Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ_Boston
My guess is that the mole was pre-cancerous and thus negative from the lab. I have seen dermatologists (I worked for two of them up north) who take a 'cautious waiting' treatment option. In other words, keep and eye on it every few months and then treat if necessary. They certainly didn't remove every irregular mole they saw.
|
As a Clark's Level 3 melanoma survivor, I had been in the care of a dermatologist up north for forever. When I moved here, I began using a dermatologist whose practice structure is to allow the PA to determine what to biopsy, and when it comes back positive and not with clean margins, then the MD operates. I swear by the PA I use; half to three quarters of the questionable moles come back as what used to be termed as "early evolving melanoma." My body just seems to form these with gusto! IMHO, based on what I've learned from the both dermatologists and the PA, something that is "pre-cancerous" should not be described as "negative"....
I have records sent to the dermatologist up north, who during one of my rare visits there (I live in FL most of the year) he commented that some of what was biopsied may never actually become melanomas and that removing them that early was (pardon the expression) overkill, in his opinion. When I brought this up the PA, the response--which seemed pretty sensible to me--is that in FL we have to be that much more cautious than up north because of sun exposure so much more and so much stronger. And frankly, I'd rather err on the side of caution: "Take it off!"