August
2008
sunSmart isn’t enough
Yet again another story about a young person facing melanoma, who recalls vividly being careful in the sun and taking steps to avoid skin cancer, yet ending up with the worst kind.
“I vividly remember always having to wear a sun hat or a sun visor when I was playing outside, too. Every few hours, Mum would call me in from playing to put more cream on - especially if we were abroad on holiday. I definitely wasn’t a child who got sunburned”. Story
It’s this paradox which has always been at the heart of my questioning on how effective sunsmart is at preventing serious skin cancers because the evidence suggests contray to common sense that staying inside and out of the sun puts you at higher risk of melanoma.
Sunsmart pretty much targets the most common form of skin cancer, non-melanoma, which is less serious and caused by over exposure to UV, so how is it that being careful and being sunsmart can wind you up in a worse off position? because there’s no focus on skin!! I mean it shouldn’t be sunSmart it should be skinsmart, I only hope the right people are listening?
It’s the short intense bursts of UV which could have an effect on Melanoma, simply because if you think about it pigment producing cells are not having to do any work, then all of a sudden, they have to go into ooverdrive and work overtime to produce melanin. In Type One skin that can’t happen and if it does, then might it cause these cells to go mental and not shut off, thus leading to melanoma?
It’s a serious issue that cancer research UK have so far failed to address in their education on skin cancers, they need to think along these lines with sunSmart. The notion of short intense infrequent incidental bursts of UV doesn’t even figure in the advice on sun exposure. The type of exposure you’d get by waiting for a bus to college, not the kind of exposure you get on holiday. Have you noticed the advice is to go outside after 3pm when UV levels can actually be HIGHER, depending on the day? If it’s cloudy at 12pm, but clear at 3pm, it’s slightly better to go out at midday under cloud, even though cloud isn’t protective, the advice for sun sensitive folks, should never have been to go out in the hotest part of the day!
Sunscreens are an issue too, UVA could now be the cause of melanoma, not UVB and if that’s the case sunscreen makers should ready against law suits. “UVA rays remain the same strength year around and can penetrate such things as clothing, windshields and hats” is perhaps a line we all need to read over and over until we get why action on melanoma awareness is shamefully ineffective.
August
2008
Hello Lee
I hope you are ok. In the past I contacted you about my late daughter Nicola who died from malignant melanoma in April 2002 at the age of 24. I just thought I would contact you to see how you are doing.
I recently read that there is concern that GP’s are still removing melanomas which should be done by a specialist at a hospital. The reason being that they do not remove enough of the surrounding area with the suspect lesion.
Nicola went to see her GP in March 1998, had a mole removed in May 2008 at our local surgery and then had to wait another two months before she was seen by a consultant and had a skin graft in July 1998. I feel this delay and the mole being removed by a GP could have been part of the reason her cancer returned three years later in the summer of 2001. I would be interested to know your views on this.
I send you my best wishes for the future.
Sue Higginbottom