Dr. Abraham Morgentaler

Higher prevalence, higher stage, the higher mortality, nothing. And we were shocked. The editors at New England Journal were also shocked. And I was relatively young. This is more than 20 years ago. And they were uncomfortable publishing the paper. So they sent it first to three urologists who gave it high scores. But they didn't believe this thing about the prostate cancer.

It was taught everywhere in the world. So they sent it out for another three reviews, this time to endocrinologists. The endocrinologists didn't mention any papers that we'd missed either. And they gave it high marks. And they still weren't satisfied. And they sent it out for another round of reviews, this time to oncologists, who also couldn't find anything.

It was taught everywhere in the world. So they sent it out for another three reviews, this time to endocrinologists. The endocrinologists didn't mention any papers that we'd missed either. And they gave it high marks. And they still weren't satisfied. And they sent it out for another round of reviews, this time to oncologists, who also couldn't find anything.

It was taught everywhere in the world. So they sent it out for another three reviews, this time to endocrinologists. The endocrinologists didn't mention any papers that we'd missed either. And they gave it high marks. And they still weren't satisfied. And they sent it out for another round of reviews, this time to oncologists, who also couldn't find anything.

And so they published, took about a year to publish it, and it got published in 2004. And that was the first time that any kind of major journal questioned or challenged this idea that high testosterone or testosterone therapy was dangerous for the prostate. So that's 2004. We're now in 2024. It's 20 years later. And I can tell you that there's been a lot of research in the last 20 years.

And so they published, took about a year to publish it, and it got published in 2004. And that was the first time that any kind of major journal questioned or challenged this idea that high testosterone or testosterone therapy was dangerous for the prostate. So that's 2004. We're now in 2024. It's 20 years later. And I can tell you that there's been a lot of research in the last 20 years.

And so they published, took about a year to publish it, and it got published in 2004. And that was the first time that any kind of major journal questioned or challenged this idea that high testosterone or testosterone therapy was dangerous for the prostate. So that's 2004. We're now in 2024. It's 20 years later. And I can tell you that there's been a lot of research in the last 20 years.

We have three large randomized controlled trials now, as well as numerous large observational trials. None of them Not one shows anything bad about high levels of testosterone or raising testosterone and prostate cancer. But still, there are many parts of the world where you never, ever, ever give testosterone after the man's had radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy.

We have three large randomized controlled trials now, as well as numerous large observational trials. None of them Not one shows anything bad about high levels of testosterone or raising testosterone and prostate cancer. But still, there are many parts of the world where you never, ever, ever give testosterone after the man's had radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy.

We have three large randomized controlled trials now, as well as numerous large observational trials. None of them Not one shows anything bad about high levels of testosterone or raising testosterone and prostate cancer. But still, there are many parts of the world where you never, ever, ever give testosterone after the man's had radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy.

The AUA guidelines actually were the first to allow, for 2018, first to allow there to be, to give some cover, to say it's okay, or at least that there's not a contraindication, to give it to men with low-risk cancers where there appears to be what looks like a parent cure.

The AUA guidelines actually were the first to allow, for 2018, first to allow there to be, to give some cover, to say it's okay, or at least that there's not a contraindication, to give it to men with low-risk cancers where there appears to be what looks like a parent cure.

The AUA guidelines actually were the first to allow, for 2018, first to allow there to be, to give some cover, to say it's okay, or at least that there's not a contraindication, to give it to men with low-risk cancers where there appears to be what looks like a parent cure.

But, you know, there's still nothing documented anywhere that says maybe we can give it to other men or men on active surveillance or men after radiation. And the argument to not do it, I think, is based on nothing.

But, you know, there's still nothing documented anywhere that says maybe we can give it to other men or men on active surveillance or men after radiation. And the argument to not do it, I think, is based on nothing.

But, you know, there's still nothing documented anywhere that says maybe we can give it to other men or men on active surveillance or men after radiation. And the argument to not do it, I think, is based on nothing.

So in the late 1980s, early 1990s, what we had available was mainly the short-acting injectables, testosterone, cipunate, testosterone, and anthate. There was a pill, methyl testosterone, which wasn't used. It was known to cause some liver damage. It's still available, but doctors are discouraged from using it. Dangerous in most cases. So that was really what we had.

So in the late 1980s, early 1990s, what we had available was mainly the short-acting injectables, testosterone, cipunate, testosterone, and anthate. There was a pill, methyl testosterone, which wasn't used. It was known to cause some liver damage. It's still available, but doctors are discouraged from using it. Dangerous in most cases. So that was really what we had.

So in the late 1980s, early 1990s, what we had available was mainly the short-acting injectables, testosterone, cipunate, testosterone, and anthate. There was a pill, methyl testosterone, which wasn't used. It was known to cause some liver damage. It's still available, but doctors are discouraged from using it. Dangerous in most cases. So that was really what we had.

The first real advance in terms of the new technologies branded things was a patch, testosterone patch. It wasn't very successful. You needed to apply it to the scrotum. And so you had to shave your scrotum. And it didn't stick very well because people get sweaty down there.