positive experience with local blood testing lab

[orang37]

Hi. One of the real benefits I've enjoyed on this forum, over the years, is reading people's experiences with local companies' goods and services.

 

Since my trusted GP 's clinic is not available, I decided to go to a lab myself. That may not be the right choice for you, and, imho, you really need a medical professional's advice to interpret your test results, and make any decision regarding treatment, medication, etc.  I have a good reason to monitor my thyroid levels, and uric acid levels, regularly.

 

Disclaimer: your mileage may vary. Disclosure: I had no experience of this lab before I went; I selected it for convenient location; I have not been asked to write this "review:" they do not know I am writing this.

 

I used the CMFLab near the Empress Hotel (Chang Klan, Soi 12) for blood testing, and they were very professional. I went about 6:30PM last night. and the results were emailed (.pdf files) to me before noon today

 

https://www.cmflabchiangmai.com/th

 

Tests I had: total cost 1260 Baht.

 

Uric acid

 

Renal Function
    Creatinine / eGFR

 

Thyroid function test (CMIA method)
    TSH / Free T3 / Free T4 / T3 / T4

 

Blood
    WBC / Neutrophil / Lymphocyte / Monocyte2 / Eosinophil1 / Basophil0 / RBC / Hb / HctM / MCV / MCH / MCHC / Platelet Cells

[Lacessit]

Mengrai Labs in Chiang Rai highlights results out of range, and also gives the normal range of every parameter. 2100 baht.

 

Your results do not appear to include fasting glucose and HBa1C, or PSA. Presumably you are not concerned about the potential for diabetes and prostate cancer.

[orang37]

18 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Your results do not appear to include fasting glucose and HBa1C, or PSA. Presumably you are not concerned about the potential for diabetes and prostate cancer.

Hi, While I appreciate your response, I think you do not have enough information for such a (at best) hypothesis.

 

cheers, ~o:37

[The Hammer2021]

18 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Mengrai Labs in Chiang Rai highlights results out of range, and also gives the normal range of every parameter. 2100 baht.

 

Your results do not appear to include fasting glucose and HBa1C, or PSA. Presumably you are not concerned about the potential for diabetes and prostate cancer.

PSA is no longer considered  a credible  test for Prostate  cancer.

[Lacessit]

37 minutes ago, The Hammer2021 said:

PSA is no longer considered  a credible  test for Prostate  cancer.

It seems to be by many doctors. Get above a reading of 10, it's time for a manual prostate check.

Enlighten me with your own medical qualifications, please.

[Hummin]

1 hour ago, The Hammer2021 said:

PSA is no longer considered  a credible  test for Prostate  cancer.

Have never been a solely credible  test for prostate cancer, but it can be an good indicator that something could be wrong. 
 

https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/psa-test/about/pac-20384731

[moogradod]

2 hours ago, Hummin said:

Have never been a solely credible  test for prostate cancer, but it can be an good indicator that something could be wrong. 
 

https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/psa-test/about/pac-20384731

Absolutely correct. The referenced article gives as well a short but valuable summary. However, I beg to differ as far as the relevance of the rate of change of the PSA is concerned. I may say that because it most probably saved my life so far (see below).

 

After having undergone yearly standard checkups for many years it was only after an increase of the PSA (to not even much, something in the range of 2.5 - 4.5 - but raising within a relatively short time) that triggered a biopsy (which was negative on the first try), but after the PSA kept raising further (around 6 I remember) more the doctor became more suspicious and a second more extensive biopsy was performed.

 

The diagnosis has then been been cancer with a gleason score of 8 (gleason score=measure of agressivity, 10 is max, 8 already in the catastrophic range). They had to postpone other scheduled surgery to priotize my treatment. My prostate was removed completely using robot assisted surgergy in a 7.5h long procedure. Despite the very unfortunate prognosis I have (miraculously) survived over 11 years now even without the slightest signs of a biochemical relapse (=PSA rising, minimal levels of PSA are even detectable without the prostate gland).

 

The trigger of the whole life saving procedure has been the raise of PSA within a short time. The cancer was not detected before regardless of my yearly checkups. I was treated in Switzerland and the level of medical knowhow is generally regarded as excellent there. This is why I would share my own experience and recommend to take relevant changes seriously and thoroughly discuss them with your Urologist by all means.

 

 

[Hummin]

21 minutes ago, moogradod said:

Absolutely correct. The referenced article gives as well a short but valuable summary. However, I beg to differ as far as the relevance of the rate of change of the PSA is concerned. I may say that because it most probably saved my life so far (see below).

 

After having undergone yearly standard checkups for many years it was only after an increase of the PSA (to not even much, something in the range of 2.5 - 4.5 - but raising within a relatively short time) that triggered a biopsy (which was negative on the first try), but after the PSA kept raising further (around 6 I remember) more the doctor became more suspicious and a second more extensive biopsy was performed.

 

The diagnosis has then been been cancer with a gleason score of 8 (gleason score=measure of agressivity, 10 is max, 8 already in the catastrophic range). They had to postpone other scheduled surgery to priotize my treatment. My prostate was removed completely using robot assisted surgergy in a 7.5h long procedure. Despite the very unfortunate prognosis I have (miraculously) survived over 11 years now even without the slightest signs of a biochemical relapse (=PSA rising, minimal levels of PSA are even detectable without the prostate gland).

 

The trigger of the whole life saving procedure has been the raise of PSA within a short time. The cancer was not detected before regardless of my yearly checkups. I was treated in Switzerland and the level of medical knowhow is generally regarded as excellent there. This is why I would share my own experience and recommend to take relevant changes seriously and thoroughly discuss them with your Urologist by all means.

 

 

I do a complete blood check panel every year on hospital cost me 8 500 - 14 500, depending on hospital and also sometimes lucky with a special offer, useally Bangkok Hospital in Bangkok. Also do partly checks every 6 months on one of the  Health Labs and if I remember correct around 2 500, for the tests I choose. I do PSA on both of them. Since I started almost 6 years ago, it have rised from 0,9 to 1,25, and still in check for my age at 53. However I start to come in to an age where also manual check is recommended. 

 

Normal values

0-2.5: Normal for a man 40-50 yrs.

2.5-3.5: Normal for a man 50-60 yrs.

3.5-4.5: Normal for a man 60-70 yrs.

4.5-5.5: Normal for a man 70-80 yrs.

[Scott]

Troll post reported and removed.

 

[SammyJ]

On 3/23/2022 at 1:30 PM, The Hammer2021 said:

PSA is no longer considered  a credible  test for Prostate  cancer.

Actually, it is still regularly used and considered, at least in the US, what is correct, is that some of the total reliance upon it has changed, and other tests are used as well.  It is but one of the results that are considered.

[JimmyJ]

On 3/23/2022 at 4:55 PM, moogradod said:

Absolutely correct. The referenced article gives as well a short but valuable summary. However, I beg to differ as far as the relevance of the rate of change of the PSA is concerned. I may say that because it most probably saved my life so far (see below).

 

After having undergone yearly standard checkups for many years it was only after an increase of the PSA (to not even much, something in the range of 2.5 - 4.5 - but raising within a relatively short time) that triggered a biopsy (which was negative on the first try), but after the PSA kept raising further (around 6 I remember) more the doctor became more suspicious and a second more extensive biopsy was performed.

 

The diagnosis has then been been cancer with a gleason score of 8 (gleason score=measure of agressivity, 10 is max, 8 already in the catastrophic range). They had to postpone other scheduled surgery to priotize my treatment. My prostate was removed completely using robot assisted surgergy in a 7.5h long procedure. Despite the very unfortunate prognosis I have (miraculously) survived over 11 years now even without the slightest signs of a biochemical relapse (=PSA rising, minimal levels of PSA are even detectable without the prostate gland).

 

The trigger of the whole life saving procedure has been the raise of PSA within a short time. The cancer was not detected before regardless of my yearly checkups. I was treated in Switzerland and the level of medical knowhow is generally regarded as excellent there. This is why I would share my own experience and recommend to take relevant changes seriously and thoroughly discuss them with your Urologist by all means.

 

 

Any significant after effects of the surgery?

[JimmyJ]

On 3/23/2022 at 2:11 PM, Lacessit said:

It seems to be by many doctors. Get above a reading of 10, it's time for a manual prostate check.

Enlighten me with your own medical qualifications, please.

https://www.cancer.gov/types/prostate/psa-fact-sheet

 

https://www.physiciansweekly.com/psa-testing-not-recommended-for-prostate-cancer-screening

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/urologists-no-longer-recommend-routine-psa-testing-for-prostate-cancer/

 

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/260087

[JimmyJ]

On 3/25/2022 at 7:25 AM, SammyJ said:

Actually, it is still regularly used and considered, at least in the US, what is correct, is that some of the total reliance upon it has changed, and other tests are used as well.  It is but one of the results that are considered.

"Actually, it is still regularly used and considered, at least in the US..."

 

Hardly.

 

https://www.cancer.gov/types/prostate/psa-fact-sheet

 

 

[moogradod]

44 minutes ago, JimmyJ said:

Any significant after effects of the surgery?

A prostatectomy - the complete removal of the prostate gland - is a major endeavour and is followed by several aftereffects. The immediate effect is that you stay out of operation and in hospital for a considerable time.

 

You cannot remove the whole gland without destroying the canal that carries urine out of your body. This wound has to heal while you bypass it with a catheder. Furthermore one of the two muscle groups that controls urine flow has to be removed as well, so even after everything is grown (and 100% tight) together again you need extensive training to gain control the urine flow with one muscle group alone. During this time (months) you need to wear diapers.

 

Directly after the surgery and after they did remove the catheder you have abolutely no control about the urine flow anymore. You drink and it goes strait through. To get this all back to normal again takes a lot of effort and time with weeks of therapy. Your sexual capabilitites may as well be severly affected. I have read that this does not apply to anybody but unfortunately with me it did have massive impact. Your best piece will as well shrink (somehow it is already shorter after the surgery but this tendency continues more and more).

 

Change of the catheter has as well 2 times lead to a retention of urine. At the first time I did not know that such an effect existed and I had to be carried via ambulance to the hospital. The pain that went along with this retention (of course I have waited too long, hoping it would go away itself has been dramatic and may be compared to the pain of a broken appendix (I had the pleasure to experience this as well).

 

Without going into every detail I may sum up that after effects have been significant, mainly with urine and sexual control. On top comes the psychological effects, but all this may be individual. But you would not like it - this I can guarantee - and I would recommend to take advantage of every screening at least once a year that you are able to get. An early detection does increase your life expectancy.

[Lacessit]

11 hours ago, JimmyJ said:

https://www.cancer.gov/types/prostate/psa-fact-sheet

 

https://www.physiciansweekly.com/psa-testing-not-recommended-for-prostate-cancer-screening

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/urologists-no-longer-recommend-routine-psa-testing-for-prostate-cancer/

 

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/260087

It just says you can use Google, and cherrypick what articles suit you. It's called confirmation bias.

Reading through those links carefully, it would appear PSA testing is not recommended for men older than 70, or under 55. Mainly because it may lead to painful biopsies which either turn up nothing, or cancers that are so slow -growing the patient will probably die of something else.

Those links do not invalidate PSA testing for all situations, it is simply one of the testing tools in a range of techniques.

Of course, MRI testing is much more profitable than a PSA test, but that's just me being cynical.

[CharlieH]

Reported post and responses removed.

[SammyJ]

15 hours ago, JimmyJ said:

"Actually, it is still regularly used and considered, at least in the US..."

 

Hardly.

 

https://www.cancer.gov/types/prostate/psa-fact-sheet

 

 

If you read the information you provided and understand the instances in which it is still

used, you would understand that the PSA is still pretty widely used.  While it is not the "end-all test" once thought, it is still a very commonly used part of most prostate exams--and, while the link suggests it should be an "individual choice" most older friends i have in the US request it, and theyir doctors have recommended it, as a component of prostate health--most men want a non-invasive test if there is one at all--and, really, shouldn't every test or medical procedure be an "individual decision"?

[Sheryl]

2 hours ago, SammyJ said:

 the PSA is still pretty widely used.  While it is not the "end-all test" once thought, it is still a very commonly used part of most prostate exams

 

As above.

 

In particular, rapid increases in PSA level over time, or very high readings, are highly predictive of cancer provided other cause like prostatitis is excluded.

 

PSAs  need not lead to unnecessary tests unless doctor and/or patient (who may pressure doctor) fail to interpret the findings in context. 

 

Note that PSA levels should nto be measured within 48 hours of any sexual activity or biccykle/motorcycle riding as these can cause temporary elevations.