• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dodd Diagnosed With Early-Stage Prostate Cancer

1069 said:
Well, this new source you're citing is claiming the relative survival rates for prostate cancer are 99.3% in the US (a ludicrous figure, unless it's a 5-year survival rate only) versus 77.5% in the UK (quite possible, but still markedly different from the 44% UK survival rate your other source claimed).
Click to expand...

That 77.5% figure is not the UK. That is a European average and it is a significant difference between there and here.

It seems to me that your study is skewed in the following way: I'll bet they're comparing five year survival rates for the US (which the ACS claims is 100%, but which could easily be 99.3%) to ten or fifteen year survival rates for the UK (even in the US, the 15-year survival rate is only 76%).
There is no law against publishing skewed studies on medscape in service of an agenda... an agenda such as, say, maligning national health care.
Click to expand...

Well then, feel free to prove to us that's all a big lie and a massive conspiracy on the part of Medscape. I can give you plenty of other sources that will confirm the same information, but frankly, I'm tired of doing it for you. You have Internet access. Try taking a few minutes to learn something and look the stuff up yourself. I have given you plenty of numbers and sources to back up everything I have been telling you. You have provided absolutely nothing except your own preconceived idea of the way you "think" things should be and you ignore any evidence on the contrary and go as far as to suggest a grand conspiracy.

You're uninformed on this topic. If you're comfortable being a lamb led to its slaughter by power hungry politicians then that's your prerogative.
 
1069 said:
Should be even easier since you just "showed us that" yourself, with this new study you've quoted (I know, it's got lots of big words. it's okay. i'll interpret for you).
Your new study claims that the survival rate for prostate cancer in the UK is 77.5%, a far cry from the "44%" your previous study claimed.
Click to expand...

I think you better read it again, big words and all.... :roll:
 
aps said:
It makes me happy to see Dodd so optimistic, since my father was just diagnosted with early state prostate cancer last week.

Do any of you above who have made nasty comments about Dodd want to wish death on my father?
Click to expand...
Of course not, your father made you a real cutey, so he's alright by me. Dodd is another story, he a douchebag. But seriously, I don't wish his death, but I do wish his retirement; the crooked slob.
 
Don't Tase Me Bro said:
Yes, I am about to politicize this and if you have a problem with it, too bad. You're a wuss.

It’s rather ironic that Senator Dodd has been inflicted with prostate cancer while at the same time he is one of those running around supporting socialized health care in this country. The survival rate for American men with prostate cancer is 81.2%. Take a look at the countries that have socialized health care, or what people like Dodd wish to refer to as the “public option.” In France, the survival rate of men with prostate cancer is 61.7% and in the U.K 44.3%.

The Ugly Truth About Canadian Health Care by David Gratzer, City Journal Summer 2007

Of course, Dodd wouldn’t be using the “public option” anyway. The Democrats’ health care plan is so good that the Congress exempted itself from having to participate in it.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

The five-year relative survival rate for men diagnosed in England in 2000–01 was 71%, compared with only 31% for men diagnosed in 1971–75...The one and 10-year prostate cancer survival rates have also risen dramatically. Similar increases have occurred in Scotland:five-year relative survival rates increased from 47% for patients diagnosed in 1980-1984 to 80% for patients diagnosed in 2000-2004.
Click to expand...
Cancer Research UK : Prostate Cancer survival statistics

If you have a problem with universal healthcare, that's your perogative, but that facts don't back you up on this point.
 
Last edited:
Anima said:
If you have a problem with universal healthcare, that's your perogative, but that facts don't back you up on this point.
Click to expand...

It's prerogative and yes, the facts do back me up even if the figure in my original article is understated or relies on old data, the numbers that both you and 1069 produced are significantly less than the survival rate here in the U.S. with our private system. I know where I'd rather be.
 
Don't Tase Me Bro said:
It's prerogative and yes, the facts do back me up even if the figure in my original article is understated or relies on old data, the numbers that both you and 1069 produced are significantly less than the survival rate here in the U.S. with our private system. I know where I'd rather be.
Click to expand...

The facts actually DO NOT back you up. Survival rates for UK men diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2003-2004 were a percentage point lower than in the US. One percentage point, comapred to the 35% gap you were claiming originally.
 
Last edited:
Anima said:
The facts actually DO NOT back you up. UK men diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2003-2004% was a percentage point lower than in the US. One percentage point, comapred to the 35% gap you were claiming originally.
Click to expand...

Neither do they back him, what is worse he is completely ignorant as to why specifically the U.S. has the cancer survival rates that they do.

Answer is still out there, maybe the OP should take some time to get educated.
 
sam_w said:
Neither do they back him, what is worse he is completely ignorant as to why specifically the U.S. has the cancer survival rates that they do.

Answer is still out there, maybe the OP should take some time to get educated.
Click to expand...

For the record, Don't_Tase_Me:

The widespread use of PSA testing in the USA results in not only higher prostate cancer incidence but also a much higher proportion of early stage cases being diagnosed than in countries with lower levels of testing and this naturally leads to higher survival rates overall and lower mortality rates relative to incidence.
Click to expand...

Cancer Research UK : UK Prostate Cancer mortality statistics

Survival rates measure the time from diagnosis to death. PSA testing detects cancer in it's earliest stages, so you have an early diagnosis, which means on average a longer period of "diagnosed but alive" than nations that don't use PSA as frequently. It's also why the US has the highest incidence of prostate cancer in the developed world: PSA testing can detect the cancer years before it begins manifesting clinical symptoms.
 
Last edited:
Anima said:
For the record, Don't_Tase_Me:
Click to expand...

Yes, I was referring to the fact that Don't Tase Me Bro is completely clueless as to the reason why we have the cancer survival rates that we do. Funny thing is, kind of has to do with a little smattering of "SOCIALISM" from our government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom