Peter Attia· MD
the thing that kind of stands out to me is we have great tools of detection for prostate cancer and based on that I guess it's a little surprising to me that it is still the second leading cause of cancer death in men
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
the thing that kind of stands out to me is we have great tools of detection for prostate cancer and based on that I guess it's a little surprising to me that it is still the second leading cause of cancer death in men
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death among men. And unlike many other forms of cancer, this one is actually really preventable because of the pace at which it develops and the newer and newer tools that we have to predict which of those prostate cancers are non-lethal, which means they're going to stay in the prostate, they're not going to leave, versus which ones are going to be lethal, which means they have the ability to leave and spread, and they almost always spread to the bone, which is unfortunately exactly what has happened to President Biden.
Whole-body MRI screening in healthy adults produces more incidentaloma harm than cancer-mortality benefit.
Starting colonoscopy screening at 45 (vs 50) prevents enough early-onset cancers to justify the population cost.
Multi-cancer liquid-biopsy tests like Galleri detect early cancers at a stage that meaningfully improves survival.