I was chatting to friends at the pub on Friday and someone I know very well didn't bother doing the free bowel cancer test that we all get sent when we turn 50.

I was very surprised and told her that she needed to get it done ASAP but it got me thinking and I did a bit of research and found these stats:

Cancer Screening Rates in Australia

• Bowel cancer 40 per cent participate
• Breast screen 55 per cent participate
• Cervical cancer 57 per cent participate

Low take up rate. | The Australian

I know the bowel cancer test process might put people off but why would so many people not bother with tests that could save their lives?

Isn't the test just a matter of providing a small sample of a stool to check for any presence of blood in it?

Another one to watch out for (for over 50s men at least) is prostate cancer. That's just a blood test every 12 months.

I think the percentage of people who don't take advantage of the checks will hold one or a mixture of this thought process.
A) can't be bothered to go
B) doesn't want to/can't even think about cancer
C) don't think they'll ever get cancer, therefore no need for the checks

Admittedly the smear test is degrading and uncomfortable, but you have to think of the bigger picture. 5 minutes of unpleasantness and being cancer free sure beats having cancer.

Stool, lol, very diplomatic of you Paul.

And another category that is a bit like A, above: I'll get the checks done one of these days....

Just saving up the less diplomatic remarks for those who need them

Agree Renth, it's frightening that so many people take such a risk with their health. I think the main reason is the old 'those sorts of things happen to other people, not me'. Unfortunately it can take a family member or close friend's diagnosis to make people think again.

Molly, I'm ok with pap smears now, but it's a wonder I wasn't put off forever by a less than pleasant experience years ago.

I'd made the appointment but my usual GP was off sick, with a doddery old man replacing her. He faffed around, mumbled and fumbled, and when the speculum was finally where it was supposed to be - he wandered off with vague mutterings like "I just need to......I don't know where......I'll just be a minute...' - and then he was gone, left the room! Leaving me in a most undignified position. NOT HAPPY!

OMG. Sorry, but Although at the time it probably wasn't that funny.

Yes, I didn't have a smear until I had my daughter aged 35. Too embarrassed to let anyone other than my OH see the "private parts". But once you have had a giant Nigerian put his fist up there with a crochet hook to break the waters (which were non-existent) then a small speculum isn't at all uncomfortable, and you become almost blase at who you allow to inspect there. Well , that is medically speaking: I don't flash my bits at just anyone you know.

But also just to say that I didn't think any breast problems would happen to me - it seems a bit unfair given that I have so many other medical problems. Why me?? I just don't need it on top of everything else. Let's hope that the recall clears me of anything to do with cancer.

Board hopping, I worked in the UK in the bowel screening sector... One other reason is the age bracket Bowel Screening is targeting is likely to be your older (man) who really doesn't want to do the further test (colonoscopy) should they have a positive FOB. I would frequently get comments about "I'm not gay you know" ... It's just that age bracket- it is a concern to them.

Hopefully younger men will be more enlightened about their health when they get to age..

Got to be quote of the week!!!!

Really?

This doesn't meet Wilson's screening criteria.

Who's Wilson and why should what he has to say affect anyone's decision on whether or not to have checks for prostate cancer?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screening_(medicine)


Additionally, remember that if a male lives long enough, they have as much chance as getting prostate cancer as a female of reproductive age does in getting pregnant.

Ca prostate, in the main, is something that men die with not of.

I write this as a medical doctor on, bizarrely, the four year anniversary of my father's death aged 80 from prostate-related causes seven years after his diagnosis. So he fell into the unlucky group

So is it pointless men going for checks?

Which criterion of the Wilson and Jungner screening criteria isn't met by a blood test for prostate cancer?

1. The condition sought should be an important health problem.
2. There should be an accepted treatment for patients with recognized disease.
3. Facilities for diagnosis and treatment should be available.
4. There should be a recognizable latent or early symptomatic stage.
5. There should be a suitable test or examination.
6. The test should be acceptable to the population.
7. The natural history of the condition, including development from latent to declared disease, should be adequately understood.
8. There should be an agreed policy on whom to treat as patients.
9. The cost of case-finding (including diagnosis and treatment of patients diagnosed) should be economically balanced in relation to possible expenditure on medical care as a whole.
10. Case-finding should be a continuing process and not a “once and for all” project

S ok Caroline, I laugh about it now myself Hahaaa about the giant Nigerian! My ever so prim and proper Mum used to say to us girls 'Once you've been through pregnancy and child-birth, you could walk naked down Hay Street and not care".

"Why me" is a very valid and reasonable question. All we can do at this stage is hope that it's not you xx

4,7,8,9