Biden diagnosed with prostate cancer

Not all cancers grow at the same rate. And there is a score that rates how fast prostate cancer grows called the Gleason Score. The score is based on a combo of two scores, and can range between 6 and 10. The lower the score, the slower the growth of the cancer. Biden's score was a 9, meaning his cancer is a faster growing cancer.

It's most likely Biden had this cancer in his previous screening, but his tests came up on the higher end of normal, making it look like he didn't have cancer. Then, in the interval, his cancer grew very quickly and metastasized. Had Biden's cancer been a 6 or 7 on the Gleason scale, doctors probably would have caught it before it spread.

 

Sounds like you are his doctor who hid it from the public.

 

Coming from you that's a compliment

 

Interesting information River.
Under what measure did they diagnose your 'cancer'?
Could you please explain 'seeds implanted to reduce it'?
How high did your PSA (or Gleason) get and did insurance pay for the procedure?

 

Interesting that you use quotation marks. There are radioactive seeds that they implant in your prostate. It's a pretty common procedure

 

Primary care spotted it in my annual bloodwork. Just went from 3something to 5something. Referred me to a urologist. He brought in someone who took the little biopsies. I could feel each of 13 little bites.
Eleven came back positive. He gave me some info on two choices and told me to decide. Removal or what I chose.
Sent me to oncologist. Inserted a testosterone blocker capsule under the skin in my groin.
A month or so later they inserted a bunch of what they called seeds: little radioactive bits the width of a pencil lead.
Couldn’t hold kids in my lap for a month or so.
He said prostate shrank a bit after that.
Then the daily radiation.

I really don’t remember the financial details. But my employee insurance didn’t pay for it all. I’m thinking I paid a couple of thousand.

 

Sounds like you don’t want to hear facts that don’t support your position.

 

Thanks. What's total bullshit about your post is the inference that Ivermection would be an effective treatment for COVID-19.

 

It would be easier to believe there was not a cover up if there was not a third book dropping this week about how the Biden's and his top staff hid the fact he was declining mentally while President. Not to mention that the Biden's have a history of lying to the public about the medical condition of elected officials in their family.

 

My dad and uncle are each dealing with Prostate Cancer currently. Each with different levels. My dad was going to have a surgical procedure but after getting a pacemaker decided with the doctor to continue and monitor as he is happy with his current living standard with the risk benefits discussed wrt doing the surgical procedure. Unfortunately my uncle is dealing with a more aggressive form where serious action was needed. I should get to see him soon but I did hear that there might have been a recent set back in the fight. Hope it was just something small in the realm of news...

 

When I looked at the options, most had similar 5 year outcomes. The side effects of the different treatments were where a lot of the differences were. All the specialists of course have the best treatment.
I’m certain advanced age and other health concerns will influence his treatment.

 

It would, and there are dozens of studies now proving it. Double-blind placebo studies. FYI, I'm talking about the human pill that won a Nobel prize, not the kind you squirt into a horse's mouth. It is a WHO “Essential Medicine” already used in several different indications, in colossal cumulative volumes. Before looking at the NIH articles below, I have a question for you. What forms of "medicine" do not require double-blind placebo studies? Hint: The makers of these medicines are 100% immune to injury lawsuits. Ivermectin has no such protection.

Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines - PMC

Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19 - PMC

 

Do some reading

 

My Goodness the nonsense.
That one study is a review of other studies, the main one was also a review.

When looking at countries where parasites are a problem (no shot at thfsg posters) they have always said IM was helpful. Well you know, because of worms.

Double blind is certainly apropos. IM could be affective, but so far, I haven’t seen real data.

 

Merck Statement on Ivermectin use During the COVID-19 Pandemic - Merck.com

From Merck the makers of ivermectin....

Never understood the belief that "big pharma" was conspiring against ivermectin which is made by Merck, a 60 billion dollar a year company.

 

Thank you kindly for educating me on this River.
I assume when you said you went from 3-Something to 5-Something that was a Gleason score?
That really puts Biden's 9-Something score into reference. Is 5-Something considered aggressive too?
I've only received PSA scores and wondering why my doctor hasn't suggested a Gleason up to now.
Did you have any idea what your PSA was? (A neighbor of mine says he got up to 20-something PSA).

 

Are people now claiming ivermectin cures cancer too?’

 

The Gleason score will come after a biopsy. A Gleason score will give you two numbers in a sample, the predominant grade of cancer cells and the highest cell. A Gleason of 7 is typically 3+4=7

A rapid increase in psa is also looked for.

 

They are claiming it helps