Move over Amazon, THIS is automation!

[HalGameGuru]

16 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

Its pretty effective. If you have an enlarged prostate or a prostate with lumps it’s very easy to detect with a finger. It’s the most cost efficient way by a mile with no specialist equipment needed. Seeing as modern countries have a prostate cancer survival rate of >90% this really isn’t an area that needs improvement. 

 

Cancer tests need to be:

- Cost effective

- Cheap

- Portable

- Correct at least 95% of the time

- Easy to administer

 

 Nothing fits that better than a finger.

 

Yeah the problem is its being detected after its enlarged or developing growths, there are other tests that can catch it MUCH sooner.

 

EDIT: By your own criteria DRE fails as a cancer test. Check the source I linked below

[HalGameGuru]

11 hours ago, mr moose said:

PSA testing is heavily controversial at the moment within the industry.    It's hard to ascertain exactly why without a degree in biology however I can say that my oldman's PSA test came back negative and it turned out he had a most aggressive PC and was within mm of metastasizing.

PSA testing is very iffy. One of the newer, and more effective, tests doesn't look at the amount but the structure of the protein. 

 

Quote

We suggest not performing digital rectal examination (DRE) for prostate cancer screening either alone or in combination with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. Although DRE has long been used to diagnose prostate cancer, no controlled studies have shown a reduction in the morbidity or mortality of prostate cancer when detected by DRE at any age [87]. (See 'Combining PSA and DRE' below.)

There are inherent limitations to the DRE. It can detect palpable abnormalities (eg, nodules, asymmetry, or induration) in the posterior and lateral aspects of the prostate gland where the majority of cancers arise; however, other areas of the prostate where cancer occurs are not reachable by a finger examination [86]. Furthermore, the majority of cancers detected by DRE alone are clinically or pathologically advanced [88], and stage T1 prostate cancers are nonpalpable by definition.

DRE is also not recommended for colorectal cancer screening. 

Source: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/screening-for-prostate-cancer (last updated Jun.2018)

 

 

EDIT: And if you notice I was suggesting eschewing DRE AND PSA testing in favor of a sexbot that could directly scan the entire prostate more effectively than either.

[Guest]

On 7/19/2018 at 5:42 AM, HalGameGuru said:

Yeah the problem is its being detected after its enlarged or developing growths, there are other tests that can catch it MUCH sooner.

 

EDIT: By your own criteria DRE fails as a cancer test. Check the source I linked below

It's not really  a problem because at that point it's still pretty benign. 

 

On 7/18/2018 at 6:38 PM, mr moose said:

PSA testing is heavily controversial at the moment within the industry.    It's hard to ascertain exactly why without a degree in biology however I can say that my oldman's PSA test came back negative and it turned out he had a most aggressive PC and was within mm of metastasizing.

PSA levels fluctuate by a wide range and its best to use a set of data from the past from an individual to conform, so if its below 4ng/ml then it may be considered a negative result but unfortunately it doesn't mean it is a correct result. 

 

The best test is of course a biopsy, so the standard procedure here in New Zealand - where prostate cancer needs a lot of work - especially in clinical practice, is to have a prostate examination then check the PSA levels and move on to urology for a biopsy. 

 

Prostate cancer is just not in need of any research due to its preventability and occurrence (there's no shortage of prostate cancer cases due to high prevalence). You can just take the prostate out if the cancer has not metastasised. Surgery and radiation therapy is the best course of action after detection and there are no large side effects. The most effective prevention is of course detection but with proper training we can detect prostate cancer early enough as it is, it's mostly getting people to the doctors and getting themselves checked. If they don'l like the notion of a trained professional's finger in their rectum then I think having a 'sexbot' is a bit of a stretch.

[mr moose]

3 hours ago, HalGameGuru said:

PSA testing is very iffy. One of the newer, and more effective, tests doesn't look at the amount but the structure of the protein. 

 

Source: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/screening-for-prostate-cancer (last updated Jun.2018)

 

 

EDIT: And if you notice I was suggesting eschewing DRE AND PSA testing in favor of a sexbot that could directly scan the entire prostate more effectively than either.

I was merely pointing out that PSA testing alone is not sufficient and the DRE is what saved my fathers life. The point being there is no value in recommending people don't have it done until a test of equal or better is found. And given any trained doctor can administer a DRE in less than 5 minutes during a normal visit there is little justifiable reason not to have one.

[Christophe Corazza]

I never quite understood this sudden "the robots are taking our jobs"-hype.

We’ve been massively "robotising" our work for at least 150 years now. Machines replaced craftsmen, machines replaced counters, machines replaced typewriters, drafters, harvesters, plowers, carpenters, stokers, maids, messenger boys, calculators, book copiers, trafic lights, etc etc etc. Big changes. Massive. Mind-boggling.

 

And what happened, those 150 years? Well, turns out, we all found other jobs (and enjoyed the increased productivity by buying even more complicated stuff).

[Donut417]

On 7/16/2018 at 7:03 AM, asus killer said:

now imagine self driving trucks delivering the goods to the warehouse, and self driving cars delivering the orders to the house. All electric powered by renewable energies. 

 

We can only hope. There is a shortage of Truck Drivers in the US. Its not only going to start affecting delivery times, but the price of goods. We need self driving trucks. 

[Amazonsucks]

2 hours ago, Christophe Corazza said:

I never quite understood this sudden "the robots are taking our jobs"-hype.

We’ve been massively "robotising" our work for at least 150 years now. Machines replaced craftsmen, machines replaced counters, machines replaced typewriters, drafters, harvesters, plowers, carpenters, stokers, maids, messenger boys, calculators, book copiers, trafic lights, etc etc etc. Big changes. Massive. Mind-boggling.

 

And what happened, those 150 years? Well, turns out, we all found other jobs (and enjoyed the increased productivity by buying even more complicated stuff).

Familiar with the Red Queen theory?

[Amazonsucks]

1 hour ago, Donut417 said:

We can only hope. There is a shortage of Truck Drivers in the US. Its not only going to start affecting delivery times, but the price of goods. We need self driving trucks. 

Or maybe we need to refocus a lot of those people with degrees who cant get jobs into lines of work that dont involve $100k of debt by the time theyre done getting said useless degree?

[HalGameGuru]

22 hours ago, mr moose said:

I was merely pointing out that PSA testing alone is not sufficient and the DRE is what saved my fathers life. The point being there is no value in recommending people don't have it done until a test of equal or better is found. And given any trained doctor can administer a DRE in less than 5 minutes during a normal visit there is little justifiable reason not to have one.

I was never talking about PSA testing, and my earlier suggestion for a replacement for DRE was merely a better and automated exam of the prostate structure. The problem is DRE cannot catch cancer early because early cancer does not cause growths or palpable changes in the prostate. And cannot detect cancer in the anterior portions of the prostate at all. A deeper and more effective scan is necessary. There are already tests that can catch the cancer by the time it reaches the point where its palpable. Many, less accurate, tests can catch it long before that time. DRE is begging to be replaced. Someone needs to find the avenue to provide it and do so.

[HalGameGuru]

On 7/18/2018 at 2:41 PM, RorzNZ said:

-snip-

You wouldn't rather catch cancer while its still benign? Before it gets malignant or metastasizes?

 

DRE is unable to catch cancer that early. It is an inferior methodology, we need better. There will be better, eventually. I think my tongue-in-cheek suggestion COULD well do it. But would be ridiculous to try. 

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, HalGameGuru said:

You wouldn't rather catch cancer while its still benign? Before it gets malignant or metastasizes?

 

DRE is unable to catch cancer that early. It is an inferior methodology, we need better. There will be better, eventually. I think my tongue-in-cheek suggestion COULD well do it. But would be ridiculous to try. 

Tumours are a natural process, there is no reason to treat if it is benign. Some people get colorectal polyps around 25 due to a hereditary disorder, but its fairly natural. 

 

Current therapies is where the research lies because they can often be so damaging, such as chemotherapy that they often cause an increase of malignancy. It's not worth giving someone who has HNPCC chemo or radiation therapy simply because it can make it worse. 

 

In the context of prostate cancer, the current treatment is a simple surgery (if done in time) and radiation therapy. It has great results because the body can live without the prostate - but as losing your prostate - I'm sure patients want to hang on to them for a bit longer. 

 

At this moment there is no cure for cancer at all. The only cure is to remove the malignancy, and that can really only mean an invasive therapy. Trying to remove benign tumours (remember a tumour is not a cancer - it is simply a mass of cells, a cancer is a malignant tumour - very aggressive) could be problematic. 

[Donut417]

2 hours ago, Amazonsucks said:

Or maybe we need to refocus a lot of those people with degrees who cant get jobs into lines of work that dont involve $100k of debt by the time theyre done getting said useless degree?

No way in fuck I'll ever drive a truck. People can't drive in my state. Plus trucking companies fucked themselves when they started that owner opperator bullshit, just so they didn't have to pay health insurance or bennifits.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, HalGameGuru said:

I was never talking about PSA testing, and my earlier suggestion for a replacement for DRE was merely a better and automated exam of the prostate structure. The problem is DRE cannot catch cancer early because early cancer does not cause growths or palpable changes in the prostate. And cannot detect cancer in the anterior portions of the prostate at all. A deeper and more effective scan is necessary. There are already tests that can catch the cancer by the time it reaches the point where its palpable. Many, less accurate, tests can catch it long before that time. DRE is begging to be replaced. Someone needs to find the avenue to provide it and do so.

But you have not shown a viable alternative, and when you poo poo current methods which are the best we have, e.g:

On 7/18/2018 at 11:08 AM, HalGameGuru said:

It's not effective, its been shown many other practices are more effective at detecting prostate cancer earlier. If you are going to argue to keep sticking other peoples' parts in peoples' recta for lesser results why not allow other methods that would remove that ingress and automate a more effective vector?

you are saying things that turn people away from one of the only 2 current options (and actually sometimes better method). All becasue you want to argue for a device you created in your head, you are giving out really bad advice.   Whether you think it or not,  your post is telling people to avoid rectal exams as they are pointless. This is wrong.

[HalGameGuru]

18 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

-snip-

Even a non-malignant tumor in the prostate will cause mechanical issues with urination and sexual processes. And as prostate cancer is one of the most prevalent catching it early is important. Especially to prevent the need to completely remove the prostate. And since you can have malignant prostate cancer before a palpable growth is evident the earlier it is found the better.

 

EDIT: Necrosis, Sepsis, and brown recluse bites are "natural" as well. Medicine is all about intervening in natural processes to exert our influence in changing them into ones we prefer over nature.

[HalGameGuru]

17 hours ago, mr moose said:

But you have not shown a viable alternative, and when you poo poo current methods which are the best we have, e.g:

you are saying things that turn people away from one of the only 2 current options (and actually sometimes better method). All becasue you want to argue for a device you created in your head, you are giving out really bad advice.   Whether you think it or not,  your post is telling people to avoid rectal exams as they are pointless. This is wrong.

That wasn't me saying it is ineffective. I linked you to where they support that claim with statistical analysis. It cannot detect prostate cancer before palpable growths are evident. There are methods, now, that can. And if physically scanning the prostate is how we wish to buttress the other methods an automated and more in-depth method is needed.

 

FACT: DRE cannot detect prostate cancer before palpable growths are present.

 

FACT: Not all prostate cancer will present a palpable growth before metastasis or other complications.

 

FACT: DRE Cannot detect growths analogous to typical palpable growths that are in the anterior portion of the prostate

 

Foundational and routine cancer screening is super important. All the more important is that the screening methods available and promoted are the best available. And DRE is sitting on our laurels.

 

EDIT: Anyone who would take what I am saying here to dictate how they interact with their doctor wasn't going to have a DRE anyway, they will have latched onto something herbal from facebook to cure all their ills. But maybe a few people will ask their doctor for other screening options in addition to DRE and catch aggressive prostate cancer before it gets to that point because of it. DRE is still useful in the niche of cancers that are not caught by other screening methods before they become palpable in the posterior prostate. And in that percent of a percent of cases DRE is still quite valuable. Unfortunately it will, more and more often as time goes on, ONLY be useful in those cases where the cancer was not caught by screenings meant to catch it earlier and where the eventual growth IS in the posterior prostate.

[mr moose]

8 hours ago, HalGameGuru said:

That wasn't me saying it is ineffective. I linked you to where they support that claim with statistical analysis. It cannot detect prostate cancer before palpable growths are evident. There are methods, now, that can. And if physically scanning the prostate is how we wish to buttress the other methods an automated and more in-depth method is needed.

 

FACT: DRE cannot detect prostate cancer before palpable growths are present.

 

FACT: Not all prostate cancer will present a palpable growth before metastasis or other complications.

 

FACT: DRE Cannot detect growths analogous to typical palpable growths that are in the anterior portion of the prostate

 

Foundational and routine cancer screening is super important. All the more important is that the screening methods available and promoted are the best available. And DRE is sitting on our laurels.

 

EDIT: Anyone who would take what I am saying here to dictate how they interact with their doctor wasn't going to have a DRE anyway, they will have latched onto something herbal from facebook to cure all their ills. But maybe a few people will ask their doctor for other screening options in addition to DRE and catch aggressive prostate cancer before it gets to that point because of it. DRE is still useful in the niche of cancers that are not caught by other screening methods before they become palpable in the posterior prostate. And in that percent of a percent of cases DRE is still quite valuable. Unfortunately it will, more and more often as time goes on, ONLY be useful in those cases where the cancer was not caught by screenings meant to catch it earlier and where the eventual growth IS in the posterior prostate.

That's nice.  Stop telling people not to have DRE done.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, HalGameGuru said:

Even a non-malignant tumor in the prostate will cause mechanical issues with urination and sexual processes. And as prostate cancer is one of the most prevalent catching it early is important. Especially to prevent the need to completely remove the prostate. And since you can have malignant prostate cancer before a palpable growth is evident the earlier it is found the better.

 

EDIT: Necrosis, Sepsis, and brown recluse bites are "natural" as well. Medicine is all about intervening in natural processes to exert our influence in changing them into ones we prefer over nature.

I think you have your understanding a little bit different. It's not a bad thing, differing views are great, and we should try to improve in all areas. I would suggest do a bit of reading on current practice and some pathology. Keep up your interest though, because thats what medicine needs, especially for progress in areas like prostate cancer that don't get much attention. 

[Peter S]

In my opinion, robots are beneficial to humans, cause we can command them to perform dangerous tasks and reduces labor for most of the company workers. However, robots are not as intelligent as humans because they can never improve their jobs outside the pre-defined programming. So, if a single thing goes wrong the entire company will suffer the loss.