I personally know 4 people who had the procedure and cancer was detected. Some further along than others. All still living.
Colonoscopy is one of the few procedures that as they screen they can also take action.
Not all cancer is the same.
Every person will have some amount of cancer as they get older. Some of the cancer will not be aggressive or disruptive enough to cause a problem before the person dies of another old-age related infirmary.
Treating cancer is not free. Treatment reduces the quality of life of the person treated. Elderly people are slower to heal, and more at risk for complications. To treat a cancer that would not cause problems in the natural lifespan of its host is an expensive mistake.
Screening technology can expand our ability to detect cancer without giving us the insight to know dangerous cancer from inconsequential cancer. When we go on to treat inconsequential cancer we've actually reduced the years of healthy life of the patient.
Sadly my oldest brother didn't catch his so quickly and the colonoscopy he had showed he was pretty far along, and ultimately the cancer spread and killed him.
I now have one every 5 years until I hit 50 then I'll move to every 2 years. The test is pretty pain and issue free, the only 'bad' part if the laxatives first, but after seeing my brother die, it is well worth the couple of hours of discomfort.
My older brothers had continued with faecal testing, but after some pushing moved to colonoscopies too, as we'd rather catch it early, than once it has taken hold.
5/1000 colonoscopy patients have complications (some fatal) which is way higher than the base rate for colon cancer.
It’s not a harmless screen like a mammogram.
Can you provide a source for this?