9 ms·

Start colon cancer screening at 45, not 50, American Cancer Society urges

93 points by mudil 8y ago

francisofascii 8y ago
Link to the research paper: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.3322/caac.21457 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.3322/caac.21457 and press release: http://pressroom.cancer.org/releases?item=770 http://pressroom.cancer.org/releases?item=770
JacobJans 8y ago
Bowel disease is becoming a widespread problem in the United States, and is a big factor behind the increasing popularity of specialized diets such as The Whole 30 Diet, Keto, Paleo, gluten free, etc. Many people's bowels are not happy, and they're looking for answers by modifying their diets. The increase is colon cancer among younger people is likely a result of the increased bowel disease among younger people. The medical establishment is not really equipped for handle this rise in disease; much of the focus is on the development of expensive drugs that are basically cash-cows for pharmaceutical companies. For example, Remicade costs up to $20,000 a month -- and the market of potential users of it is many millions of people. The financial math for researching non-drug treatments simply pales in comparison to the potential payoff for successfully developing a drug, even if the results are far-inferior to alternative approaches.
- ch4s3 8y ago
  There is an incentive that people often forget when it comes to drugs vs. lifestyle interventions, which is patient compliance. If a drug is < $50/mo out of pocket, patient compliance is very high. However, prescribed lifestyle and diet changes have very low compliance. If a doctor wants their patients to get better or at least feel better, they'll end up prescribing drugs to a lot of them because most of them aren't going to stick to a dietary change.
  - JacobJans 8y ago
    I know that more than most, from very personal experience. However, think about it this way: Imagine investing $20,000 a month in supporting compliance, instead of Remicade. For dietary interventions, this could mean a nutritionist with weekly meetings, occasional meal-prep provided by a personal chef, and even weekly therapy sessions. This would still likely be cheaper than $20,00 a month. We're willing to make this kind of investment with drugs, often without batting an eye. Why not with other interventions?
    - sgc 8y ago
      This. Someone just needs to know how to wrap it in a package that still makes some central big business a ton of money and it will take right off by itself !). Some large health club chain needs to work on getting certified as a medical care provider and developing package products. Would probably need to partner with a supplement manufacturer with deep pockets to have any chance of success.
      - ch4s3 8y ago
        Plenty of gyms offer PT and have registered dietitians, you have to convince insurance companies to pay for it.
        sgc 8y ago
        Yes, that was my point. You need a behemoth of a special interest to convince anyone with power to make it happen.
      - JacobJans 8y ago
        It's not just wrapping it in a package. There should be a level of investment in research proving the effectiveness of such alternative treatments, including large studies similar to the types of studies that drugs are required to have. However, this is yet another huge barrier, and our cost incentives simply do not align.
    - ch4s3 8y ago
- vonmoltke 8y ago
  > For example, Remicade costs up to $20,000 a month -- and the market of potential users of it is many millions of people. That is the annual cost: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infliximab https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infliximab
  - JacobJans 8y ago
    Those numbers are from 2007. The prices have increased dramatically. (Because, why not? They can get away with it.) Of course, it varies, depending on "a number of factors" > Drug cost was $19,727.34. Total for 1 infusion is $22,278.02. https://www.howmuchisit.org/remicade-infusion-cost/ https://www.howmuchisit.org/remicade-infusion-cost/
    - LinuxBender 8y ago
      I have a friend that requires this shot. He has to stay unemployed so that the government will pay for it.
      - namibj 8y ago
        Well, teach/guide him to do open source development? That way he can even do good, and, possibly there might be a charity of some sort that loans the necessary equipment for him to do the work, and as long as he doesn't own it/can't use it for his own good (might be considered as taxable income then), he could probably get away with it. Don't feel bad. UBI is there, just with a shitload of bureaucracy around it.
        LinuxBender 8y ago
        He rebuilds cars. He has no interest in learning how to code. That said, he does really good work rebuilding and restoring old cars for people. I have seen him contribute to society in other ways, including standing up for a small business owner that was being bullied by a local thug that is the son of a Sheriff.
    - vonmoltke 8y ago
- maxerickson 8y ago
  Removal of polyps during a colonoscopy dramatically lowers the chances of developing cancer. That's part of why they increase the frequency of screening when they find some. Of course it is an existing procedure and doesn't especially need to be researched (but it also costs a fair amount).
  - lloyd-christmas 8y ago
    > but it also costs a fair amount It doesn't cost anything more than the colonoscopy. It's required by the ACA to be included in a colonoscopy.
    - maxerickson 8y ago
      Yes, and paying $4,000 for people to get screenings is an actual cost that shows up in premiums. (I was talking about colonscopies themselves costing a fair bit; of course all told they are preferable to catching and treating cancer later).
jbob2000 8y ago
"Stop eating so much red meat" - What the American Cancer Society should be urging. https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/red-meat-and-colon-cancer https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/red-meat-a...
- mtgx 8y ago
  I think lack of fiber could be a factor, too. White bread has almost no fiber.
  - kristallizer1 8y ago
    Neither do meat, dairy, and other animal products.
- itamarst 8y ago
  According to that article this will decrease your risk by... 25%. Which is nice, but not massive on an individual level.
  - throw_away 8y ago
    Quitting smoking only drops your risk of lung cancer by 21%: https://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/news/20080506/quit-smoking-death-risk-drops-fast https://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/news/20080506/quit-s...
  - sgc 8y ago
    As someone who loves red meat, I find 25% extremely significant on a personal level.
    - ams6110 8y ago
      The lifetime risk of developing colon or rectal cancer is about 4.5%. Assuming research cited above is correct (a big assumption, considering the history of medical research) and red meat consumption increases that 25%, your risk is now about 5.5%. Edit: I misread; the claim is in the other direction, that cutting red meat reduces your risk. So 4.5% becomes 3.4%
ytNumbers 8y ago
Always check the online reviews before going to any doctor. A bad doctor with zero ethics might be tempted to do a "rush" job on you. If you want to know what that experience would be like, click the link below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmW9Pl7R1dc&t=238s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmW9Pl7R1dc&t=238s
- nradov 8y ago
  Online reviews by patients are almost always useless and have near zero correlation with actual evidence-based medicine care quality. Studies have shown that patient satisfaction is most impacted by whether the doctor writes a prescription, regardless of whether the patient really needs one. Apparently patients like to feel they're getting something for their money.
  - heymijo 8y ago
    Would you mind citing your sources?
    - nradov 8y ago
      Here you go: https://www.bmj.com/content/315/7117/1211.short https://www.bmj.com/content/315/7117/1211.short
      - musage 8y ago
        That's in relation to "acute lower respiratory symptoms". To generalize this to "people want a prescription" isn't even valid, but there's even less to connection to "severe pain caused by the doctor rushing it". That guy isn't complaining about too little being done, but too much being done in too few minutes. I've personally seen this, from the nurse perspective, only with a tracheoscopy. The patient screamed so loud people were rushing to the windows of the dental clinic across the street. That's nearly 20 years ago and I still remember it, I still know the weather and time of day and what wing of the building it was in. Anyway, I'm not sure what evidence-based quality [sic] you're thinking of, but if it doesn't involve any testimonies at all, it's probably worthless. I wouldn't know, since you didn't post a even shred of evidence for > Online reviews by patients are almost always useless and have near zero correlation with actual evidence-based medicine care quality. And you also just say "Online review", as if that video was just some anonymous oneliner in a textarea. While I'm sure there's something to be said about the accuracy of "online reviews", I very much doubt one could defend a more relevant phrasing such as > Testimonies by patients are almost always useless and have near zero correlation with assessment of medical care quality based on evidence other than patient testimony.
Ensorceled 8y ago
Also, can we pass a law that if the person doing a screening colonoscopy finds "1 polyp" that turns the diagnostic into a far more profitable "treatment" they lose their medical license? And can we make that law retroactive?
- ch4s3 8y ago
  > can we make that law retroactive No, we can't make laws retroactive, at least not in the US, and why would you want that anyway? *edit for formatting
  - wafflebear 8y ago
    Only criminal laws are prohibited from being retroactive, because the Supreme Court works in mysterious ways.
    - ch4s3 8y ago
      I assumed the parent meant a criminal penalty. But, I still don't understand why anyone would want the government to have such a capricious legislative power.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- riahi 8y ago
  So you want a second, diagnostic colonoscopy to remove the polyp rather than converting the screening into a diagnostic at time of service? This would require another bowel prep, another round of anesthesia, and even more operative time, and yes, another colonoscopy charge.
  - Ensorceled 8y ago
    The point is, there sometimes isn’t a polyp, they take a chunk out of your bowel and say the did a polyp removal.
Proven 8y ago
Why not at 25?
devdrew 8y ago
With enough money, I'm sure a whitepaper can be written to support getting Cancer screenings at 20. If you make most of your money off removing polyps then the way to increase revenue is to get more people screenings.
- lloyd-christmas 8y ago
  Not everything is a conspiracy. Colon and rectal cancers have increased 51% among adults under age 50 since 1994, the cancer society said. That isn't a white paper. > If you make most of your money off removing polyps Preventative medicine is cheap. In accordance with the ACA, polyp removal is guaranteed to be covered if discovered during a colonoscopy. Don't want it removed? Maybe it becomes cancerous. Now you've moved on to curative care. Cancer medications can cost over $100k. Surgery to remove the colon is $35k+. These are just small pieces of a larger puzzle including other treatments, readmission risks for related illnesses, etc. Now you're done all your treatment and you've moved on to palliative care. If treatment succeeded, you have costs associated with the constant infections related to a colostomy bag. If the treatment fails, now you have the costs associated with end-of-life care. If you want your conspiracy to hold some weight, they would be pushing the age in the other direction.
  - gitgacutils 8y ago
    > Colon and rectal cancers have increased 51% among adults under age 50 since 1994, the cancer society said. Percentages can be deceiving. 51% off what base? Was it 100 people in 1994 and now it is 151? > Preventative medicine is cheap. Sure, if the odds of you getting it is high enough. If the odds of getting it is low, does it make sense for tens of millions of adults to get invasive and potentially dangerous check ups? Not everything is a conspiracy, but we do know that "institutions" love to fear monger to get more money, funding and exposure. > If you want your conspiracy to hold some weight, they would be pushing the age in the other direction. Not necessarily. Collecting $200 from 10 million people each for an annual checkup vs the cost of a few thousands with colon cancer. There is a reason why businesses ( like nflx and amzn ) love the subscription model.
ams6110 8y ago
tl; dr: experts disagree.
rajadigopula 8y ago
Or start including fermented foods like Sauerkraut at least a day in the meals and keep away from junk food. Prevention is always better than cure.
simulate 8y ago
Annual home stool tests (FIT) mentioned in this article can be as effective as colonoscopies. My provider, Kaiser-Permanente mails a kit once a year and I mail it back so no appointment is necessary and it's a lot less invasive. 538 wrote a good piece about the advantages of FIT vs. colonoscopy: "You Could Skip Your Colonoscopy If You’re Willing To Collect Your Poop" https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/you-could-skip-your-colonoscopy-if-youre-willing-to-collect-your-poop/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/you-could-skip-your-col...
- dandigangi 8y ago
  Thank you for sharing. I tried to get something going at just under 30 years old and insurance wouldn't even consider it.
- dghughes 8y ago
  I agree FIT kits are great especially to ease your mind if you're worried about colon cancer. But the FIT kit can be difficult to use with two main problems. It's like bobbing for apples only much less fun. You can't urinate or it ruins the sample. I don't know about you guys but I find it almost impossible to avoid urinating when defecating. And with that happy mental image have a nice day everyone! And remember to eat lots of fibre.
  - dv_dt 8y ago
    Still seems better than a colonoscopy experience if it's as effective a screen.
  - lambda 8y ago
    > I find it almost impossible to avoid urinating when defecating Can't you just urinate first, flush, and then defecate?
    - ASalazarMX 8y ago
      Fishing out poop from the toilet? No. Buy latex gloves and poop in your hand like every self-respecting primate.
bedhead 8y ago
One of my best friends just got diagnosed with colon cancer at 38. Surgery last week, hasn’t even gotten the pathology report yet. Anecdotal I admit but when it hits close to home you see things a little differently.
Nihilartikel 8y ago
Datapoint: At 36 I noticed small amounts of blood in my stool intermittently over the course of a year and told my GP. He said it was probably nothing (hemorrhoids) but that I could get a sigmoidoscopy if I was really concerned. I did, and right around-the-corner was a big old polyp. The Gastroenterologist was surprised. Had 3 more removed in the following colonoscopy. None cancerous, thankfully, but who knows how much longer that would have lasted. I should also note that bleeding is not a very common symptom. Usually there are none, so I got lucky. He said that my bowels were pretty bad looking, like a 70 year old. This surprised me since I thought I had a pretty good diet for most of my adult life, and very good in my 30s. I had a garbage diet as a child and teenager though. I really can't guess what's driving the trend of bowel disease in younger and younger patients, but I am following news on it with great interest.
- orev 8y ago
  You can’t guess? > I had a garbage diet as a child and teenager though.
squozzer 8y ago
The article doesn't mention the percentage of colonscopies among 50-year-olds that find something bad. If say it was 30%, that sounds like a great reason to start sooner. 5 - 10% maybe not so much.
sharadov 8y ago
"Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."

93 points by mudil 8y ago

Link to the research paper: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.3322/caac.21457 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.3322/caac.21457 and press release: http://pressroom.cancer.org/releases?item=770 http://pressroom.cancer.org/releases?item=770

JacobJans 8y ago

Bowel disease is becoming a widespread problem in the United States, and is a big factor behind the increasing popularity of specialized diets such as The Whole 30 Diet, Keto, Paleo, gluten free, etc. Many people's bowels are not happy, and they're looking for answers by modifying their diets. The increase is colon cancer among younger people is likely a result of the increased bowel disease among younger people. The medical establishment is not really equipped for handle this rise in disease; much of the focus is on the development of expensive drugs that are basically cash-cows for pharmaceutical companies. For example, Remicade costs up to $20,000 a month -- and the market of potential users of it is many millions of people. The financial math for researching non-drug treatments simply pales in comparison to the potential payoff for successfully developing a drug, even if the results are far-inferior to alternative approaches.

ch4s3 8y ago
There is an incentive that people often forget when it comes to drugs vs. lifestyle interventions, which is patient compliance. If a drug is < $50/mo out of pocket, patient compliance is very high. However, prescribed lifestyle and diet changes have very low compliance. If a doctor wants their patients to get better or at least feel better, they'll end up prescribing drugs to a lot of them because most of them aren't going to stick to a dietary change.
- JacobJans 8y ago
  I know that more than most, from very personal experience. However, think about it this way: Imagine investing $20,000 a month in supporting compliance, instead of Remicade. For dietary interventions, this could mean a nutritionist with weekly meetings, occasional meal-prep provided by a personal chef, and even weekly therapy sessions. This would still likely be cheaper than $20,00 a month. We're willing to make this kind of investment with drugs, often without batting an eye. Why not with other interventions?
  - sgc 8y ago
    This. Someone just needs to know how to wrap it in a package that still makes some central big business a ton of money and it will take right off by itself !). Some large health club chain needs to work on getting certified as a medical care provider and developing package products. Would probably need to partner with a supplement manufacturer with deep pockets to have any chance of success.
    - ch4s3 8y ago
      Plenty of gyms offer PT and have registered dietitians, you have to convince insurance companies to pay for it.
      - sgc 8y ago
        Yes, that was my point. You need a behemoth of a special interest to convince anyone with power to make it happen.
    - JacobJans 8y ago
      It's not just wrapping it in a package. There should be a level of investment in research proving the effectiveness of such alternative treatments, including large studies similar to the types of studies that drugs are required to have. However, this is yet another huge barrier, and our cost incentives simply do not align.
  - ch4s3 8y ago
vonmoltke 8y ago
> For example, Remicade costs up to $20,000 a month -- and the market of potential users of it is many millions of people. That is the annual cost: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infliximab https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infliximab
- JacobJans 8y ago
  Those numbers are from 2007. The prices have increased dramatically. (Because, why not? They can get away with it.) Of course, it varies, depending on "a number of factors" > Drug cost was $19,727.34. Total for 1 infusion is $22,278.02. https://www.howmuchisit.org/remicade-infusion-cost/ https://www.howmuchisit.org/remicade-infusion-cost/
  - LinuxBender 8y ago
    I have a friend that requires this shot. He has to stay unemployed so that the government will pay for it.
    - namibj 8y ago
      Well, teach/guide him to do open source development? That way he can even do good, and, possibly there might be a charity of some sort that loans the necessary equipment for him to do the work, and as long as he doesn't own it/can't use it for his own good (might be considered as taxable income then), he could probably get away with it. Don't feel bad. UBI is there, just with a shitload of bureaucracy around it.
      - LinuxBender 8y ago
        He rebuilds cars. He has no interest in learning how to code. That said, he does really good work rebuilding and restoring old cars for people. I have seen him contribute to society in other ways, including standing up for a small business owner that was being bullied by a local thug that is the son of a Sheriff.
  - vonmoltke 8y ago
maxerickson 8y ago
Removal of polyps during a colonoscopy dramatically lowers the chances of developing cancer. That's part of why they increase the frequency of screening when they find some. Of course it is an existing procedure and doesn't especially need to be researched (but it also costs a fair amount).
- lloyd-christmas 8y ago
  > but it also costs a fair amount It doesn't cost anything more than the colonoscopy. It's required by the ACA to be included in a colonoscopy.
  - maxerickson 8y ago
    Yes, and paying $4,000 for people to get screenings is an actual cost that shows up in premiums. (I was talking about colonscopies themselves costing a fair bit; of course all told they are preferable to catching and treating cancer later).

jbob2000 8y ago

"Stop eating so much red meat" - What the American Cancer Society should be urging. https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/red-meat-and-colon-cancer https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/red-meat-a...

mtgx 8y ago
I think lack of fiber could be a factor, too. White bread has almost no fiber.
- kristallizer1 8y ago
  Neither do meat, dairy, and other animal products.
itamarst 8y ago
According to that article this will decrease your risk by... 25%. Which is nice, but not massive on an individual level.
- throw_away 8y ago
  Quitting smoking only drops your risk of lung cancer by 21%: https://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/news/20080506/quit-smoking-death-risk-drops-fast https://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/news/20080506/quit-s...
- sgc 8y ago
  As someone who loves red meat, I find 25% extremely significant on a personal level.
  - ams6110 8y ago
    The lifetime risk of developing colon or rectal cancer is about 4.5%. Assuming research cited above is correct (a big assumption, considering the history of medical research) and red meat consumption increases that 25%, your risk is now about 5.5%. Edit: I misread; the claim is in the other direction, that cutting red meat reduces your risk. So 4.5% becomes 3.4%

ytNumbers 8y ago

Always check the online reviews before going to any doctor. A bad doctor with zero ethics might be tempted to do a "rush" job on you. If you want to know what that experience would be like, click the link below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmW9Pl7R1dc&t=238s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmW9Pl7R1dc&t=238s

nradov 8y ago
Online reviews by patients are almost always useless and have near zero correlation with actual evidence-based medicine care quality. Studies have shown that patient satisfaction is most impacted by whether the doctor writes a prescription, regardless of whether the patient really needs one. Apparently patients like to feel they're getting something for their money.
- heymijo 8y ago
  Would you mind citing your sources?
  - nradov 8y ago
    Here you go: https://www.bmj.com/content/315/7117/1211.short https://www.bmj.com/content/315/7117/1211.short
    - musage 8y ago
      That's in relation to "acute lower respiratory symptoms". To generalize this to "people want a prescription" isn't even valid, but there's even less to connection to "severe pain caused by the doctor rushing it". That guy isn't complaining about too little being done, but too much being done in too few minutes. I've personally seen this, from the nurse perspective, only with a tracheoscopy. The patient screamed so loud people were rushing to the windows of the dental clinic across the street. That's nearly 20 years ago and I still remember it, I still know the weather and time of day and what wing of the building it was in. Anyway, I'm not sure what evidence-based quality [sic] you're thinking of, but if it doesn't involve any testimonies at all, it's probably worthless. I wouldn't know, since you didn't post a even shred of evidence for > Online reviews by patients are almost always useless and have near zero correlation with actual evidence-based medicine care quality. And you also just say "Online review", as if that video was just some anonymous oneliner in a textarea. While I'm sure there's something to be said about the accuracy of "online reviews", I very much doubt one could defend a more relevant phrasing such as > Testimonies by patients are almost always useless and have near zero correlation with assessment of medical care quality based on evidence other than patient testimony.

Ensorceled 8y ago

Also, can we pass a law that if the person doing a screening colonoscopy finds "1 polyp" that turns the diagnostic into a far more profitable "treatment" they lose their medical license? And can we make that law retroactive?

ch4s3 8y ago
> can we make that law retroactive No, we can't make laws retroactive, at least not in the US, and why would you want that anyway? *edit for formatting
- wafflebear 8y ago
  Only criminal laws are prohibited from being retroactive, because the Supreme Court works in mysterious ways.
  - ch4s3 8y ago
    I assumed the parent meant a criminal penalty. But, I still don't understand why anyone would want the government to have such a capricious legislative power.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
riahi 8y ago
So you want a second, diagnostic colonoscopy to remove the polyp rather than converting the screening into a diagnostic at time of service? This would require another bowel prep, another round of anesthesia, and even more operative time, and yes, another colonoscopy charge.
- Ensorceled 8y ago
  The point is, there sometimes isn’t a polyp, they take a chunk out of your bowel and say the did a polyp removal.

Proven 8y ago

Why not at 25?

devdrew 8y ago

With enough money, I'm sure a whitepaper can be written to support getting Cancer screenings at 20. If you make most of your money off removing polyps then the way to increase revenue is to get more people screenings.

lloyd-christmas 8y ago
Not everything is a conspiracy. Colon and rectal cancers have increased 51% among adults under age 50 since 1994, the cancer society said. That isn't a white paper. > If you make most of your money off removing polyps Preventative medicine is cheap. In accordance with the ACA, polyp removal is guaranteed to be covered if discovered during a colonoscopy. Don't want it removed? Maybe it becomes cancerous. Now you've moved on to curative care. Cancer medications can cost over $100k. Surgery to remove the colon is $35k+. These are just small pieces of a larger puzzle including other treatments, readmission risks for related illnesses, etc. Now you're done all your treatment and you've moved on to palliative care. If treatment succeeded, you have costs associated with the constant infections related to a colostomy bag. If the treatment fails, now you have the costs associated with end-of-life care. If you want your conspiracy to hold some weight, they would be pushing the age in the other direction.
- gitgacutils 8y ago
  > Colon and rectal cancers have increased 51% among adults under age 50 since 1994, the cancer society said. Percentages can be deceiving. 51% off what base? Was it 100 people in 1994 and now it is 151? > Preventative medicine is cheap. Sure, if the odds of you getting it is high enough. If the odds of getting it is low, does it make sense for tens of millions of adults to get invasive and potentially dangerous check ups? Not everything is a conspiracy, but we do know that "institutions" love to fear monger to get more money, funding and exposure. > If you want your conspiracy to hold some weight, they would be pushing the age in the other direction. Not necessarily. Collecting $200 from 10 million people each for an annual checkup vs the cost of a few thousands with colon cancer. There is a reason why businesses ( like nflx and amzn ) love the subscription model.

ams6110 8y ago

tl; dr: experts disagree.

rajadigopula 8y ago

Or start including fermented foods like Sauerkraut at least a day in the meals and keep away from junk food. Prevention is always better than cure.

simulate 8y ago

Annual home stool tests (FIT) mentioned in this article can be as effective as colonoscopies. My provider, Kaiser-Permanente mails a kit once a year and I mail it back so no appointment is necessary and it's a lot less invasive. 538 wrote a good piece about the advantages of FIT vs. colonoscopy: "You Could Skip Your Colonoscopy If You’re Willing To Collect Your Poop" https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/you-could-skip-your-colonoscopy-if-youre-willing-to-collect-your-poop/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/you-could-skip-your-col...

dandigangi 8y ago
Thank you for sharing. I tried to get something going at just under 30 years old and insurance wouldn't even consider it.
dghughes 8y ago
I agree FIT kits are great especially to ease your mind if you're worried about colon cancer. But the FIT kit can be difficult to use with two main problems. It's like bobbing for apples only much less fun. You can't urinate or it ruins the sample. I don't know about you guys but I find it almost impossible to avoid urinating when defecating. And with that happy mental image have a nice day everyone! And remember to eat lots of fibre.
- dv_dt 8y ago
  Still seems better than a colonoscopy experience if it's as effective a screen.
- lambda 8y ago
  > I find it almost impossible to avoid urinating when defecating Can't you just urinate first, flush, and then defecate?
  - ASalazarMX 8y ago
    Fishing out poop from the toilet? No. Buy latex gloves and poop in your hand like every self-respecting primate.

bedhead 8y ago

One of my best friends just got diagnosed with colon cancer at 38. Surgery last week, hasn’t even gotten the pathology report yet. Anecdotal I admit but when it hits close to home you see things a little differently.

Nihilartikel 8y ago

Datapoint: At 36 I noticed small amounts of blood in my stool intermittently over the course of a year and told my GP. He said it was probably nothing (hemorrhoids) but that I could get a sigmoidoscopy if I was really concerned. I did, and right around-the-corner was a big old polyp. The Gastroenterologist was surprised. Had 3 more removed in the following colonoscopy. None cancerous, thankfully, but who knows how much longer that would have lasted. I should also note that bleeding is not a very common symptom. Usually there are none, so I got lucky. He said that my bowels were pretty bad looking, like a 70 year old. This surprised me since I thought I had a pretty good diet for most of my adult life, and very good in my 30s. I had a garbage diet as a child and teenager though. I really can't guess what's driving the trend of bowel disease in younger and younger patients, but I am following news on it with great interest.

orev 8y ago
You can’t guess? > I had a garbage diet as a child and teenager though.

squozzer 8y ago

The article doesn't mention the percentage of colonscopies among 50-year-olds that find something bad. If say it was 30%, that sounds like a great reason to start sooner. 5 - 10% maybe not so much.

sharadov 8y ago

"Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."