OJ Simpson dead at age 76

[WRGA Dog]

Prostate cancer.

[gulfportdawg]

I still believe he did it.

[Toasty B]

If it can't piss, he must quit

[Milldawg]

I still believe he did it.
[/quote]

yup

[DawgNatty]

POS Murderer...gone and forgotten.

[Concourse E]

I still believe he did it.
[/quote]

The underlying question is probably the most simple question able to discern someone's race without seeing them.  The response to the OJ trial was a wake-up call for how badly wrong our civil rights efforts had gone.  And of course he did it.

[redpantsdawg]

Roast in Hell murderer!

[JC-DAWG83]

I still believe he did it.
[/quote]

The underlying question is probably the most simple question able to discern someone's race without seeing them.  The response to the OJ trial was a wake-up call for how badly wrong our civil rights efforts had gone.  And of course he did it.
[/quote]

It should have been a jolting wake up call to all white people.

[Milldawg]

I still believe he did it.
[/quote]

The underlying question is probably the most simple question able to discern someone's race without seeing them.  The response to the OJ trial was a wake-up call for how badly wrong our civil rights efforts had gone.  And of course he did it.
[/quote]

It should have been a jolting wake up call to all white people.
[/quote]
I was thinking if this was the start of some of this woke crap...maybe even BLM stuff....regardless....sad and terrible situation.

[RockmartDawg]

I'm puzzled when I read about someone dying from prostate cancer... especially someone who would/should have plenty of finances to see a doctor and it be caught and addressed.

My limited understanding of prostate cancer is that it is either "the" slowest growing cancer, or at least one of the slowest. If you go for an annual physical you can usually catch this by way of PSA tests. That's the very early indicator. Once found it can either be treated or, worst case, your entire prostate be fully removed.

I guess it is possible that someone could have prostate cancer and it not be detectable by way of PSA testing (??). I haven't heard of that, but I didn't stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[Rogasingingdawg]

I still believe he did it.
[/quote]

Concur.

[Walnut River]

There's one form of it that affects maybe 5% of the cases that is particularly aggressive.  I think when you hear about someone dying of it, they had that one.  I've read that if you autopsied all men over 80 upon death, nearly 100% have it.  It's just that something else kills them first.

[Sugarhilldawg]

My father died of prostate cancer, was being treated for it for 5 or 6 years then it metastisized (sp?) all in his lungs, liver, kidneys, etc.... once the extreme effects of the cancer were realized he was gone in 3 weeks. he was 82 years old and this was in'98 so I guess medical knowledge has changed since then

[RockmartDawg]

There's one form of it that affects maybe 5% of the cases that is particularly aggressive.  I think when you hear about someone dying of it, they had that one.  I've read that if you autopsied all men over 80 upon death, nearly 100% have it.  It's just that something else kills them first.
[/quote]

Thanks. Very interesting info.

I have also heard/read that if they tested/biopsied every male over the age of 60 something like 25% would come back with a positive test result. It is to the point that Gleason 6 (3+3) is being debated as even if it is truly cancer or not.

---

My father died of prostate cancer, was being treated for it for 5 or 6 years then it metastisized (sp?) all in his lungs, liver, kidneys, etc.... once the extreme effects of the cancer were realized he was gone in 3 weeks. he was 82 years old and this was in'98 so I guess medical knowledge has changed since then
[/quote]

Interesting. That is the big key with prostate cancer... whether or not it grows and goes outside the prostate gland. If they catch it when it is still confined to the prostate, even if higher-grade cancer, they can usually stop the situation through prostate removal. Like you said, I guess the way they approach it and treat has changed, even since then, which doesn't seem so very long ago, although that is now just past 25 years. Now they have things like nano-knife surgery, laser, other methods they are looking into to destroy the cancer locally, and not have to remove the entire prostate.

I guess even with the most cutting edge treatment and technology, cancer can and will do what it does on its own terms. My wife's mother died of cancer in 2000. She had undergone surgery, chemo, etc., and it was "gone". A short few years later it came back and it was worse than the first bout.

[JC-DAWG83]

There's one form of it that affects maybe 5% of the cases that is particularly aggressive.  I think when you hear about someone dying of it, they had that one.  I've read that if you autopsied all men over 80 upon death, nearly 100% have it.  It's just that something else kills them first.
[/quote]

Thanks. Very interesting info.

I have also heard/read that if they tested/biopsied every male over the age of 60 something like 25% would come back with a positive test result. It is to the point that Gleason 6 (3+3) is being debated as even if it is truly cancer or not.

---

My father died of prostate cancer, was being treated for it for 5 or 6 years then it metastisized (sp?) all in his lungs, liver, kidneys, etc.... once the extreme effects of the cancer were realized he was gone in 3 weeks. he was 82 years old and this was in'98 so I guess medical knowledge has changed since then
[/quote]

Interesting. That is the big key with prostate cancer... whether or not it grows and goes outside the prostate gland. If they catch it when it is still confined to the prostate, even if higher-grade cancer, they can usually stop the situation through prostate removal. Like you said, I guess the way they approach it and treat has changed, even since then, which doesn't seem so very long ago, although that is now just past 25 years. Now they have things like nano-knife surgery, laser, other methods they are looking into to destroy the cancer locally, and not have to remove the entire prostate.

I guess even with the most cutting edge treatment and technology, cancer can and will do what it does on its own terms. My wife's mother died of cancer in 2000. She had undergone surgery, chemo, etc., and it was "gone". A short few years later it came back and it was worse than the first bout.
[/quote]

Cancer surgeon told me years ago that if someone has cancer and it is treated and is "gone", if that same cancer comes back in the future it is pretty well impossible to treat if surgery is not an option.  My FIL had bladder cancer, went through everything and had his bladder removed, thought it was completely gone.  About 10 years later the same cancer returned.  He did a different chemo treatment that was very hard on him and he lived about 5 years but was in pretty poor health the whole time.

[RockmartDawg]

There's one form of it that affects maybe 5% of the cases that is particularly aggressive.  I think when you hear about someone dying of it, they had that one.  I've read that if you autopsied all men over 80 upon death, nearly 100% have it.  It's just that something else kills them first.
[/quote]

Thanks. Very interesting info.

I have also heard/read that if they tested/biopsied every male over the age of 60 something like 25% would come back with a positive test result. It is to the point that Gleason 6 (3+3) is being debated as even if it is truly cancer or not.

---

My father died of prostate cancer, was being treated for it for 5 or 6 years then it metastisized (sp?) all in his lungs, liver, kidneys, etc.... once the extreme effects of the cancer were realized he was gone in 3 weeks. he was 82 years old and this was in'98 so I guess medical knowledge has changed since then
[/quote]

Interesting. That is the big key with prostate cancer... whether or not it grows and goes outside the prostate gland. If they catch it when it is still confined to the prostate, even if higher-grade cancer, they can usually stop the situation through prostate removal. Like you said, I guess the way they approach it and treat has changed, even since then, which doesn't seem so very long ago, although that is now just past 25 years. Now they have things like nano-knife surgery, laser, other methods they are looking into to destroy the cancer locally, and not have to remove the entire prostate.

I guess even with the most cutting edge treatment and technology, cancer can and will do what it does on its own terms. My wife's mother died of cancer in 2000. She had undergone surgery, chemo, etc., and it was "gone". A short few years later it came back and it was worse than the first bout.
[/quote]

Cancer surgeon told me years ago that if someone has cancer and it is treated and is "gone", if that same cancer comes back in the future it is pretty well impossible to treat if surgery is not an option.  My FIL had bladder cancer, went through everything and had his bladder removed, thought it was completely gone.  About 10 years later the same cancer returned.  He did a different chemo treatment that was very hard on him and he lived about 5 years but was in pretty poor health the whole time.
[/quote]

That's sad. Go through all of that treatment, and even have your bladder completely removed, and it still comes back. My wife's mother also had bladder cancer.

[dncdawg]

I didn't even know OJ had cancer, but I guess he was pretty good at hiding stuff.

[E.CobbDawg]

It couldn’t be more obvious that he did it!

[ugafan49]

30 years too late.