Vi,
Thanks for the kind words. I don't think I'm any smarter than doctors. I have a different perspective than many. Personally, I have tons of respect for doctors. The dedication that it takes to become a doctor and all of things they have to do once they are doctors is amazing to me.
With that said, just as in any profession, there is a bell curve of performance. Some are top of the field and some are the bottom with the majority being in the middle. As patients, our desire is be treated by those at the very high end of exceptional, have them immediately figure us out as people and talk to us in a way that we understand and appreciate while staying absolutely abreast of each and every study in world that has anything to do with our condition.
Of course, we'd prefer to pay them at the bottom end of the spectrum for all these wonderous expections as well.
Kind of not fair when you think about it but that's often a patient perspective and the majority of people look at things from a self interest perspective. Nothing wrong with that as long everyone understands everyone else's perspective.
I can't do a study by surveying people on this site and others because it's not really a study that would have any scientific merit. It would just fall under the category of "anectodal evidence". If a research group picked it up and there was merit, then it could be acted upon and that's my objective. If bladder cancer can be prevented in some, caught sooner in others, that's a good thing.
I only asked the question because I've read of BPH folks on this site and others and the tought came into my head and it made logical sense. Then when I looked at the research study of Swedish men, it was kind of obvious (in my opinion) that they missed the reason for the connection between TURP and higher incidence of bladder cancer.
However, my uro's reponse to my research idea indicated another probable reason for the correlation that I was unaware of. That is, until recent years TURP was the treatment of choice for all sorts of bladder issues and some of those issues may have been presence of bladder cancer.
I still think there is some merit to the idea of retention being a risk factor (as you can tell from my message above). It still makes logical sense to me.
I couldn't be a doctor in a million years. I'd just want to shake some patients until they pass out when they don't follow what I tell them to do. Trying to keep a business running (practice) and dealing with the personnel and equipment issues at the same time as trying to stay on top of current research is just so daunting in my mind that I can't fathom it.
I tell people to get to major bladder cancer centers all the time. Doesn't mean I don't have the utmost respect for local urologists. I do and they fit into the overall treatment hierarchy perfectly. However, just as a GP refers to a specialist, the specialists need to refer to sub-specialists in order to increase positive outcomes.
Besides, how could I be as wordy as I am and still manage to treat enough patients in a day to pay the salaries of my staff, the rent, equipment maintenance, malpractice insurance, etc.???
Mike