Hello All                I had a Blood and PSA test a couple of weeks ago. But first I had a call from the Doctor asking me if I really wanted a PSA test at my age(80+) because if it comes back marginal I would subject to all sorts of test and I was more likely to die with it than from it!! I mulled it over for a few days and went for the Blood test and thought Sod it and asked the lady to do a PSA test as well. When the results came back PSA is at a low level Liver and Kidney all good and Cholesterol a touch over but 0.1 lower than last time(2.5years ago) There was no call from the Doctor to say I need to go on Statins so I am still one of the Very Lucky ones not on Tablets of any sort (other than for headaches etc)  So now I can drive around in a 46 year old car that is probably trying to kill us regularly!!! without any worries? Roger 

Maybe this should be on "interesting YouTube", but it more relevant here:  

John Interesting. The preceding page (p.5) illustrates the predominance of PCa in diagnoses, whilst p.10 encouragingly illustrates a rising detection rate in parallel with a dropping mortality rate over the 10 years to 2022.

Here's the real gen, on age related cancer.   It can be a heavy read though: Cancer incidence by age - NHS England Digital John

Funny you mention that. I had to have surgery for hemorrhoids in my early 30's and the surgeon - after asking questions about lifestyle - said it was common in cyclists. Bicycle and Motor. Rode a bicycle all the time, everywhere until I got my drivers license and then bought a motorcycle. Followed by a second when the first one blew up. 

Yep, it’s the same.  8 is definitely a call to action!  Sounds like it was caught just in time.  As for the age vs. speed of progression thing, I think it’s a bit of a myth.  There are different forms of PCa (Gleeson scoring partly relates). The lower scoring is less aggressive and slower growing, and is the more common especially in older men. It’s this end of the scale that (rightly) generates the concerns about over-treatment and the “die with it, not of it”, in no small part because the victims are old and likely have other things queuing up to get them! It does sometimes mutate up the Gleeson scale, but only sometimes, and trying to predict who is at risk of this is one of the fields of research. Active surveillance is one sensible response (though the biopsies are not fun). At the other end of the scale is the aggressive PCa, G8 (some say 7) and up, which is proportionately more common in younger men and needs urgent treatment.  Unfortunately it’s quite often found too late for a full cure, but improving treatment means it’s still possible to die with it rather than of it - though the treatments aren’t exactly pleasant. Not aware of any divine exemption for cyclists…. But nothing wrong with being lucky! 

Ah.... we are at cross purposes I believe, Nicky. What I meant is that there is no evidence of any prostate issues with me. Which i am taking as an excellent excuse to avoid surgery 'down there' for now  I've had enough cardiac related issues over the years to keep me occupied medically 

I'm not sure I'd forego surgery on that claim.  65 is not - I believe - the "old" they mean when they refer to the slow progression. Just sayin'.....

65... but he knows I ride/race a bike 

I'm not sure how old you are but I've read prostate cancer progression after a certain age is very slow.  Which would fit the "more likely something else will get you before the prostate" comment.