› Forums › General Melanoma Community › ‘ Film ‘ that masks seeing melanoma on my body – according to My doctor ?
- This topic has 30 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 10 months ago by
stars.
- Post
-
- January 31, 2016 at 5:58 am
Hi All
i have a history of 2 melanoma on my legs – December 2014 excised .
Yesterday my dermatologist removed 17 suspicious looking Nevi after looking at them with Mole Mate . I have been told by lots of people that this is not common practice ? when questioned , My dermatologist refers to a ' film' that masks her seeing melanoma clearly on my body that is why she just excises all . Does anyone know about this type of 'film ' pls , what is the medical term / explanation .
. I got second opinion ,they said remove only 5 out of the 17. He said he only excises what looks worrying to the naked eye , he said suspected melanoma are very obvious and you see them with the naked eye / dermis cope very easily ! I then went back to original Dermo who wants to remove the 17 and asked her to explain.
she said all 17 showed ABCD but not E. With smudgy outlines . She said she finds my skin very difficult to read as there is a ' film ' which hinders masks seeing the melanoma , so she suspects them all ??? Is that possible . Does anyone have any medical terminology reference of this ? ?
She has scared me sufficiently so I then went ahead and she removed all 17 yesterday wide excision and I am now awaiting biopsy results .
thabks very much
- Replies
-
-
- January 31, 2016 at 6:20 am
Never heard of anything like a film and I've been on this site almost 15 years helping people. Why couldn't she give you a medical term or reason? CHANGE!!! Ugly duckling!!! Not wholesale removal because of some mysterious film. Did the other derm mention this? Take pictures. Monitor your moles yourself! I've found my three and plan to find any in the future. I rely on photos and gut feeling, not my derm (who I trust completely) because he also relies on photos and my gut feeling!
-
- January 31, 2016 at 6:20 am
Never heard of anything like a film and I've been on this site almost 15 years helping people. Why couldn't she give you a medical term or reason? CHANGE!!! Ugly duckling!!! Not wholesale removal because of some mysterious film. Did the other derm mention this? Take pictures. Monitor your moles yourself! I've found my three and plan to find any in the future. I rely on photos and gut feeling, not my derm (who I trust completely) because he also relies on photos and my gut feeling!
-
- January 31, 2016 at 8:45 am
Hi Tks for reply . I will try post an image of the moles excised on my back if I am able to here
-
- January 31, 2016 at 8:45 am
Hi Tks for reply . I will try post an image of the moles excised on my back if I am able to here
-
- January 31, 2016 at 9:01 am
Tks pls see my profile pic as an example . If u have the time or could be bothered I can email you the pics of all the moles . I realize u are not a doctor but don't know who else to ask . Doctors all say different things … Bit worrying as of course this can be a life threatening disease . Thanks very much
-
- January 31, 2016 at 9:01 am
Tks pls see my profile pic as an example . If u have the time or could be bothered I can email you the pics of all the moles . I realize u are not a doctor but don't know who else to ask . Doctors all say different things … Bit worrying as of course this can be a life threatening disease . Thanks very much
-
- January 31, 2016 at 4:24 pm
The two I see there remind me of many of mine, and i haven't removed those that didn't change. None of my three primaries looked like these moles. The fact that the two shown look similar to each other rules out the ugly duckling theory. Looks are NOT the best method, but I don't get why she just didn't do a simple biopsy. And again, 17 at once is over the top. But if you don't mind doing the biopsies, more power to you. As I've stated on my replies to you and many others here, I use pictures and remove things that change. I don't remove anything atypical looking unless it changes. All my biopsies to date have been atypical or melanoma and all have changed. That is actually the whole concept of mole mapping, subsequent photos showing comparison, not superficial 'one time glance' and software evaluation. This doc is raking in the dough if she does this on everyone. I'd be curious about her ratio of biopsies to melanoma. Sorry but I think this was over the top. Good luck on the healing and the results!
-
- January 31, 2016 at 4:24 pm
The two I see there remind me of many of mine, and i haven't removed those that didn't change. None of my three primaries looked like these moles. The fact that the two shown look similar to each other rules out the ugly duckling theory. Looks are NOT the best method, but I don't get why she just didn't do a simple biopsy. And again, 17 at once is over the top. But if you don't mind doing the biopsies, more power to you. As I've stated on my replies to you and many others here, I use pictures and remove things that change. I don't remove anything atypical looking unless it changes. All my biopsies to date have been atypical or melanoma and all have changed. That is actually the whole concept of mole mapping, subsequent photos showing comparison, not superficial 'one time glance' and software evaluation. This doc is raking in the dough if she does this on everyone. I'd be curious about her ratio of biopsies to melanoma. Sorry but I think this was over the top. Good luck on the healing and the results!
-
- January 31, 2016 at 5:53 pm
Hi thanks . I am seeing her on Friday and will ask for a scientific explanation for the film that prevents her from identifying the worst moles. If she can explain this then I will be more confident in her method . Thank you for all your advice .
-
- January 31, 2016 at 5:53 pm
Hi thanks . I am seeing her on Friday and will ask for a scientific explanation for the film that prevents her from identifying the worst moles. If she can explain this then I will be more confident in her method . Thank you for all your advice .
-
- January 31, 2016 at 5:53 pm
Hi thanks . I am seeing her on Friday and will ask for a scientific explanation for the film that prevents her from identifying the worst moles. If she can explain this then I will be more confident in her method . Thank you for all your advice .
-
- January 31, 2016 at 4:24 pm
The two I see there remind me of many of mine, and i haven't removed those that didn't change. None of my three primaries looked like these moles. The fact that the two shown look similar to each other rules out the ugly duckling theory. Looks are NOT the best method, but I don't get why she just didn't do a simple biopsy. And again, 17 at once is over the top. But if you don't mind doing the biopsies, more power to you. As I've stated on my replies to you and many others here, I use pictures and remove things that change. I don't remove anything atypical looking unless it changes. All my biopsies to date have been atypical or melanoma and all have changed. That is actually the whole concept of mole mapping, subsequent photos showing comparison, not superficial 'one time glance' and software evaluation. This doc is raking in the dough if she does this on everyone. I'd be curious about her ratio of biopsies to melanoma. Sorry but I think this was over the top. Good luck on the healing and the results!
-
- January 31, 2016 at 9:01 am
Tks pls see my profile pic as an example . If u have the time or could be bothered I can email you the pics of all the moles . I realize u are not a doctor but don't know who else to ask . Doctors all say different things … Bit worrying as of course this can be a life threatening disease . Thanks very much
-
- January 31, 2016 at 8:45 am
Hi Tks for reply . I will try post an image of the moles excised on my back if I am able to here
-
- January 31, 2016 at 6:20 am
Never heard of anything like a film and I've been on this site almost 15 years helping people. Why couldn't she give you a medical term or reason? CHANGE!!! Ugly duckling!!! Not wholesale removal because of some mysterious film. Did the other derm mention this? Take pictures. Monitor your moles yourself! I've found my three and plan to find any in the future. I rely on photos and gut feeling, not my derm (who I trust completely) because he also relies on photos and my gut feeling!
-
- January 31, 2016 at 6:25 am
Hi
I remember your original posts, Graham. I hope you are not in too much discomfort.. you must have felt like a human pincushion, having 17 excisions done! Look, this is THE litmus test of molemate. I replied to you last time that I was a bit doubtful about the molemate technology, and your second opinion Dr had a similarly cautious view, recommending just five excisions. It will be interesting to see what pathology says on these 17. I would be very surprised if many – indeed any – of these were melanoma. But, if you are from the 'if in doubt, cut it out' school, then these 17 excisions make a lot of sense.
-
- January 31, 2016 at 6:25 am
Hi
I remember your original posts, Graham. I hope you are not in too much discomfort.. you must have felt like a human pincushion, having 17 excisions done! Look, this is THE litmus test of molemate. I replied to you last time that I was a bit doubtful about the molemate technology, and your second opinion Dr had a similarly cautious view, recommending just five excisions. It will be interesting to see what pathology says on these 17. I would be very surprised if many – indeed any – of these were melanoma. But, if you are from the 'if in doubt, cut it out' school, then these 17 excisions make a lot of sense.
-
- January 31, 2016 at 9:03 am
Hi there thanks . Can email u pics of what they cut out if that is okay . They are all on my back . Anyway if not no problem , Tks
-
- January 31, 2016 at 9:03 am
Hi there thanks . Can email u pics of what they cut out if that is okay . They are all on my back . Anyway if not no problem , Tks
-
- January 31, 2016 at 7:58 pm
Look, what's done is done – there's no harm in all those excisions, but to me it's an expensive and painful exercise. Plus there goes your modelling career!
However, what you posted the picture of really don't look like melanoma to me. I have this kind of mole/freckle – the fact that so many of your mole/freckles look like this tells me only that this is the kind of mole/freckle you have. Nothing more.
In fact, I've had several of this kind removed and they were simply dysplastic but none melanoma. Let's see what pathology says about the 17. If you have 17 non-melanomas, then you know to perhaps be in the market for a less knife-happy doctor. If you have severely dysplastic, don't be fooled if they say something like 'pre melanoma'. That doesn't exist. It's melanoma, or it's not. I think some docs come up with terms like pre-melanoma to justify why they've taken the knife to someone. Then again, if you have 17 melanomas, you'll be happy you had it done.
I stand by my assumption that few of none of your 17 will be melanoma, and then we can talk further about molemate alrogithms. I wouldn't bother asking your dr how it works, you can read all about it online:
http://www.medxhealth.com/our-products/siascopytrade;/molemate.aspx
This shows you how with molemate, a dr can choose different 'views' of a mole to isolate eg blood patterns etc. When your doc says 'fim', I think they are talking about the different views you can choose to isolate different things like collagen etc.
Here's another fellow sceptic (like I am sceptical):
Good luck… am curious how pathology will come back. Hopefully all clear. And remember: no malarkey about 'pre melanoma'. Dysplasia – even severe dysplasia – may never have evolved to melanoma.
-
- January 31, 2016 at 7:58 pm
Look, what's done is done – there's no harm in all those excisions, but to me it's an expensive and painful exercise. Plus there goes your modelling career!
However, what you posted the picture of really don't look like melanoma to me. I have this kind of mole/freckle – the fact that so many of your mole/freckles look like this tells me only that this is the kind of mole/freckle you have. Nothing more.
In fact, I've had several of this kind removed and they were simply dysplastic but none melanoma. Let's see what pathology says about the 17. If you have 17 non-melanomas, then you know to perhaps be in the market for a less knife-happy doctor. If you have severely dysplastic, don't be fooled if they say something like 'pre melanoma'. That doesn't exist. It's melanoma, or it's not. I think some docs come up with terms like pre-melanoma to justify why they've taken the knife to someone. Then again, if you have 17 melanomas, you'll be happy you had it done.
I stand by my assumption that few of none of your 17 will be melanoma, and then we can talk further about molemate alrogithms. I wouldn't bother asking your dr how it works, you can read all about it online:
http://www.medxhealth.com/our-products/siascopytrade;/molemate.aspx
This shows you how with molemate, a dr can choose different 'views' of a mole to isolate eg blood patterns etc. When your doc says 'fim', I think they are talking about the different views you can choose to isolate different things like collagen etc.
Here's another fellow sceptic (like I am sceptical):
Good luck… am curious how pathology will come back. Hopefully all clear. And remember: no malarkey about 'pre melanoma'. Dysplasia – even severe dysplasia – may never have evolved to melanoma.
-
- February 1, 2016 at 4:31 am
Hi thanks for all your trouble . I now recall more in the conversation about this so called film supposedly masking her ability to see the moles . She went on to talk about when people come back from holiday sunburnt and therefore inflammation and therefore masked . But I went no where near the sun so that cant apply to me and she knows it . this was just before the surgery I am going to ask more about this film when I see her .
Will look at those links . Why would a 65 year old experienced Dermo use a substandard system and subject her patients to all of this ? Anyway let's see. Thanks again , Graham
-
- February 1, 2016 at 4:31 am
Hi thanks for all your trouble . I now recall more in the conversation about this so called film supposedly masking her ability to see the moles . She went on to talk about when people come back from holiday sunburnt and therefore inflammation and therefore masked . But I went no where near the sun so that cant apply to me and she knows it . this was just before the surgery I am going to ask more about this film when I see her .
Will look at those links . Why would a 65 year old experienced Dermo use a substandard system and subject her patients to all of this ? Anyway let's see. Thanks again , Graham
-
- February 1, 2016 at 7:48 am
Yeah, the whole 'film' bit is basically a mystery. I guess one way of looking at it is that Molemate is not so much substandard, but an additional tool at your doctor's disposal. For example, she might be using Molemate as an addition to her clinical judgement and knowledge of the ABCDE criteria etc. I've been to places that use this kind of digital tool – not Molemate but similar – it is an extra tool that they can use. The studies show, though, that it's no replacement for an experienced and/or diligent doctor. I'm very interested in how all that pathology comes back. Who knows, she might be onto something. I just find it highly, highly unlikely that any one person can have 17 dodgy moles at one time. Plus, from your photo, your moles don't actually look that dodgy at all.
-
- February 1, 2016 at 7:48 am
Yeah, the whole 'film' bit is basically a mystery. I guess one way of looking at it is that Molemate is not so much substandard, but an additional tool at your doctor's disposal. For example, she might be using Molemate as an addition to her clinical judgement and knowledge of the ABCDE criteria etc. I've been to places that use this kind of digital tool – not Molemate but similar – it is an extra tool that they can use. The studies show, though, that it's no replacement for an experienced and/or diligent doctor. I'm very interested in how all that pathology comes back. Who knows, she might be onto something. I just find it highly, highly unlikely that any one person can have 17 dodgy moles at one time. Plus, from your photo, your moles don't actually look that dodgy at all.
-
- February 1, 2016 at 7:48 am
Yeah, the whole 'film' bit is basically a mystery. I guess one way of looking at it is that Molemate is not so much substandard, but an additional tool at your doctor's disposal. For example, she might be using Molemate as an addition to her clinical judgement and knowledge of the ABCDE criteria etc. I've been to places that use this kind of digital tool – not Molemate but similar – it is an extra tool that they can use. The studies show, though, that it's no replacement for an experienced and/or diligent doctor. I'm very interested in how all that pathology comes back. Who knows, she might be onto something. I just find it highly, highly unlikely that any one person can have 17 dodgy moles at one time. Plus, from your photo, your moles don't actually look that dodgy at all.
-
- February 1, 2016 at 4:31 am
Hi thanks for all your trouble . I now recall more in the conversation about this so called film supposedly masking her ability to see the moles . She went on to talk about when people come back from holiday sunburnt and therefore inflammation and therefore masked . But I went no where near the sun so that cant apply to me and she knows it . this was just before the surgery I am going to ask more about this film when I see her .
Will look at those links . Why would a 65 year old experienced Dermo use a substandard system and subject her patients to all of this ? Anyway let's see. Thanks again , Graham
-
- January 31, 2016 at 7:58 pm
Look, what's done is done – there's no harm in all those excisions, but to me it's an expensive and painful exercise. Plus there goes your modelling career!
However, what you posted the picture of really don't look like melanoma to me. I have this kind of mole/freckle – the fact that so many of your mole/freckles look like this tells me only that this is the kind of mole/freckle you have. Nothing more.
In fact, I've had several of this kind removed and they were simply dysplastic but none melanoma. Let's see what pathology says about the 17. If you have 17 non-melanomas, then you know to perhaps be in the market for a less knife-happy doctor. If you have severely dysplastic, don't be fooled if they say something like 'pre melanoma'. That doesn't exist. It's melanoma, or it's not. I think some docs come up with terms like pre-melanoma to justify why they've taken the knife to someone. Then again, if you have 17 melanomas, you'll be happy you had it done.
I stand by my assumption that few of none of your 17 will be melanoma, and then we can talk further about molemate alrogithms. I wouldn't bother asking your dr how it works, you can read all about it online:
http://www.medxhealth.com/our-products/siascopytrade;/molemate.aspx
This shows you how with molemate, a dr can choose different 'views' of a mole to isolate eg blood patterns etc. When your doc says 'fim', I think they are talking about the different views you can choose to isolate different things like collagen etc.
Here's another fellow sceptic (like I am sceptical):
Good luck… am curious how pathology will come back. Hopefully all clear. And remember: no malarkey about 'pre melanoma'. Dysplasia – even severe dysplasia – may never have evolved to melanoma.
-
- January 31, 2016 at 9:03 am
Hi there thanks . Can email u pics of what they cut out if that is okay . They are all on my back . Anyway if not no problem , Tks
-
- January 31, 2016 at 6:25 am
Hi
I remember your original posts, Graham. I hope you are not in too much discomfort.. you must have felt like a human pincushion, having 17 excisions done! Look, this is THE litmus test of molemate. I replied to you last time that I was a bit doubtful about the molemate technology, and your second opinion Dr had a similarly cautious view, recommending just five excisions. It will be interesting to see what pathology says on these 17. I would be very surprised if many – indeed any – of these were melanoma. But, if you are from the 'if in doubt, cut it out' school, then these 17 excisions make a lot of sense.
-
Tagged: cutaneous melanoma
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.