The Good News: I'm A "Perfect Candidate" For Focal Cryo Treatment

The meeting with Dr. E. David Crawford earlier this week was concerned with the outcome of the 3D staging biopsy done some two plus weeks ago. To say it went well would be an understatement, especially after he displayed the 3D grid of the mapped prostate on his computer.

He pointed to one localized region, roughly 5-6 mm in diameter, where all the cancer was confined. There were no other lesions or regions, and that assurance is the primary benefit of having the much more invasive 3D biopsy. No such assurances exist for those who get regular prostate biopsies, including the highly touted MRI fusion form (which I also had).

Recall that biopsy mistakenly identified separate cores, e.g.


And the pathology report showed a Gleason 7 score in one region (3 + 4) with 63 percent of the cells assigned malignant status and also with "perineural invasion". Thus, I beheld the summary of diagnostic information as shown:



However, none of that was confirmed in the 3D staging biopsy. Indeed, there was no evidence of any perineural invasion, as the localized lesion was situated not only apart from the rectal wall but also from the urethra. In addition, the maximum Gleason score pair for the sole cancerous region was 3 + 3, not 3 + 4.  

When Janice asked what could account for the difference in Gleason score, as well as the reduction of multiple lesions to just one, Dr. Crawford said "the radiation treatment he had four years earlier". Basically, that high dose brachytherapy treatment - leaving loads of "scar tissue" - left the histology analysis a mess, and unreliable. That pathology report was basically useless, at least in terms of moving forward. Had I therefore not had the 3D biopsy I likely would have opted for a follow-up treatment that was inappropriate.

Dr. Crawford assured me there was no rush to get the treatment done, and in that case I've postponed it until later in the year, after we take a holiday in Barbados.  In any case, as I told him, I was still contending with residual urinary burning as well as urgency, which he agreed was because of the Foley catheter. Again, it had been in barely two days. 

When I asked him how long it would need to be inserted after the focal cryo, he said it "varied" but steered clear of his original claim of "one day" (which his RN vigorously disputed when I spoke with her after the biopsy)  He agreed the most likely interval was 2-4 days, which pretty well conforms with the 3-5 days cited on the UC site. But I am hoping given the localized tumor and placement, it can maybe come out in 2-3 days. 

We will see.   For now, I am simply enjoying the good vibes of being the "perfect candidate" for this focal cryotherapy treatment.  I have asked for the copy of the 3D grid map with the lesion identified, and when I receive it from UC Health I will post it as an update on this post.


See also:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OnqA-mJDWg


And:


http://www.edavidcrawford.com/targeted-prostate-cancer-treatment

PFC Contamination Also Theatens U.S. Water Supply

EPA map showing cities where PFC levels exceeded 70 parts per trillion

While we have already seen, as in the case of Flint, MI and other cities, the extent to which lead contamination threatens the water supply, e.g

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2016/02/mark-ruffalo-bill-maher-expose-degraded.html

 that is not the only contaminant to worry about. More than 55 % of the U.S. watersheds and millions of citizens are also at risk from PFC (perflourinated chemical) contamination.

As noted from a Denver Post story (June 16, p. 16 A) "these perflourinated chemicals rank among the worst in an expanding multitude of unregulated chemicals that federal scientists are detecting in city water supplies, including hormones, pesticides, antibiotics and anti-depressants."

And as further observed: "Perflourinated chemicals don't break down"

In Colorado now, as in  many other states and cities, it has reached the critical crisis mark as the water in all 32 wells of the Security, CO water district has been found contaminated by - you guessed it - PFCs. (DPost, p. 1A) In every case the contamination levels have exceeded 70 ppt and in one case hit 1,367 ppt - nearly 20 times higher than the putative limit (and hence inimical for the consumption of pregnant women and small children).

And while PFC ingestion might not lead to retardation as does lead, it can lead to a whole raft of cancers, including the one I am currently fighting (prostate).  It has also been linked to "kidney and testicular cancer (p. 16A) as well as "developmental damage to fetuses, low birth weight, accelerated puberty, distorted bones and liver tissue damage".

Incredibly, despite the fact these horrendous chemicals are persistent in the environment (don't break down) "they aren't regulated under any national water standard although Vermont and New Hampshire have launched state-level action."

So it appears the country as well as most states, have made a deal with the corporate 'devil' to allow as much contamination of water as it likes to further prospective business (and employment) - devil take the hindmost (or the most cancer sensitive). No wonder so many insurance companies are running up huge, outstanding losses under the ACA  - they probably can't keep up with all the poor health as a result of our contaminated water supply.

The situation doesn't get better nationally. Hence (ibid.):

"The EPA has measured PFCs exceeding the limit in one percent of 4,464 public water systems nationwide. That means more than 5 million Americans in 33 states may regularly be drinking contaminated water with perflourinated chemicals".

Would you willingly and knowingly give your loved one a glass of poison? Well, that's pretty much what you are doing if you inhabit one of those PFC contaminated areas. And then triggering one cancer or another, or one of the other damaging medical horrors.

But, of course, it doesn't stop with PFCs since as I noted our water is literally awash with other toxins too, virtually none of which are regulated, including antibiotics, atrazine-laden weedicides and pesticides and other industrial byproducts - all carcinogenic crap for which the cancers generated will likely need painful, invasive biopsies as well as treatments later.

The situation just south of us in Security (ironic name, eh?) is now so bad that summer school students at four elementary schools began to use bottled water. Meanwhile, the residents themselves- worried over the terrible effects - have begun to stock their shelves with bottled water only.  (They hope that showering in the stuff won't prove too deleterious, but who knows?)

Again, more evidence that the neoliberal state and agenda doesn't really care about its citizens other then to make money off them, and use them as temporary cogs in its machine before tossing them away. Or ditching them entirely if they get too sick to work -or too expensive for continued medical benefits.

Mark Ruffalo & Bill Maher Expose Degraded State Of Our Water

"The whole nation is Flint. We just don't hear about it until people get sick". Mark Ruffalo on REAL TIME last night.

"I know people don't want to hear about any more bad shit, that hurts you. ...but chloramine - you really gotta put that at the top of your list." Bill Maher on REAL TIME.

 Last night's 'Real Time' instalment was notable for not only the way it totally trashed the juvenile Repuke debate the night before  ("the level of toilet humor and kindergartners") but also exposing the deplorable state of our municipal water systems. This was especially thanks to guest Mark Ruffalo, currently starring in the Oscar nominated film 'Spotlight', and also nominated for Best Actor. Ruffalo is also the founder of the non -profit: www,waterdefense.org

Ruffalo began by pointing out that contrary to the myth California was some liberal, environmental bastion, it actually more resembled a "regressive, libertarian, wild West oil and gas state". In other words, with California guv Jerry Brown fulfilling the role of John Hickenlooper here in Colorado - both in the pockets of the fossil fuel frackers.

Ruffalo also related taking a group of actors,  producers and artists on the 'toxic tour' of LA. This included going to four drill sites in Los Angeles proper, all in relatively poor (91 % minority) neighborhoods.  At each venue the fossil-fuel monkeys were using acidification, extreme drilling, fracking to get their stuff out of the ground with horrific health consequence, including nosebleeds, stomach issues and neurological problems as well as asthma.

As he pointed out, sadly  - thanks to the bought and sold media which prefers PR to facts and truth - "the whole nation is like Flint (Michigan). We just don't hear about it until people get sick".

This then led into the discussion of the mass use of a toxic water purifier called chloramine, with Bill Maher referencing a recent visit by activist Erin Brockovitch to get people to pay attention to what's happening to their water. Chloramine is a cheaper substitute for chlorine - that used to be used in the 'old' days (1960es, 70s)  but has now become too expensive for budget -stressed, low tax cities that think they can run only on Repuke administrations and "less government".

Chloramines (one form of which is what was used to purify the water in Flint) are basically ammonia and chlorine compounds that are far more corrosive to lead pipes (which are all across the country) than chlorine. As Bill read out the chloramine -affected cities: Washington, DC, San Francisco, LA, Denver, Miami, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Minneapolis, San Diego, Portland, Austin, Houston - viewers had to sit up and take note, or should have.

As Bill also pointed out: "It kills all fish and other animals, people on kidney dialysis treatments can't drink it  and these should be indicators that maybe we shouldn't be using it"

As Ruffalo asked: "We are one of the biggest industrial nations in the world. Why can't we trust the water that comes out of our tap?"

Then answering: "Because we don't trust the agencies that are supposed to take care of us! We're the richest country in the world and we don't give a damn about our people!"

Which is also a point I've made multiple times before, in connection with the refusal to label GMO foods, the extent of fracking's contamination of our air, soil and water and the use of cancer causing pesticides and weedicides. All have been swept under the rug by a complicit and now useless media that is often compromised by having the CEOs of the offending industries sitting on their boards.

The water and lead contamination issue has only come to the fore because of the outside investigations of a Univ. Of Virginia prof who found extraordinary corrosion in lead pipes- thanks to a chloramine used to disinfect Flint River water. But now we  know this isn't confined to Flint by any means as noted in a recent WSJ piece ('Lead Pipes Vex Many Cities').

The piece noted that Flint alone "has no choice but to spend an estimated $55 million to replace all the lead pipes leading to homes".

But adding:

"Now, utility officials across the country are calculating the cost of getting rid of their lead water lines, a task that could take years, disrupt tens of millions of homes and businesses and require billions of dollars in spending".

Will the cheapskate bastards who rule our cities finally raise taxes and get the damned job done? Not bloody likely, despite the risk that hundreds of Flints are now likely to erupt in the coming years thanks to: 1) using cheap disinfectants to purify water supplies, and 2) inattention to our overall crumbling infrastructure -which some morons actually believe to be just a ruse of the American Society for Civil Engineers. What? So THEY can get rich? Give me a fuckin' break. But I suppose these deadheads think it's similar to "climate scientists getting rich from the global warming hoax".

The bottom line, as the article also notes, is the EPA estimates there are "10 million lead service lines that link water mains in streets to buildings"

The American Water Works Association, which represents 4,000 water utilities, estimates the average cost for each replacement line at about $5,000 - for a total of $32. 5 billion (based on a lower limit of 6.5 million lines to replace).

Tracy Mehan III, executive director of government affairs for the AWWA believes all lead lines will eventually have to be replaced, adding that municipalities will likely have to raise funds through a blend of local, state and federal sources"

And dare I say the T -word? Yes, I will: TAXES!

See also:
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/gaius-publius/66222/a-vote-for-hillary-clinton-is-a-vote-for-fracking