: ProstateCancerSupport Sent: Fri, April 30, 2010 12:56:56 PMSubject: Re: 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% Effective

I must point out, I didn't say:> 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100% EffectiveThat was the heading of the article. I have no personal opinion.I find Cancer Compass quite useful, and thought I should pass this on.Ted> > > 'New' Prostate Cancer Treatment 100%> > Effective> > http://www.cancerco mpass.com/ cancer-news/ article/33366. htm?c=NL20100428> > I personally believe that when any prostate cancer treatment is> stated to be 100% effective, the only thing

you can be 100% sure> of is that the author of the statement is a fool or a liar.> > Radical prostatectomy completely removes the prostate. How is it> possible that, if radical prostatectomy does not provide 100%> cure rates that any method that kills the prostate with heat> would provide 100% cures?> > The article describes the "cure" of a man who did not have> cancer. According to the article, "a biopsy showed pre-cancerous> cells", whatever that means.> > For a more sober view of the good Dr. Douwes, read this:> > http://www.quackwat ch.org/01Quacker yRelatedTopics/ Victims/ksg. html> > It is a story written by a real oncologist about what happened to> his wife's sister when she went to Douwes' clinic in Germany on> the

promise of an 80% chance of a cure for her terminal breast> cancer. The bottom line is that she lost $70,000 Australian> dollars, spent 7 of the last 10 weeks of her life away from her> husband and children, was retreated with treatments that had> already stopped working for her, suffered great and unnecessary> pain, and died earlier than necessary, in pain, of readily> treatable complications of the cancer that, according to the> author, any competent oncologist would have been able to> diagnose.> > I'm very angry about people like Douwe. He lured a sick woman> away from her family with false promises, abused her with ill> treatment and incompetent medical practice, sucked money out of> her that could have been better used to pay for her children's> education, and let her die, at least in part, of medical neglect.> > I'd much rather deal with

an honest mugger who steal my wallet> than a con man like Douwe who preys on sick people.> > I'm going to try to post this as a comment to the article.> > Alan>