Loans in Malaysia

A personal loan is defined as a type of short-term loan with short repayment period relatively to other loans like mortgages. Personal loans in Malaysia are designed based on Sharia law and principles which are applicable to all Islamic banks offering personal loans. Whatever the end result or goal for taking a personal loan which might be similar, they all obey different forms of principles at the time of application as well as the sanctions for defaulters.

In Malaysia, personal loans amount start as low as RM1000 and can be accessed up to the RM200000 amount. The amount of the personal loan that can be accessed is dependent on the needs of the individual and the ability to repay the loan on time in order to avoid penalties in some cases. The types of personal loans offered in Malaysia can be broadly divided into secured and unsecured personal loans.

A secured loan is basically defined as a type of loan where an applicant tenders his or her assets in a form of security or as collateral to get access to the loan. A secured loan relatively comes with lower interest rates. However, caution should be taken because failure to repay the borrowed funds might lead to the loss of the assets used as collateral. For an unsecured loan, the acquisition of this type of loan might be a little tedious because there is no requirement for guarantor or collateral. The credit score and financial value of an individual will be used in determining the approval of an unsecured loan. In case a borrower fails to repay the funds by the end of the loan tenure, such individual is taken to court and the sale of properties might be the only way out.

 

List of Banks

Some of the banks that offer personal loan in Malaysia include:

  • Bank Rakyat
  • HSBC Bank
  • Public Islamic Bank
  • BSN Bank
  • CIMB
  • May Bank
  • RHB  

 

Terms and Conditions

  • The applicant must be a citizen of Malaysia with the minimum age of 20 years although some banks have provision for foreign citizens
  • The applicant must be a permanent and full-time employee working under a company in the banks’ approved list with proof from the employer or self-employed with good savings account statement or credit record
  • The applicant must have a minimum income of RM3000 per month on average and this amount may vary from bank to bank
  • There is a fee for late repayment of loan; most of the time the individual will pay 1% of the borrowed funds per annum
  • Personal loans offered in Malaysia come in various packages and plan with competitive interest rates and flexible repayment which can span up to 10 years and  this makes personal loan so attractive to potential borrowers
  • Interest rate on personal loan varies from bank to bank and also the type of personal loan scheme being applied for
  • In general, the interest rate on personal loan in Malaysia ranges between 4.49% to 13.75%
  • Loans that are applied for by individuals working in the government sector or some notable corporate organizations come with cheaper interest rates

 

Required Documents

Please take note that the required documents may vary from bank to bank. However, below is a list of the required documents that are currently required by the banks.

  • A photocopy of your MyKad for front and back
  • Latest tax receipts and tax returns
  • Confirmation letter stating your personal details from your current employer or Head of Department
  • Latest savings account bank statement
  • Latest savings or current account bank statement if you are a self-employed
  • Latest and current Employee Provident Fund (EPF) statement
  • Other required supporting documents that are requested by the banks

 

ADT:Prostate Cancer’s “Slow Drip Chemo”

In my job, I meet a lot of interesting and dedicated people. One of the most recent was Rick Davis, a Bay Area patient and prostate cancer advocate. Rick has co-moderated a prostate cancer support group in Marin County and sits on the Prostate Cancer Advocates Committee at UCSF Medical Center, assuring patient care, as well as  developing prostate cancer patient information materials. He is an active athlete and is also working on a unique program to more proactively link exercise to patient treatment plans for all serious and chronic illness.

As we met over lunch we swapped stories of our experiences with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Rick’s experience was particularly extreme. He was so affected by his time on Lupron that he had to file for disability. We agreed that each man is affected differently by the spectrum of potential ADT side effects. Some men are fortunate enough to barely notice a difference. Others are prone to every side effect on the list. The severity of the side effects also varies greatly from man to man. Most men I talk with are–to say the least– surprised by the experience. Rick and I agreed that, from our perspectives and responses to treatment, ADT is a form of slow drip chemo–something most bystanders don’t understand and that perhaps many physicians don’t appreciate from a patient’s point of view. Still, the benefits far outweigh the downside.

I asked Rick to pen a guest blog entry and he graciously agreed. I wonder if readers will agree with our “slow drip chemo” characterization.

–Dan

 

Twenty-eight months of hormone therapy does not sound like much considering the benefits –your life. But nobody tells you how many functions of the male body can go awry without an assist from your macho hormones that turn 120 pound weaklings into Charles Atlas and Plain John into Casanova.

Three months find you fanning your brow as you swelter in mid-winter. At six months you could be wondering how you might have failed to notice Julia Roberts pass under your nose.  And yes, you are always hungry – not for healthy victuals but the carbs, ice cream, and chocolate your wife and friends crave. It’s quite possible to add a quick 20 lbs while not being able to find the motivation to hit the gym… not to mention the strength or endurance once you get your sorry butt there.

By nine months you are cursing this slow drip chemo. ‘Lupron Brain’ lowers you into the constant fog of a San Francisco July; it’s hard to concentrate for more than 120 seconds since you lose track of the first sixty. The wretched combination of fatigue, depression and anemia, the same three musketeers that duel with brain cells in chemotherapy patients, all result from a lack of testosterone.  Surprisingly and contrary to expectations, a fuller mane above is covertly offset by loss of cover elsewhere on our pre-pubescent body.

Yet, so many well-meaning folks tell you look so healthy, producing emotional twinges of guilt for feeling as crappy as you do.

After 12 months, we know the systems are all awry; the liver may be inflamed, cholesterol rockets, the heart beats to its own testosterone-less drum;  and one task per day can lay us flat. Our medical gurus never mentioned all the issues we might well have noted by carefully perusing the pharmaceutical disclaimer.

It’s fair to say, every man reacts differently to hormone therapy. Few hit the jackpot of every side effect with a 5% or less incidence. My bogeymen were liver and anemia; Dan’s his arrhythmic heart, fatigue and momentary brain fogs. In the worst cases, some poor souls who have never received a visit from what I call the emotional  ‘black dog’ spiral further into depression. For many men the simplest and safest antidote is daily exercise – perhaps the subject of a future post.

Hormone therapy, like chemotherapy, is systemic. Contrary to many chemo treatments it does not assault the system; it creeps up like too many birthdays. Men facing just 4-8 months of adjuvant therapy in combination with radiation are frequently off the ‘juice’ before much more than the sweats. Those facing longer treatments find an exponential deterioration in their quality of life beyond 12 months. Several doctors have disclosed, NOT upfront mind you, that some men cannot endure more than 12 months before coming off the LHRH (luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone) drugs.

Intermittent therapy, going on and off hormone therapy, balances Quality of Life factors with controlling the prostate cancer; but this is more in line with recurrent disease. It must be managed for a lifetime stretching the period hormone therapy is still effective. For men receiving neo-adjuvant or adjuvant hormone therapy in the hope of finding the elusive C-word grail – CURE, different studies suggest continuous therapy for 18-36 months. In line with Dan’s recent post, there is a developing school of thought that the LHRH drugs do the bulk of their work in the first 12 months; thereafter the benefits are marginal and easily outweighed by QoL and medical co-morbidities.

Either way, those of us who have lasted the longer course as well as several enlightened practitioners, are in agreement that treating doctors do a poor job preparing men for their rough ride along the hormone therapy journey. Over the past 18 months I have provided a catalytic function to produce a comprehensive UCSF ‘Your Health Matters’ pamphlet for men considering hormone therapy, long or short. While still in draft, I am happy to share with any of you that follow this blog. And for those of you well along the Lupron highway – keep the faith …. onwards & upwards!

New Drugs for Advanced Prostate Cancer Continue to Work Their Way to Market

The count keeps growing for the benefit of patients.

ust as I had updated my new drug tally last week, another one progresses. No complaints, mind you. In fact, it’s wonderful news.

Here are the updated totals: 4 new drugs in the past two years including Jevtana (cabazitaxel), Xgeva (denosumab), Provenge and Zytiga (abiraterone). Another, enzalutimide (MDV3100) is pending approval for the FDA and currently available to patients under an expanded access program. A promising new radiotherapy, Alpharadin (radium-223 chloride) is working its way through the approvals process with a Fast-Track designation from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Now today, Tokai Pharmaceuticals Inc., a biopharmaceutical company based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, said in a press release that the Food and Drug Administration has granted Fast-Track status for its lead drug candidate, a potential treatment of metastatic treatment-resistant (otherwise known as castration-resistant) prostate cancer.

As reported by Chris Reidy, of the Boston Globe, “Fast-track designation is reserved for the review of experimental drugs that treat serious or life-threatening conditions or address unmet medical needs. In general, regulators spend about 10 months reviewing a drug candidate before issuing a decision. Getting fast-track status means that Tokai could get a decision in six months on whether or not the FDA will approve the drug.”

Tokai’s drug is galeterone, or TOK-001. It aims to treat castration-resistant prostate cancer, or CRPC, an advanced, difficult-to-treat form of prostate cancer that occurs when the disease progresses despite the use of androgen deprivation therapy.

Despite recent progress in prostate cancer treatment, CRPC often becomes resistant to androgen deprivation therapy, and galeterone’s unique triple mechanism of action may offer an important therapeutic advance, said  Martin D. Williams, Tokai’s presiden t and chief executive. “We are very encouraged by the recent positive results from our ARMOR1 clinical study, and we look forward to advancing galeterone into Phase 2 development in patients with CRPC later this year.”

Of these drugs that work on the androgen receptor (AR), Zytiga, TOK-001, and Enzalutimide, they target varying and multiple mechanisms in signalling pathways for disease progression. So, not only do we have more weapons in our arsenal for advanced disease, we will also be able to study which patients and varieties of prostate cancer respond best to specific drugs or combinations of these new therapies and move closer to patient-specific treatments.

Let the numbers roll… I am up for constantly having to revise them.

With Proposed Cuts to NIH Research, 21 New Young Investigators Offer Good News

As researchers and advocates rallied in Washington today, calling for a halt to proposed medical research cuts, prostate cancer research received 21 Young Investigators committed to discovering better treatments and cures. 

 

Since budget sequestration went into effect, the news for medical research has been precarious at best. Current projected budget cuts for medical research as a result of sequestration stand at $1.6 billion. These cuts would have a devastating effect on progress against cancer and other life-threatening diseases. With the budget of the NIH holding steady over the last half-decade, the chances of research grants being funded have already fallen to roughly 1 in 6, half of the historic rate.

Advocates and researchers rallied in Washington today, calling upon legislators to preserve medical research funding at the National Institutes of Health.
Advocates and researchers rallied in Washington today, calling upon legislators to preserve medical research funding at the National Institutes of Health.

In a recent interview with USA Today, Francis Collins, director of the NIH said: “I worry desperately this means we will lose a generation of young scientists… A lot of good science just won’t be done.”

Without our young scientists, not only would scientific advances for cures dwindle, so would America’s leading position in bio-medical science. What’s more, some estimates place the potential number of jobs that would be lost in the research sector at around 20,000. I know I’ve said it before, but it needs to be repeated: funding for medical research is not a cost. It is an investment in the well-being of Americans and our healthcare system, as well as our economy.

I am pleased to report that hours before the Rally for Medical Research took place this morning in Washington, DC,
theProstate Cancer Foundation (PCF) announced $4.7 million in funding for 21 new and innovative Young IMG00043-20130408-12261-300x198Investigators(YIs) to focus on the problem of prostate cancer. PCF has funded 118 young professionals since 2007, representing a total investment of more than $25 million. Since the launch of PCF’s Young Investigator program, the contributions of young scientists funded by PCF are making measurable contributions in changing the way patients diagnosed with this disease are treated today.

One PCF Young Investigator recently told me, “We don’t know the meaning of it can’t be done… Young Investigators are the hope for the future of prostate cancer research.”

As a patient, I whole-heartedly agree. I am very hopeful of my future because of the future these young and very talented researchers are bringing to fruition.

Seeing the Unseen

Advances in PET scan imaging may soon enable clinicians to see and treat metastatic prostate cancer lesions earlier and with greater precision. 

CT-scan
Recent discoveries in PET scanning may soon enable clinicians to see and treat metastatic prostate cancer tumors earlier than ever before.

 

Ask any fellow patient who has been diagnosed with advanced metastatic disease what their biggest fear is and the answer is simple: recurrence. Of course, the quarterly or six-month PSA test–which comes with its own mix of anxiety and reassurance–remains the first step in watching for the progression of prostate cancer. But patients also wonder, is it growing? And if so, where is it growing?

To date, traditional imaging techniques such as bone scans and computed tomography (CT) have been used to detect prostate cancer tumors that have metastasized away from the gland. But they have drawbacks. They can neither detect lesions that are outside of bony areas nor discern between benign and cancerous lesions. Now all that may be changing with advances in PET (positron emitting tomography) scanning, also known a molecular imaging.

Scientists at Johns Hopkins are now attaching a positron-emitting radioactive tracer to a newly synthesized small-molecule compound that is targeted to a protein (prostate specific membrane antigen–PMSA) that is found in prostate cancer as well as in the newly-formed blood vessels of many other solid types of tumors. The result is that the radioactive tracer is able to “light up” on PET scan images of soft tissues that have been invaded by cancer cells, such as lymph nodes. With several new drugs that have come to market  for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer, the earlier these cancerous lesions are found, the sooner treatments can be prescribed.

As a patient, I am encouraged that clinicians may soon be able to see the heretofore unseen spread of cancer and treat it earlier should mine return. So should many other patients.

According to Dr. Steven Cho, the first author on theJournal of Nuclear Medicine paper PET and PMSA (and recipient of PCF Young Investigator and Creativity Awards), “Much work remains before PET scans are routinely used to bring functional or molecular imaging into routine clinical care to improve prostate cancer treatment. However, ongoing collective work, here at Hopkins and others sites, is moving at an accelerated pace that we believe will bring this form of imaging into clinical reality for prostate cancer patients in the short-term future.”

Reassuring news, indeed.

Prostate cancer treatment options

The sheer volume of scientific data and marketing copy aside, the best allies remain information and personal preference. 

I read an article today about a new study out of NYU Langone Medical Center and Yale School of Medicine that shows that when hospitals acquire surgical robotic technology, men in that region are more likely to have prostate cancer surgery.

“The use of the surgical robot to treat prostate cancer is an instructive example of an expensive medical technology becoming rapidly adopted without clear proof of its benefit,” said Danil V. Makarov, MD, MHS, lead author and assistant professor, Department of Urology at NYU Langone Medical Center and assistant professor of Health Policy at NYU Wagner School of Public Health. “Policymakers must carefully consider what the added-value is of costly new medical devices, because, once approved, they will most certainly be used.”

I can think of other modalities and techniques about which the same can be said: proton beam therapy vs. intensity modulated radiation therapy, CT vs. MRI vs. other imaging technologies. The fact is, whenever new technologies are introduced, they come with large entry costs, sometimes widely conflicting data and an abundance of marketing messages from eager manufacturers and medical centers who hope to differentiate themselves in highly competitive markets. I remember twenty some odd years ago, smaller medical centers often shared the services of mobile CT and MRI equipment so they could also market the latest technologies and keep patients from defecting to larger, competing institutions. It’s what patients demand.  It’s what a free market encourages.

My first thought in reading the article was that it was a matter of reallocation… patients were simply electing to go to elsewhere for the new technology. But then I read: “…hospitals with surgical robots increased surgery cases an average of 29.1 per year while those without robots experienced a decline in radical prostatectomy by – 4.8 cases.” That’s still a net gainof 24.3…

Now, in this day and age where overtreatment of certain prostate cancers is a real concern, I can’t image any well-regarded institution or practice up selling patients to procedures that aren’t necessary. What I find plausible is that with a surgical option that is less invasive and offers some appealing benefits such as not needing to bank blood, shorter hospital stays and smaller incisions, more patients may be willing to entertain the thought of being more aggressive with their treatment selections. This is the area that deserves more consideration:how do you tell a patient who would prefer to have the cancer taken out, perceives an attractive option and no longer wants to consider less invasive and less aggressive options, that they can’t? At this point, they may be less willing to look at the diagnostics numbers more closely and objectively. And, until a physician can definitively tell a patient that his cancer is not a life-threatening variety, what are they to do? There is the ever prevalent threat of malpractice lawsuits.

I have always said that I was dubiously lucky enough to have clear diagnostics data (Gleason scores, percentages of involvement within the prostate, PSA doubling time, etc…) that pointed to aggressive treatment. In my casem surgery. As a result of my research, I was confident that outcomes with open or roboticsurgery are about the same and are more dependent on the surgeon’s experience (number of procedures) with a specific technique. Age can also have more of an effect on outcomes than the difference between open and robotic. Following a long consult with my surgeon and a query into the number of robotic  procedures he had performed, along with his outcome percentages for urinary continence and ED, I made my decision to have him perform the procedure robotically. Had he only done open surgery with the same stats, I might have elected for that option based on my confidence levels. Perhaps not. (I’ll admit, I am a bit of a weenie when it comes to incisions.) The most important factor was that I was comfortable with my final decision and went into surgery without reservations.

If a patient is to be comfortable with their treatment choice, aggressive or not, I believe personal preference has to play into the decision process. We are all so very different… I know one patient who chose to have open surgery with only an epidural block.  I admire the man, but I certainly couldn’t have done it!

What’s the point of all of this? No matter what the technology, there will always be a plethora of data and confusing–sometimes conflicting–opinions around it until its effectiveness and benefits play out over time, and, until the next great innovation comes along.

Keeping this reality in mind, there is no substitute for us being our own best patient advocates. To this end, our strongest allies remain information harvesting, the advice of  a trusted medical professional  and a good dose of our personal preferences guiding our final decisions.

 

Is It a Detour or Just a Winding Road?

My journey without a map yields more tests and more appointments.

As a result of today’s appointment, I am now scheduled for an echocardiogram on Tuesday and a nuclear stress test on Friday. Standard stress tests would not be able to detect if there is any base reason for my irregular EKG result.

The cardiologist, fully familiar with the side effects of Lupron, believes at this point that my palpitations and chest pains are just that–side effects that are not to be of a major concern. In this case, they would be called benign. Yet, he wants to rule out any other underlying factor.  Of course, I sat there thinking to myself… NOT A MAJOR CONCERN? You try living with the entire USC marching band AND the football team running through your chest several times a day…!  

Of course, there is reassurance to be found in his preliminary assessment. Perhaps this news alone will help control the sensations I am experiencing. It echoed what one of my most trusted associates at work had hypothesized earlier this week. If there are no underlying reasons (a plus), I might just have to live this way until I end my dance with Lupron (a BIG minus in my book). When I pressed the cardiologist for alternatives, he offered that treatment with beta blockers night help–I suppose that would be better than changing my Lupron treatment and hoping an alternate works as well at this point.

Today’s visit was able to provide some peace of mind. As I left the appointment I found myself wondering if this should be considered a frustrating detour or merely another twist on a winding road. Either way, I suppose I can’t complain. I started this journey knowing there is no road map to go with it.

Have a good weekend.

 

A Perfect Storm: PSA Screening is Imperfect But Not Failed

The morning after the final USPSTF recommendation against widespread PSA screening leaves me believing that many have missed their mark and their efforts could have been better directed.

perfect-storm

 

The debate over PSA screening began to simmer and quickly rose to a boiling point about three years ago. Opponents pointed to the problem of overtreatment (according to scholars at Johns Hopkins, overtreatment costs more than $1 billion annually in the U.S.). Proponents looked to the reduced number of prostate deaths as a mark in favor of screening. Studies from both sides of the Atlantic were both complex and provided differing data, making them easy fodder for campaign positions. In short, all the makings of a perfect storm for the debate were in place.

What was missing in the equation was general acceptance that there is a middle ground. One can find it by acknowledging that while PSA screening is imperfect, it is not a failed test. While it is not cancer-specific, it is not a failed test.

In my completely personal opinion, all parties in the debate, including the United States Preventive Services Task Force, would have been better served by launching a nationwide men’s health campaign for patients and clinicians, outlining the pros and cons of both screening and of various treatment options so patients could make informed decisionsregarding their personal healthcare. This should have been coupled with an urgent call for research funding that is making rapid progress for better, prostate cancer-specific biomarkers. Just one example, out of the University of Michigan, is a simple urine test (looking TMPRSS2:ERG gene fusion and PCA3 DNA that are expressed at high levels in 95 percent of prostate cancers) that has the potential to eliminate thousands of unnecessary biopsies and more accurately direct those who can benefit from proactive surveillance rather than aggressive treatment.

But guess what? Even with this urine test, PSA screening would still have an important preliminary role in an informed diagnostic and treatment decision process…

One fellow patient aptly captured what I believe is the feeling of many patients when he posted the following on the Men’s Prostate Cancer Support Group page of Facebook (an invitation-only private forum for men dealing with prostate cancer and treatment):  ”Enough of the nanny state. We are big boys. Give us our PSA and we can decide if we want a biopsy or further treatment knowing the risks involved. But let us decide and give us the only tool we currently have.”

Lancet Oncology, the prestigious medical journal, reports that 84 percent of women in the United States are alive at least five years after receiving a diagnosis of breast cancer. Only 70 percent of British women survive that long. Further, 92 percent of American men with prostate cancer survive for at least five years, compared to 51 percent of Britons. In Britain, PSA screening is less utilized and prostate cancer is often diagnosed in more advanced stages.

The good news that needs to be reiterated is that the Department of Health and Human Services has already stated that Medicare will continue to reimburse for PSA screening. Private insurers, some reinforced by State mandates, should also continue reimbursing for this simple blood test.

Already, many groups are rallying to reach out to their Congressional representatives, asking them to have the USPSTF recommendation reversed. How much more time and effort will that take? How much more confusion will be generated?

From the standpoint of one who believes that his advanced disease was caught in time by the PSA, I also understand and sympathize with those many men who might have been overtreated in their rush to rid themselves of what might have been a non-life-threatening variety of this disease. Thus, any further discussion on reversing the final decision of the USPSTF is futile unless it calls for a clear and concise education campaign on what the PSA is and isn’t capable of doing, the pros and cons of treatments AND and urgent call for funding new biomarkers as fast as our researchers can validate and commercialize them.

Only with better biomarkers can we put this issue to rest. Only then can we overtreat less and cure more.

Imerman Angels to the Rescue

Faced with a diagnosis of testicular cancer, one 26 year-old man initiates Imerman Angels to match newly diagnosed patients with cancer mentors.

We all know the confusion and isolation that a cancer diagnosis brings. There is so much information to absorb and so much to gather. The road ahead is covered in a shroud of fog and often, those around us, save for our caretakers, are often helpless to assist us in the way we need it most. Tomorrow I will be participating on a patient panel hosted by MOVEMBER. On it with me will be a remarkable patient who had a simple yet brilliant idea…

Jonny Imerman was diagnosed with testicular cancer at 26, during his treatment he had the support of friends and family through his journey but never met anyone his age who was a cancer survivor. He wanted to talk to someone just like him, someone who truly understood and remembered – someone who had already beaten the same type of cancer. Based on this experience Jonny founded Imerman Angels. His organization carefully matches and individually pairs a person touched by cancer (a cancer fighter or survivor) with someone who has fought and survived the same type of cancer (a Mentor Angel).

Most of us will agree that having someone who has “blazed the cancer road” ahead of us is invaluable. They have insights and suggestions that newly diagnosed patients haven’t even been able to consider. Perhaps most importantly, having a dialog with some who reminds us that we are not alone and understands exactly how we are feeling is an important assist through our journey.

Summer’s Rushing By While Some Things Stand Wonderfully Still

It’s been a whirlwind few weeks, with Home Run Challenge, Father’s Day and the 4th of July Holiday.

iced-tea
The warmth of the summer sun, a chilled glass of ice tea on the terrace and an undetectable PSA–yes, its a good summer!

I know I’ve been quiet lately–partially catching my breath after an exhilarating Home Run Challenge that has raised more than $1 million (and counting) to support much needed research to protect our fathers and sons, and placing the prostate cancer issue in front of millions of baseball fans and television viewers. I’ve also allowed myself some “me time” –letting cancer play its new secondary role in my life.

But I have to break my silence to let you know that my latest PSA result came back undetectable. While I no longer panic waiting for results, the news was every bit the same to me as a national holiday. In fact, it was my very own Independence Day, confirming at least a continued temporary, if not sustained independence from this disease.

Yes, I feel so good with Lupron behind me. My transition off treatment wasn’t an easy one. The surge of returning hormones was a reverse assault. It charged my emotions and played with my abilities almost more compared to being in the depths of treatment. Few can understand or even sympathize with what that process was like. Looking back, I believe more studies may be warranted to understand the tremendous impact coming off treatment and a storm front of surging testosterone can have on a guy. It can change a person forever. It was my own hurricane Sandy.

But that is past. And I am alive and writing this entry sitting in the warmth of the glorious summer sun.

As I take all of this in, I still have to wonder, how many men will be faced with a diagnosis today… how many will learn that their PSAs are rising… how many will begin to feel the pain in their bones, confirming their fears that their disease is indeed progressing. For them I continue to pray. For them we need to continue our assault on this disease. For them, I will continue to write whatever I can to provide some comfort and hope. It’s the least we can do.

Yes, life is unpredictable, but it’s still beautiful.  Bless you all.