Dr. Abraham Morgentaler

maybe with negative margins, undetectable PSA afterwards, or even radiation therapy, again, with lower risk disease. And I think once you start seeing that lightning does not strike either the doctor down or the patient, that people get more comfortable. Amazing thing happened to me, which is, so at this past year's AUA, I moderated a plenary session.

And the question was about, the debate was on whether or not you could reasonably treat a man with testosterone who was on active surveillance. And it was a case of, I don't remember if it was Gleason 3 plus 4 or 4 plus 3, but it was Gleason 7. And so we had good debaters and they debated it. And then I asked for a show of hands from the audience, you know, and it's one of the plenary sessions.

And the question was about, the debate was on whether or not you could reasonably treat a man with testosterone who was on active surveillance. And it was a case of, I don't remember if it was Gleason 3 plus 4 or 4 plus 3, but it was Gleason 7. And so we had good debaters and they debated it. And then I asked for a show of hands from the audience, you know, and it's one of the plenary sessions.

And the question was about, the debate was on whether or not you could reasonably treat a man with testosterone who was on active surveillance. And it was a case of, I don't remember if it was Gleason 3 plus 4 or 4 plus 3, but it was Gleason 7. And so we had good debaters and they debated it. And then I asked for a show of hands from the audience, you know, and it's one of the plenary sessions.

They've got a couple of thousand people in the room.

They've got a couple of thousand people in the room.

They've got a couple of thousand people in the room.

Yeah. And about a third of the audience put up their hand saying that they would have treated the case that we had. Now, that's amazing. Amazing. Because just a few years ago, it probably would have just been maybe a couple of hands. So it's shifting.

Yeah. And about a third of the audience put up their hand saying that they would have treated the case that we had. Now, that's amazing. Amazing. Because just a few years ago, it probably would have just been maybe a couple of hands. So it's shifting.

Yeah. And about a third of the audience put up their hand saying that they would have treated the case that we had. Now, that's amazing. Amazing. Because just a few years ago, it probably would have just been maybe a couple of hands. So it's shifting.

And part of the reason it's shifting is that so many urologists now and doctors have experience treating men after radical prostatectomy or radiation. They've seen that nothing happens. So then we go on to the next group.

And part of the reason it's shifting is that so many urologists now and doctors have experience treating men after radical prostatectomy or radiation. They've seen that nothing happens. So then we go on to the next group.

And part of the reason it's shifting is that so many urologists now and doctors have experience treating men after radical prostatectomy or radiation. They've seen that nothing happens. So then we go on to the next group.

And there's a way of thinking about this that I think is very effective, which is that if you had a patient in that situation, prostate cancer, treated in whatever way, but it's not metastatic, and he had a normal testosterone and felt good, nobody would talk about lowering that person's testosterone.

And there's a way of thinking about this that I think is very effective, which is that if you had a patient in that situation, prostate cancer, treated in whatever way, but it's not metastatic, and he had a normal testosterone and felt good, nobody would talk about lowering that person's testosterone.

And there's a way of thinking about this that I think is very effective, which is that if you had a patient in that situation, prostate cancer, treated in whatever way, but it's not metastatic, and he had a normal testosterone and felt good, nobody would talk about lowering that person's testosterone.

So if you can imagine as a urologist, as a physician, that there'd be no point in lowering a testosterone in a man with normal testosterone, then what's the danger in raising it to a normal level? It's the same chemical. So the cells that need testosterone cannot tell the difference between testosterone made by the testicles and testosterone that we inject once it hits the bloodstream.

So if you can imagine as a urologist, as a physician, that there'd be no point in lowering a testosterone in a man with normal testosterone, then what's the danger in raising it to a normal level? It's the same chemical. So the cells that need testosterone cannot tell the difference between testosterone made by the testicles and testosterone that we inject once it hits the bloodstream.

So if you can imagine as a urologist, as a physician, that there'd be no point in lowering a testosterone in a man with normal testosterone, then what's the danger in raising it to a normal level? It's the same chemical. So the cells that need testosterone cannot tell the difference between testosterone made by the testicles and testosterone that we inject once it hits the bloodstream.

So they all have all these names, right? Like testosterone, cypionate or enanthate, they're esters. But what happens is that when they hit the bloodstream, there are enzymes that cleave off those side groups and what circulates is testosterone. It's the same molecule. So that's one way to think about it.