A misleading entry into the health care debate:

[hedgehog]

"In Health Reform, a Cancer Offers an Acid Test

The prostate cancer test will determine whether President Obama and Congress put together a bill that begins to fix the fundamental problem with our medical system: the combination of soaring costs and mediocre results. If they don’t, the medical system will remain deeply troubled, no matter what other improvements they make."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/business/economy/08leonhardt.html?scp=1&sq=prostate%20cancer%20test&st=cse

The article notes that there are five different treatments in use for prostate cancer, states that they all have the same outcomes and suggests doctors advise the more expensive treatments in order to line their own pockets.

In fact, the best treatment for prostate cancer depends on the patient, his age, the aggressiveness of the cancer and his overall health. I doubt any doctor would advise watchful waiting to a man of 45 or advise anything else to a man of 85!

The article further trivializes the side effects of some treatments. Radiation therapy can cause permanent incontinence and loss of bowel control. It should be clear why researchers are looking for a better method.
The suggestion that money instead be spent to "help prostate patients manage their diarrhea" is simply unacceptable.

The underlying assumption is that nothing ever changes in health care. The proton gun which is very expensive today also seems to offer the best outcome for young men. Presumably costs will come down as equipment is developed and paid for. This is the process we've seen with cat scans and MRIs. The article also assumes that prostate cancer is here to stay. Studies are underway to test the theory that Vitamin D offers a simple, cheap effective way to prevent this cancer.