“So, yeah, it’s cancer.”

My urologist smoothly transitioned from complaining about the hassle of picking up his daughter from school that morning to delivering a cancer diagnosis to me, all without pausing. Just two weeks ago, I didn't even have a urologist.

"Yeah," he remarked, looking a bit puzzled as he stared at the results, "I was surprised myself."

While my groundbreaking new doctor discussed intricate details like cell cores, Gleason scores, survival odds, incontinence, and impotence, and why certain surgeries might be the best option, his voice gradually faded. It felt just like those scenes in movies or TV shows where a guy gets the life-shattering news he has cancer—a quintessential Walter White moment. Except this was my reality, and there were no cameras rolling.

I received my prostate cancer diagnosis on Friday, June 13th, 2014. By September 17th of that same year, I received the news that I was cancer-free. Those three months in between were an intense roller coaster experience, something roughly 180,000 men in America face each year.

Immediately after receiving the news, I found myself struggling to grasp the critical words that kept echoing faintly in my mind (probability of survival–vival-vival-val…” “incontinence-nence-nence-ence…). In a state of uncertainty, I quickly turned to my computer and Googled “Men who had prostate cancer.” I felt lost and desperately needed to find some evidence that this wasn't the end of everything.

John Kerry… Joe Torre... fantastic, both are still thriving. Mandy Patinkin… Robert DeNiro. They’re full of life. Alright, feeling pretty hopeful, I naturally had to push my luck with one last search. This time, I ventured into gloomier territory by quickly typing “died of” instead of “had” in the search bar...

After gaining more insights into my illness (one crucial piece of advice: avoid Googling “people who died of prostate cancer” right after a diagnosis), I came to understand just how lucky I was. Lucky because my cancer was caught early enough to be treated. Additionally, I was fortunate that my internist conducted a test he wasn’t obligated to perform.

Taking the PSA test genuinely saved my life. That’s the whole reason I’m sharing my story now. Recently, there’s been a lot of debate surrounding this test. Plenty of articles and opinion pieces question its safety, along with studies that seem to be interpreted in all sorts of ways, and discussions on whether men should even bother taking it. I’m not here to provide a scientific analysis, just my personal experience. Here’s the crux of it: I was fortunate to have a doctor who administered what’s known as a “baseline” PSA test when I was around 46. Despite having no family history of prostate cancer and not fitting into the high-risk category—being neither, to my knowledge, of African or Scandinavian descent—I had no symptoms.

I'm in good health today thanks to my attentive internist. He believed it was the right time for me to begin monitoring my PSA levels and took the time to discuss it with me.

If he had waited, as the American Cancer Society advises, until I turned 50, I wouldn't have discovered my tumor for another two years after undergoing treatment. Had he adhered to the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations, I would have never been tested, and I wouldn't have found out about my cancer until it was far too late to treat effectively.

In my experience, Dr. Bernard Kruger monitored my PSA levels for over eighteen months, testing every half-year. As the figures kept climbing, he referred me to a urologist, who performed a brief, slightly invasive physical exam using a gloved finger. The entire process lasted just 10 seconds. It’s not something I’d suggest for pleasure, but surprisingly, some don’t recommend it at all. After this examination and reviewing my increasing PSA levels, he advised getting an MRI to map out my prostate.

It's a non-invasive test, similar to what athletes undergo to detect torn ACLs. The process is loud but doesn't cause any pain. It was only after reviewing the MRI scans that my doctor suggested a decidedly unpleasant biopsy. Unlike the MRI, the biopsy was extremely invasive, involving long needles in sensitive areas, accompanied by awkward small talk about kids and school pick-ups during the procedure.

Then the biopsy results came in, and they were positive. Naturally, in the realm of medical testing, "positive" often carries a negative connotation. My Gleason score registered at 7 (3+4), which falls under the classification of "mid-range aggressive cancer." Surgery was suggested as a course of action. At that juncture, I chose to seek out several additional opinions. Every doctor I consulted agreed that the tumor required removal.

Ultimately, I discovered an excellent surgeon by the name of Edward Schaeffer, with whom I felt at ease. He carried out a robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Thanks to his exceptional skill and perhaps a touch of grace from a higher power, he managed to eliminate all the cancer. As of this writing, I am two years cancer-free and immensely thankful.

So, what’s going on with the PSA test and why is it causing such a stir?

This quick and easy blood test is completely harmless. If the PSA (Prostate Specific Antigen) level in your blood is high or increases significantly over time, it might signal prostate cancer. However, it's important to note that this test is not without its limitations.

Critics argue that the test can lead doctors to interpret data in a way that results in unnecessary follow-up procedures like MRI scans and more invasive biopsies. This often happens even when it's not required. Physicians may end up identifying low-risk cancers that pose little to no threat, particularly for older patients. As a result, men with these less dangerous cancers might undergo "over-treatment," including radiation or surgery, which can cause side effects like impotence or incontinence. Clearly, this is problematic; however, it ultimately falls under the discretion of the doctor treating the patient.

But without the PSA test itself, or any screening method at all, how are doctors supposed to detect asymptomatic cases like mine before the cancer has spread and become incurable? And what about the men at higher risk, such as those of African ancestry and those with a family history of prostate cancer? Shouldn't we screen them, contrary to what the USPSTF suggests? There's growing evidence that these guidelines have resulted in more prostate cancers being detected too late for the patients to survive.

Five years following their original advice against PSA testing, the USPSTF is currently "updating their recommendations," according to their website. I believe men aged 40 and above should have the option to talk about the test with their doctor and become educated about it, giving them the opportunity to consider screening. This way, an informed patient can make a responsible decision on the next steps.

I feel fortunate to have had a doctor who laid out these options for me. Once I decided to take the test, he connected me with specialists at top-notch centers to figure out the next steps. It's a complex and ever-changing issue. However, in this imperfect world, I believe that the best strategy to tackle one of the most treatable yet deadly cancers is early detection.