William Dravis

1,643 men with localized prostate cancer were randomized to surgery, radiation, or active monitoring. Fifteen years later, deaths from prostate cancer: Monitoring — 3.1% Surgery — 2.2% Radiation — 2.9% P = 0.53. No difference. None. Surgery and radiation halved metastasis and progression. It bought not one additional year of life. A quarter of the monitored men were alive at 15 years having received no treatment at all. Under standard care every one of them would have been cut or irradiated. And every one would have been counted afterward as a life the treatment saved. The men who were treated paid in incontinence, impotence, and bowel injury. Here is the conclusion of the investigators themselves, in the New England Journal of Medicine: "Depending on the extent of side effects associated with early radical treatments, more aggressive therapy can result in more harm than good." That is Oxford. In NEJM. Reporting their own 15-year randomized trial. The scandal is not that the treatments harm (and they do). It is that the choice was never offered. 👉Dive deeper in my latest investigation on the topic: sayerji.substack.com/p/25-ca…