The procedure was a piece of cake. As the standard is where I'm from (Norway), I was only administered some sedatives - but honestly I couldn't feel much difference. I watched the procedure on the screen, which was quite fascinating.

The worst part, by far, was the emptying / prepping. A month prior to the colonoscopy I took a stool sample (negative for blood), but my doc wanted to be safe.

In the end they nothing was found, not even polyps.

EDIT: I had put of going to it for the longest time, but a friend of mine (35 years old) was diagnosed with stage 4 last year, which pushed me to get it checked out. He had experienced prolonged constipation, that's it. When the tumor was found, the cancer had spread to both of his lungs and liver. He's still alive, and fighting it.

- I take 100g proteins, 30g fibers daily

- Red meat once a week but never fried

- Most of the protein comes from eggs, yoggurt, chicken and various plant based sources

- No white bread

- No added sugars, no deserts except fruits

- Nothing fried

- No added salt

- No canned food

- Saturated fats kept at minimum.

- No spicy food

- No alcohol

The results are incredible. I lost 8 kg, my blood samples are perfect, my pulse dropped with 10, I sleep better, no migraines (I had those for years). Also this year I was the only one in the family that didn't got any cold, and that's quite hard with two kids going to kindergarten.

It's hard in the first two weeks, but afterwards it's becoming your daily routine. I also use an app to track various stats. The gameification of the diet also helped me a little.

I urge you to try this. To make it more manageable start small. For example avoid fast food for 2 weeks. Don't put any mayonnaise in your food for 1month. Stop eating white bread. And then add more and more restrictions. The hardest fight is the urge to eat sugar and drink alcohol, give it time.

Unlike the usual Bettridge's law, the answer to the headline is only a qualified "No".

It is a "So is all other cancers!", which is pretty bad news for folks who are young and healthy right now.

IMO, the fundamental issue for preventative screening is there is basically no amount of money I would not part with (of my money, the insurer's money, or private debt) to not die. I expect this is true for most people, and it makes preventative screening a tricky topic. In recommending screening for those >x age, you will miss some detectable, preventable and treatable cancer risk for those <x age, purely for cost. No one wants to be explicit about that though!

I think the only way out of that uncomfortable conversation is making screening so cheap via automation that you can basically run it for very low incremental cost as often as individual risk tolerance permits. This would be paid for on the back of earlier interventions vs late-stage, expensive interventions.

One of our better microscopes these days is DNA sequencing, especially for cancer, and the particular base mutations and the sequences in which they occur give heavy clues about the types of mutagens that are going on. The DNA damage from UV radiation from the sun and bulky adduct repair from smoking damage are vastly different. Even when cells have a defect in a repair mechanism, you can tell which repair mechanism is broken based on the particular base changes in which context.

A study from 2025 reapplied these Alexandronv signatures to colorectal cancer with a global set of cohorts, and suggests that colibactin, a mutagen produced by some strains of E. coli and related bacteria, could be driving some of the increase in early age colorectal cancer:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09025-8

Of course we don't know exactly how much of the increase, or the other explanations; causality is multi-causal and I bring this particular cause up because it's one of the stronger leads so far. But when we've lost our keys in the night, even if its easiest to look under the light of the streetlamp, that doesn't mean its the only place we might find them.

My Gastroentrologist told me just recently that the stool test (Cologuard) is very accurate but must be repeated every 3 years as opposed to getting a Colonoscopy which should be repeated every 7 to 10 years

36 polyps were found. Some of elevated risk. So now I get yearly screening. But by the sounds of the type of polyps I had, if I had waited until the screening age I would have had high chances of cancer.

Try asking a doctor for asymptomatic screening (for anything), they usually say "There's a schedule for such screenings at age X, you're too young for that. There's also proven negative effects of excessive screenings."

Which kinda makes sense, as they supposed to have protocols/schedules for all kinds of healthcare. We're talking here about changing that protocols/schedules. But doctors (and insurances) are generally reluctant.

So my actionable question is "How do I convince my doctor to get the screening?"

My anecdote (M, 35) is that I got one after experiencing symptoms that turned out to be unrelated, but they did find pre-cancerous polyps so now I will be getting them more regularly. I received received meaningful early detection and peace of mind. Also aside from the prep, its a very convenient procedure. You get put under anesthesia and do a quick time travel.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox

No:

Colorectal cancer is going up in young people.

Yes:

Various kinds of cancer are going up in later generations. (Definitely at younger ages, possibly at all ages.)

Reminder

This blog endorses colorectal cancer screening. We don’t yet know if colonoscopies are better than other methods of screening (sigmoidoscopy, stool tests), but we do know that screening is better than not screening. When caught early, CRC is highly treatable, often with only surgery (no chemotherapy or radiation) and a return to normal activities within a couple weeks.

What I’m wondering about is…why?

As in…why is cancer rising among the later generations? Smoking has substantially fallen and this has led to a sharp decrease in lung cancer rates. So why are cancer rates overall increasing for those born in the later generations?

Presubably if you detect eveything earlier, every one of the detected cases would be younger if all else were equal.

In case you aren't aware of dynomight yet, there is a great backlog of posts to read.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/celebrity/articles/kathy...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/202...

But not at Kaiser.

$17k later…

(1) Vitamin-D (drops)

(2) Magnesium (as Magnesium aspartate hydrochloride trihydrate)

(3) Psyllium shells (you won't take too much)

(4) Move your body!

Yes. Nothing to see here. And stop abusing quotation marks.

     TLDR
     No:
     Colorectal cancer is going up in young people.

     Yes:
     Various kinds of cancer are going up in later generations. (Definitely at younger ages, possibly at all ages.)

Can someone who's read it confirm?

Did you miss the BILLIONS in lawsuits against RoundUp and other herbicides?

Did you miss all the deregulation by the first and now second Trump administration allowing crazy levels of pollution and toxicity among all the industries?

They are still using leaded fuel in prop aircraft at hundreds of airports around the country and world, spraying it on unknowning population

Our environment has never been more dangerous yet people never more ignorant or carefree

Then some clown downvotes this straightforward question. Brilliant.