Absolutely, when TotalBiscuits (John Bain) was still fighting cancer he couple times unabashedly said while doing his live starcraft 2 esports casting to everyone listening to be mindful of colon cancer, to not play dumb with it if you consistently find blood in your stool and go get yourself checked, insist on it if the doctors seem not particularly concerned

He was saying that to save lives

Might he rest in peace

> In late April 2014, Bain announced he had a precancerous mass in his colon, the first indications of bowel cancer, a condition with which two of his grandparents had also been diagnosed. (wikipedia)

It's good to promote diagnosis, but let's also put this in perspective: he had family history of this kind of cancer. This kind of changes everything when it comes to your personal risk, just like your grand parents having Alzheimer indicate a major risk that you will get it as you age as well.

This is why (good?) doctors also ask for conditions running in families.

Thanks for reiterating this. In the end, what we leave behind is the love we gave others and the wisdom we bestow. Hoping they learn sooner than us, and benefit.

This concept behind earlier screening is a whole thing amongst medical professionals, and a point of controversy in a number of specialties.

As with most things, procedures have risks and benefits. Colonoscopies have risks too, right? Bowel perforation (bad news), bleeding, infection, etc. So, balancing that with the obvious benefit of catching cancers early, the USPSTF (United States Preventive Services Taskforce) made some recommendations on when patients should undergo screening for colon cancer.

As of right now, per their highest level of evidence recommendations, you should get a colonoscopy starting age 50, and every 10 years thereafter. Note, I said colonoscopy. Not sigmoidoscopy, not stool testing, etc. Those have different guidelines and intervals (but do still start age 50).

If you have family history of colon cancer, or certain diseases that put you at higher risk for colon cancer, the recommendations are significantly earlier. In the case of a positive family history, you get a colonoscopy age 40 or 10 years before the earliest colon cancer diagnosis in the family, whichever comes first.

The reason I bring all this up is to point out that if you go to the USPSTF web site, you'll see an evidence level B recommendation to start screening age 45 as well. You'll also find the American Cancer Society has colonoscopies starting age 45.

The evidence and safety for colonoscopies at earlier and earlier ages is getting better and better. Doctors should absolutely be screening well before age 60. If your doctor isn't following uspstf guidelines due to practicing outdated medicine (some variation due to personal preference/evidence based practice I guess is acceptable), in my not so professional opinion you should probably find a new doctor.

No risk with a camera pill. Less risk with a virtual colonoscopy.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/capsule-endoscop...

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseas...

Sure but both modalities don’t have large randomized trials comparing long term efficacy.

Here’s some food for thought regarding pill cam endoscopy:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa0806347

“ The use of capsule endoscopy of the colon allows visualization of the colonic mucosa in most patients, but its sensitivity for detecting colonic lesions is low as compared with the use of optical colonoscopy.”

It still seems pretty rare, even if it's more common. I have had some similar symptoms, and similar interactions with doctors in the past. No, I don't think I have cancer. But, what I want to know is what is the probability of having this condition given the symptoms. In other words, use Bayes' rule. Most doctors seem incapable of thinking this way! If it's a 1% chance that I have a life-threatening condition because there's blood in my stool, then it makes sense to get diagnostic that would test for that. I know these datasets exist, but why can't my doctor make use of this, or me for that matter?

Rare doesn't really help when there are almost 8B people on the planet.

I was 41 when I was diagnosed with colorectal cancer. I had blood in my stool and my GP misdiagnosed me due to my age. If I hadn't pushed the issue, I wouldn't be here now.

If you ever have blood in your stool, get an exam. Preferably by a gastroenterologist.

I had a friend who died of colon cancer in his late teens. We weren't super close so I don't know the details like what variety it was.

Blood may not be present in sufficient quantity to be detected visually or not at all so keep looking out for other irregularities (being I'll is irregular). Examples: strange badly smelling diarrhoea (not one you might have after a having eaten something that was a little off) or burning sensation (which might get dismissed as a diverticulitis).

What I'm trying to say is that it's rare in the general population. Maybe it's common enough in the population of people that have certain symptoms, like blood in stool, that it really does deserve a strong response and not to be ignored by a doctor.

The lifetime risk of getting colon cancer is 4% for men. It's the third leading cause of cancer deaths.

I’ve had tests done where false negatives ran 20+% this is well known. I had every single symptom of the condition. Test came back negative. Doctor declared no issue, no reason to continue care.

A better doctor confirmed the diagnosis with additional tests. Growing belief that a false negative may mean a worse variation of the disease. Episode cost me an added year of organ damage.

> The lifetime risk of getting colon cancer is 4% for men. It's the third leading cause of cancer deaths.

The most important part of your sentence is "lifetime". Prostate is 11%, but most people don't get prostate cancer in their 30s.

The important part of this entire thread is that if you have symptoms, don't let the bell curve affect whether you seek treatment/exams from medical professionals. Colorectal cancer is no longer a rare thing in people under 50, and many practitioners operate under the naive idea that it doesn't occur in younger people.

What about under age 40? Or 45? Or 50?

In the next 15 years, more than one in 10 colon cancers and nearly one quarter of rectal cancers will be diagnosed in patients ages 20-34, according to the study. It also found that, in this age group, colon and rectal cancers are expected to increase by 90% and 124.2%, respectively, by 2030. For those ages 35-49, the predicted increase will be 27.7% for colon cancer and 46% for rectal cancer. Routine screening currently is not recommended for those under 50.

https://www.mdanderson.org/publications/conquest/colorectal-...

Also, if you have a family history of colorectal cancer, you should definitely get examined earlier.

Do we know the cause of this? More consumption of red meats?

I've seen a study that points in that direction, but I don't think that's conclusive.

Hi,

mind sharing how the blood in your stool looked like? What was the color etc? Was it there always? Was it occassionally? Was it ON the stool or mixed through it?

And when you finally got diagnosed. What stage were you in? Are you healed now?

And how long did you put it off?

Sry for asking so much.

I noticed bright red blood on my toilet paper periodically. I would ignore it a bit, then worry more when it re-occurred. After a month or so, I went to see my GP (I was 40 at the time). He thought it was just hemorrhoids. A year later my wife convinced me to go back and see what was up. I was referred a week later to my gastroenterologist who diagnosed me with a 5cm tumor. The path report showed that it was T2N0M0.

I'm fully healed now, though I have a permanent colostomy.

ah congratulations. glad to hear this.

few more follow ups if you dont mind :-) so there was no blood in or on the stool itself? and what was the quanitity on the toilet paper? just a small stripe or a lot? and how frequent was it throughout the year? monthly,weekly,daily?

thanks :-)

I didn't look at my stool. There was a decent stripe on the toilet paper. I was in denial so I didn't measure it. ;)

It was infrequent. My doctor speculated that if I had a firm stool, that would cause the tumor to bleed.

You seem worried with your multiple posts. You really should ask a doctor.

Note there can also be blood that is not visible in your stool - (occult blood is the term). It's recommended to check for that on a regular basis and it's fairly easy to confirm their presence.

Fairly easy to spot not-visible blood? How?

iFOB test

For my experience, noticed rich red blood at first collected in the bowl of the toilet, then started noticing streaks of blood on the stool, consistently there every time. I did put it of for 3 months, and I was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer, that had spread from my colon to the liver through my lymph nodes.

A few years ago there was a somehow public trend saying there was an epidemic of over diagnosis. People would have more medical exams like colonoscopy and would get treatment over the simplest signs and the effects were not good.

I don't know how true it is, but it may explain why docs in general refuse to go too early on exams.

I've heard of this issue with mammograms, but not with colorectal cancer. Complications from a colonoscopy are very rare, and removing polyps before they become malignant is a pretty safe choice as well.

Maybe I was wrong but it was clearly related to the lower torso.. maybe prostate cancer overdiagnosis ?..

Be sure to have a dialogue with your parents and siblings regarding your family history. My dad has a history of polyps, starting around 40. It's not something I would have known about without talking to him as it's just a regular part of his life to get them removed every few years. I had my first colonoscopy last year at 45 and had a polyp removed. If I didn't know my family history, I might have waited until the normal age of 50 and it might have been too late.

There are at-home screening tests you can get that are inexpensive and as accurate as colonoscopies in screening for cancer (according to some ways of measuring).

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/dreading-colonoscopy-...

Some of these can be ordered without a prescription online. So if you want to get screened and can't justify or afford a colonscopy, these are worth checking out.

Same here; had a large tubulovilous adenoma removed a couple years ago, at just about the same age. It wasn't cancerous, but it probably would have been soon if left to its own devices.

In my case it's probably genetic. My grandmother survived cancer by having part of her colon removed. She had a bunch of siblings who all died of cancer or undetermined causes; the difference is that she went to the doctor and they didn't.