Interesting....I actually think the testing should be done at 40 and not 50, and certainly sooner for those who are children of colon cancer parents who have died from it. I do know of a teen whose father and grandmother had died from colon cancer....her biopsies were positive and colon removed at age 15.

My husband had his first scope at 55 and is due this year for the next...he did have a polyp removed but no precancer. His mom had colon cancer, but didn't die from it. We don't know if it had spread at the time of her death, however.

They say the same about mammograms. Just because the stats say one thing, subjectively it has no impact on who will get it and possibly die from it. If it's the best tool in the moment, why not use it?

q

the article said...
To that point, the task force website displays a graphic showing the number of colon cancer deaths averted per 1,000 screened. You might notice that the number of deaths averted by the various methods only differ from 22 to 23 to 24, with colonoscopy the highest, but not by much.

There doesn't seem to be much difference in effectiveness between the different methods of colon cancer screening, but there is a big difference in costs especially if you include anesthesia, etc. I don't know anything about the Canadian health system but I wonder if the difference in recommendations between the U.S. and Canada is how doctors are compensated.