NZ Police public image

[RDJ]

I appreciate this may be trawling a red herring across the bows, or should I say the forks, of forum readers, but... at this stage there is little benefit from scrutinizing men for prostate cancer, nothing like the benefit to women from checking for cervical cancer.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, reviewed all major previous studies of PSA (prostate specific antigen) tests and another common screening tool, the digital rectal exam (no, I'm not going to explain further :-) ). In summary, while screening can detect prostate cancer in its early stages, there is no evidence that screening led to fewer prostate cancer deaths but that it can lead to unnecessary treatment, for small cancers that did not necessarily pose a danger to patients; when treatment could also lead to serious side effects, or even death. As a result, the task force said "there is no way of determining whether the benefits of screening outweighed the possible harms."

[inlinefour]

Obviously any suggestion that cops are tax collectors hits a very raw nerve

But the mere suggestion of that is just showing how ignorant you are...

[inlinefour]

I appreciate this may be trawling a red herring across the bows, or should I say the forks, of forum readers, but... at this stage there is little benefit from scrutinizing men for prostate cancer, nothing like the benefit to women from checking for cervical cancer.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, reviewed all major previous studies of PSA (prostate specific antigen) tests and another common screening tool, the digital rectal exam (no, I'm not going to explain further :-) ). In summary, while screening can detect prostate cancer in its early stages, there is no evidence that screening led to fewer prostate cancer deaths but that it can lead to unnecessary treatment, for small cancers that did not necessarily pose a danger to patients; when treatment could also lead to serious side effects, or even death. As a result, the task force said "there is no way of determining whether the benefits of screening outweighed the possible harms."

If prostate cancer is detected and treated there is a much higher chance of survival. The reason why its such a large problem is that males fail to go to their GP and deny that there is a problem. Hence the problem is worse, if men took a proactive stance and did get screened or knew the initial symptoms are (does RDJ know what they are, yes I do, look at my place of work...) and do something about it the incidents of prostate cancer would reduce (common sense?).
In summary guys, get to know what the initial signs and symptoms and be prepared to do something about it. If people think that a finger up the arse is worse that dying of prostate cancer then those individuals have a few farking screws loose...

[spudchucka]

Obviously any suggestion that cops are tax collectors hits a very raw nerve

Obviously clear evidence of an apprentice troll hard at work.

[RDJ]

Dear Honda

Unfortunately, the medical evidence is against the fact that mass screening of the male population at or above a certain age will result in a reduction in deaths.

Fortunately, the evidence is firmly in favor of the fact that if men at risk / with symptoms or signs present early for checking and treatment, there will be a reduction in (preventable, early) deaths from Ca prostate.

I don't think we're disagreeing here.

Best regards

[inlinefour]

Dear Honda

Unfortunately, the medical evidence is against the fact that mass screening of the male population at or above a certain age will result in a reduction in deaths.

Fortunately, the evidence is firmly in favor of the fact that if men at risk / with symptoms or signs present early for checking and treatment, there will be a reduction in (preventable, early) deaths from Ca prostate.

I don't think we're disagreeing here.

Best regards

But the statement from the US in your previous post was not quite correct either. Its a well know fact that its more of a problem and I've allready pointed out why...
Besides I am more interested in your comment regarding the Police being revenue gatherers. If people knew how to follow the law then no tickets would be issued. The problem is not the Police, revenue gathering, or legislation, but actually the people who are breaking the law

[Jackrat]

I appreciate this may be trawling a red herring across the bows, or should I say the forks, of forum readers, but... at this stage there is little benefit from scrutinizing men for prostate cancer, nothing like the benefit to women from checking for cervical cancer.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, reviewed all major previous studies of PSA (prostate specific antigen) tests and another common screening tool, the digital rectal exam (no, I'm not going to explain further :-) ). In summary, while screening can detect prostate cancer in its early stages, there is no evidence that screening led to fewer prostate cancer deaths but that it can lead to unnecessary treatment, for small cancers that did not necessarily pose a danger to patients; when treatment could also lead to serious side effects, or even death. As a result, the task force said "there is no way of determining whether the benefits of screening outweighed the possible harms."

Q.
Why is it called a "cervical smear"??

A.
Because if it was called a "cunt scrape" no woman would get one.

Errr, carry on

[inlinefour]

Q.
Why is it called a "cervical smear"??

A.
Because if it was called a "cunt scrape" no woman would get one.

Errr, carry on

Well done, well done.

[inlinefour]

I wish I could lock this thread because its turned into a complete pansy whinging bitch session lately.

[scumdog]

I wish I could lock this thread because its turned into a complete pansy whinging bitch session lately.

You are so right Mr H. but then the pansy whinging bitch type people are good targets for trolling.

[Lou Girardin]

I appreciate this may be trawling a red herring across the bows, or should I say the forks, of forum readers, but... at this stage there is little benefit from scrutinizing men for prostate cancer, nothing like the benefit to women from checking for cervical cancer.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, reviewed all major previous studies of PSA (prostate specific antigen) tests and another common screening tool, the digital rectal exam (no, I'm not going to explain further :-) ). In summary, while screening can detect prostate cancer in its early stages, there is no evidence that screening led to fewer prostate cancer deaths but that it can lead to unnecessary treatment, for small cancers that did not necessarily pose a danger to patients; when treatment could also lead to serious side effects, or even death. As a result, the task force said "there is no way of determining whether the benefits of screening outweighed the possible harms."

This crap is the same argument our health authorities use. I, for one, would rather have an unecessary op, than die. If men had proper lobby groups as women do, this kind of nonsense would be instantly dismissed.

[Lou Girardin]

I wish I could lock this thread because its turned into a complete pansy whinging bitch session lately.

Stop reading it then

[Lou Girardin]

I just saw a recruitment article about the Police, it appears that there are no minimum qualifications for entry and of those accepted the failure rate is just 2%.
Even for the MOT you had to have School Cert as a minimum and a drivers licence.
If they became a bit more discriminating they might not have to face the image problems they currently have.

[scumdog]

I just saw a recruitment article about the Police, it appears that there are no minimum qualifications for entry and of those accepted the failure rate is just 2%.
Even for the MOT you had to have School Cert as a minimum and a drivers licence.
If they became a bit more discriminating they might not have to face the image problems they currently have.

No School Cert anymore Lou and drivers licence was easier to get back then ($400 instant licences not withstanding)

Bottom line is: They need more staff but won't up the pay/conditions to get the people MOST likely to be the right ones as opposed as to what they can get at budget prices.

[Lou Girardin]

No School Cert anymore Lou and drivers licence was easier to get back then ($400 instant licences not withstanding)

Bottom line is: They need more staff but won't up the pay/conditions to get the people MOST likely to be the right ones as opposed as to what they can get at budget prices.

OK. NCEA then. Which I guess is the same as no qualification.
Granted, the conditions are crap. (Imagine having everyone pissed off at you all the time.) But the pay's not bad. You start on 45 - 50 grand? Have ticket immunity and get to wear a uniform and thrash someone elses car to death.
Where's the problem?