Ronnie Helvy is on his way for a screening test. He's in his sixties and wants an assessment to check for a variety of cancers. He isn't currently displaying any symptoms but is seeking reassurance. His blood will undergo a series of tests in exchange for over a thousand pounds. The outcome might be able to determine whether he is susceptible to cancers that some of his family have died from. It sounds like a good thing. Or is it?

Advances in health screening have allowed us to see far into our bodies' future. During the pandemic home testing became an everyday routine. The same technology has helped develop new tools that can sequence our DNA quickly. Simple tests are making the process less intrusive than ever before.

These improvements have also seen the development of a number of major national screening programmes. Including Our Future Health and the UK Biobank. Both of these are large scale research studies to help researchers prevent chronic health conditions. They could also inform the NHS on how to implement generalised screening across more of the population.

Private health clinics are also offering health check-ups -- tests that could spot future warning signs. Home-testing kits can be ordered from the internet. But what does this information tell us? And is it information we can trust? We look at whether the private industry is acting responsibly when it comes to genetic testing.

The BBC's Health Correspondent Matthew Hill finds out whether screening programmes can really help us live both better and longer lives. And he asks: can diagnosing conditions decades before they might affect us cause more harm than good?

The promise of diagnosing conditions early is an exciting one. But there are fears among some health professionals that more screening might not be entirely helpful.

We take a look at what lessons from the past could tell us about the current surge in screening. And we consider some of the dilemmas it might present us with.

Presenter: Matthew Hill

Contributors: