Jump to content
IGNORED

Board Members over age 50: When was your last Colonoscopy?


Recommended Posts

At the end of the day if we elect not to have a colonoscopy then we have to face the consequences - it may mean a very slow extremely painful and disgusting way to die.  Not to mention the stench from someone dying from colon cancer is something you do not want to put loved ones through.

 

Whilst it would seem difficult to argue with the above, having reached an age when the problems and possible damage from such a procedure have increased. Whilst at the same time an alternative combination of other tests which are not so invasive and therefore offer less risk are offered. Then I believe that the decision not to proceed with such a procedure can be validated.

 

Even when fully aware of the unpleasantness of this particular cancer, mr glock always offers a less distasteful exit strategy then suffering with it till the end.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 6853395

    20

  • MrDK

    7

  • Whalley

    5

  • Skalliwag

    5

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Don't know what official NHS guidance is in the U.K. but I'm 54 and it's never been suggested. I went to my GP a couple of years ago with what I thought was a possible issue and he just did a blood t

Upon reading this thread I thought I would do a little research, which complicated the matter even more when comparing the various learned faculties and finding them to be almost balanced in those say

2 guys i play hockey with who are surgeons , both told me unless there is a family history or symptoms, they DO NOT recommend it, as there are risks involved under going this procedure.

Posted Images

I had colitis many moons ago and had to have regular colonoscopy's. One time it was done by an older lady who was brilliant, laughed and jlked all the way through the examination. When the test was finished one of her assistants was washing the scope with a bucket of soap and water I asked if it was the same one that they stick down peoples throats, she said "Yes and I've heard them all before",

I said" I hope you wash it well",

to which she replied "Yessss, of course we do",

I them replied "good because I don't want to get gingivitis of the arse hole",

She burst out laughing and said "OK, I haven't heard that one  before"

Link to post
Share on other sites
Cerberus, on 18 Jan 2017 - 12:16 AM, said:

Whilst it would seem difficult to argue with the above, having reached an age when the problems and possible damage from such a procedure have increased. Whilst at the same time an alternative combination of other tests which are not so invasive and therefore offer less risk are offered. Then I believe that the decision not to proceed with such a procedure can be validated.

 

Even when fully aware of the unpleasantness of this particular cancer, mr glock always offers a less distasteful exit strategy then suffering with it till the end.

 

Please provide a credible link as to where such risks of damage have increased.

Is the medical profession getting worse?

 

EVERY medical procedure has risks.

Looking and credible websites (IMO) like Hopkins, NHS, NIH, Mayo, etc. ALL state minimal risks and complications are rare and often complications are easy to fix, but extremely rarely require surgery.

The risks are almost always related to either adverse effects of being sedated or the removal of tissue/polyps.

Remember the latter is only a risk if a developing cancer is suspected, but I suspect leaving such suspect alone is safer than taking a sample for a biopsy.

 

Most of the stool tests ONLY identifies blood in the stool, the most advance a change in DNA.

The latter requires a reference sample as comparison and hopefully before any change has taken place.

Remember the reason shit is "brown" is from expired red blood cells, plasma and platelets, so all stools have blood.

Blood other than expired matters can come from an ulcer, a hemorrhoid or a colon cancer already developed and is bleeding.

In best case scenarios it will be a stage 1 cancer and about 90% curable.

 

When I had my first colonoscopy I had 3 golf ball sized polyps and each with a 50% chance of cancer (make that 87.5% by stats)

Luckily all was benign, but the lab report indicated an almost definite probability of a cancer in some years. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A colleague at work joined the ship could not take a shit was sent to Hospital for a minor op woke up most of his bowel gone given a few months to live survived about a year. NHS sent me appointment I went training day had a few watching a camera up my arse. Was told I had minor problem looked it up over 50 percent of Americans of my age have the problem it is just wear and tear. Do it could save your life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i had the procedure done about 4 years ago , the doc stated that on average 1 in 1650 cases involved a tear in the intestine and he was up to 1500 procedures without mishap , he asked me if i wanted to continue >>>> i felt safe ! , continued and all was ok ! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please provide a credible link as to where such risks of damage have increased.

Is the medical profession getting worse?

 

EVERY medical procedure has risks.

Looking and credible websites (IMO) like Hopkins, NHS, NIH, Mayo, etc. ALL state minimal risks and complications are rare and often complications are easy to fix, but extremely rarely require surgery.

The risks are almost always related to either adverse effects of being sedated or the removal of tissue/polyps.

Remember the latter is only a risk if a developing cancer is suspected, but I suspect leaving such suspect alone is safer than taking a sample for a biopsy.

 

Most of the stool tests ONLY identifies blood in the stool, the most advance a change in DNA.

The latter requires a reference sample as comparison and hopefully before any change has taken place.

Remember the reason shit is "brown" is from expired red blood cells, plasma and platelets, so all stools have blood.

Blood other than expired matters can come from an ulcer, a hemorrhoid or a colon cancer already developed and is bleeding.

In best case scenarios it will be a stage 1 cancer and about 90% curable.

 

When I had my first colonoscopy I had 3 golf ball sized polyps and each with a 50% chance of cancer (make that 87.5% by stats)

Luckily all was benign, but the lab report indicated an almost definite probability of a cancer in some years. 

 

I don't want to turn this into, "Mine is bigger than yours" scenario, however, my experience back in late 2012 is worth relating.

 

A rigid cystoscopy revealed 3 tumors in my bladder and they were removed for testing.  Mr. Google advised 90% chance of being cancerous, so stats indicated 99.90% of getting the Big C.

 

The pathology results stated I had a condition called cystitis cystica which perfectly mimicked bladder cancer in every aspect and totally fooled the urologist. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to turn this into, "Mine is bigger than yours" scenario, however, my experience back in late 2012 is worth relating.

 

A rigid cystoscopy revealed 3 tumors in my bladder and they were removed for testing.  Mr. Google advised 90% chance of being cancerous, so stats indicated 99.90% of getting the Big C.

 

The pathology results stated I had a condition called cystitis cystica which perfectly mimicked bladder cancer in every aspect and totally fooled the urologist. 

 

Good for you all went well.

Better fooled by a false positive prospect turning in to a confirmed negative than discovering a positive too late in the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the sigmoidoscopy (kind of a baby colonoscopy done without sedatives) just before turning 50. They recommended a colonoscopy, and that found and removed several polyps (turned out to be non cancerous). That was done with a sedative, but not one that knocked me out. Watched the whole thing on the TV monitor.

 

I've been getting them every 5 years since then. My last one I got the doctor to do without the sedative because I don't like drugs. It was fine--just a feeling like cramps when he shot air in to get a better look at something. After all, the snake they insert is smaller diameter than the average turd. Some hospitals will not do it without a sedative (I suppose because they get to charge you/your insurance for it).

 

As many others have said, the prep is more annoying than the procedure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had mine done right after I turned 50 and the insurance would cover it. It was nice and clean inside and I was told I wouldn't need another one for 10 years. The poo blood test should be good enough for the intervening years I guess.

Same here.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please provide a credible link as to where such risks of damage have increased.

Is the medical profession getting worse?

 

EVERY medical procedure has risks.

Looking and credible websites (IMO) like Hopkins, NHS, NIH, Mayo, etc. ALL state minimal risks and complications are rare and often complications are easy to fix, but extremely rarely require surgery.

The risks are almost always related to either adverse effects of being sedated or the removal of tissue/polyps.

Remember the latter is only a risk if a developing cancer is suspected, but I suspect leaving such suspect alone is safer than taking a sample for a biopsy.

 

Most of the stool tests ONLY identifies blood in the stool, the most advance a change in DNA.

The latter requires a reference sample as comparison and hopefully before any change has taken place.

Remember the reason shit is "brown" is from expired red blood cells, plasma and platelets, so all stools have blood.

Blood other than expired matters can come from an ulcer, a hemorrhoid or a colon cancer already developed and is bleeding.

In best case scenarios it will be a stage 1 cancer and about 90% curable.

 

When I had my first colonoscopy I had 3 golf ball sized polyps and each with a 50% chance of cancer (make that 87.5% by stats)

Luckily all was benign, but the lab report indicated an almost definite probability of a cancer in some years. 

 

Hi MrDK, not ignoring you, at the time I was doing some general reading of various medical documents/studies having just read this thread. All found by google searches so did not bother to keep a record of them. When i get a moment I will cover some of the same ground and record the more credible ones. The majority when addressing people aged 75 + referred to an increase in the possibility of perforation amongst other, be they minor, potential problems.

 

I understand after reading of your own experience your own stance and therefore firm belief and recommendation. Whilst my position is based on my own experience/medical history which make me question the validity of this procedure for myself.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi MrDK, not ignoring you, at the time I was doing some general reading of various medical documents/studies having just read this thread. All found by google searches so did not bother to keep a record of them. When i get a moment I will cover some of the same ground and record the more credible ones. The majority when addressing people aged 75 + referred to an increase in the possibility of perforation amongst other, be they minor, potential problems.

 

I understand after reading of your own experience your own stance and therefore firm belief and recommendation. Whilst my position is based on my own experience/medical history which make me question the validity of this procedure for myself.  

 

Never though you were ignoring, in my experience you seem to always respond to matters addressed to you being it business or not :)

 

You are correct on two levels.

1. Since about all medical procedures have risks you have choice and that choice is solely yours 

2. Family history does have a statistical role in the decision making

Other than that we probably have to agree to disagree

 

I am, however, interested in the increased risk by age ... and compare it to the increased risk of getting colon cancer by age; not many in their 20's suffer from it.

There are actually time when a cancer might be left untreated, colorectal in not one, but if someone age 75 is diagnosed with state one prostate cancer there is a good chance you will outlive the cancer, depending on overall health.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will you have one after you actually have cancer?

I am not getting cancer.

you don't really mean a colonoscopy prevents cancer do you?

 

And, I CERTAINLY WILL NOT DIE OF CANCER . .. LOL

There are much better ways to die.

 

Cancer doesn't scare me in the slightest.

Why are you living in fear of cancer?

Do you have a family history of colon cancer?

 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi MrDK, not ignoring you, at the time I was doing some general reading of various medical documents/studies having just read this thread. All found by google searches so did not bother to keep a record of them. When i get a moment I will cover some of the same ground and record the more credible ones. The majority when addressing people aged 75 + referred to an increase in the possibility of perforation amongst other, be they minor, potential problems.

 

I understand after reading of your own experience your own stance and therefore firm belief and recommendation. Whilst my position is based on my own experience/medical history which make me question the validity of this procedure for myself.  

 

Don't like the chance for a perforation? Couple of choices: 

 

1. Some sort of stool analysis. Occult blood in stool. There was one test that sounded good for about $600 (your primary care MD or HMO likely won't be using a stool test this costly). Compared to the potential alternative, that's not so expensive. 

 

2. Virtual colonoscopy. This is a CT xray study. You still have to do the bowel prep but there is no scope. Air is introduced into the colon to provide contrast against the soft tissue (the lining of the colon). When/if I have my next colonoscopy it will be virtual. If that shows something suspicious you are still back to the conventional study. 

 

The point is...do SOMETHING. "Gin and tonic" and hope for the best? LOSER idea. Just my opinion. 

 

If we ever meet you owe me a Gin and Tonic for potentially saving your life, as well as others who may read this. All the best.   :P

 

Virtual colonoscopy (VC, also called CT Colonography or CTPneumocolon) is a medical imaging procedure which uses x-rays and computers to produce two- and three-dimensional images of the colon (large intestine) from the lowest part, the rectum, all the way to the lower end of the small intestine and display them on a ...
Edited by CyberPro
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer the original question, I'm 65 and had my second colonoscopy last year, 12 years after the first.  It was all clear and the doc said I don't need another for 10 years.  The second one was, however, prompted by blood in a fecal occult sample, the mail-in shit test.  I recommend those for anyone.  Only if something shows do you need a colonoscopy and even then the scope may show there's no cancer problem as mine did.

 

The key factor in all the comments about risks is that they are really minimized if your colonoscopy is done by some-one who is skilled and does a lot of them.  Don't let some fucking amateur stick a scope up your ass.  If you get a pro doing it the discomfort is minimal and the risk likewise.

Edited by pattayaplayer
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...
Posted (edited)

If you’re going consider Thailand, Bunmrungrad is probably the only safe WHO option.

https://www.bumrungrad.com/en/treatments/colonoscopy

https://www.who.int/hospitals/en/

As with any non-emergency or non-critically urgent care procedure, I wouldn’t recommend Thailand.

Edited by 6853395
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
On 02/01/2020 at 02:24, 6853395 said:

As with any non-emergency or non-critically urgent care procedure, I wouldn’t recommend Thailand.

Do you have any evidence to back up that statement? The WHO page you linked provides none, and it certainly doesn't match my non-expert experience here over many years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/01/2020 at 20:47, Suphawk said:

Has anyone had one done in Thailand? What do they cost there?

Had one done at Bangkok Pattaya Hospital 1 year ago for 18000 baht. They have some promotional health care packages several times per year and this was one of them. Inter Hospital as well as Memorial quoted them at 36000 baht.

The procedure was not inconfortable at all. You have to slip in special trousers having a small opening just where it should be. You lie on one side so that you can see the screen. I could follow only the first few minutes. After that the product they give you kicked fully in and my memory lost everything until the procedure was already  finished. Time between preparation and paying the bill was about 2 hours.

Doctor removed a polyp, which was not cancerous. I had to return a few days later to get the final result.

I can only recommend the Bangkok Pattaya Hospital.

I had the first one about 15 years ago in France, which was done like a big operation with full anesthesia. Felt like "middle age" compared to the one last year in Pattaya. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/01/2020 at 20:47, Suphawk said:

Has anyone had one done in Thailand? What do they cost there?

Most of the international hospitals in Thailand will quote you on a procedure like that if you contact them. No need to guess. BTW, many, like Bumrungrad, have US board certified doctors on staff. Often you can vet those as well online, on their websites.

Link to post
Share on other sites
NorthernSpirit

None so far, but have one scheduled for Mid-February. My best mate (50+ as well) had his done recently and got a good result.

Suffering from skin cancer caused by a gen defect already and I wouldn't like to take chances on another cancer source. Early recognition (if present) is the key - same with any forms of skin cancer. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
Posted (edited)

About two years ago at 63, and fiveish years before that.

Why? In my province of Canada they take screening seriously. They also do a fecal occult blood test as routine. My grandfather died of colon cancer.

I requested no drugs during the procedures. It was painless. And it was fun watching my innards on the monitor.

Edited by Jay108
Typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a colonoscopy 8 years ago and 8 before that. This year I'm 70'ish and just had the Cologuard screening. All is OK per the Cologuard(no colonoscopy)  so I'm having one of those every 3 or 5 years until I'm over 85 or Cologuard recommends a colonoscopy. Medicare pays for Cologuard test every three years if you meet conditions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • COVID-19

    Any posts or topics which the moderation team deems to be rumours/speculatiom, conspiracy theory, scaremongering, deliberately misleading or has been posted to deliberately distort information will be removed - as will BMs repeatedly doing so. Existing rules also apply.

  • Advertise on Pattaya Addicts
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.