Posted on 08/09/2005 5:57:48 AM PDT by OESY
The nation is in the grip of what looks like a terrifying melanoma epidemic: melanoma is being diagnosed at more than double the rate it was in 1986, increasing faster than any other major cancer.
But why the numbers are increasing is a contentious subject, so touchy that one dermatologist called it "the third rail of dermatology."
Many dermatologists argue that melanoma, the most deadly of the skin cancers, is in fact becoming more common. And they recommend regular skin cancer screening as the best way to save lives. But some specialists say that what the numbers represent is not an epidemic of skin cancer but an epidemic of skin cancer screening, and a new study lends support to this view.
In the study, published in the current issue of The British Medical Journal, Dr. H. Gilbert Welch of the Department of Veterans Affairs in White River Junction, Vt., and Dartmouth Medical School and his colleagues analyzed melanoma's changing incidence and death rate over time.
The researchers used Medicare data to track the swift rise in melanoma cases since 1986 and data compiled by the National Cancer Institute to track the death rate and the number of people with early and late-stage disease.
They found that since 1986, skin biopsies have risen by 250 percent, a figure nearly the same as the rise in the incidence of early stage melanoma. But there was no change in the melanoma death rate. And the incidence of advanced disease also did not change, the researchers found....
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Can you have an "epidemic" of something that's not contagious?
Skin cancer is pretty common in my family so I'm carefull about getting too much sun.
Man has been out in the sun for how many millions of years yet skin cancer is a new desease. Makes one wonder what's causing it. Interesting, the rise in these cancers came about the same time as sun block lotions.
Wouldn't it make sense to look at the survival rate of all people diagnosed with melanoma and index the death rate accordingly to either 1986 or the most recent year?
Melanoma is probably something that has been around forever, but thanks to better screening, is now being more frequently discovered....doesn't necessarily mean that there is an "epidemic" or whatever word du jour NYT and other fearmongers might use.
Oh and by the way, it's all Bush's fault. :)
Heard that a while back and it makes sense...if the body produces no Vitamin D, and you get Vitamin D from exposure to sunlight, and Vitamin D helps fight cancer, could the rise in Melanoma come from us suddenly hiding away under our SPF4000 blockers?
Of course they can.......he who controls the language controls the argument.
Melanomas can vary in size, shape, color, texture, and location. When in doubt, get it checked out. My wife had a red 4mm pimple-like lesion on a non-sun exposed area that was not suspected by moi (a radiation oncologist) or by her dermatologist as being a melanoma. She insisted that it just didn't "feel right". Fortunately, she insisted on a biopsy, and a very early melanoma was found and widely excised. This was about 13 years ago, and so far there has been no recurrence, but she has had a few basal cell skin cancers that have been more of a nuisance than a real health threat.
I have a friend who has survived two melanomas, and a great-grandmother who died of it (only person I know of in my family who has had any other type of cancer but basal cell skin cancer).
Better screening is good. It's what has saved my friend's life.
Calling the situation of a lot more early cancers detected because screening has gone from almost nothing to a regular practice an epidemic is weird.
In a word, no. Otherwise you would see Eskimos dropping dead from cancer mid-winter. Your body gets enough Vitamin D from an hour or so of sun a week, or (less desirably) from food sources.
Longer life spans + more time being exposed (i.e, wearing less clothing) + better detection = more skin cancers being dectected...
Someone should whomp them upside the head with the Unabridged Dictionary.
I agree with you.........but they've already hijacked the definition years ago starting with the "epidemic of smoking" which led to the "epidemic of obesity" so an "epidemic of melanoma" is not a stretch in their minds........
Vitamin D seems to be a potent anti tumor agent, but you only need about 15 minutes a day of "unprotected" exposure to the sun to reap the benefits. I read a long report a couple of years ago about how folks in the sunbelt have a significantly lower rate of tumors/cancers, even though the skin cancer numbers are higher.
I also read that skin cancer is misdiagnosed as much as seventy percent of the time by doctors other than dermatologists.
I went through a phase of paranoia when we lived in the southwest. And every May when the sunblock media blitz hits. It seems that each month nowadays offers a new disease/condition/crime to be aware of or paranoid about..Skin Cancer Awareness Month, Colon Cancer Awareness Month, Child Abuse Prevention Month, Domestic Violence blahblahblah.
The more I read, the more I tend to agree with your theory. There was a blip in the media recetly aout the benefits of sun exposure...
I think it's a lot like 'grandma' would say. Moderation is the key. My aunts used to tell me "you don't want your face to look like your grandma's old leather purse when you're 50."
I wonder what the Nanny State will do - Outlaw the Sun..or our use of it?
My feeling is that it is the sunscreen lotion. The higher the rating, the more melanoma you get.
Have a beer, you are all going to die of something!
My father-in-law was treated for a lesion on his chest.
His uncle died from a lesion on his toe.
And, my brother had it on the back of his thigh.
Gee, after all the hype about sunscreens and tanning and health foods, we come to find out that the rates of skin cancer have doubled???? It would almost seem that the medical establishment doesn't have a clue, and that there might be ulterior motives behind the hype.
Why do you think it's new? Maybe newly identified rather than just going under the old name of natural causes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
