Share This

Saturday 23 October 2010

Baidu as the Google of China

Baidu: China's Google can't be beat

chart_ws_stock_baiduinc.top(2).png 
 Shares of Baidu have trounced Google's this year as the Chinese search engine's sales and profits soar. By Paul R. La Monica, editor at large

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Some investors refer to Baidu as the Google of China.
But if Baidu keeps delivering quarterly performances like its most recent one, investors may have to start calling Google the Baidu of the United States.
paul_lamonica_morning_buzz2.jpg

Baidu reported third-quarter profits Thursday night that more than doubled, easily beating analysts' forecasts. Sales rose a stunning 76%. The company continues to gain market share in China while Google (GOOG, Fortune 500) remains a distant second -- especially after Google essentially threw in the towel on keeping a presence in mainland China.

Shares of Baidu (BIDU) shot up nearly 6% Friday morning on the news, hitting a new record-high in the process. Can the stock possibly still be a buy at this point?

It's getting tougher to blindly ignore the stock's exorbitant valuation. But amazingly, several analysts think Baidu has nowhere to go but up.

"All fundamental drivers for growth of online and search advertising in China remain unchanged, and Baidu remains the prime beneficiary," wrote RBC analyst Stephen Ju in a report Friday morning.

Aaron Kessler, an analyst with ThinkEquity Partners, added in a note Friday that Baidu had made great strides toward improving how much revenue it generates per click thanks to its Phoenix Nest program, which is kind of like Google's AdWords sponsored links service.

Baidu also has room to grow in another key area of online media -- contextual ads. Contextual advertising, displaying relevant ads over a network of sites (i.e. services like Google's AdSense), is something that Baidu is developing.
"Due to its superior technologies, Google remains as the biggest player in contextual ads in China, but the gap between Google and Baidu in market share is not huge," wrote C. Ming Zhao, an analyst with Susquehanna Financial.

Baidu, like Google, is also continuing to invest aggressively in research and development, in order to make sure that it holds onto its search lead and can catch up to Google in other areas.

Oppenheimer analyst Paul Keung noted in a report Friday that the company is dipping its toe in businesses that could eventually become big generators of revenues and profits, such as online video, mobile search and Baidu's so-called "box computing" initiative, which is Baidu's take on the apps craze.

"While there is no large [revenue] contribution in the near term, we believe even with fierce/crowded competition amongst the sectors [Baidu] still serves up as an advantageous newcomer," he wrote.

Still, it's worth wondering if this is all more than priced into the stock already. Baidu trades at nearly 50 times 2011 earnings estimates, an incredibly rich multiple for a stock.

In order to make the case that Baidu is still a bargain, you have to factor in just how rapidly it's expected to grow. Kessler said in his report that the stock's current valuation is justified because he expects Baidu's profits to grow at a rate of 40% a year, on average, for the next few years.

In fact, he increased his price target on Baidu Friday to $135 a share, 25% higher than where it's trading at now.

Sure, Baidu isn't for the faint of heart. But it's undeniably a leader in one of the hottest segments of one of the world's hottest markets. Stocks like that often aren't on sale -- and for good reason.

Reader comment of the week. And my mind is on the brink. I wrote on Monday about how big bank stocks may face another problem with the foreclosure fiasco. That sparked one reader to endorse even tougher rules on the big banks.

"The banking industry needs to be changed to not make crazy profits. They provide a service that mom and pop shops can not. Every dollar they make comes out of a small business or large corporation's ability to hire more workers. Watch out for banks coming after you for every fee imaginable," wrote Mike Lenzini.

Over in the Twitter-sphere, I issued another of my crazy pop culture challenges Thursday. I noticed that shares of tobacco giant Philip Morris were down after reporting results. That got me humming a tune with the following lyric that I asked you to identify: "And curse Sir Walter Raleigh. He was such a stupid git!"

Many followers responded with the correct answer. "I'm So Tired" by The Beatles. But the first to do so was Sabin Woods (@clannwoods). Congrats! I'd give you everything I've got for a little peace of mind.

- The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Paul R. La Monica. Other than Time Warner, the parent of CNNMoney.com, and Abbott Laboratories, La Monica does not own positions in any individual stocks.  To top of page 
Newscribe : get free news in real time 



IMF meetings in October a cop-out

WHAT ARE WE TO DO
By TAN SRI LIN SEE-YAN

http://www.moneycontrol.com/news_image_files/IMF_190.jpg
MAYBE I am getting old.

For 20 years since the early ‘60s, I was a regular at the annual meetings of the IMF (International Monetary Fund). Those days, the annual meetings were eagerly awaited and exciting – serious systemic international monetary issues were usually taken-up and resolved in corridors outside the main meeting.

While concrete action was definitely lacking, the just concluded mid-October meetings showcased the growing influence of emerging nations, who were on the verge of winning a greater share of IMF governance power. The flocking of a record number of private bankers and fund managers to gain insights from (and access to) policymakers from Asia, Africa and Latin America offered the main excitement – a further testament to the growing importance of emerging markets where generous returns have drawn (and continues to draw) an uncomfortably heavy flow of investment monies from the United States and Europe. The mood was absorbing.

I sense the common thread was countries pursuing a national agenda in a fruitless effort to resolve major global problems. It is clear no nation is really ready to act for the greater global good.

So what else is new. The main issue on the table was currencies, two to be precise – the US dollar and the yuan. The US dollar because it is deemed to be deliberately made too weak; and the yuan because it is deliberately managed too inflexibly (despite breaking away from its fixed parity with the US dollar on June 19).

Behind the squabbles, much is at stake – how to rebalance the global economy. The outcome was predictable – global economic co-operation was in tatters and the currency war is now destined to be picked up at the G-20 meetings in November in Seoul after the weekend meetings broke-up with no resolution.

Global economic adjustment

Let’s step back. This year has gone messy.

Policy-makers had thought having rescued the world from the brink of economic disaster, they would by now be plotting an exit from stimulation rather than planning again to boost demand. IMF data pointed to an anaemic global recovery after initially experiencing rather rapid growth albeit uneven.

As a result, GDP of the rich economies is still below pre-2008 levels. Stubbornly high unemployment is making lives uncomfortable and souring politics. Euro-zone narrowly avoided igniting a second worldwide crisis in May following the “bailout” of Greece and possibly other highly indebted euro-nations at risk of sovereign default.

Continuing massive monetary easing by the United States and until recently, euro-zone flooded global markets with US dollar in particular, forcing emerging economies like Brazil, India and Thailand to take steps to protect themselves from destabilising capital inflows, including exchange market interventions. The IMF now touts capital controls. Japan intervened in the currency markets for the first time in six years to halt its yen from being further appreciated but with little success.

Against this backdrop, the Oct 12 communiqué of the International Monetary & Financial Committee of the IMF stated firmly: “While the international monetary system has proved resilient, tensions and vulnerabilities remain as a result of widening global imbalances, continued volatile capital flows, exchange rate movements, and issues related to the supply and accumulation of official reserves. Given that these issues are critically important for the effective operation of the global economy and the stability of the international monetary system, we call on the Fund to deepen its work in these areas, including in-depth studies to help increase the effectiveness of policies to manage capital flows.”

What a cop-out.

IMF’s economic counsellor Blanchard is right in stating that “achieving a strong, balanced and sustainable world recovery was never going to be easy … It requires two fundamental and difficult economic rebalancing acts.”

First, internal balancing. Recession arose because private demand collapsed; fiscal stimulus helped alleviate the fall in GDP – which has to eventually give way to fiscal consolidation; this means sustained growth needs private demand to resume and be strong enough to take over and lead.

Second, external rebalancing. Most advanced nations (notably the United States) which relied excessively on domestic demand must now restructure to depend more on net exports to grow; similarly, most emerging economies (mainly China) which depended largely on net exports must now switch to rely increasingly on domestic demand. Adjustment problems arose because both rebalancing acts moved too slowly.

On paper, what needs to be done is straightforward. The private sector of high spending, high deficit rich nations need to deleverage quickly to reach the “new normal” referred to by this year’s Per Jacobsson lecturer Mohd El-Erian (Pimco, world’s largest bond fund). At the same time, economies with robust payments surpluses and strong investment opportunities need to let their exchange rates reflect the market and appreciate; while encouraging domestic demand to expand to offset consequential drag from fall in net exports. In practice, what happened was overdone and undercooked. Aggressive monetary easing by reserve issuing rich nations (again notably US) flooded the world with cheap US dollar, pushing exchange rates of strong emerging nations to revalue (since the US dollar as the world’s anchor can’t devalue on its own). Worse, capital recipients react stubbornly to accept the needed changes and acted to deflect the changes elsewhere. Hence, the currency “wars.”

Martin Wolf (Financial Times) sums it best: US wants to inflate the rest of the world, while the latter tries to deflate the US. Frankly, the US is getting desperate. The jobless recovery is not getting better fast. Debt deleveraging is moving too slowly. Monetary policy is up against Keynes’ liquidity trap (further falls in interest rates can’t stimulate demand). Inflation is low and falling. To avoid debt-deflation, the Fed has reintroduced QE2 (quantitative easing, Mark 2). The objective is to avoid deflation. The Fed is determined to do what it takes to meet this goal. Whatever impact this has on the rest of the world is collateral damage.
However, the World Bank has since warned that surging capital inflows threaten Asia’s economic stability, and fan fears of asset bubbles.

We can already see what’s going to happen. On Oct15, the Fed chairman sent a clear message, sledged-hammered home by four phrases in italics: The Fed takes its cues from two primary objectives: the “longer-run sustainable rate of unemployment” and the “mandate-consistent inflation rate,” adding what the Fed thinks of both right now: inflation is “too low” and unemployment “too high”. This means further QE2 is a given. The Fed will turn-up its electronic printing pieces, creates loads of US dollar and buys trillions of US Treasury debt, as it is poised to do to resuscitate the US economy.

As I see it, what’s unfolding are radically different views of the world. China does not accept that its under-valued exchange rate is a significant cause of global imbalances. Beijing goes on to suggest the US external deficits and fiscal deficits are self-inflicted. The common view in the United States is Asia’s excess savings created the US current account deficits.

So the solution lies in Asia. It has come to a stage of not who blinks first, but who moves if at all and in what direction. So there is no deal. Other emerging nations are mostly caught in-between: concerned about China’s currency misalignment which undercuts their exports; but worried at the same time that fund managers armed with lots of cheap US dollar, are driving their currencies higher in search of higher yields.

No doubt, QE2 is potentially very stimulative, with expansive ramifications for the global economy. This is particularly so if it compels other central banks to follow suit in retaliation to protect their currencies’ value and ward-off inflation. But does QE2 really work? It comes out loud and clear at the IMF meetings that European central banks and politicians need lots of convincing.

Despite almost identical problems-high unemployment and very low inflation, the Fed and the ECB (European Central Bank) walk vastly different paths in their policies. The Fed chairman attributed the unemployment “to the sharp contraction in economic activity that occurred in the wake of the financial crisis and the continuing shortfall in aggregate demand since then, rather than structural factors.” The Fed is wedded to using all tools at its disposal to lower long-term rates and goose growth to reduce the jobless. Hence, more QE2.

The Europeans regard their unemployment as more structural, reflecting labour rules. Axel Weber, Germany’s central bank chief, stresses: “my reading of what happened on the (euro-zone) labour markets is that what we’ve seen in the crisis is largely structural and we need structural policies.” Who’s right? In euro-zone, there is a wide gap – from 4.3% in Austria to 20.5% in Spain.

In the United States, there is growing concern that unemployment could become structural. The term “hysteresis” is now used to describe this dynamic in which the longer you remain jobless, the more your skills erode; as you get used to being out of work, you adjust your behaviour making re-entry to work tougher. The real challenge is whether more QE spurs real investment, badly needed to bring down the jobless rate.

In the United States, this gets more complicated because of viable attractive alternatives: including use as capital-protection against US dollar debasement and inflation; and greater growth prospects in emerging countries. Nobel Laureate Stigliz thinks QE is “ineffective in reviving the US economy … won’t do much to stimulate business directly.” For the ECB: “monetary policy cannot, by itself transform a jobless recovery into a job generating recovery.”

What’s to happen?

The world appears on the brink of a nasty confrontation over exchange rates. China’s central bank chief realises the yuan value will rise but its strength must depend on gauging fundamentals like inflation, growth and employment: “China likes to use more gradual ways to realise a balance between domestic and external demands … we have a package to enhance internal demand including consumption, social security system reform, new investment in the rural areas.” But the US is seeking to impose its will via the printing press: frankly, there is no limit to the amount of US dollar the Fed can create.

At its heart, the currency war appears more like a skirmish. The big problem lies in there being no political will to really reform the international monetary system. The core of the system is unstable. Reckless risk taking can once again lead to widespread collateral damage. The communiqué after the IMF meeting spoke of countries working “co-operatively,” but says nothing on how to find agreement on the issues that divide them.

Former banker, Dr Lin is a Harvard educated economist and a British Chartered Scientist who now spends time writing, teaching & promoting the public interest.

Thursday 21 October 2010

UK’s Dreadful Debt, Saves Economy

Chancellor Addresses UK’s Dreadful Debt, Saves Economy

George Osborne MP, pictured speaking on the la...
Image via Wikipedia

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne announced yesterday in the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR), that the UK had a structural budget deficit of at £109Bn. The largest in Europe. Debt interest payments this year would amount to £43Bn.Therefore radical action to tackle the gap in the public finances was unavoidable. On this point the Chancellor is absolutely correct.

The opposition and Trade Unions can undertake as much posturing as they choose. However, without the measures taken in June. Just one month after the election. The process of steering public finances toward a sustainable path long term interest rates (the yield on gilts) would have been delayed . Gilt yields would certainly have been higher than now.

Why is it that opposition and unions fail to make a connection between debt levels, sovereign ratings, sovereign debt yields and the level of Base Rates? From the rate the Bank of England has to set, so the nation’s medium term economic fortunes will evolve.

Without the June judgments debt interest payments would also have been higher, so further increasing the deficit. This would have delayed the date when the ratio of debt to GDP stabilised.

This dismal scenario would have had wreaked carnage on private sector activity and also the longer term supply performance of the overall economy. In passing the first test of his nerve; one has to respect that the Chancellor has gone further in terms of welfare reform – Mr Osborne has maintained the downward pressure on gilt yields.

This will act as a non fiscally expansive stimulus to private sector activity. There will be no crowding out!
Still acolytes of Keynes still want their hero to see his name in the spotlight. This is, however, no time for a simplistic Y= C + I + G … model to be trotted out again.

Theory has to yield to empirical evidence. Evidence borne in the environment of economic dynamics, not dogmatic comparative statics. The data shows that periods in which the structural budget deficits have increased are generally associated with economic weakness and vice versa.

This is because in the real world increased government spending “crowds out” private sector activity. One only has to consider the UK case in the 1983-87 period, when the public finances moved into surplus whilst the economy enjoyed an extended period of above trend economic growth. The reverse case in seen in Sweden in the mid 1970’d when fiscal spending was hampering the economy despite the export success of ABBA!

This is no frivolous statement for one just has to question what happened to the Japanese economic miracle? Were it just a question of spending tax payers money Japan would have experienced an extended boom over the last 10-15 years. That was not the case. We all know about the dreadful and ongoing “lost decade”.

What is crucial for the UK and indeed any modern western market economy lies with where is the money supply. The Bank of England Governor, Dr. Mervyn King recognises this. On the road in the West Midlands he told his that there is “too little money in the economy”. Take that as an unsubtle hint that more QE in the UK is on the way. This is likely to be marked at the MPC in November.

Implications for Financial Markets
UK financial markets were little moved by the Chancellor’s statement yesterday. Be not surprised as the plan was well signaled. The macro message was barely changed from the June Budget. Yield to maturity on 10 year Gilts was unchanged at 3.00%. The 25 point rise in the FTSE 100 index to 5728 had more to do with the strong Wall Street opening than any of the detailed cuts in departmental budgets unveiled by the Chancellor.

Of course there is delight that there was no back-tracking in the CSR on the need for large cuts in planned expenditure or a shift in the emphasis from spending restraint to tax increases.

With the economic recovery likely to derive considerable support from sustained low long term interest rates and further asset purchases by the Bank of England I continue to expect equities to make solid gains over the rest of 2010 and throughout 2011.

Newscribe : get free news in real time


Getting monthly dividend payments from REITs

What is REITS and how to get monthly dividend payments from it

Personal Investing - By Ooi Kok Hwa


A LOT of investors, especially senior citizens, are hoping to get consistent and regular dividend payments from stocks.

In this article, we will look into constructing an investment portfolio, which consists of real estate investment trusts (REITs), to get monthly dividend payments.

A REIT is a real estate company that pool investor funds to purchase a portfolio of properties. Normally, it has two unique characteristics: investment in income-producing properties, with almost all of its profits distributed to investors as dividends.

From the table, based on the latest stock price (as at Oct 18) and on assumption that the same dividend payments will be paid over the next 12-month period, almost all REITs will provide about 7%-8% dividend yields. Based on our observations, most of the REITs will try to pay higher dividends over the years. Hence, if the overall economy continues to recover, some REITs may pay even higher dividends for the coming few years.

Due to them only listing at the middle of this year, we have excluded CMMT and Sunreit.

As mentioned earlier, a lot of retirees would like to invest in investment assets that can provide a consistent and regular dividend income. Therefore, we think that REITs can provide a good alternative to the retirees. 
From the table, except for Arreit, Atrium, Axreit and Hektar, all other REITs will make dividend payments twice per year. Most of them will pay their dividends in the month of February and August. Hence, if an investor would like to receive his dividends other than the above two months, he may need to diversify their REITs into holding many types of REITs.

Based on the list of REITs in the table, we can see that, except for the month of January and April, dividend payments were being made at different months throughout the year, thus investors can receive a stream of dividend income by buying into different types of REITs.

Investors can build a REIT portfolio consisting of a few REITs which make dividend payments at different months of the year. The following is just one of selection options available for consideration.


Based on the current price dated on Oct 18, assuming that the same dividends will be paid in the next 12 months, a portfolio with AMfirst, Arreit, Atrium and Hektar can generate a dividend yield of more than 8% (see table). Besides, by buying with equal amount into these four REITs, investors can get dividend payments for almost every month, except for the month of January, April, July and October.

Nevertheless, investors need to understand that the above selections are solely based on the assumption that these REITs will reward investors with the same dividends and pay during the same month as shown in the table above.

We also understand that apart from the above four REITs, some other REITs may reward investors with even higher dividend payments.


  • OoiKokHwa is an investment adviser and managing partner of MRR Consulting




  • Prostate Cancer Symptoms, Treatment & PSA Tests; Couples counseling improves sexual intimacy after prostate treatment




    Prostate Cancer Symptoms and Treatment

    By LiveScience Staff

    Prostate cancer is diagnosed in about 20 percent of men. It may be more prevalent, however, because some men never know they have it and die of other causes before the slow-growing cancer becomes a problem. 
    Prostate cancer is the most common type of cancer found in American men, after skin cancer, according to the American Cancer Society. And prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in men, after lung cancer.

    Only men have a prostate gland, which is just below the bladder, in front of the rectum. It is about the size of a walnut.

    The prostate grows from birth to adulthood. But in some men, it keeps growing. This can lead to an enlarged prostate, a non-cancerous condition called benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).  This can cause problems passing urine.

    In some cases, certain cells in the prostate become cancerous and continue multiplying.

    Scientists don't know what causes prostate cancer, officially called prostate adenocarcinoma. Risk factors include smoking, age and family history.  A diet high in red meat also plays a role, studies suggest. Black men are more likely to get prostate cancer than others.

    Experts don't agree on whether all men should be routinely tested for prostate cancer. One test involves the doctor putting a gloved finger in the rectum to feel for bumps or hard spots on the prostate. A blood test, called PSA (prostate-specific antigen) looks for signs of the disease in the blood.

    "These tests are not perfect, though," states the American Cancer Society. "Uncertain or false test results could cause confusion and worry." And, the society notes, surgery is sometimes performed or radiation therapy conducted even when a doctor is not sure how fast the cancer might spread. Importantly, prostate cancer grows slowly, according to the American Cancer Society. In fact autopsies suggest that as many as 90 percent of men over age 80 have prostate cancer, most never knowing it and dying of something else.

    "If you are older than age 70, you may opt for expectant management (also called watchful waiting) if your prostate cancer is growing slowly," according to the Mayo Clinic.

    Early and accurate diagnosis of prostate can, however, improve odds of survival, studies show.

    The American Cancer Society suggests the decision about whether to test should reside with patient and doctor after a discussion about the cancer and its risks. The talk should take place at age 50 for men who are at average risk, at age 45 for men at high risk of getting prostate cancer (African American men and men who have a father, brother, or son found to have prostate cancer before age 65), and at age 40 for men with several family members who had prostate cancer at an early age.
    Newscribe : get free news in real time



    Prostate Cancer: PSA Test (Part 2)


    -IMAGEALT-
    A breast cancer cell seen through an electron microscope.
    CREDIT: The National Cancer Institute.

    This is the second part of a three-part series on the PSA test for prostate cancer.
     
    Cancer of the prostate is one of the most common types of cancer among American men. More than 6 in 10 cases of prostate cancer cases occur in men 65 and older. Treatment for prostate cancer works best when the disease is found early.

    Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is a protein produced by the cells of the prostate gland. The PSA test measures the level of this protein in the blood. It can be detected at a low level in the blood of all adult men.

    A fundamental problem with the PSA test is that, while elevated levels can indicate the presence of cancer, they can also be caused by other problems such as benign enlargement of the prostate that comes with age, infection, inflammation and seemingly trivial events such as ejaculation and a bowel movement.

    Another major problem with the PSA test is defining what is “abnormal.” Older men usually have higher PSA measurements than younger men. African-Americans normally have slightly higher values than whites.

    PSA test results are usually reported as nanograms of PSA per milliliter (ng/mL) of blood. In the past, most doctors considered PSA values below 4.0 ng/mL as normal. However, recent research found prostate cancer in men with PSA levels below 4.0 ng/mL

    Some researchers have suggested lowering the PSA cutoff levels. For example, a number of studies have used cutoff levels of 2.5 or 3.0 ng/mL instead of  4.0 ng/mL.

    Many doctors are now using the following ranges with some variation: 0 to 2.5 ng/mL is low, 2.6 to 10 ng/mL is slightly to moderately elevated, 10 to 19.9 ng/mL is moderately elevated, and 20 ng/mL or more is significantly elevated.

    Because age is an important factor in increasing PSA levels, some doctors use age-adjusted PSA levels to determine when diagnostic tests are needed. When age-adjusted PSA levels are used, a different PSA level is defined as normal for each 10-year age group.

    Doctors who use age-adjusted levels usually suggest that men younger than age 50 should have a PSA level below 2.4 ng/mL, while a PSA level up to 6.5 ng/mL would be considered normal for men in their 70s. Doctors do not agree about the accuracy and usefulness of age-adjusted PSA levels.

    But there’s even more to make you nuts when you’re evaluating your PSA.

    PSA is either free or attached to a protein molecule. If you have a benign prostate condition, there is more free PSA. Cancer produces more of the attached form. A free PSA test that indicates prostate cancer can lead to more testing, such as a biopsy.

    PSA velocity is the change in PSA levels over time. A sharp rise in the PSA level may indicate a fast-growing cancer.

    The relationship of the PSA level to prostate size is PSA density. An elevated PSA in a man with a very large prostate is not as alarming as a high PSA reading in someone with a small prostate.

    Another problem with PSA are false test results.

    If you have an elevated PSA but no cancer, you get what is called a false positive. This type of result can lead to medical procedures, anxiety, health risks and expense. Most men with an elevated PSA don’t have cancer.

    When you have prostate cancer and your PSA test comes back in the normal range, you get a false negative. It’s important to understand that most prostate cancers are slow-growing; they can be around for many years before they cause symptoms.

    Prostate Cancer: PSA Test (Part 3)

    [This is the final part of a three-part series on the PSA test for prostate cancer.]

    Cancer of the prostate is one of the most common types of cancer among American men. More than 6 in 10 cases of prostate cancer cases occur in men 65 and older. Treatment for prostate cancer works best when the disease is found early.

    Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is a protein produced by the cells of the prostate gland. The PSA test measures the level of this protein in the blood. It can be detected at a low level in the blood of all adult men.

    A fundamental problem with the PSA test is that, while elevated levels can indicate the presence of cancer, they can also be caused by other problems such as benign enlargement of the prostate that comes with age, infection, inflammation and seemingly trivial events such as ejaculation and a bowel movement.

    PSA test results are horribly confusing and often terrifying. In the first parts of this series, we discussed the sources of much of the confusion. In this column, we’ll address the primary question about PSA: Does it save lives?

    The answer is: We don’t know. What’s worse is that we don’t know if PSA screening outweighs the risks of follow-up diagnostic tests and cancer treatments.

    For example, prostate surgery can cause incontinence and erectile dysfunction. Even a  prostate biopsy has risks because it can cause bleeding and infection.

    The PSA test can detect small tumors. However, finding a small tumor does not necessarily reduce a man’s chance of dying from prostate cancer. PSA testing may identify very slow-growing tumors that are unlikely to threaten a man’s life. Also, PSA testing may not help a man with a fast-growing or aggressive cancer that has already spread to other parts of his body before being detected.

    So, what should a man do to protect himself from prostate cancer?

    Some doctors encourage annual screenings for men older than age 50; others recommend against routine screening. However, most doctors and medical organizations agree that men should learn all they can about prostate cancer, so they can reach informed decisions.

    My personal history with PSA tests is illustrative of many of the problems men face with this type of screening. I hope that sharing it will help.

    I’m 69 years old. I’ve been having physical exams almost every year since I hit my 50s. These physicals included a PSA blood test and a digital rectal exam (DRE).  Until recently, all tests produced normal results.

    My PSA was always around 1.5. Most doctors want your PSA to be under 4. (The numbers stand for nanograms of PSA per milliliter of blood.) And, my DREs found no irregularities, just some benign enlargement.

    About three years ago, my family physician gave me a DRE and found nothing, but my PSA test came in at 2.97. My doctor told me to see a urologist for a follow-up exam because my PSA, while under 4, had increased.

    The urologist did another DRE and ordered another PSA test. The test came in at 2.96. The urologist said that he thought 2.96 was my new PSA and that I should not worry about it.

    Two years later, my PSA was still 2.96. Then, this year, it came in at 4.1.  My family physician sent me to a urologist.

    Before I went to the urologist, I did some research and learned that something as seemingly insignificant as a bowel movement could affect a PSA test. I told the urologist that I recalled going to the bathroom just before having blood drawn. He thought that this BM could have affected the test.

    Another DRE. Okay. Another blood test. The PSA was 3.3. The urologist said no biopsy was required. The increase from 2.96 to 3.3 was not a cause for concern.

    What now? I’m tempted to forget about PSA tests, but I’ll probably have another in a year.
    The Healthy Geezer column publishes each Monday on LiveScience. If you would like to ask a question, please write fred@healthygeezer.com. © 2010 by Fred Cicetti.

    Newscribe : get free news in real time  




    Couples counseling improves sexual intimacy after prostate treatment

    September 25, 2011
    Couples counseling improves sexual intimacy after prostate treatmentEnlarge

    This is Leslie Schover, Ph.D, a professor in MD Anderson's Department of Behavioral Science. Credit: Image courtesy of MD Anderson 

    VIDEO: Hope for Restored Sexual Function for Prostate Cancer Patients and their Partners
    VIDEO: Sexual Counseling for Couples after Prostate Cancer Treatment
    PODCAST: Listen to expert Leslie Schover discuss results of face-to-face and internet-based counseling.

    Prostate cancer survivors and their partners experience improved sexual satisfaction and function after couples counseling, according to research at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. The article, published in the September issue of Cancer, a journal of the American Cancer Society, revealed both Internet-based sexual counseling and traditional sex therapy are equally effective in improving sexual outcomes. Couples on a waiting list for counseling did not improve.

    Men experienced a marked improvement in their sexual function for up to one year, and women who started out with a improved significantly with counseling.

    "We know that one of the crucial factors in a man's having a good sexual outcome after treatment is a partner who also wants their sex life to get better," said Leslie Schover, Ph.D, a professor in MD Anderson's Department of , lead investigator on the study and author of the paper, "A Randomized Trial of Internet-Based Versus Traditional Sexual Counseling for Couples After Localized ." "Women's issues such as ill health, post-menopausal and lack of desire for sex can be a major barrier in achieving satisfactory sexual outcomes."

    Leslie Schover explains the significance of results in randomized trial incorporating couples counseling for prostate cancer patients and their partners. Credit: Video courtesy of MD Anderson

    CAREss (Counseling About Regaining Erections and Sexual Satisfaction) randomized 115 heterosexual prostate cancer survivors who were experiencing erectile dysfunction and their partners into three groups: a wait list group that received delayed counseling, a face-to-face counseling group, and a group that received an Internet-based sexual counseling program.

    After three months, the wait-list couples were randomized into either the face-to face or the Internet-based counseling group. A second Internet-based group of 71 couples was added to boost the numbers and allow researchers to analyze the relationship between extent of website use and outcomes.

    Couples were assessed before and after the three-month wait-list period, again after counseling, and also at six and 12-month follow-ups. In addition to web-based education and exercises, participants in the Internet-based group received feedback from their counselor through email.

    Treating the Body and the Mind

    Many prostate cancer survivors are as concerned about loss of desire and lack of satisfying orgasms as they are about erectile dysfunction. Men in this study improved on most dimensions of sexual function. From baseline to one year, men improved significantly in erectile function, but also in orgasmic function, intercourse satisfaction and overall . Sexual desire remained stable.

    Leslie Schover discusses results of face-to-face and internet-based counseling. Credit: MD Anderson

    Some patients and/or partners are too anxious about sexual issues to seek help from a therapist face-to-face. An internet-based program that offers online tools and surveys, as well as interaction with the therapist by email, gives them a less threatening option. "Not only do men often use the internet to search for information on sex, but prostate cancer patients consider the web a valuable resource for information on the impact of treatment on sex," said Schover.

    Another advantage of web-based counseling for couples is the potentially lower cost. While many insurance companies cover medical treatment of erection problems after , the cost of sex therapy is often not reimbursed. Already burdened with co-payments for their cancer treatment, many couples cannot afford additional costs associated with mental health care.