In 2004, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) published a Grade D recommendation for both testicular self-examination (TSE) and clinical evaluation to screen for testicular cancer in asymptomatic males. This review committee reaffirmed these recommendations in 2009 and again in 2011 (Testicular Cancer: Screening Release Date: April 2011. Final Update Summary: Testicular Cancer: Screening. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. September 2016). The 2011 USPSTF review found no significant evidence that would warrant a change from the last full review in 2004. We believe that the USPSTF erred in its assessments. As acknowledged in the task force report, testicular cancer is not believed to be preventable, and treatment of early detected testicular cancer is generally associated with very favorable outcomes; it is our belief therefore that every encouragement should be given to early detection. We are therefore requesting that the USPSTF review the D rating for testicular examination, both in a clinical setting and as self-examination. We are requesting this, as recent studies and public health warrant a change in grade. The new studies build on earlier studies that support the benefits of regular screening by individuals and their physicians. Further, and equally important, we believe that the current grade and attendant information confuses men and boys about the importance of self-care and wellness and continues to inadvertently reinforce negative cultural attitudes. We believe that adjusting the rating to a Grade B is both warranted and necessary.

State Public Health Departments (SPHDs) provide critical access to health outreach and services. Important strides have been made in these areas for broad ranges of populations; however, many men's health advocates believe that services to achieve similar goals for men and boys have inadvertently declined creating an unintended, but remediatable, service and health disparity. In 2008, the Men's Health Network completed a benchmarking survey of SPHDs to investigate the validity of concerns about this disparity, characterize the range and nature of existing SPHD resources for men and boys, and establish a survey methodology. Validated data were obtained from 49 states and Washington, D.C. Analysis indicates that there are few state resources dedicated to the health of men and boys, such resources are significantly less than for other populations, few states have population-specific information for men and boys, and most such information was subsumed in women's health information sites. This study validates concerns that a health disparity has developed; highlights the need for better planning, resourcing, and outreach specific to men and boys; and indicates the imperative to perform a regular comprehensive environmental scan to guide policy.

This survey evaluated resources available to men and boys at the state level including state public health departments (SPHDs), other state agencies, and governor’s offices. Most of the resources and programs are found in the SPHDs and these administer state-initiated and federally funded health programs to provide services and protection to a broad range of populations; however, many men’s health advocates believe that SPHDs have failed to create equivalent services for men and boys, inadvertently creating a health disparity. Men’s Health Network conducts a survey of state resources, including those found in SPHDs, every 2 years to identify resources available for men and women, determine the extent of any disparity, and establish a relationship with SPHD officials. Data were obtained from all 50 states and Washington, D.C. An analysis of the 2016 survey data indicates that there are few resources allocated and a lack of readily available information on health and preventive care created specifically for men and boys. The data observed that most health information intended for men and boys was scarce among states or oftentimes included on websites that primarily focused on women’s health. A potential result of this is a loss of engagement with appropriate health-care providers due to a lack of information. This study continues to validate the disparity between health outcomes for women and men. It continues to highlight the need for better resource allocation, outreach, and health programs specifically tailored to men and boys in order to improve overall community well-being.