@socks
Forum Replies Created
- Replies
-
-
- March 26, 2019 at 2:29 am
Green et al. 2011,42 found in a prospective study that there may be an association between sunscreen use and reduced risk of melanoma. However, since the participants were told they were participants in a skin cancer prevention trial and were questioned periodically during the trial on their use of sunscreen, the likelihood that they were significantly more diligent in applying sunscreen in accordance with manufacturers' instructions than ordinary users of sunscreen cannot be discounted. (Bolding mine)
I'm sorry, it's just really hard for me to take this 2016 study seriously when it seeks to ding other studies by saying, "Maybe the problem is that people used the sunscreen PROPERLY and that's why the researchers got the data they did."
Regardless, this is one study surrounded by seas of other – and more recent – studies that do show a benefit in using broad-spectrum sunscreen to help prevent melanoma. Vitamin D deficiency is a real problem, of course, and one deserving of proper study. There could very well be a correlation between Vitamin D deficiency and increased melanoma/other skin cancer risks in a person who otherwise has a history of sunburns (like, for example, me: I was a very outdoorsy kid, I got burned on a pretty regular basis, including one really bad burn one year, but as I grew older, my interests became more indoor-based, and I didn't get out as much… and when I did, I typically burned (yay, super fair skin v_v)). But I think the link between UV radiation and skin cancers is pretty well-established by now. I also know that some sunscreens inflate their SPF factors and/or are just fancy lotion. But a reputable, broad-spectrum sunscreen still seems like a good idea to me.
Ultimately, I'm just not ever convinced by a single study on anything. One study says "eating eggs is good!" and another says "eating eggs is bad!" You have to look at the entire body of evidence, and a lot of times, what's good for one person is bad for another. But I am glad to see that there are more and newer studies out there than this one, because that means it is still being looked at! If we keep at it, our understanding will only grow!
-
- March 16, 2019 at 12:10 pm
Sounds like a pretty normal part of life in general.
If nothing else, you can always withdraw from the clinical trial later (right?) and go to MD Anderson. It's not going anywhere. And as much as I love everything MD Anderson has done for my mom, trucking on down to Houston on a regular basis can be pretty stressful (I live in Michigan; she lives in Indiana). Better to go easy on yourself; less stress should help! 😀
But don't beat yourself up over your choices.
-
- March 14, 2019 at 4:48 am
Not a medical professional, but some quick google fu makes it sound like what this says is you have a really weird mole that doesn't look cancerous from what they've got, but they want to go back and get the rest of it off of you just to be sure. You might be at a higher risk for melanoma, but it sounds like the sample they got wasn't positive.
Most dermatologists and dermatopathologists use a system devised by the NIH for classifying melanocytic lesions. In this classification, a nevus can be defined as benign, having atypia, or being a melanoma. A benign nevus is read as (or understood as) having no cytologic or architectural atypia. An atypical mole is read as having architectural atypia, and having (mild, moderate, or severe) cytologic (melanocytic) atypia.[10] Usually, cytologic atypia is of more important clinical concern than architectural atypia. Usually, moderate to severe cytologic atypia will require further excision to make sure that the surgical margin is completely clear of the lesion.
So basically the options are "it's fine," "it's weird," or "it's cancer." And you're in the "weird" category. That's how I'm reading it anyway, and again, I'm far, far, faaaaaar from an expert. Hopefully someone with more background on this will weigh in.
-
- August 4, 2014 at 5:09 am
*hugs* I'm IIIc myself. Getting ready for my next set of scans soon. Personally I chose not to do interferon but that's based entirely on my life and my personal situation. I feel that, for me personally, it's not a good idea. Make sure you go over all the options – and the pros & cons of each – with your doctor. Ask about clinical trials, etc.
And do everything you can to remain positive. It sounds kind of silly, but a positive attitude really does help!
-
- August 4, 2014 at 5:09 am
*hugs* I'm IIIc myself. Getting ready for my next set of scans soon. Personally I chose not to do interferon but that's based entirely on my life and my personal situation. I feel that, for me personally, it's not a good idea. Make sure you go over all the options – and the pros & cons of each – with your doctor. Ask about clinical trials, etc.
And do everything you can to remain positive. It sounds kind of silly, but a positive attitude really does help!
-
- August 4, 2014 at 5:09 am
*hugs* I'm IIIc myself. Getting ready for my next set of scans soon. Personally I chose not to do interferon but that's based entirely on my life and my personal situation. I feel that, for me personally, it's not a good idea. Make sure you go over all the options – and the pros & cons of each – with your doctor. Ask about clinical trials, etc.
And do everything you can to remain positive. It sounds kind of silly, but a positive attitude really does help!
-
- October 6, 2020 at 6:30 pm
Well, it’s hard to tell from an MRI what the spots are. It’s most likely they’re cancer, because, well, there’s a big ol’ tumor sitting right there on the left hepatic lobe. But livers get benign masses all the time. So… maybe? ‘Course there’s also the spleen… and all over my scalp, apparently. >_O UGH.I am BRAF negative. Or, at least, my initial tumor was, back in 2014. I’d be surprised if any of these are any different.
My doctor – Dr. Lao at University of Michigan – is a great doctor, honestly. He listens to me, he respects my decisions, and he gives me all the information I need to make those decisions, along with his professional opinion, but still lets ME decide MY treatment. I really like the liver surgeon, too; too bad I likely won’t be seeing much more of him.
-
- October 6, 2020 at 6:27 pm
TIL sounds fascinating. We’ll have to see what my options are.I speak to my oncologist tomorrow. In the meantime, I spoke to my psychiatrist, and I told him what a big help y’all have been. Even just having some *idea* of what options are out there has helped a lot, because I really didn’t know them. Just knowing that this isn’t the end of the road was already such a relief.
-
- October 6, 2020 at 6:25 pm
Yeah, I’m BRAF negative, but that TIL stuff sounds *really* good. Not sure if U of M(ichigan) is doing any of those, but I suppose I’ll find out tomorrow when I see my onc.I’ve said since the beginning that if we ran out of things U of M could do for me, that I’d be going straight to M.D. Anderson. My mom went there for her Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and I was her caregiver, so I’m very familiar with MDA. I know melanoma is a moonshot for them, that they have lots of clinical trials, and, if nothing else, there’s that feeling of familiarity which would be such a comfort.
Plus I already know some of the best restaurants in the area! xD
-
- March 14, 2019 at 1:41 am
No port; there's usually no trouble finding a vein for me (unless you're that one idiot I had last time). I've had so many CTs and MRIs and blood draws by now that I know my left arm is where the good vein is. My oncologist says that he goes by the nurse's suggestions on whether or not to have a port put in; he figures they're the ones who have to try to find my veins.
My husband and I are actually moving to Ann Arbor (I'm getting treatment at U of M) so that we won't have to make the 2.5 hour drive (one way) every time I have an infusion. My oncologist sees infusion patients on Wednesdays and Fridays, so maybe I'll shoot for Friday infusions, to have the weekend to recover, per your advice. Thank you!
-
