Are black people at a lower risk of skin cancer than white people? - Two very conflicting opinions...?

This isn’t a grey area at all. It is a well known fact (and has been for some time) that black people are less likely to get skin cancer than white people and among white people the highest at risk are red heads. I’m not sure what your point is – race/skin tone is only one risk factor. What potential issue? How could this cause a misdiagnosis?

I can address the melanoma portion of skin cancer. It is true blacks have a lower risk, but they wait longer to get treatment due to a false sense of security. Therefore, it is at a later stage when diagnosed.

People of ******* descent are at less risk of developing skin cancers in general and melanoma specifically. People of both ******* and asian descent are at higher risk of developing a non-UV related form of melanoma on the soles of the feet, betwen toes and between fingers. As many people with darker skin colour feel safe from these cancers, they are less likely to detect it early so the mortality rates for these cases are higher. There is nothing racist in these findings, it is just a part of their genetic make-up that happens to co-relate. Basically, caucasians need to be aware of skin cancer anywhere, most non-caucasions are of less risk over most of their body but of higher risk on feet and hands of a less common form of melanoma.

You. sir are an inherent racist with an odd predilection for evidence of superior qualities. Leave it.

I'd say chances are the same.

I really don't think he was being racist... But anyway... are you serious?? Of course they wouldn't wear gloves and socks all the time. It wasn't saying they're high risk on their hands and feet, have you seen a black skinned person's palms and soles of feet? They're much lighter and therefore at a higher chance of being damaged by the sun. There are always adverts about how bad skin cancer can be. Should there be even more?

It's an interesting and thought-provoking question. I'd have thought that any lower risk of skin cancer in those with darker skin would be because white skin has so little protection (in comparison) against the harmful effects of the sun. Having said that I worked as a volunteer with disabled children some years ago and we would always cover the darker children with high protection sun-cream just as much as the white kids just to be on the safe side. In retrospect I'm glad that we did because my closest friend (who is a black woman with a dark complexion) tells me that when she was a child she actually got severe sunburn and she was in the UK at the time not Jamaica or Australia or somewhere hot like that. Before she told me that I didn't know that black people could get sunburn I thought it was only white people that got burned because our skin was too lacking in melanin (I think it's called). If I had any advice on this I'd suggest that all people use sun-protection regardless of their skin colour because it is better to be safe than sorry.

You seem very sincere, so I doubt anyone would be offended. I think you are reading into the answer something which is not really there. Having risk doesn't mean high risk. Melanoma has genetic origins as well as exposure to the sun origins. I think black or dark people can get Melanoma under their finger nails and even in their eyes. Melanin is in several places where you would not expect it. I am a Melanoma survivor and get a full body check-up every year. The Dr. looks at all parts of my body including where the sun doesn't shine and places too delicate to describe here. Generally, dark skinned people do not have the skin cancer risk of us lighter skinned individuals. They are at greater risks for other diseases and as a result, their life expectancy is lower than light skinned people. I hope this helps.

So..if a website says that overweight people are twice and likely to get diabetes,heart problems and cost more in healthcare, you'd be ok with it? Well that's sizest if you go on your reckoning. If a study says that smokers are more likely to get lung cancer than non smokers then are you saying that is also offencive? (my mum smoked and got renal - kidney cancer, which is not smoking related so there are lots of exceptions) We know that groups of people are more or less likely to get certain diseases, healthcare problems or need more or less treatment based on lifestyle so if it's not sizest to point out fat people may be more at risk and smokers may be more at risk, then what's the problem stating that there may be less risk with one particular race or colour. Black people are still advised to wear sunscreen BUT compared to me - a very fair skinned, pale woman with multiple sun burns as a child AND multiple moles and frekles that have to be kept an eye on or removed *some* black people will have less of a risk than I do. The Cancer websites are not saying a black person can never get cancer but there is some study that says that *some* are less of a risk Now turn that around on it's head: Black people are MORE at risk generally of sickle cell. Is THAT racist? When it comes to healthcare, race OR size OR lifestyles must not be an issue. It should be based on FACT and Medical evidence NOT some PC attitude. You risk healthcare by doing so. Cancer advice is given to EVERYONE regardless of race. JUST like healthy eating and healthy lifestyles. Now obviously not everyone is the same, my hubby is very overweight, has NO high blood pressure, NO high cholesterol and NO problems regarding health other than mental. My gran died of a stroke at a young age, was a vegetarian, didn't smoke, didn't drink, was in fact UNDERweight BUT she still had a stroke. Sometimes advice and guidelines is what it is. Guidelines. We should not start on the race bandwagon simply because some people react differently to different conditions.