 |
|
|
|
|
May 30th, 2010
11:58 AM ET
Hopper's disease No. 2 cancer killer of menActor Dennis Hopper, who starred in such Hollywood classics as "Easy Rider" and "Blue Velvet," died Saturday at his home in Venice, California. He was 74. His prostate cancer was diagnosed last October. According to his wife, Victoria Hopper, he was surrounded by his children when he died. Hopper is one of the approximately 27,000 men who die every year from prostate cancer, according to the American Cancer Society It is the second largest cancer killer of men, just behind lung cancer. In 2009, there were more than 192,000 new diagnoses according to ACS. Recently, there has been a lot of talk about the best course of treatment for prostate cancer. According to a study published last year in The New England Journal of Medicine, prostate screenings don't reduce the number of deaths from illness. But not all experts agree. The study caused much controversy in the medical community. My colleague, Elizabeth Cohen, wrote about the opinions on treatment options in her column, "The Empowered Patient." Funeral arrangements have not been decided, but Hopper's wish was to be buried in Taos, New Mexico, "his heart home," Victoria Hopper said. To read more about Hopper's life and career, click here.
« Previous entryPublic health pioneer on trail of "the next lead"
|
  About this blog
Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love.
 |
|
|
|
The reason that awareness of this is so low relates to 2 areas in my opinion: 1) men are "supposed" to be tough and not complain, just help others in the family out. They therefore often forget about themselves. and 2.) everyone knows men have prostate glands, but not many people know what that is. Since it is a reproductive gland, it is often uncomfortable to speak about this for both men and women. The most interesting thing about prostate cancer is that it is very beatable if diagnosed early. Given the latest recommendations in the New England Journal of Medicine, it is fully unacceptable for their baloney to be spewed....GET A SCREENING TUESDAY!!! And check with other men who are 60+ and put pressure on them to do the screening....most insurance will pay for this and many urologists and medical professionals have days they do free screenings especially during OCT (Prostrate cancer awareness month). And tell your feamle friends to get their breast cancer screenings too!
Prostate and testicular cancer is a thing we need to make men more aware. I think it is drilled into boys heads to be a man tough it out, so what if they thinking no biggie I will tough anything out. It is going to hurt their health. Men dont gather around and talk freely about a prostate exam they got, women are like oh yeah I got a breast exam no big deal... I think having men open up about the issue and that would help with awareness.
You would have to be living in a cave in the back side of New Guinea not to have heard of prostate cancer, it's symptoms and causes. Among the 5 minute commercials every three minutes on most television programs now – and especially CNN, prostate health products are advertised constantly. If you read any nutrition/health information you should know the links between eating and life style to prostate health. Any lack of awareness on the subject comes from an apathetic and consequently ignorant public who expects all their knowledge to poured through a funnel into their minds – by someone else. I am glad to see that some of the medical community is finally admitting that testing isn't the whole solution – for prostate and breast health. If you want to have the best prostate health possible – read what there is known on the subject and stay current on the new information that is coming out all the time. Make your health your hobby. Otherwise, just like the rest of us – you're going to die of something, but you might be leaving a little too early like old Dennis.
You must look into Proton Therapy radiation...this is a way to handle prostate cancers with a minimum of side effects and consequences. Often your urologist or surgeon won't tell you this because there are only a handful of facilities which have this amazing technology. Start your healing by contacting the Loma Linda Hospital in California and they will send you further info.
Hey, guys, my husband had a rising PSA for a few years and was finally diagnosed with PC in 2006. I did all the research on treatment techniques. He finally opted for proton radiation in Loma Linda CA. His concerns, as I feel for most men, are the quality of life regarding bladder, bowel and sexual function after whatever procedure is chosen. I believe that is why many men put off doing anything. He chose proton because it has the fewest side effects. He had none.
There are currently more options for dealing with prostate cancer than breast cancer. Seeding and IMRT which have been available to men for many years have only in recent years been used in breast cancer. 3T MRI is a good alternative for those who fear the biopsy. And breast cancer doesn't have a "watch and wait"option.
PSA screenings just saved my husband's life. He had a radical prostatectomy less than a week ago. Screen early! My husband is only 52.
I had been watching my PSA count for years due to my father,both uncles and cousin having it. I had a 5.5 PSA in 2009 and blew it off becuse I was to busy I now have a 9.45 PSA and the biop confirms that i have cancer. The MRI and the bone scan is schedualled and I hiope like hell it is contained.
I'm one of those who is alive today due to routine PSA screening. My PSA was 6 at my annual physical and was as high as 10 before I had robotic surgery. Biopsy revealed that I had an aggressive and fast moving form. Clearly, if I had not been tested, I would be dead or fighting advanced cancer by now. Dr. Patrick Walsh of Johns Hopkins, probably the most distinguished urological oncologist in the country, has written extensively about the flaws in the studies recommending that men forgo annual screening. It is true that aggressive prostate cancers might be rare, but to the person who has the cancer it is not rare.
Spare your family (and yourself) the pain. Get tested annually.
I used to work for one of the country's leading experts on prostate cancer. I leaarned that men until they are pushed into a corner don't want to discuss their urological needs. Men, I have 1 question are you afraid of the side effects of surgery of if your wife/ significant other is going to leave you if you can't perform. There are different things that can be done ( Viagra, cialis, levitra, muse, pumps, etc...) I know a man that had an enlarged prostate and stayed on top of things for years and then to no one's surprise- prostate cancer. He did not want to deal with the surgery or radiation so he took himself to Canada and had High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) done (25K cash). It is still in trials here. He is doing fine. The prostate stays but the tumor is burned off. September is Prostate Cancer Awarness month, instead of talking about this disease call or go online and find out when the next free screening is and find out how you can help and spread the word.
Reading the comments here are kind of scarey, since, some really important sounding words exist that say that "...100% of men aged 100..." have prostate cancer. Comments like that get put out on a board like this and it seems to get validity and spread, erroneously, as fact! How is it that the media allows such irrisponsibility? Seems that the pink ribbon type campaign needs to be used to raise this awareness. Someone here seems to think that it's up to just men to get out and raise this awareness, even though she is making money off of the prostate cancer moneywagon. I would suggest that when women have shown up at my worksite for the pink thing, men have gladly stepped up to show support. Have you been to a rodeo lately where the phrase "man enough to wear pink" is touted and have you noticed the cowboys in pink shirts to show support for the womans disease? I would say that men have gladly stepped up in this ... and to the female researcher: Whay can't women reciprocate?
Why do people have to keep bringing up how many women have breast cancer? This is about a MAN who died of prostate cancer. Maybe 27k people sounds small to you, but they did indicate it's the second largest cancer killer in men after lung cancer (also the #1 cancer killer of WOMEN). I don't understand why lung cancer gets so little press when it kills so many-and no I don't want to hear people railing against smokers.
And to the writer about "they don't want to cure us, they want to keep us sick to make a profit"-until they cure aging we're all going to die of something!! Cures aren't so easy when cells can mutate or so many diseases (ie heart disease) are impacted by our own behavior.
Michael Millone (who by the way says he's a PhD and not an MD, so he's not a medical doctor and apparently doesn't know anything about this):
All cancer kills by destroying organs or changing the way the body is able to work properly. In that sense no cancer actually kills anyone! It's not a technicality – if you are a drunk driver, run into someone, and they die from hitting the metal from your car, was it the metal that killed them and not you?
As to everyone else:
Yes, prostate cancer kills. But if at 100, 100% of men have it, do some thinking and just imagine how it will be if we give everyone treatment, radiation...et cetera. Destroy their colons, give them colostomy bags so they poop from their stomachs forever....mess up their ureters, give them permanent urine catheters....and now they die of urosepsis from a UTI (overwhelming total body infection from a urinary tract infection) when they had stage 1 (low-grade) prostate cancer at 72.
You get the picture. It depends on the individual case, as does all of medicine. That's why talking to your doc is important, and just hearing horror stories that scare you on the news is not.
And the quote "approximately 100% of men aged 100" is directly out of medical school lectures at a top 50 school. It's an estimation, but intended to give a general idea of how many men get prostate cancer. Namely, basically all of them if they live long enough.
Breast cancer – unless someone here was mistaken – is both a male and female disease. Men have breast tissue too, even if they might not want to admit it. Trying to play sides in the cancer debates doesn't help anyone. Trying to actually understand the role these cancers does is – and believe you me, there are a ton of different cancers out there. The word cancer scares people. But depending on the cancer, it might be very treatable. It's not a sure death sentence. It all depends. Some cancers never kill you, even without treatment. Prostate cancer, depending on what exactly you have, might or might not kill you. It just all depends on the situation.
When diagnosed with PC, I went on line and reviewed all the available information on treatment. I had a PSA of 4.0 and absolutely no symptoms. My urologist did a core tissue sample and detected not one but two tumors in the gland. At 64 I thought I may outlive the situation but decided to have the DeVinci Robot (laprascopic surgery) instead. Good thing I did. One of the cancers was at the outside edge of the gland and ready to metastasize to other structures. Don't fool around with cancer. If it can be cut out, do it.
I was diagnosed with PC without any symptoms. My PSA numbers were high and a biopsy showed an agressive cancer. I'm 54. I had my prostate removed a month later. I have no cancer, but now have to wear pads because i have just about no bladder control. It's very frustrating. Now that we can cure the cancer through prostate removal work has to be done to help men retain bladder control. It's a real lifestyle killer to have to wear and change diapers frequently.
When I read the postings on this issue, it makes me sad. Everyone in our lives is precious, whether they be male or female. And statistics are that, just statistics. Whether the number is 27,ooo or 270,ooo, the number is irrelevant when the cancer victim is you, your husband, son, brother, daughter, mother, wife. The bottom line is cancer is a killer. We need early diagnosis and good education and available treatments. Don;t waste time trying to make out one cancer is worse than the other. We need to be proactive. No room for discrimmination or sexism here. The potential losses are just too important.
No man is ever going to stroll in to the doctor's office asking to have a mamogram even though men get breast cancer too. Very few men stroll in to their doctor's office asking for their man-o-gram (ie DRE or PSA test). Their wives have to push them to do it. If individual men are too squeamish to take their own health into their hands, this is why there isn't a more prevalent presence of prostate cancer awareness. Guys don't want to talk about it or even think about it. When they finally get a PSA test and it's over 5 ng/dL or has climbed several points in a year, they bury their heads in the sand and say "o woe is me! I might have some trouble peeing or worse than death!- I might have trouble getting it up!" If these things are more important than your life or debilitating, intractable bone pain, it is your choice. The cancer might continue to be slow or not. It is your choice and remember, once made, you have to live with it and the possibility of your wife saying "I told you so.". Just because my cousin's husband told my cousin she wasn't a woman anymore after her double mastectomy (which saved her life) doesn't mean YOUR wife will say you are no longer a man if you have some side effects. Unlike many men, women love their men for their non-physical qualities so unless your treatment cuts those out too, you have nothing to worry about. We will always love you.
All these comments about "what should be done", makes me laugh given the fact that 75 percent of working Americans have inadequate or non-existant health care coverage.
So what is all of your answers for them? Think they give a damn about some new miracle procedure? Timelines when to begin periodic check-ups of the prostrate?
Well they do, but they also know being told they have prostrate cancer is the same as getting a death sentence when you can't obtain treatment.
Cancer is a terrible disease and I wish that it could be cured for everyone.
Too bad the medical profession does not know how many men have prostate cancer and die of something else. The same goes for any cancer. Many people die with cancer but not because of it. Since most people die without a autopsy, the existence of cancer or heart disease is not known.
I read where a doctor said that the he believed that almost 30 or 40% of the people who die have cancer but about 10% die because of cancer. If this is true, then it would mean that the number of people being treated for cancer would go up by a 300%. Until science knows how many people really have cancer, then how could it possible to say if any treatment really save lives. Maybe the treatments only "save" the people who would not have died anyway.
I get sick and tired of hearing, "Even if you get prostate cancer, you'll die from something else anyway." That is true if your diagnosed when your 75 years old.
When I was 59 and I had a PSA of 15. That was 7 1/2 years ago. Had I taken the wait and see approach I'd be dead. A radical prostatectomy was recommended. I got a second opinion and the second M.D. also recommended a radical prostatectomy. Robotic surgery was in its infancy.
It is hard for me to get an erection but I am cancer free and now there are drugs that help with erectile dysfunction. Life is good.
If you are a man, age 50 get a PSA done. If your a black man do not wait until your 50, get done in your forties. If your a woman who knows a man who is near for 50 tell him to get a PSA. If you have to pester the man and be a 'bitch' about it, then do it. Man do not like to go to doctors and they wind up dying because they are stubborn.
I was diagnosed with low volume prostate cancer a year ago at age 60. My PSA was 4.0 and my Gleason score was a moderately aggressive 3+3. My primary care doctor and my oncologist suggested watchful waiting aka active surveillance. In my case so far, this means PSA checks and digital exams every 3 months and a second biopsy 6 months after diagnosis. The second biopsy showed no cancer but this is due to the small size of my cancer. My PSA readings have been stable and by digital exams have been non-suspicious. After diagnosis, I immediately purchased 2 books, one a guide to prostate health written by a prominent integrative medicine prostate surgeon in 2006 and the other a comprehensive guide to surviving prostate cancer written in 2007 by the preeminent prostate cancer surgeon in the US. The first book has very valuable recommendations for diet and nutritional supplements and the second is a complete guide to all treatment options and numerous other prostate-related topics. I'd suggest that all men, regardless of age, buy these 2 books even if they do not have prostate cancer. In my case, I'm not anxious to rush into a more active form of treatment (surgery or radiation), given the potential side effects of these treatments. 2 other helpful books that I've purchased are a listing of America's top doctors and a listing of America's top doctors for cancer. If I do need more active treatment, I intend to utilize the best doctor that I can get (even if I have to travel), to minimize the risk of side effects.
To say that prostate cancer is "just behind lung cancer" in male cancer deaths is not a very accurate statement. According to widely used statistics on cancer in the US (see CA Cancer J Clin 59(4):229, 2009), prostate cancer is expected to kill 27,360 American men. Lung cancer will kill 88,900. That is more than three times as many deaths from lung cancer, despite the fact that prostate cancer has a higher incidence (more men actually get the cancer).
Lung cancer will also kill 70,490 American women. That's a little less than twice as many as breast cancer claims per year.
Overall, lung cancer kills as many Americans as the next three biggest cancer killers COMBINED. And yes, I'm a lung cancer researcher and physician.
Because it is men involved Jake.
Hi
I'm going to stay out of the Brest Cancer v. Prostate Cancer debate because I think it's besides the point.
Here's the deal: I just turned 30, I have a grandfather that survived PC and a father that was diagnosed with PC in his 40s (with an ULTRA high PSA).
I find the information about PC to be of very poor quality and generally not helpful. There seems to be nothing clear, conscise and consistent. My understanding about the disease is that: 1) until it spreads it's usually asymptomatic, and 2) once it spreads symptoms can include difficult urination and even back pain- but then again all of this is AFTER it spreads.
Lots of things cause back pain, but when exactly should someone go see a doctor?
So what's the deal? Are we to think of this PC as something more like pancreatic cancer- treatable if caught early (but chances are it won't be caught early because there are no symptoms)? OR something highly treatable and that, in many cases, watchful waiting leads to the best treatment option?
It seems like younger and youger men are being diagnosed all the time. At 30, I can't even find someone willing to perform the tests. I hear it from doctor after doctor- wait until you're at least 35. This may not be such a good idea- especially with my family history.
Any thoughts from any diagnosed recently.....especially those of you diagnosed at a young age (under 50)?
Thanks.
I am in the early testing stages for this. My insurance carrier, the one for school teachers here in Oregon, OEBB, just sent me a letter stating that they no longer will cover any surgical, testing, or other treatments for *any* prostate problems. In fact, as the letter states, they wont have ANY urological coverage for my area at all. Likewise, my son got a similar notice from his carrier, Blue Cross, but, in addition, they wont cover MRI's or CAT scans, either, for *any* reason.
So... I gotta wonder, is this some of the fallout of the Democrat's healthcare "reform"? And, if the same companies suddenly stopped treating breast cancer, even paying for breast cancer examinations, wouldn't this be front page news with every politician in the country before camera's denouncing it? Of course, we're men, so I don't expect to hear anything and this whole story will fade into obscurity and the number of deaths due to prostate cancer will simply double.
My Father had prosate cancer for many years, but that's not what killed him at 82. Most cancers of the prostate are very slow growing so the success rate is much higher than for breast cancer which grows radipidly in most cases.That's the biggest difference between the two.
Many more women, and men die of breast cancer each year compared to prostate cancer. Those are just the facts. Please understand I'm not saying it's not hard to deal with any type of cancer. Cancer is hard for anyone to fight, and overcome to get into remission.
At age 56 I was diagnosed with aggressive prostate cancer. I researched all of the available treatment options. All of the treatments for the most part cured the cancer but unfortunately all ot the treatments could not guaranty the quality of life after with the exception Proton Radiation (PR). I chose PR and I'm glad I did. I feel like I am back to normal. There are little to no side effects, no catheter, no ED, no leakage, and no diapers. Most doctors will not recommend it since it is not available to them. Most doctors will not give you a list of former pacients to talk to. PR facilities will give you a list of former patients. Men that are happy to talk about their experience. It may not be an option for all but is is an option for many. Do your research and learn the difference.
Keeping the media and MDs informed of the growing information on prostate treatment should become crucial more than once a year with the proclaimed awareness month. It is through them and people's acquaintances that information is passed on to the general public. After other celebrities' unfortunate deaths, more detailed information on the illness and treatments were presented. With prostate enlargement and/or cancer, the media and MDs need to gather the most recent effective information and present it for the public's use hopefully before September.
Like Betty J. Down, I'm sadened by the comments on this post, especially by you women who are condescending in your tone, implying that you know why we men act as we do, how we think, and that you are in a position to give us advice..
The fact is that we don't obsess over our bodies as you do....and we don't fixate on every little thing. Having said that, we do need to take this affliction seriously, and step up our own self-monitoring. Our PC media has made a cause celebre' out of breast cancer, a real, serious, and far too prevalent disease. We only ask that the same attention be given to PC by the media. it appears serious research is being done on both issues, and it doesn't matter about the statistics on either – a death by either is a tragedy.
How about all of us pulling together and working to eliminate both, and, in a greater sense, eliminating all this sexist, hypocritical drive which seems to permeate society?
I have read on a medical web site that having sex in a short time span before one's PSA test will likely make the PSA level go up; and therefore one should not ejaculate within a reasonable time of taking the test. I had the test (before reading that article) and no Dr. or anyone on the medical staff that was giving me the blood test ever mentioned this. Is it true that recent ejaculation can change your PSA results? Since my PSA test was concluded as being 'borderline': Perhaps I wouldn't have even had a biopsy had I been given that information beforehand. Is it because Doctors are embarassed to talk about that to their patients; or is it false information that I read........or had their been too little research done on the subject?
The PSA screening test is for men what the mammogram is for women. Early detection = savings lives.
Unfortunately, this article fails to mention the PSA screening test has been shown to reduce prostate cancer deaths by at least 20 percent and up to as much as 37 percent.
This is shown by the world's largest randomized screening trial on prostate cancer, known as the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).
While initial results showed a 20 percent decrease in prostate cancer deaths, subsequent analyses have shown the PSA test reduces prostate cancer deaths by as much as 37 percent.
More information on this is available at http://www.ZeroCancer.org
For those having problems with understanding why a recommendation of don't screen sounds so stupid. The screening isn't the problem, the problem is the ability for doctors to tell the difference between an aggressive growing cancer and a slow growing cancer. Now once you and your doctor find out you have cancer, from a legal liability stand point
do you think he is going to say' " don't worry about it, statistically speaking most of these things are slow growing and you will probably die of something else first." No he can't say that because he has no medical way to know if it is fast or slow growing. Now fact is if you were in Vegas you could get rich on the odds it is slow growing. The problem is once informed almost nobody says let's do nothing, though, statistically, that is the best thing to do. If it were a case of nothing to loose if you go for surgery, it would be different, but while most go fine, many don't. I have one friend who can no longer achieve erection normally with out a pump. That has really got to be romantic, and the thing is, again statistically he probably did not need the surgery. So just because someone says they got tested early, had their prostrate removed, and now feel they are alive because of early testing, is not necessarily true, if it was the slow growing type they weren't going to die from it in the first place. I think what we need here are some numbers of what percentage of surgeries have additional complications. To exaggerate, if there is 95% chance of it being slow growing with a 75% chance of surgery complications, I just might go with the do nothing choice.
I dont understand why people think "more people are not aware" of all these cancers. Ever heard of IGNORANCE IS BLISS? thats what most people do, they ignore things that dont affect them...until, well, they affect them. Trying to change human nature is a difficult thing. So, those clamoring about prostate cancer awareness, are you equally upset about all the other diseases that dont get much media attention? Do you even know what they are? Have you done anything to educate yourself about all the ways in this world in which you can get a disease and die? no, of course you havent...
"I've been told by an acquaintance in Singapore that East Indian males have a much lower incidence of PC. This has been attributed, partially, to a diet high in Curry. The active ingredient seems to be Turmuric.
Any comments, feedback?"
Re:
Curry is a powerful antioxidant. Some of the medical community is starting to acknowledge some cancer(s) are caused by viral and bacterial infections. Basically cell mutation (tumor, etc..) caused by the host infection (or history of its' presence, ex. mycoplasma). Antioxidants prohibit or slow down the infection, therefore you have lower rates of cancer. IMO, all cancers not caused by environmental conditions (i.e. asbestos exposure, chemicals, etc..) are caused by infections.
Until there can be adequate treatment options that don't give many more negatives and risks than benefits there is no reason to further advance screening. Like many before this comment have stated, many men have prostate cancer and for most observation is the best option due to lack of treatment possibilities.
Prostate cancer kills 27,000 men each year. Lung Cancer kills 161,000 men and women each year. The survival rate for those diagnosed with prostate cancer is approx. 97%. Survival rate for those diagnosed with lung cancer.....12%. LUNG CANCER NEEDS ATTENTION......and you don't have to smoke to get it. In fact, it is killing more and more young, non-smoking adults than ever before. No one knows why because there is virtually no funding for the research. Lung cancer kills more than breast, prostate, colon and melanoma cancers COMBINED.
Read this research report from UCSD: http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/newsrel/health/03-07Prostate.asp
Inflammation May Play Role in Metastasis of Prostate Cancer.
“Our findings suggest that promoting inflammation of the cancerous tissue – for instance, by performing prostate biopsies – may, ironically, hasten progression of metastasis,” said Karin. “We have shown that proteins produced by inflammatory cells are the ‘smoking gun’ behind prostate cancer metastasis. The next step is to completely indict one of them.”
While we don't have Dennis Hopper's medical records. News reports say he was first diagnosed in 2002 and regularly visited USC Medical. He may have chosen "watchful waiting" or "active surveillance" which involves repeated biopsies at regular intervals to "monitor" his "disease." Repeated biopsies=repeated inflammation=metastasis. We have a lot to learn about prostate cancer.
I'm with you, JakeF. My sincere empathy notwithstanding, breast cancer awareness has come to dominate nearly all the awareness of cancer there is–and I'm a girl!. This unfortunately has served to foster a wide disparity in the types of cancer funding, and it also threatens to perpetuate ignorance of a disastrous sort: My coworker once expressed offense at Farrah Fawcett's manner of death being so "graphically" spelled out ("Why do they have to say 'anal?' They could have just said 'cancer.' "). It would be nice to see "anal" cancer become as easy to pronounce as "breast" cancer, "prostate" cancer awareness spread as aggressively as the disease, and "pancreatic" cancer recieve adequate funding to research ways to get the survival rate above it's current 4%. I for one look to the day when no one will say, "I am sick."
As a 64 year old man who was diagnosed with prostate cancer 3 years ago, the key to surviving this deadly disease is catching it early with regular PSA testing, and then finding your best odds of cure. My research took me through several books, a visit to Johns Hopkins, and ultimately to a radiation treatment called ProstRcision (http://www.prostrcision.com) by RC Cancer Centers in Atlanta, GA. I wanted real data in making my decision, and I found that with > 16,000 patients treated, they have the best cure rate I could find anywhere. I discovered that men come from other countries to be treated there. I had the seeds put in on a Thursday, and went to work the following Monday. My PSA is down to 0.8, and I expect to be < 0.2 –which is as low as can be tested on my next PSA. There were basically no side effects to speak of.
Discount Software to Purchase Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 x64
November is Prostate Cancer Awareness month yet despite the number of men that either are or will be affected by prostate cancer, it would be fair to say that it does slip under the radar to some extent.
http://www.mynetpharma.com/prostrate-cancer-awareness-month.html
You already know thus significantly relating to this subject, made me for my part imagine it from so many numerous angles. Its like men and women don't seem to be involved except it's one thing to do with Girl gaga! Your own stuffs nice. Always handle it up!
http://www.waynelevinimages.com/random/buyvaliumonline/index.php?page=7 where can i buy valium online yahoo answers – where can i buy valium online yahoo answers
Why did you go to http://www.yahoo.com answers to post your question?
*didn't
Hopper's disease No. 2 cancer killer of men – The Chart – CNN.com Blogs
MBT Chaussures Hommes http://www.mbt-france.com/mbt-chaussures-hommes-c-4.html