Proton Beam

Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. Just started considering it as an
option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the essence.

If anyone has some usefull links, I be grateful to see them.

Thanks,

Charlie

TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2

Loma Linda in Southern Cal is one of them - I think they were the
first some years ago. There are now a few more around the country
which others may chime in about. There are also a couple of guys on
this newsgroup who have had the procedure and if my memory is intact,
they were and are pleased with the result. You could try a search on
this newsgroup to find them and their comments.
Dave Perry

On May 5, 3:30*pm, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. *Just started considering it as an
> option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the essence..
>
> If anyone has some usefull links, *I be grateful to see them.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
> TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2

On May 5, 6:30 pm, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. Just started considering it as an
> option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the essence.
>
> If anyone has some usefull links, I be grateful to see them.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
> TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2

Register and ask your question here: http://www.healingwell.com/community/default.aspx?f=35

-Les

On Mon, 5 May 2008 18:30:06 -0400, "Charlie" <drucelakexxxx@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. Just started considering it as an
>option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the essence.
>
>If anyone has some usefull links, I be grateful to see them.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Charlie
>
>TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2

Loma Linda is still the primary location for proton beam therapy

http://www.protons.com/proton-therap...ed/pelvis.html

I don't go with time is of the essence. With PCa gleason 6 there is no
reason to panic. Check on the side effects too for if you choose
radical surgery or radiation there's is no do overs afterward.

I just had TFT(Targeted Focal Treatment) which is a clinical study.
I'm the 57th to have had this therapy. To make it short I had a 3d
imaging biospy better locating the cancer then it was killed off by
cryotherapy (ice balls). Now I have to have PSA tests every 3 months
and a regular biospy next April. As of now I am theroetically cancer
free without any impotence or incontinence. In fact I returned to
playing golf today. I had cryosurgery on 4/22/08

http://alprostate.com/aboutus.aspx

On May 5, 7:40 pm, He'sDeadJim <Hesdeadj...@nienspamhotmail.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, 5 May 2008 18:30:06 -0400, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. Just started considering it as an
> >option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the essence.
>
> >If anyone has some usefull links, I be grateful to see them.
>
> >Thanks,
>
> >Charlie
>
> >TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2
>
> Loma Linda is still the primary location for proton beam therapy
>

As is Mass General and M.D. Anderson in Houston.

-Les

On May 5, 7:51�pm, alv...@gmail.com wrote:
> On May 5, 7:40 pm, He'sDeadJim <Hesdeadj...@nienspamhotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 5 May 2008 18:30:06 -0400, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. �Just started considering it as an
> > >option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the essence.
>
> > >If anyone has some usefull links, �I be grateful to see them.
>
> > >Thanks,
>
> > >Charlie
>
> > >TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2
>
> > Loma Linda is still the primary location for proton beam therapy
>
> As is Mass General and M.D. Anderson in Houston.
>
> -Les- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

By coincidence, I just attended a lecture last night (may 5) in Boston
by a Dr. Zeitman (sp) from Harvard Medical about proton beam,
sponsored by a prostate cancer support group. He explained that it is
unique in that it uses little radiation going in and then maxes power
at the target point and stops. The problem is they never know exactly
where it stops so in his words, they always "overshoot" the beam to
make sure they don't stop short of the target.
It was a one hour lecture so I'm just paraphrasing one anecdote, but
he emphasized that even though he uses it all the time, and he rates
it very effective for most, it is in his estimation no better than
IMRT or other standard forms of radiation. His opinion is that proton
beam is best for brain tumors and for infants, which the machine is
used for 80% of the time. If you really want more info i recorded
most of it on a digital recorder and can send it to you as an mp3.
He also takes issue with a lot of the claims Loma Linda makes about
it...again, even though he uses one in his practice.
He rates RP, brachytherapy, IMRT and proton beam all equally effective.

On May 5, 4:30*pm, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. *Just started considering it as an
> option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the essence..
>
> If anyone has some usefull links, *I be grateful to see them.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
> TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2

Charlie...A paper describing the Loma Linda experience can be found at

http://www.jkpix.com/TenYearStudy/Te...ar%20Study.pdf

JHU prepared a comment sheet (biased?) on proton therapy and it can be
found at

http://www.johnshopkinshealthalerts....ert_882-1.html
or
http://tinyurl.com/3wk8a7

The results in the LL paper are not stratified in much detail which
makes comparison to other treatment modes somewhat fuzzy.
Nonetheless, the recurrence results appear to be (IMO) in the same
ball park as other treatment modalities. A few other comments:

These results are from a mix of protons and photons. I'm not sure
how far treatment has migrated to pure proton since the paper was
written.

Reduced side effects are an anticipated advantage of heavy ion RT, but
I am haven't seen studies documenting this improvement.

Loma Linda is working on an updated paper.

An interesting paper discussing the possible problem with neutrons
created in the proton process can be found at PMID: 16618572
...ron

Skeptic:

I would be more than happy to get the MP3. Use the address below with the
obvious fixups.
To everyone else, thanks for the input, links, etc. All are helpfull

Thanks,
Charlie

drucelake at yahoo dot com

"skeptic" <ribrass@aol.com> wrote in message
news:84c72110-f778-42c7-87fc-fd421f882c62@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On May 5, 7:51�pm, alv...@gmail.com wrote:
> On May 5, 7:40 pm, He'sDeadJim <Hesdeadj...@nienspamhotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 5 May 2008 18:30:06 -0400, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. �Just started considering it as
> > >an
> > >option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the
> > >essence.
>
> > >If anyone has some usefull links, �I be grateful to see them.
>
> > >Thanks,
>
> > >Charlie
>
> > >TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2
>
> > Loma Linda is still the primary location for proton beam therapy
>
> As is Mass General and M.D. Anderson in Houston.
>
> -Les- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

By coincidence, I just attended a lecture last night (may 5) in Boston
by a Dr. Zeitman (sp) from Harvard Medical about proton beam,
sponsored by a prostate cancer support group. He explained that it is
unique in that it uses little radiation going in and then maxes power
at the target point and stops. The problem is they never know exactly
where it stops so in his words, they always "overshoot" the beam to
make sure they don't stop short of the target.
It was a one hour lecture so I'm just paraphrasing one anecdote, but
he emphasized that even though he uses it all the time, and he rates
it very effective for most, it is in his estimation no better than
IMRT or other standard forms of radiation. His opinion is that proton
beam is best for brain tumors and for infants, which the machine is
used for 80% of the time. If you really want more info i recorded
most of it on a digital recorder and can send it to you as an mp3.
He also takes issue with a lot of the claims Loma Linda makes about
it...again, even though he uses one in his practice.
He rates RP, brachytherapy, IMRT and proton beam all equally effective.

"Charlie" <drucelakexxxx@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:mqydnbC9VbzuF4LVnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. Just started considering it as an
> option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the
> essence.
>

Welcome to the club, Charlie.

Very few of the more than 800 visitors to this NG in the last several years
have opted for proton treatment as their initial treatment. Four that have
are as follows:

cwarman89134@gmail.com CW89134
wborglum@sbcglobaldot.net Desert Denizen
keith340@webtv.net Keith Lundy
jeffbalfoort@yahoo.com surfdog



I have no links for you, however.



--
PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46
Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c
RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins
PSA <.1 <.1 <.1 .27 .37 .75 PSAD 0.19 years
EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 PSAD .056 years
Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 and every 4 months there after
PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145 PSAD 1.4 years
Casodex added daily 07/06
PSA <0.04, <0.05, <0.04, <0.04, <0.1 2/12/08
Non Illegitimi Carborundum

On May 5, 5:30*pm, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. *Just started considering it as an
> option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the essence..
>
> If anyone has some usefull links, *I be grateful to see them.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
> TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2

Here is a good site for you with links to other locations:
http://www.protonbob.org/proton-treatment-homepage.asp I have an
appointment for this Friday in Bloomington, IN and am leaning toward
this approach. I currently have surgery scheduled for 6-12. My
numbers look similar to yours.

On May 6, 10:23Â*am, SKEPTIC (change to "DUMB RUMOR MONGER")
<ribr...@aol.com> wrote:
> On May 5, 7:51�pm, alv...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 5, 7:40 pm, He'sDeadJim <Hesdeadj...@nienspamhotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 5 May 2008 18:30:06 -0400, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > >Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. �Just started considering it as an
> > > >option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the essence.
>
> > > >If anyone has some usefull links, �I be grateful to see them.
>
> > > >Thanks,
>
> > > >Charlie
>
> > > >TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2
>
> > > Loma Linda is still the primary location for proton beam therapy
>
> > As is Mass General and M.D. Anderson in Houston.
>
> > -Les- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> By coincidence, I just attended a lecture last night (may 5) in Boston
> by a Dr. Zeitman (sp) from Harvard Medical about proton beam,
> sponsored by aprostatecancersupport group. He explained that it is
> unique in that it uses little radiation going in and then maxes power
> at the target point and stops. Â*The problem is they never know exactly
> where it stops so in his words, they always "overshoot" the beam to
> make sure they don't stop short of Â*the target.
> It was a one hour lecture so I'm just paraphrasing one anecdote, but
> he emphasized that even though he uses it all the time, and he rates
> it very effective for most, it is in his estimation no better than
> IMRT or other standard forms of radiation. Â*His opinion is that proton
> beam is best for brain tumors and for infants, which the machine is
> used for 80% of the time. Â*If you really want more info i recorded
> most of it on a digital recorder and can send it to you as an mp3.
> He also takes issue with a lot of the claims Loma Linda makes about
> it...again, even though he uses one in his practice.
> He rates RP, brachytherapy, IMRT and proton beam all equally effective.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You make BIG assumptions – from what he said – the words you
recorded.

You wrote that he said “He also takes issue with a lot of the claims
Loma Linda makes about
it...again, even though he uses one in his practice. “ … and that
“he emphasized that even though he uses it all the time, and he rates
it very effective for most, it is in his estimation no better than
IMRT or other standard forms of radiation�.

And this is a prime example of where ‘hearsay’ – ‘incomplete
knowledge’ – and ‘false assumptions’ (misinformation) STUPIDLY spread
and magnify what is false. In doing this blogging – I assume to make
yourself ‘feel better’ – you are creating fear – and definitely the
wrong information for people who need to know the truth.

If you have the ability to know and comprehend technical matters
relating to ‘radiation’ and ‘nuclear science’ – go and study and learn
about the VERY major differences between Proton Beam radiation (which
is magnetically focused – and fine tuned to point of impact --- soon
to be with pencil point accuracy) and Gamma Radiation – “X-Rays’ – and
for openers – learn how (1) Gamma Radiation CANNOT really by focused–
how it travels equally in EVERY direction – and keeps right on
traveling and (2) The damage such Gamma Radiation can and does cause
to other tissues and cells in your body – or any animal.

So when by blogging you broadcast to the world – that the treatment is
equally effective (in your monkey hear – monkey say lack of
brilliance) – you are in one way telling the truth (both forms of
radiation CAN be equally effective in CURING prostate cancer – BUT
that half truth is a disgusting thing to disseminate online – or
anywhere else.

Gamma Radiation does its Prostate Cancer curing by killing the cancer
cells. Wonderful. So the happy good doctor can collect his money and
dollar investment in the machinery – and can truthfully say – “there
goes Joe – I cured his prostate cancer�. What he doesn’t add is that
Joe’s asshole no longer works – he leaks all over the place – and he
(may be) developing all manner of other cancers – and if not
immediately – he is now certainly at much greater risk of all those
cancers. So you see – YES – the Gamma Radiation was equallyeffective
in curing the cancer. The potentially destructive side effects were
never mentioned.

On the other hand (I will give you the generalities) – Proton Beams do
NOT DIRECTLY kill the cancerous cells. They are equal opportunity
proton particles. They CUT the DNA strands in each cell they get to
(a thousand times more accurately) in half.

In short order – each exposed cell (like the skin cells on your arms
and feet and body) try to replicate – replace themselves. They ‘find
they cannot do so promptly. The cancerous cells – by their very
nature MUST replicate quickly – so they can SPREAD. When they try and
fail – they simply DIE! “Mission Accomplished� to quote our non
brilliant leader (you know – the one who cannot properly pronounce the
word ‘nuclear’ to save his ass.

The normal cells exposed to Proton Beams – also try to replicate – and
notice they cannot do so. Sooo – they try again the next day, etc.
Unlike the cancerous cells – they are not programmed to be in a
monumental hurry to reproduce. And when they try again – voila – they
do. End result – they never were killed!

Think about that – whoever you are. And think about men diagnosed
with prostate cancer – who are in great panic and fear – andrealize
that by your stupid blog – you are just one of probably so very many
who have no idea – that you’ve just sentenced thousands of men to
suffer side effects – and likely other cancers – they need never have
exposed themselves to – in order to be cured. The try to sleep at
night – realizing how much damage your ‘loose lips’ in conjunction
with your ‘stupid conclusions’ – are CAUSING.

One other point. You again cleverly write “again, even though he uses
one in his practice� gives the impression he actually possesses one of
these quarter billion dollar machines in a facility which in total
costs about ½ billion dollars�. Sure he does! That’s about as
accurate as everything else you’ve written.

If he’s in Boston – he at best is using the one at Harvard –
Massachusetts General. Wherever these few systems in they world are –
they are not used by ‘A doctor’ – but must be used by Doctors working
hand in glove with nuclear physicists – and doing so on a full time
regular basis – in order to work properly. If the ‘good doctor’ you
quote does so on an ‘occasional basis’ it is NOT him who is doing it.
And he makes ZERO DOLLARS sending his patients there – as opposed to
raking in $75,000 a pop for using his (probably practice owned) X-Ray
system.

Perhaps now you can ‘think’ more clearly and REALIZE why he simply
says ‘they are equally effective� – and can say so with a reasonably
straight face.

You on the other hand – are one of many ‘dupes’ who are effectively
spreading the wrong information. So much for your ‘treasured mp3
recording.

You’re ‘such good guy’ – (ignorant gossip) spreading the wrong word
to people in need of knowing the truth before they elect (at their
good doctor’s suggestion) to go with an array of damaging and
destructive slice and dice – mediaeval – barbaric approachesto their
major problems.

Finally smart person: (1) The Loma Linda machine – set up was built in
1995 – has been slightly updated over time – and the organization
which built it had never sold and built another one. The Proton Beam
machine at Harvard is 2 generations old. The unit built after it –in
central China was an improvement. And the newest – most advanced is
at the Proton Beam Therapy Institute (Part of The University of
Florida – and The Shands Hospital system) in Jacksonville, Florida
(see floridaproton.org).

I urge you to remove your dumb statement from the Internet. Thank
you.

Surely you’ve heard the phrase ‘free advice stinks’.It applies
totally to your advice – conclusions – gossip – and obsessive need to
distribute your mp3 recording – for free! Wow.

No reply required. I will not look for a follow up. YOU must live
with yourself and what you are doing. You and those who listen to
your incompetent conclusions.

It takes all sorts.

On May 6, 5:28Â*pm, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Skeptic:
>
> I would be more than happy to get the MP3. Â*Use the address below with the
> obvious fixups.
> To everyone else, Â*thanks for the input, links, etc. Â*All are helpfull
>
> Thanks,
> Charlie
>
> drucelake at yahoo dot com
>
> "skeptic" <ribr...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:84c72110-f778-42c7-87fc-fd421f882c62@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On May 5, 7:51�pm, alv...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 5, 7:40 pm, He'sDeadJim <Hesdeadj...@nienspamhotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 5 May 2008 18:30:06 -0400, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > >Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. �Just started considering it as
> > > >an
> > > >option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the
> > > >essence.
>
> > > >If anyone has some usefull links, �I be grateful to see them.
>
> > > >Thanks,
>
> > > >Charlie
>
> > > >TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2
>
> > > Loma Linda is still the primary location for proton beam therapy
>
> > As is Mass General and M.D. Anderson in Houston.
>
> > -Les- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> By coincidence, I just attended a lecture last night (may 5) in Boston
> by a Dr. Zeitman (sp) from Harvard Medical about proton beam,
> sponsored by aprostatecancersupport group. He explained that it is
> unique in that it uses little radiation going in and then maxes power
> at the target point and stops. Â*The problem is they never know exactly
> where it stops so in his words, they always "overshoot" the beam to
> make sure they don't stop short of Â*the target.
> It was a one hour lecture so I'm just paraphrasing one anecdote, but
> he emphasized that even though he uses it all the time, and he rates
> it very effective for most, it is in his estimation no better than
> IMRT or other standard forms of radiation. Â*His opinion is that proton
> beam is best for brain tumors and for infants, which the machine is
> used for 80% of the time. Â*If you really want more info i recorded
> most of it on a digital recorder and can send it to you as an mp3.
> He also takes issue with a lot of the claims Loma Linda makes about
> it...again, even though he uses one in his practice.
> He rates RP, brachytherapy, IMRT and proton beam all equally effective.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You make BIG assumptions – from what he said – the words you
recorded.

You wrote that he said “He also takes issue with a lot of the claims
Loma Linda makes about
it...again, even though he uses one in his practice. “ … and that
“he emphasized that even though he uses it all the time, and he rates
it very effective for most, it is in his estimation no better than
IMRT or other standard forms of radiation�.

And this is a prime example of where ‘hearsay’ – ‘incomplete
knowledge’ – and ‘false assumptions’ (misinformation) STUPIDLY spread
and magnify what is false. In doing this blogging – I assume to make
yourself ‘feel better’ – you are creating fear – and definitely the
wrong information for people who need to know the truth.

If you have the ability to know and comprehend technical matters
relating to ‘radiation’ and ‘nuclear science’ – go and study and learn
about the VERY major differences between Proton Beam radiation (which
is magnetically focused – and fine tuned to point of impact --- soon
to be with pencil point accuracy) and Gamma Radiation – “X-Rays’ – and
for openers – learn how (1) Gamma Radiation CANNOT really by focused–
how it travels equally in EVERY direction – and keeps right on
traveling and (2) The damage such Gamma Radiation can and does cause
to other tissues and cells in your body – or any animal.

So when by blogging you broadcast to the world – that the treatment is
equally effective (in your monkey hear – monkey say lack of
brilliance) – you are in one way telling the truth (both forms of
radiation CAN be equally effective in CURING prostate cancer – BUT
that half truth is a disgusting thing to disseminate online – or
anywhere else.

Gamma Radiation does its Prostate Cancer curing by killing the cancer
cells. Wonderful. So the happy good doctor can collect his money and
dollar investment in the machinery – and can truthfully say – “there
goes Joe – I cured his prostate cancer�. What he doesn’t add is that
Joe’s asshole no longer works – he leaks all over the place – and he
(may be) developing all manner of other cancers – and if not
immediately – he is now certainly at much greater risk of all those
cancers. So you see – YES – the Gamma Radiation was equallyeffective
in curing the cancer. The potentially destructive side effects were
never mentioned.

On the other hand (I will give you the generalities) – Proton Beams do
NOT DIRECTLY kill the cancerous cells. They are equal opportunity
proton particles. They CUT the DNA strands in each cell they get to
(a thousand times more accurately) in half.

In short order – each exposed cell (like the skin cells on your arms
and feet and body) try to replicate – replace themselves. They ‘find
they cannot do so promptly. The cancerous cells – by their very
nature MUST replicate quickly – so they can SPREAD. When they try and
fail – they simply DIE! “Mission Accomplished� to quote our non
brilliant leader (you know – the one who cannot properly pronounce the
word ‘nuclear’ to save his ass.

The normal cells exposed to Proton Beams – also try to replicate – and
notice they cannot do so. Sooo – they try again the next day, etc.
Unlike the cancerous cells – they are not programmed to be in a
monumental hurry to reproduce. And when they try again – voila – they
do. End result – they never were killed!

Think about that – whoever you are. And think about men diagnosed
with prostate cancer – who are in great panic and fear – andrealize
that by your stupid blog – you are just one of probably so very many
who have no idea – that you’ve just sentenced thousands of men to
suffer side effects – and likely other cancers – they need never have
exposed themselves to – in order to be cured. The try to sleep at
night – realizing how much damage your ‘loose lips’ in conjunction
with your ‘stupid conclusions’ – are CAUSING.

One other point. You again cleverly write “again, even though he uses
one in his practice� gives the impression he actually possesses one of
these quarter billion dollar machines in a facility which in total
costs about ½ billion dollars�. Sure he does! That’s about as
accurate as everything else you’ve written.

If he’s in Boston – he at best is using the one at Harvard –
Massachusetts General. Wherever these few systems in they world are –
they are not used by ‘A doctor’ – but must be used by Doctors working
hand in glove with nuclear physicists – and doing so on a full time
regular basis – in order to work properly. If the ‘good doctor’ you
quote does so on an ‘occasional basis’ it is NOT him who is doing it.
And he makes ZERO DOLLARS sending his patients there – as opposed to
raking in $75,000 a pop for using his (probably practice owned) X-Ray
system.

Perhaps now you can ‘think’ more clearly and REALIZE why he simply
says ‘they are equally effective� – and can say so with a reasonably
straight face.

You on the other hand – are one of many ‘dupes’ who are effectively
spreading the wrong information. So much for your ‘treasured mp3
recording.

You’re ‘such good guy’ – (ignorant gossip) spreading the wrong word
to people in need of knowing the truth before they elect (at their
good doctor’s suggestion) to go with an array of damaging and
destructive slice and dice – mediaeval – barbaric approachesto their
major problems.

Finally smart person: (1) The Loma Linda machine – set up was built in
1995 – has been slightly updated over time – and the organization
which built it had never sold and built another one. The Proton Beam
machine at Harvard is 2 generations old. The unit built after it –in
central China was an improvement. And the newest – most advanced is
at the Proton Beam Therapy Institute (Part of The University of
Florida – and The Shands Hospital system) in Jacksonville, Florida
(see floridaproton.org).

I urge you to remove your dumb statement from the Internet. Thank
you.

Surely you’ve heard the phrase ‘free advice stinks’.It applies
totally to your advice – conclusions – gossip – and obsessive need to
distribute your mp3 recording – for free! Wow.

Bob,

While you clearly possess a lot of knowledge on this topic, if there's
one thing I've learned about PSA, PCa, and treatment options ... there's
a lot of controversy and differing opinions out there. Respectfully, if
you think that an open information source like an internet newsgroup is
not going to contain any heresay ... or subjective opinions ... you
really shouldn't read the posts here. Subjectivity is what the medical
profession and the internet are all about. I just had 3 different
recommendations on whether to have a biopsy or not. PLEASE.

You're correct in asking for substantiation and in asking posters to
provide backup studies/documentation to backup claims. But there are
going to be inevitable times when someone quotes a medical professional
who could be right and could be wrong. If proton beam was the answer for
everything and it was so obvious that it was the best choice, believe me
.... we would all know it and people wouldn't be having RPs anymore.

LE

Bob wrote:
> On May 6, 10:23 am, SKEPTIC (change to "DUMB RUMOR MONGER")
> <ribr...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>On May 5, 7:51�pm, alv...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>On May 5, 7:40 pm, He'sDeadJim <Hesdeadj...@nienspamhotmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>
>>>>On Mon, 5 May 2008 18:30:06 -0400, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>
>>>>>Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. �Just started considering it as an
>>>>>option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the essence.
>>
>>>>>If anyone has some usefull links, �I be grateful to see them.
>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>
>>>>>Charlie
>>
>>>>>TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2
>>
>>>>Loma Linda is still the primary location for proton beam therapy
>>
>>>As is Mass General and M.D. Anderson in Houston.
>>
>>>-Les- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>- Show quoted text -
>>
>>By coincidence, I just attended a lecture last night (may 5) in Boston
>>by a Dr. Zeitman (sp) from Harvard Medical about proton beam,
>>sponsored by aprostatecancersupport group. He explained that it is
>>unique in that it uses little radiation going in and then maxes power
>>at the target point and stops. The problem is they never know exactly
>>where it stops so in his words, they always "overshoot" the beam to
>>make sure they don't stop short of the target.
>>It was a one hour lecture so I'm just paraphrasing one anecdote, but
>>he emphasized that even though he uses it all the time, and he rates
>>it very effective for most, it is in his estimation no better than
>>IMRT or other standard forms of radiation. His opinion is that proton
>>beam is best for brain tumors and for infants, which the machine is
>>used for 80% of the time. If you really want more info i recorded
>>most of it on a digital recorder and can send it to you as an mp3.
>>He also takes issue with a lot of the claims Loma Linda makes about
>>it...again, even though he uses one in his practice.
>>He rates RP, brachytherapy, IMRT and proton beam all equally effective.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>- Show quoted text -
>
>
> You make BIG assumptions – from what he said – the words you
> recorded.
>
> You wrote that he said “He also takes issue with a lot of the claims
> Loma Linda makes about
> it...again, even though he uses one in his practice. “ … and that
> “he emphasized that even though he uses it all the time, and he rates
> it very effective for most, it is in his estimation no better than
> IMRT or other standard forms of radiation�.
>
> And this is a prime example of where ‘hearsay’ – ‘incomplete
> knowledge’ – and ‘false assumptions’ (misinformation) STUPIDLY spread
> and magnify what is false. In doing this blogging – I assume to make
> yourself ‘feel better’ – you are creating fear – and definitely the
> wrong information for people who need to know the truth.
>
> If you have the ability to know and comprehend technical matters
> relating to ‘radiation’ and ‘nuclear science’ – go and study and learn
> about the VERY major differences between Proton Beam radiation (which
> is magnetically focused – and fine tuned to point of impact --- soon
> to be with pencil point accuracy) and Gamma Radiation – “X-Rays’ – and
> for openers – learn how (1) Gamma Radiation CANNOT really by focused –
> how it travels equally in EVERY direction – and keeps right on
> traveling and (2) The damage such Gamma Radiation can and does cause
> to other tissues and cells in your body – or any animal.
>
> So when by blogging you broadcast to the world – that the treatment is
> equally effective (in your monkey hear – monkey say lack of
> brilliance) – you are in one way telling the truth (both forms of
> radiation CAN be equally effective in CURING prostate cancer – BUT
> that half truth is a disgusting thing to disseminate online – or
> anywhere else.
>
> Gamma Radiation does its Prostate Cancer curing by killing the cancer
> cells. Wonderful. So the happy good doctor can collect his money and
> dollar investment in the machinery – and can truthfully say – “there
> goes Joe – I cured his prostate cancer�. What he doesn’t add is that
> Joe’s asshole no longer works – he leaks all over the place – and he
> (may be) developing all manner of other cancers – and if not
> immediately – he is now certainly at much greater risk of all those
> cancers. So you see – YES – the Gamma Radiation was equally effective
> in curing the cancer. The potentially destructive side effects were
> never mentioned.
>
> On the other hand (I will give you the generalities) – Proton Beams do
> NOT DIRECTLY kill the cancerous cells. They are equal opportunity
> proton particles. They CUT the DNA strands in each cell they get to
> (a thousand times more accurately) in half.
>
> In short order – each exposed cell (like the skin cells on your arms
> and feet and body) try to replicate – replace themselves. They ‘find
> they cannot do so promptly. The cancerous cells – by their very
> nature MUST replicate quickly – so they can SPREAD. When they try and
> fail – they simply DIE! “Mission Accomplished� to quote our non
> brilliant leader (you know – the one who cannot properly pronounce the
> word ‘nuclear’ to save his ass.
>
> The normal cells exposed to Proton Beams – also try to replicate – and
> notice they cannot do so. Sooo – they try again the next day, etc.
> Unlike the cancerous cells – they are not programmed to be in a
> monumental hurry to reproduce. And when they try again – voila – they
> do. End result – they never were killed!
>
> Think about that – whoever you are. And think about men diagnosed
> with prostate cancer – who are in great panic and fear – and realize
> that by your stupid blog – you are just one of probably so very many
> who have no idea – that you’ve just sentenced thousands of men to
> suffer side effects – and likely other cancers – they need never have
> exposed themselves to – in order to be cured. The try to sleep at
> night – realizing how much damage your ‘loose lips’ in conjunction
> with your ‘stupid conclusions’ – are CAUSING.
>
> One other point. You again cleverly write “again, even though he uses
> one in his practice� gives the impression he actually possesses one of
> these quarter billion dollar machines in a facility which in total
> costs about ½ billion dollars�. Sure he does! That’s about as
> accurate as everything else you’ve written.
>
> If he’s in Boston – he at best is using the one at Harvard –
> Massachusetts General. Wherever these few systems in they world are –
> they are not used by ‘A doctor’ – but must be used by Doctors working
> hand in glove with nuclear physicists – and doing so on a full time
> regular basis – in order to work properly. If the ‘good doctor’ you
> quote does so on an ‘occasional basis’ it is NOT him who is doing it.
> And he makes ZERO DOLLARS sending his patients there – as opposed to
> raking in $75,000 a pop for using his (probably practice owned) X-Ray
> system.
>
> Perhaps now you can ‘think’ more clearly and REALIZE why he simply
> says ‘they are equally effective� – and can say so with a reasonably
> straight face.
>
> You on the other hand – are one of many ‘dupes’ who are effectively
> spreading the wrong information. So much for your ‘treasured mp3
> recording.
>
> You’re ‘such good guy’ – (ignorant gossip) spreading the wrong word
> to people in need of knowing the truth before they elect (at their
> good doctor’s suggestion) to go with an array of damaging and
> destructive slice and dice – mediaeval – barbaric approaches to their
> major problems.
>
> Finally smart person: (1) The Loma Linda machine – set up was built in
> 1995 – has been slightly updated over time – and the organization
> which built it had never sold and built another one. The Proton Beam
> machine at Harvard is 2 generations old. The unit built after it –in
> central China was an improvement. And the newest – most advanced is
> at the Proton Beam Therapy Institute (Part of The University of
> Florida – and The Shands Hospital system) in Jacksonville, Florida
> (see floridaproton.org).
>
> I urge you to remove your dumb statement from the Internet. Thank
> you.
>
> Surely you’ve heard the phrase ‘free advice stinks’. It applies
> totally to your advice – conclusions – gossip – and obsessive need to
> distribute your mp3 recording – for free! Wow.
>
> No reply required. I will not look for a follow up. YOU must live
> with yourself and what you are doing. You and those who listen to
> your incompetent conclusions.
>
> It takes all sorts.
>
>

"Bob" <dreamscanbe@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:903488b6-dddb-479a-8d1f-99bb65e9a36b@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On May 6, 10:23 am, SKEPTIC (change to "DUMB RUMOR MONGER")
<ribr...@aol.com> wrote:
> On May 5, 7:51�pm, alv...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 5, 7:40 pm, He'sDeadJim <Hesdeadj...@nienspamhotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 5 May 2008 18:30:06 -0400, "Charlie" <drucelakex...@yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > >Trying to research Proton Beam Therapy. �Just started considering it
> > > >as an
> > > >option to a prostectomy (scheduled for Mid June) so time is of the
> > > >essence.
>
> > > >If anyone has some usefull links, �I be grateful to see them.
>
> > > >Thanks,
>
> > > >Charlie
>
> > > >TIC Gleason 6, PSA 4.2
>
> > > Loma Linda is still the primary location for proton beam therapy
>
> > As is Mass General and M.D. Anderson in Houston.
>
> > -Les- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> By coincidence, I just attended a lecture last night (may 5) in Boston
> by a Dr. Zeitman (sp) from Harvard Medical about proton beam,
> sponsored by aprostatecancersupport group. He explained that it is
> unique in that it uses little radiation going in and then maxes power
> at the target point and stops. The problem is they never know exactly
> where it stops so in his words, they always "overshoot" the beam to
> make sure they don't stop short of the target.
> It was a one hour lecture so I'm just paraphrasing one anecdote, but
> he emphasized that even though he uses it all the time, and he rates
> it very effective for most, it is in his estimation no better than
> IMRT or other standard forms of radiation. His opinion is that proton
> beam is best for brain tumors and for infants, which the machine is
> used for 80% of the time. If you really want more info i recorded
> most of it on a digital recorder and can send it to you as an mp3.
> He also takes issue with a lot of the claims Loma Linda makes about
> it...again, even though he uses one in his practice.
> He rates RP, brachytherapy, IMRT and proton beam all equally effective.-
> Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You make BIG assumptions – from what he said – the words you
recorded.

You wrote that he said “He also takes issue with a lot of the claims
Loma Linda makes about
it...again, even though he uses one in his practice. “ … and that
“he emphasized that even though he uses it all the time, and he rates
it very effective for most, it is in his estimation no better than
IMRT or other standard forms of radiation�.

And this is a prime example of where ‘hearsay’ – ‘incomplete
knowledge’ – and ‘false assumptions’ (misinformation) STUPIDLY spread
and magnify what is false. In doing this blogging – I assume to make
yourself ‘feel better’ – you are creating fear – and definitely the
wrong information for people who need to know the truth.

If you have the ability to know and comprehend technical matters
relating to ‘radiation’ and ‘nuclear science’ – go and study and learn
about the VERY major differences between Proton Beam radiation (which
is magnetically focused – and fine tuned to point of impact --- soon
to be with pencil point accuracy) and Gamma Radiation – “X-Rays’ – and
for openers – learn how (1) Gamma Radiation CANNOT really by focused –
how it travels equally in EVERY direction – and keeps right on
traveling and (2) The damage such Gamma Radiation can and does cause
to other tissues and cells in your body – or any animal.

So when by blogging you broadcast to the world – that the treatment is
equally effective (in your monkey hear – monkey say lack of
brilliance) – you are in one way telling the truth (both forms of
radiation CAN be equally effective in CURING prostate cancer – BUT
that half truth is a disgusting thing to disseminate online – or
anywhere else.

Gamma Radiation does its Prostate Cancer curing by killing the cancer
cells. Wonderful. So the happy good doctor can collect his money and
dollar investment in the machinery – and can truthfully say – “there
goes Joe – I cured his prostate cancer�. What he doesn’t add is that
Joe’s asshole no longer works – he leaks all over the place – and he
(may be) developing all manner of other cancers – and if not
immediately – he is now certainly at much greater risk of all those
cancers. So you see – YES – the Gamma Radiation was equally effective
in curing the cancer. The potentially destructive side effects were
never mentioned.

On the other hand (I will give you the generalities) – Proton Beams do
NOT DIRECTLY kill the cancerous cells. They are equal opportunity
proton particles. They CUT the DNA strands in each cell they get to
(a thousand times more accurately) in half.

In short order – each exposed cell (like the skin cells on your arms
and feet and body) try to replicate – replace themselves. They ‘find
they cannot do so promptly. The cancerous cells – by their very
nature MUST replicate quickly – so they can SPREAD. When they try and
fail – they simply DIE! “Mission Accomplished� to quote our non
brilliant leader (you know – the one who cannot properly pronounce the
word ‘nuclear’ to save his ass.

The normal cells exposed to Proton Beams – also try to replicate – and
notice they cannot do so. Sooo – they try again the next day, etc.
Unlike the cancerous cells – they are not programmed to be in a
monumental hurry to reproduce. And when they try again – voila – they
do. End result – they never were killed!

Think about that – whoever you are. And think about men diagnosed
with prostate cancer – who are in great panic and fear – and realize
that by your stupid blog – you are just one of probably so very many
who have no idea – that you’ve just sentenced thousands of men to
suffer side effects – and likely other cancers – they need never have
exposed themselves to – in order to be cured. The try to sleep at
night – realizing how much damage your ‘loose lips’ in conjunction
with your ‘stupid conclusions’ – are CAUSING.

One other point. You again cleverly write “again, even though he uses
one in his practice� gives the impression he actually possesses one of
these quarter billion dollar machines in a facility which in total
costs about ½ billion dollars�. Sure he does! That’s about as
accurate as everything else you’ve written.

If he’s in Boston – he at best is using the one at Harvard –
Massachusetts General. Wherever these few systems in they world are –
they are not used by ‘A doctor’ – but must be used by Doctors working
hand in glove with nuclear physicists – and doing so on a full time
regular basis – in order to work properly. If the ‘good doctor’ you
quote does so on an ‘occasional basis’ it is NOT him who is doing it.
And he makes ZERO DOLLARS sending his patients there – as opposed to
raking in $75,000 a pop for using his (probably practice owned) X-Ray
system.

Perhaps now you can ‘think’ more clearly and REALIZE why he simply
says ‘they are equally effective� – and can say so with a reasonably
straight face.

You on the other hand – are one of many ‘dupes’ who are effectively
spreading the wrong information. So much for your ‘treasured mp3
recording.

You’re ‘such good guy’ – (ignorant gossip) spreading the wrong word
to people in need of knowing the truth before they elect (at their
good doctor’s suggestion) to go with an array of damaging and
destructive slice and dice – mediaeval – barbaric approaches to their
major problems.

Finally smart person: (1) The Loma Linda machine – set up was built in
1995 – has been slightly updated over time – and the organization
which built it had never sold and built another one. The Proton Beam
machine at Harvard is 2 generations old. The unit built after it –in
central China was an improvement. And the newest – most advanced is
at the Proton Beam Therapy Institute (Part of The University of
Florida – and The Shands Hospital system) in Jacksonville, Florida
(see floridaproton.org).

I urge you to remove your dumb statement from the Internet. Thank
you.

Surely you’ve heard the phrase ‘free advice stinks’. It applies
totally to your advice – conclusions – gossip – and obsessive need to
distribute your mp3 recording – for free! Wow.

No reply required. I will not look for a follow up. YOU must live
with yourself and what you are doing. You and those who listen to
your incompetent conclusions.

It takes all sorts.

Bob:

As the original poster in this thread, I support your last statement. The
rest is a confused, vitrioloic and in itself filled with more innuendo than
you ascribe to the gentleman who offerred his recordings. I have listened
to them and have thanked him, off group.

All I asked for was input. Clearly you have determined that I am unable to
evaluate such material. Clearly as well, you seem to know what no one else
does ie that Dr Zeitman does not support proton beam as the "best"
treatment because he can't then use his private practice owned investment.

Where is this phantom practice? He would seem to employed as a rad onc at
Mass
Gen. In my experience, these men are salaried with little vested interest
in which treatment works for which patient.

It seems your agenda is showing in attempting to discredit this man so
crudely.

Lastly, I am appalled that you suggest that anyone in this group or
elsewhere who elected surgery are supporting what you describe
as mediaeval – barbaric approaches.

There is no "best" treatment. There is no clear path. It is a difficult
decision and one that I and every other poster here wish no one had to make.
This decision is based on both what ever data one can collect as well as
ones
personal feelings and sensitivities and those of his loved ones.

So there I am, asking for inputs and the messenger is being shot.

I will have my robotic surgery a week from Monday.
We will just have to disagree as to the barbaric nature of my decision.

Thanks for your input.

Ain't usenet wonderful

C