Biologically male procedures only. EDIT: If the two people who downvoted this question could explain their reasoning, I would be super interested. No judgements. This is a safe space!

  • norimee@lemmy.world
    24·
    3 months ago

    Do every test available for prevention and prophylaxis.
    Get your general practitioner to do a full health check, ECG, EEG, cardiac ultrasound, a full blood panel, bloodpressure, pulmonary function, skin cancer prevention ect.
    Schedule a gastroscopy and colonoscopy.
    Check in with an urologist to get your prostate and urinary tract checked.
    If you can, get a full body scan. Either PET or MRI.

    Nearly every serious disease or health issue is easier prevented or treated when caught before it casues real issues.
    Every cancer there is, has a better outcome and is easier treated when found early. Most of them are silent until very late in the game.

    This is something I would recommend to anyone: Take advantage of every preventative messure or examination that is available to you!
    There is no illness that you can detect too early.

    • K[r]ukenberg@lemmy.world
      84·
      3 months ago

      Omfg, don’t get a PET-scan ‘just because’. You would literally have to be injected with radioactive particles. The other stuff, while not necessary, will atleast not kill you faster.

      Last paragraph is also massively oversimplified. Getting a ‘you have cancer’-speech and treatment for a superslow growing prostatecancer will fuck with your mind and body more than the cancer itself. That’s why most health care systems advise against general PSA screening.

      • bleistift2@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        4·
        3 months ago

        Just to provide some data on the radiation dose. It’s everyone’s own decision whether a ‘willy-nilly’ PET scan is worth it.

        From the English Wikipedia:

        FDG, which is now the standard radiotracer used for PET neuroimaging and cancer patient management, has an effective radiation dose of 14 mSv.

        The amount of radiation in FDG is similar to the effective dose of spending one year in the American city of Denver, Colorado (12.4 mSv/year). […T]he whole body occupational dose limit for nuclear energy workers in the US is 50 mSv/year.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron_emission_tomography#Safety

        From the German Wikipedia:

        Es ist bei einer Strahlendosis von 1 Sievert (Sv), der 100 Menschen ausgesetzt sind, mit 5 Todesfällen durch Strahlenkrebs zu rechnen […]. Man müsste also 100.000 PET-Untersuchungen durchführen, um 35 Todesfälle an Strahlenkrebs (nach einer mittleren Latenzzeit von etwa 15 Jahren für Leukämie und etwa 40 Jahren für solide Tumoren) zu verursachen, das heißt etwa eine auf 3000 Untersuchungen

        If 100 people received a radiation dose of 1 Sievert (Sv), one would expect 5 deaths due to radiation-induced cancer […]. One would need 100,000 PET scans in order to cause 35 cancer deaths (after a median wait duration of 15 years for leucemia and 40 years for solid tumors), which is about 1 in 3000 scans.

        https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positronen-Emissions-Tomographie#Strahlenexposition

    • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.worksOP
      3·
      3 months ago

      The kicker is that I just moved here and don’t have a PCP (primary care physician) yet. AND my company is switching health plans next year, so I basically need to find someone who takes BOTH health plans.