Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by MarathonMike, Mar 26, 2019.
Yeah, fuck all that.
I had a colonoscopy a dozen years ago when I turned 50. I was not turned on at all.
A homosexual I knew at work told me he loved getting colonoscopy and some guy shoving a long instrument up his caboose.
I hear you, and there is also the risk of them doing damage. The whole procedure seems bizarre and unnecessary when you have non invasive alternatives.
The advantage to the colonoscopy is that if they see something suspicious, they can take a sample for a biopsy right there. In a non-invasive procedure, if they see something suspicious, they still have to shove the scope afterwards. The biopsy is a necessary kind of thing for a cancer diagnosis.
Going straight to a colonoscopy cuts out a step.
Colonoscopy is the way to go.
Yeah, assk anyone.
I was considering Cologuard since there is no prep and it does a good job of detecting colon cancer.
For me, it was an easy decision. Since I had a family history of colon cancer it was not recommend. However, even if that was not the case, I don't think I would use cologuard and here's why.
A colonoscopy does not just detect colon cancer but it prevents it. Polyps are rather slow growing and pre-cancerous polyps are easy to spot and remove. So if the gastroenterologyist does not remove any polyps, you most probably will not need to repeat the procedure for 10 years. It's recommended that you repeat cologuard every 3 years. If you get a positive result for a cologuard, then you have to have a colonoscopy.
One of the first questions patients ask regarding Cologuard is if it is as effective as a colonoscopy. Unfortunately, the answer no. Colonoscopies are the gold standard in detecting colorectal cancer as well as precancerous lesions through the use of a camera-enabled scope; this has been proven over decades of studies of experienced Gastroenterologists’ cases. This allows a gastroenterologist to clearly view the large bowel and distal part of the small bowel for signs of polyps or cancerous lesions. If any are seen, biopsies for further examination can be taken at the same time. In all, colonoscopies can detect about 95 percent of all colorectal cancers and advanced precancerous polyps.
Cologuard, on the other hand, has no visual component and instead tests DNA from stool samples for the presence of abnormal cancerous or precancerous cells. To date, studies have shown that Cologuard detects 92 percent of colorectal cancers and only 42 percent of precancerous polyps, making it a far less effective preventative tool.
Cologuard and False Positives
Cologuard is very effective at detecting cancers, 92% but it is only
42% effective at spotting precancerous polyps.
The cost of cologuard is about $700 and if you do as recommend, repeat the test every 3 years, then the cost comes out pretty close to the cost of a colonoscopy.
For starters, cologuard detects only about 42% of precancerous polys and it does nothing to prevent them from becoming cancerous. In a colonoscopy, polyps are removed thus preventing cancer. If no polups are found and you are not considered high risk of colon cancer, you will not need to repeat the procedure for 10 years plus you can be pretty confident that you will not develop colon cancer before your next colonoscopy.
I think cologuard is great product because many people will not go through a colonoscopy. I certainly don't consider it as good as a colonoscopy but a lot better than nothing.
Why are Americans so preoccupied with their asses? Is that out of frustration that they can't grow it bigger than their 300 pound soda bellies? Or because it is so big that they can't put each others' dicks into it?
Anytime a cologuard which should be repeated every 3 years is inconclusive or it indicates a pre-cancerous polyp, or cancerous polyp then you need a colonoscopy. In my book, it's better have colonoscopy and you can be done with it for 10 years.
You're trying to make colon cancer into some kind of America-bashing? WTF is wrong with you?
Separate names with a comma.