Yes, absolutely it’s highly dependent on the individual. A lot of guidelines are born out of practicality, cost and demands on the medical system, not what is the most beneficial for one single patient.
To be clear, these recommendations are not just a re-statement of standard guidelines. They are aiming to be a sensible starting point for myself, my friends and family. I have my own biases, and I tried to balance something “perfect” and something feasible. I tended a bit towards additional screening where it could be beneficial and where the risks are low, and I tended away where I thought it wouldn’t be worth it. You can see more detail in the PDF.
For example with colonoscopy, I know a guy who had colon polyps at 41, which may have turned into cancer if he’d waited until 50 for his first colonoscopy. So that kinda biases me towards doing one early. I took into account that the progression of CRC from polyp → early tumour → deadly tumour is quite slow (10 years or more). But I also took into account that colonoscopy isn’t perfect and it does miss some polyps and even tumours. Therefore, a scan every 3-5y is a reasonable middle ground where you’re very unlikely to miss something twice in a row, but you’re also unlikely to suddenly discover a stage 4 death sentence. If you want to almost guarantee you won’t die from CRC, you could scan every year, but there is some risk and cost etc etc.
Similar for mammography, where guidelines actually vary a lot by country. Annual seems to be a sweet compromise spot, and biannual if you have higher risk. However, the benefits of mammography are not so clear-cut as colonoscopy. We’re decent at treating more advanced breast cancer now, and you generate a lot of false positives with small lesions, unnecessary testing, biopsies, and maybe even surgery or chemo for tumours that were never really dangerous. So the overall survival benefit doesn’t seem to be that great for mammography. But it’s also quick and safe, and has a fairly high miss rate, so repeated screenings are a good counter for that.
For derma, I think it’s very cultural, because in some countries doctors will think you’re insane for asking them to check moles every 3 months! I did look at apps, but couldn’t find good authoritative recommendations from societies or national guidelines, though I’m sure that some of them are great. Do you know any good ones?
I also reckoned there are less common ones in there. I haven’t seen people talk much about H.pylori testing or gastroscopy on this forum. But that’s a screening test basically as good as colonoscopy, and it’s another slow growing cancer which is extremely nasty once it’s spread. I’m doing my first H.pylori test and gastroscopy next month!
For cervical cancer, things have really moved on since I worked in a cytology lab 20 years ago. Now there’s HPV testing, automated cell examination etc. It’s another slow growing cancer, so this screening test is an absolute no brainer with very low risk and potentially huge reward.
I figure most people won’t have genetic testing done, so I didn’t go down that road. But one of the biggest factors is family history for sure. If you have strong family history, or something like Lynch syndrome, you’d probably want to move your testing earlier and increase the frequency. I totally agree. But that’s way beyond the pay grade of my little single-page recommendation PDF ![]()
What I would really like to know is if people had perfect adherence to screening tests, how much cancer would we be able to cure. I guarantee you there are women reading this who haven’t done their cervical test for a few years, or men who haven’t attentively fondled their balls for years.


