Thanks for the info. I assume that the CT approach is also cheaper, though it carries some probability of having to pay the cost of colonoscopy anyway if positive. So is there a logic here that says without history of problems, start and monitor with CT, and with history of problems, go directly to and periodically repeat colonoscopy?
But ohmygawd is it painful! I had a CT scan, then had to have a colonoscopy a few months later. I'll take that ANY DAY! Yes, the prep is a pain, but I was able to plan an approach to drinking the liquids. I have my one year re-check coming up next month, and have no fear nor concern about it.
Also, my insurance didn't cover the CT scan, so it was pretty expensive over all. I did wrap it with a heart and lung scan at the same time - I figured that since I was there anyway...
that is reasonable