As we all know, for we’re told it often enough, we live in a patriarchy. All the power belongs to men, all the money is spent upon male interests, women hardly get a look in and, obviously, we must smash capitalism to correct this dreadful state of affairs.
Then Matt Hancock, the Health Secretary, dreadfully misunderstands his genetic test for a propensity to prostate cancer. Giving us this very revealing little point:
[perfectpullquote align=”full” bordertop=”false” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””] The NHS normally only provides PSA blood tests – which can show an increased risk of prostate cancer – from the age of 50, if requested, or from the age of 45 when there is a family history of disease. There is no NHS screening programme for prostate cancer. [/perfectpullquote]Hmm. So, breast cancer screening has every woman in the country egged into passing her mammaries through a roller on a triannual basis for a significant portion of her life. Vast sums are spent upon this screening. Breast cancer incidence is:
[perfectpullquote align=”full” bordertop=”false” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]There are around 54,900 new breast cancer cases in the UK every year, that’s around 150 every day (2013-2015).Breast cancer is the most common cancer in the UK, accounting for 15% of all new cancer cases (2015).
In males in the UK, breast cancer is not among the 20 most common cancers, with around 370 new cases in 2015.
In females in the UK, breast cancer is the most common cancer, with around 54,800 new cases in 2015.[/perfectpullquote]
There is no general, as above, prostate cancer screening process on the NHS. Yet incidence is:
[perfectpullquote align=”full” bordertop=”false” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]There are around 47,700 new prostate cancer cases in the UK every year, that’s around 130 every day (2013-2015).In males in the UK, prostate cancer is the most common cancer, with around 47,200 new cases in 2015.
Prostate cancer accounts for 26% of all new cancer cases in males in the UK (2015).[/perfectpullquote]
Note that that’s a considerable underestimate of prostate cancer incidence. Of men who live more than their three score and ten the incidence is perhaps 50% of all. It’s that it doesn’t particularly cause a problem, they die of something else before it does. It’s also because there’s not that screening program to find all cases of it.
So, given the different attention paid to a largely female cancer and an entirely male one (women don’t have prostates, it’s rather a definitional thing whatever trans activists say) we live in a matriarchy or a patriarchy? You know, as Deep Throat said – now an equal opportunity across gender activity we’re told – follow the money?
Difficult to know where to start. If we ignore the data suggesting breast screening is a waste of time, we still have to accept that treatment for breast cancer might help some women.
Unfortunately whilst PSA blood tests are probably even worse than useless, the difference between radical treatment and doing nothing has surprising little effect on 10 year survival of prostate cancers. Prostate cancer is one of those things men get if they live long enough and many life a long and fruitful life blissfully unaware they have this disease.
There are some aggressive prostate cancers that will be a relatively rapid cause of death. Luckily they are a minority of prostate cancers but unless you test for the disease how will you find out (until it is too late)?
Yes, you can test all males over 60 (say) for PSA, but the number of false positives will be huge, and the investigations (to eliminate false positives) are nasty and painful, while treatments are even worse . I’ve never had the test done, but if told that I’d got elevated PSA levels, I’d say “so what?”
Best test is the finger….most uncomfortable and I had to resist the urge to fart!
I had an uncle who had breast cancer (and no, he wasn’t a super secret secret agent).