4 ms·

Article: "two forms of rare melanoma are not caused by exposure to the sun.." > Most skin cancers are not a big deal, and even Melanomas can vanish on their ow

Article: "two forms of rare melanoma are not caused by exposure to the sun.." > Most skin cancers are not a big deal, and even Melanomas can vanish on their own PSA: don't take medical advice from internet comments

Noaidi 2mo ago
[flagged]
- anonymars 2mo ago
  Your reading comprehension is way off. The article says "Each year in Australia, up to 420 people are diagnosed with acral or mucosal melanomas. They affect people of all ethnic backgrounds, and are the most common forms of melanoma in people with very dark skin." That is a discussion of specific subtypes of melanoma. You've turned that into a general statement about melanoma: > not all skin cancers are caused by sun exposure, and this is more true for Melenoma which occur both more frequently in darker skinned people and in place where there is little sun exposure. These are "Two rare ... forms of melanoma" not "melanoma as a whole." The article does not say melanoma as a whole is more frequent in darker-skinned people and in places with little sun exposure. Those two subtypes are. Let's also quote from https://wasatchdermatology.com/blogs/basal-cell-vs-squamous-vs-melanoma-guide/ https://wasatchdermatology.com/blogs/basal-cell-vs-squamous-... > BCC ... can cause significant local tissue damage if left untreated. Most cases are linked to chronic sun exposure, especially in fair-skinned individuals. > While it often remains localized at first, SCC can invade deeper tissues and, in some cases, metastasize to lymph nodes or other organs. Risk factors include cumulative sun exposure, a history of sunburns, and immunosuppression. > While not all skin cancers can be prevented, effective sun protection and healthy habits can greatly reduce your risk for basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and melanoma. That does not support "most skin cancers are not a big deal" > Melanomas can vanish on their own Your link does not support that statement https://www.nature.com/articles/s41379-021-00870-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41379-021-00870-2 "Whilst some studies reported an association with improved survival ... others did not find any significant association, and some even reported worse outcomes in patients whose tumors showed regression" You seem to have read this as "melanoma just goes away and the problem is gone" rather than "the primary tumor can recede, and in that case survival odds are somewhat better by a few percentage points (but actually worse for Stage III patients!)"
  - Noaidi 2mo ago
    5-year relative survival rates for melanoma skin cancer is 95%. That is all that matters. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/melanoma-skin-cancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/survival-rates-for-melanoma-skin-cancer-by-stage.html https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/melanoma-skin-cancer/det... The study data is not out yet, I thought it was, so I will wait untiul it is to comment further. But saying in the press that: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-20/melanoma-drug-cancer-intismeran-autogene/107056350 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-20/melanoma-drug-cancer-... "Melanoma is one of the deadliest forms of skin cancer, with more than 330,000 new cases diagnosed worldwide in 2022." Saying melanoma is the deadliest forms of skin cancer is not revealing anything and is a scare tactic. In 2022, there were approximately 60,000 deaths worldwide due to melanoma. A rare cancer with 18% death rate is not high compared to the others. The deadliest cancers include lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, liver cancer, colorectal cancer, and breast cancer. These cancers have the lowest survival rates and account for a significant number of cancer-related deaths. But I will wait for the upcoming complications and the worse 5 year all cause mortality rate in these patients.
    - anonymars 2mo ago
      Question for you: what is the goal of these comments? What is it would you like people to do or think differently after reading what you've written? I'll go first: my hope is that someone who has read what I've written will be more likely to take seriously something suspicious they see on their skin rather than ignore it as unimportant, and be more inclined to take seriously protection from sun exposure when possible
      - Noaidi 2mo ago
        My goal is to 1) not reward these companies by over inflating phase 3 clinical trial outcomes and 2) to not fear a skin cancer diagnosis and 3) not live your life in a bubble while polluting the world with sunscreen. Sun exposure does not cause skin cancer. It only increases the risk of skin cancer in some people. Look at the ROI on people's behavior and it makes no sense. Are we actually causing more damage by using all this sunscreen and the plastic bottles it comes in and lowering everyone's vitamin D levels? Sunscreen was widely used in the 70's and skin cancer rates keep going up. It's useless.
- addisonl 2mo ago
  > This also means that you are likely to get melenoma form something other than the sun. Quantifiably false statement. Incredibly dangerous misinformation to spread—shame on you. From https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.35463 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.35463 > Cutaneous melanoma (CM) accounted for around 331,700 cancer cases globally in 2022 > An estimated 267,353 (95% uncertainty intervals [UI]: 242,818, 278,638) CM cases were UVR attributable globally in 2022 UVR = Ultraviolet radiation Cutaneous melanoma (CM) is the vast majority of melanoma cases in the US at least: > The percentages of melanomas that were cutaneous, ocular, mucosal, and unknown primaries were 91.2%, 5.2%, 1.3%, and 2.2%, from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9781962/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9781962/

Noaidi 2mo ago

[flagged]

anonymars 2mo ago
Your reading comprehension is way off. The article says "Each year in Australia, up to 420 people are diagnosed with acral or mucosal melanomas. They affect people of all ethnic backgrounds, and are the most common forms of melanoma in people with very dark skin." That is a discussion of specific subtypes of melanoma. You've turned that into a general statement about melanoma: > not all skin cancers are caused by sun exposure, and this is more true for Melenoma which occur both more frequently in darker skinned people and in place where there is little sun exposure. These are "Two rare ... forms of melanoma" not "melanoma as a whole." The article does not say melanoma as a whole is more frequent in darker-skinned people and in places with little sun exposure. Those two subtypes are. Let's also quote from https://wasatchdermatology.com/blogs/basal-cell-vs-squamous-vs-melanoma-guide/ https://wasatchdermatology.com/blogs/basal-cell-vs-squamous-... > BCC ... can cause significant local tissue damage if left untreated. Most cases are linked to chronic sun exposure, especially in fair-skinned individuals. > While it often remains localized at first, SCC can invade deeper tissues and, in some cases, metastasize to lymph nodes or other organs. Risk factors include cumulative sun exposure, a history of sunburns, and immunosuppression. > While not all skin cancers can be prevented, effective sun protection and healthy habits can greatly reduce your risk for basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and melanoma. That does not support "most skin cancers are not a big deal" > Melanomas can vanish on their own Your link does not support that statement https://www.nature.com/articles/s41379-021-00870-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41379-021-00870-2 "Whilst some studies reported an association with improved survival ... others did not find any significant association, and some even reported worse outcomes in patients whose tumors showed regression" You seem to have read this as "melanoma just goes away and the problem is gone" rather than "the primary tumor can recede, and in that case survival odds are somewhat better by a few percentage points (but actually worse for Stage III patients!)"
- Noaidi 2mo ago
  5-year relative survival rates for melanoma skin cancer is 95%. That is all that matters. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/melanoma-skin-cancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/survival-rates-for-melanoma-skin-cancer-by-stage.html https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/melanoma-skin-cancer/det... The study data is not out yet, I thought it was, so I will wait untiul it is to comment further. But saying in the press that: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-20/melanoma-drug-cancer-intismeran-autogene/107056350 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-20/melanoma-drug-cancer-... "Melanoma is one of the deadliest forms of skin cancer, with more than 330,000 new cases diagnosed worldwide in 2022." Saying melanoma is the deadliest forms of skin cancer is not revealing anything and is a scare tactic. In 2022, there were approximately 60,000 deaths worldwide due to melanoma. A rare cancer with 18% death rate is not high compared to the others. The deadliest cancers include lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, liver cancer, colorectal cancer, and breast cancer. These cancers have the lowest survival rates and account for a significant number of cancer-related deaths. But I will wait for the upcoming complications and the worse 5 year all cause mortality rate in these patients.
  - anonymars 2mo ago
    Question for you: what is the goal of these comments? What is it would you like people to do or think differently after reading what you've written? I'll go first: my hope is that someone who has read what I've written will be more likely to take seriously something suspicious they see on their skin rather than ignore it as unimportant, and be more inclined to take seriously protection from sun exposure when possible
    - Noaidi 2mo ago
      My goal is to 1) not reward these companies by over inflating phase 3 clinical trial outcomes and 2) to not fear a skin cancer diagnosis and 3) not live your life in a bubble while polluting the world with sunscreen. Sun exposure does not cause skin cancer. It only increases the risk of skin cancer in some people. Look at the ROI on people's behavior and it makes no sense. Are we actually causing more damage by using all this sunscreen and the plastic bottles it comes in and lowering everyone's vitamin D levels? Sunscreen was widely used in the 70's and skin cancer rates keep going up. It's useless.
addisonl 2mo ago
> This also means that you are likely to get melenoma form something other than the sun. Quantifiably false statement. Incredibly dangerous misinformation to spread—shame on you. From https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.35463 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.35463 > Cutaneous melanoma (CM) accounted for around 331,700 cancer cases globally in 2022 > An estimated 267,353 (95% uncertainty intervals [UI]: 242,818, 278,638) CM cases were UVR attributable globally in 2022 UVR = Ultraviolet radiation Cutaneous melanoma (CM) is the vast majority of melanoma cases in the US at least: > The percentages of melanomas that were cutaneous, ocular, mucosal, and unknown primaries were 91.2%, 5.2%, 1.3%, and 2.2%, from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9781962/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9781962/