Screening Tests for Older People
Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2024 2:28 pmI belong to a CLL forum where there are some very helpful other patients. We got into a discussion because several of us over a "certain age" had been told we no longer needed to be scanned for some cancers and a few other diseases. For example, I was told last year when I had a colonoscopy that since I was now 80, I would not need any further screenings. I was not sure if I was happy with that news or not, and I questioned why, but did not get an answer from the person who gave me the screening last year. Did they think we were not going to live long enough to make it worthwhile?
One of the patients on this CLL forum is a retired doctor from Nova Scotia. He was a general practitioner, so not a cancer specialist, but he had substantial medical information and a lot of personal experience with this disease. Plus, he always make helpful responses to questions like mine. Here is his first part of his answer, which I thought was interesting for us old folks:
"It's not that fewer people get cancers in that age group—breast cancer incidence rises with age for example. It's that if diagnosed, you are less likely to die from it as cancers in older people tend to be less aggressive. So there is no advantage to early diagnosis compared to diagnosis later (point #3 above). You could spend lots of money on providing mammos for >80 year olds and maybe not save a single life. That becomes an easy decision for a single-payer system, but is more difficult when there is profit to be made by hospitals, and losses to be made by insurers".
When I asked if he knew why cancers in us older people tends to be less aggressive, he said:
"Not for sure, maybe just as our cells and their metabolism slow and become less efficient, those of our cells that become malignant remain old and inefficient too! A cell that groans trying to put its socks on in the mornings probably isn't going to make mutations that are suitable for a lean, mean, killing machine."
Interesting and positive information, at least, although I will continue to get as many screenings as I can since CLL patients tend to be more susceptible to other cancers.
One of the patients on this CLL forum is a retired doctor from Nova Scotia. He was a general practitioner, so not a cancer specialist, but he had substantial medical information and a lot of personal experience with this disease. Plus, he always make helpful responses to questions like mine. Here is his first part of his answer, which I thought was interesting for us old folks:
"It's not that fewer people get cancers in that age group—breast cancer incidence rises with age for example. It's that if diagnosed, you are less likely to die from it as cancers in older people tend to be less aggressive. So there is no advantage to early diagnosis compared to diagnosis later (point #3 above). You could spend lots of money on providing mammos for >80 year olds and maybe not save a single life. That becomes an easy decision for a single-payer system, but is more difficult when there is profit to be made by hospitals, and losses to be made by insurers".
When I asked if he knew why cancers in us older people tends to be less aggressive, he said:
"Not for sure, maybe just as our cells and their metabolism slow and become less efficient, those of our cells that become malignant remain old and inefficient too! A cell that groans trying to put its socks on in the mornings probably isn't going to make mutations that are suitable for a lean, mean, killing machine."
Interesting and positive information, at least, although I will continue to get as many screenings as I can since CLL patients tend to be more susceptible to other cancers.