AFEW isolated facts and statistics were all that I knew about cancer of the bladder until I met a patient named Mr. John Jones. I knew that cancer of the bladder accounted for 3 percent of the total cancer death rate, and that these deaths resulted from ureteral obstruction, infection, uremia, and metastases. I recalled that this disease was more common in men, and that treatment varied with the location, type, size, and degree of infiltration of the tumor. I recognized, also, that treatment was individualized according to the patient's age and symptoms. I felt very inadequate as I admitted Mr. Jones-a 56-year old man-for a cystectomy. He gave the impression of being a proud individual whose virility and health were of prime importance to him. No previous illness had limited his activities for more than a day, and now he faced major surgery. His voice trembled as he described his alarm when he discovered blood in his urine, and suffered from frequent, painful urination. After several weeks of self-diagnosis, home remedies, and mounting apprehension, he concluded that his condition warranted medical attention. He saw his physician who immediately advised a urological consultation. A cystoscopic examination with pyelography and a biopsy of the trigonal lesion established the diagnosis of cancer. The x-ray series were negative for metastases. Fulguration, segmental resection, deep x-ray therapy, or radon seed implantation were considered inade-