New Report About Melanoma Statistics: “9 of 10 Melanoma Surgeries Not Necessary”

It would be helpful to know more about your wife and her diagnosis. was it melanoma?

Watch what you read online. A biopsy is the best way to tell for sure.

Can she have plastic surgery?

It would be helpful to know more about your wife and her diagnosis. was it melanoma?

Watch what you read online. A biopsy is the best way to tell for sure.

Can she have plastic surgery?

It would be helpful to know more about your wife and her diagnosis. was it melanoma?

Watch what you read online. A biopsy is the best way to tell for sure.

Can she have plastic surgery?

That may very well be true, but what if the doctor told you that the lesion was benign and then you find out later that it really was melanoma? That certainly is not good.

My local doc discovered a 1×4 mm lesion on the bottom of my foot last June. She offered to remove it right then and there but I wanted my doctors at Johns Hopkins to take a look at it too. I asked her if it was urgent that I get it removed immediatley and she said I'd be fine until my visit in September with the docs at Johns Hopkins. Come September, the oncologist felt it probably was benign but recommended I see one of their dermatologists, which I was scheduled for that day anyway. The dermatologist examined the lesion and wasn't sure what to make of it. He thought it was probably benign but couldn't say with 100% certainty. He wanted to see me again in December to make sure there wasn't any change to it. On my December visit, he really didn't see any change but recommended I get it removed to be on the safe side. I agreed to that and they removed it that day. The lesion turned out to be benign.

Now, if the experts at a place ike the melanoma center at Hopkins (who see these things all the time) can't say with 100% certainty that a lesion is benign how is some local dermatologist supposed to know?

When in doubt, get it out. I'd rather live with a scar that with (in my case, another) melanoma.

That may very well be true, but what if the doctor told you that the lesion was benign and then you find out later that it really was melanoma? That certainly is not good.

My local doc discovered a 1×4 mm lesion on the bottom of my foot last June. She offered to remove it right then and there but I wanted my doctors at Johns Hopkins to take a look at it too. I asked her if it was urgent that I get it removed immediatley and she said I'd be fine until my visit in September with the docs at Johns Hopkins. Come September, the oncologist felt it probably was benign but recommended I see one of their dermatologists, which I was scheduled for that day anyway. The dermatologist examined the lesion and wasn't sure what to make of it. He thought it was probably benign but couldn't say with 100% certainty. He wanted to see me again in December to make sure there wasn't any change to it. On my December visit, he really didn't see any change but recommended I get it removed to be on the safe side. I agreed to that and they removed it that day. The lesion turned out to be benign.

Now, if the experts at a place ike the melanoma center at Hopkins (who see these things all the time) can't say with 100% certainty that a lesion is benign how is some local dermatologist supposed to know?

When in doubt, get it out. I'd rather live with a scar that with (in my case, another) melanoma.

That may very well be true, but what if the doctor told you that the lesion was benign and then you find out later that it really was melanoma? That certainly is not good.

My local doc discovered a 1×4 mm lesion on the bottom of my foot last June. She offered to remove it right then and there but I wanted my doctors at Johns Hopkins to take a look at it too. I asked her if it was urgent that I get it removed immediatley and she said I'd be fine until my visit in September with the docs at Johns Hopkins. Come September, the oncologist felt it probably was benign but recommended I see one of their dermatologists, which I was scheduled for that day anyway. The dermatologist examined the lesion and wasn't sure what to make of it. He thought it was probably benign but couldn't say with 100% certainty. He wanted to see me again in December to make sure there wasn't any change to it. On my December visit, he really didn't see any change but recommended I get it removed to be on the safe side. I agreed to that and they removed it that day. The lesion turned out to be benign.

Now, if the experts at a place ike the melanoma center at Hopkins (who see these things all the time) can't say with 100% certainty that a lesion is benign how is some local dermatologist supposed to know?

When in doubt, get it out. I'd rather live with a scar that with (in my case, another) melanoma.

I don't get what this is saying – that 90% of diagnosed melanomas really aren't melanoma?  Or 90% of surgeries done for melanoma didn't need to be done.  the surgery wasn't necessary, but it was melanoma?  Or, 90% of biopsies at the derm's office are unnecessary because they don't turn out to be melanoma? 

I don't get what this is saying – that 90% of diagnosed melanomas really aren't melanoma?  Or 90% of surgeries done for melanoma didn't need to be done.  the surgery wasn't necessary, but it was melanoma?  Or, 90% of biopsies at the derm's office are unnecessary because they don't turn out to be melanoma? 

I don't get what this is saying – that 90% of diagnosed melanomas really aren't melanoma?  Or 90% of surgeries done for melanoma didn't need to be done.  the surgery wasn't necessary, but it was melanoma?  Or, 90% of biopsies at the derm's office are unnecessary because they don't turn out to be melanoma? 

The article is poorly written and misleading but the biggest clue is in the box to the right of the article 

• Every day, hundreds of individuals and companies choose WebWire to distribute their news.
• WebWire places your news within numerous highly trafficked news search engines generating leads and publicity.
• Submit Your Release Now!

My guess this is a pay to publish "news" source.

The article is poorly written and misleading but the biggest clue is in the box to the right of the article 

• Every day, hundreds of individuals and companies choose WebWire to distribute their news.
• WebWire places your news within numerous highly trafficked news search engines generating leads and publicity.
• Submit Your Release Now!

My guess this is a pay to publish "news" source.

The article is poorly written and misleading but the biggest clue is in the box to the right of the article 

• Every day, hundreds of individuals and companies choose WebWire to distribute their news.
• WebWire places your news within numerous highly trafficked news search engines generating leads and publicity.
• Submit Your Release Now!

My guess this is a pay to publish "news" source.

The link you provided is a link to a story about a story about a study..

Digging a bit deeper, here is the link to the actual study  http://www.eblue.org/article/S0190-9622(11)00808-5/abstract; please read the "CONCLUSION: Over the 10-year study period, accuracy in melanoma detection improved only in specialized clinics maybe because of a larger use of new diagnostic techniques such as dermatoscopy."

No where in the study was it mentioned that 9 of 10 Melanoma Surgeries Not Necessary.

The original story that your link was a spin story about originated from this source http://www.thetanningguru.com/#axzz1ykDUTs6y; notice the name The Tanning Guru?  Well this fellow writes  position/spin pieces for the Indoor Tanning Industry .and even has a rather unique conspiracy theory on how the big pharma and cancer groups have turned Melanoma Awarness into nothing but a for profit marketing scheme………………bit of a stretch.
 

The real takeaway from this study was that accurate diagonosis of melanoma only increased in specialized clinics.

Not dissing derms, but the key aspect is still to seek EXPERT advise from melanoma specialists.

So no,  the article is not really an accurate reflection of the study I cited, nor is it the truth, but rather a "spun position piece".  Hardly an accurate source for making informed medical decisions.

Cheers,

Charlie S

The link you provided is a link to a story about a story about a study..

Digging a bit deeper, here is the link to the actual study  http://www.eblue.org/article/S0190-9622(11)00808-5/abstract; please read the "CONCLUSION: Over the 10-year study period, accuracy in melanoma detection improved only in specialized clinics maybe because of a larger use of new diagnostic techniques such as dermatoscopy."

No where in the study was it mentioned that 9 of 10 Melanoma Surgeries Not Necessary.

The original story that your link was a spin story about originated from this source http://www.thetanningguru.com/#axzz1ykDUTs6y; notice the name The Tanning Guru?  Well this fellow writes  position/spin pieces for the Indoor Tanning Industry .and even has a rather unique conspiracy theory on how the big pharma and cancer groups have turned Melanoma Awarness into nothing but a for profit marketing scheme………………bit of a stretch.
 

The real takeaway from this study was that accurate diagonosis of melanoma only increased in specialized clinics.

Not dissing derms, but the key aspect is still to seek EXPERT advise from melanoma specialists.

So no,  the article is not really an accurate reflection of the study I cited, nor is it the truth, but rather a "spun position piece".  Hardly an accurate source for making informed medical decisions.

Cheers,

Charlie S

The link you provided is a link to a story about a story about a study..

Digging a bit deeper, here is the link to the actual study  http://www.eblue.org/article/S0190-9622(11)00808-5/abstract; please read the "CONCLUSION: Over the 10-year study period, accuracy in melanoma detection improved only in specialized clinics maybe because of a larger use of new diagnostic techniques such as dermatoscopy."

No where in the study was it mentioned that 9 of 10 Melanoma Surgeries Not Necessary.

The original story that your link was a spin story about originated from this source http://www.thetanningguru.com/#axzz1ykDUTs6y; notice the name The Tanning Guru?  Well this fellow writes  position/spin pieces for the Indoor Tanning Industry .and even has a rather unique conspiracy theory on how the big pharma and cancer groups have turned Melanoma Awarness into nothing but a for profit marketing scheme………………bit of a stretch.
 

The real takeaway from this study was that accurate diagonosis of melanoma only increased in specialized clinics.

Not dissing derms, but the key aspect is still to seek EXPERT advise from melanoma specialists.

So no,  the article is not really an accurate reflection of the study I cited, nor is it the truth, but rather a "spun position piece".  Hardly an accurate source for making informed medical decisions.

Cheers,

Charlie S

That article is pretty ridiculous.

I'm sure it's very possible that 9 out of every 10 biopsies are not melanoma. That doesn't make it a melanoma surgery. The first (and only so far) mole I had removed in my life was a melanoma tumor.  TG my doctor wasn't thinking, "it's probably nothing, I don't want to give this person a scar."

That article is pretty ridiculous.

I'm sure it's very possible that 9 out of every 10 biopsies are not melanoma. That doesn't make it a melanoma surgery. The first (and only so far) mole I had removed in my life was a melanoma tumor.  TG my doctor wasn't thinking, "it's probably nothing, I don't want to give this person a scar."

That article is pretty ridiculous.

I'm sure it's very possible that 9 out of every 10 biopsies are not melanoma. That doesn't make it a melanoma surgery. The first (and only so far) mole I had removed in my life was a melanoma tumor.  TG my doctor wasn't thinking, "it's probably nothing, I don't want to give this person a scar."