Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Why do you ask I was there and have you -- -- -- fighter jets.
Hey they're -- silent killers can't -- to go from undetected for years often it's to live -- it's too -- and we find out.
That we in fact have -- ovarian cancer women for example -- prostate cancer meant.
And a startling new report admits our screening techniques art are now saving lives are not saving lives.
-- -- -- is used to develop.
It every depiction -- -- concept has been based with the idea that we have to find proteins.
That at Princeton and already east and maybe -- -- -- -- automatics praise -- its humor gross.
What we are finally being indicted is that that may be only.
So how can people find out if they are really at risk -- -- doctor Marc Siegel practicing internist and professor at.
-- of medicine New York university's also part of the fox medical eighteen.
So instead of this something else we should be looking for when it comes for example for ovarian cancer he's he's indicating.
We -- -- as early detection.
And both ovarian cancer and prostate cancer are asymptomatic you don't have any symptoms.
-- ovarian doctor Moore Roy interviewed up again I was saying we have to look for abnormal proteins.
And we have to look beyond the -- because a lot of the time the cancer originates in different parts of the reproductive -- we're looking in the wrong place.
He's on to something with these new protein -- -- Well that's exactly right he thinks we should be looking in the blood for abnormal markers that will tell us about ovarian cancer that's that wave of the future.
Now for prostate cancer we already have a tool and the US preventive services task force has been attacking that tool saying we shouldn't be doing the prostate specific antigen.
Because it's leading to too many biopsies too -- surgery but other statistics show that since we started using -- the death rate has gone down from prostate cancer.
Let's hear from inducted David somebody our own doctor somebody who's one of the top prostate cancer surgeons in the country about what he thinks of the Peterson.
The truth is that PSA.
Is not the best -- in the world but that's all we have there's an art to -- we have the same problem would mammogram in the same issues with colonoscopy in the last two decades.
It has reduced mortality.
Based on all of our your logic data that's the that exists the truth is that you need to have that information.
Weed -- any alternative tests.
Without PSA screening.
You're going to see more more men died as a result of this.
There -- about money aren't today if they think there's surgeries -- necessary which surgeries are necessary to tell you I guess.
And if they feel as though it's not accurate enough they look at the big price.
-- that's a great -- but the PSAs cheapen it actually saves money because it tells you might have a problem with your prostate.
Then you end up I end up setting the patient to someone like that to somebody who doesn't necessarily do surgery right away.
You might follow a trend you might look at an MRI -- -- we're gonna have more more imaging techniques coming out.
Then if you decide you need surgery the key is to get it while still localized and I've actually been in the operating room with some money -- it's unbelievable what -- can do with a robot it's like avatar and can literally get in there.
And get it out without any blood loss that you look at -- -- if you're a young man and you look at that -- a lifetime of having cancer problem the chances of -- -- -- a big deal.
Right facility -- a few tests there and one to look elsewhere the other one we have people who might be having -- back doctor Marc Siegel thanks so much Bristol there's opera.
Filter by section