Is a colonoscopy really necessary if symptom free?

Answer 1

Yes, even though you may be symptom free, there may still be problems. Most of the time you don't have symptoms until it actually gets bad. You could live with a problem for years and not know it. What is the catch is that its during that time where it isn't noticed with symptoms that something can be done about it.

Answer 2

I just had my first colonoscopy in February 2006. I am 47 years old with no family history of colon cancer. I knew I was approaching 50 years old which is normally when they recommend the general public to have their first colonoscopy. If you wait until you have symptoms - it's too late! They found one precancerous polyp in there and removed it during the procedure. Whew! I had no idea, but now I can take comfort in knowing that I am ok for another 3 years. Polyps can take up to 10 years to develop. I have now made family history and have been encouraging all my brothers and sisters to have a colonoscopy by age 50. One thing that it really kind of scary, when I was looking at online pictures from inside someones colon during a colonoscopy....you can see the shadow of the liver. If you get cancer in that part of your colon - your liver could be affected. You won't recover from that type of cancer! I have several useful websites if you're interested.

Answer 3

Yeah, sorta, kinda.
The colonoscopy gets really up in there and finds little thingies that could really be a big thingy in the future. Doc snips them out, and you don't feel a thing.

Answer 4

It really depends on your age and family history. I'm only 30 and i have to have one every 3 years because of my family history. I really hoped this helps. And a colonscopy is not all that bad.

Answer 5

Yes, and even before age 50, and even if no family history of colon cancer.

Answer 6

Sometimes it's done as a "baseline", i.e., a standard to which any future tests you have will be compared.

It's icky, but go ahead and do it.