News/Numbers #2

I nearly batted a thousand, but no.

The numbers:  13 out of 14 samples were not cancer.  1 was.

The number on the cancer are 7 on the Gleason Scale off a 4+3 which means it needs to be addressed but is, in the opinion of the three doctors I've heard from so far is "very treatable".

I am told I can shop around for treatment.  "Definitely not an emergency" they say.  "Treating because of your age, you're relatively young".  It's good that people are now finally adding the "relatively".  I've been ready for the "what's going to kill you first ?" calculations for a while too.

It's also nice to have an excuse to give even fewer fucks than ever.

So I talked to a few doctors and decided to go with a somewhat inconveniently located place instead of a familiar but even less conveniently located place because the doctors said I had the same chance of cure either way.  Still mystified as to why I have to travel to another state when there are multiple places that do this kind of stuff within walking distance of my residence but such is the American health care system.

Comments

HogBlogger said…
Hey, this sucks. And because of your youthful age, the numbers say to treat it. However, your numbers are not bad. And since you're basically a numbers guy anyway, you will probably not be bored to tears by this essay by Stephen Jay Gould about cancer and statistics. His diagnosis and numbers were far different from yours and far more dire. But you can't help thinking about your mortality when they say the c word. Anyway Gould lived 20 years after his bleak diagnosis so his analysis of the statistics of cancer proved to be right on. Hang in there. Marc Adams @ the club is a radiooncologist if you need to get some perspective on possible courses of treatment. I think he's on Staten Island too.
HogBlogger said…
Oh shoot..forgot the link....

https://people.umass.edu/biep540w/pdf/Stephen%20Jay%20Gould.pdf

Popular posts from this blog

...And Clubs

Drift

More Posts About Buildings and Food