My mother (Asian) was diagnosed with acro-melanoma just like what Dr. Gunter described. It was at the bottom of her foot and she went to doctor after doctor and was told again and again that it was just a harmless mole. 6 months later, when it got bigger and bigger, they finally did a biopsy and realized that it was melanoma, and it has already spread to her lymph nodes, a stage 3 cancer. Thankfully, my mother responded to immunotherapy well, even though statically, acro-melanoma patients don’t respond to treatment as well as the other melanoma types. She is now cancer free. But if her melanoma was caught early on at stage 1, which was when she first went to a dermatologist, it would’ve been so much easier and quicker to treat. We absolutely need to bring more awareness to different types of skin cancer on the skin of different ethnicities.
I am white and have also had doctors tell me that moles aren't anything to be worried about. I have one that is growing irregularly and I had to push for them to biopsy it. Not everything that happens to a person is a result of racism. Sometimes doctors just disregard potential issues due to them being lower probability. We really need to stop telling people of all colors that doctors will treat them differently because of racism. Sometimes one ethic group is more likely to have a condition. That isn't racism that is medical science. I hope you mom gets cancer free and stays that way. It isn't fun for any family member to go through this.
@@tray22 Thanks for your response. My comment wasn't about racism. It was about the need of medical community being more aware of how diseases manifest differently in different ethnicities and therefore can diagnose and treat these disease more effectively.
@@wonsunparque4788 your comment was on point. However the Dr. In this TED talk labels the exact same thing as systematic racism. I agree with your comment but keep in mind there are doctors all over the world. The data collected comes from virtually every country and university that studies medicine. I don't think the lack of understanding is intended. Doctors are human and all humans error.
@@tray22 So I totally get what you're saying, but I believe that you may be confusing covert racism with outright blatant racism. The kind of racism she explains here is not necessarily the result of a doctor choosing to ignore the obvious because of a personal bias against a person of a certain race. The issue she describes is one of ignorance. Many medical professionals do not learn how to properly diagnose patients of color because the default skin type is white. That's what they train on and that's what they have the easiest time diagnosing. This is still a form a racism, albeit one derived from a lack of understanding instead of malice. As the medical community continues to study a wider array of races and their skin types, they'll be able to catch early signs of skin cancer sooner.
@@agorapanologia This is only true in the mind of a woke liberal. It you talk to actual professional doctors and nurse practitioners they receive medical training for all races. The only reason you think this way is because you have been mislead. True racism is intentional. All the add on terms to expand racism is no different than the 50 some odd genders that now exist. If the medical field says no there are two genders then they are called sexist or homophobic.
That's such a positive way of seeing acne. Sadly it's an actual skin condition and there are plenty of treatments available to treat it. You just gotta find the best option among the millions of products that claim to help with acne.
@@Alianger It's not bullshit though; different diseases show up differently on different colours of skin, yet lighter shades are more focused on when students are learning how to diagnose them. This leaves the diseases of darker-skinned folks undiagnosed because doctors simply don't know how to (and funds for research aren't allocated for unknown things about darker skin colours). It's not really a political thing; it's a fact that the medical world knows less about darker skin colours in comparison to lighter ones
1. Myth #1: Healthy skin is the skin that looks flawless. (0:19) A: Healthy skin is the skin that does its jobs. 2. Myth #2: You only need sunscreen on sunny days. (2:02) A: Choose a broad-spectrum, at least 30 SPF, sunscreen. 3. Myth #3: People with darker skin don't need sunscreen. (2:58) A: Although a higher eumelanin/pheomelanin ratio (associated with darker skin color) has an intrinsic SPF, it's not enough. 4. Myth #4: You can shrink your pores. (4:24) A: They're largely related to genetics and don't shrink, but can enlarge with skin irritation. 5. Myth #5: Chocolate causes acne. (4:57) A: Studies are inconsistent and not conclusive. However, the healthiest diet for your body can be the healthiest diet for your skin Go to your dermatologist, ignore all myths. Edit: Timestamps
When I said that US dermatologists aren't trained enough to diagnose POC's skin diseases in a medschool discord group, I was bullied. I am Indian and we have all shades of brown and our text books reflect that!
don't be a racist. Doctors everywhere are trained to treat people of all complexions. Are not pale people human too? And shouldn't everyone be considered POC, unless you're the invisible man or woman or unknown/undecided/confused.
@@calanpeet The same disease can present differently due to genetic things specific to a subgroup, or some kind of locally prevalent food habit, or even just certain thing appear different for different skintones and can be confused with normal features of their skin. There are two important issues here. Racism as well as proper medical care. I hope you would agree that combatting racism as a (n unconscious) *cause* of stunted/overly-simplistic medical care is a worthy form of racism to fight.
@@sarcastichue2119 ah yes, we should definitely bully people for pointing out that a practise is causing disproportionate amounts of /death/ and /suffering/ because the terms they use are in disagreement with our own norm. I always like it when people prioritise a minor political issue affecting no one over systematically bad medical practises that lead to cancer.
@@calanpeet you couldn't miss the point more but okay. It is per literal definition anti-racist to point out that people's unawareness to natural differences (in this case based on skin colour and thus ethnicity) can lead to unfair treatment
I don’t like how sunscreen feels but also cancer is bad. Guess I’ll just continue never going outside. Edit: Thanks for the support and advice but I was mostly joking.
@@WhichDoctor1 yes, when you use divisive terminology when reality is more of an ooops than an intentional act. It wasn't racist, it was misguided. Most of the population is white (67%), so most doctors will be white and most patients will be white, so most studies will be on white skin...duh. That's more of an accident than a "yeah, f' black people"
@@chaunceyphilpot3986 I think you may have misconstrued my point. The medical systems are absolutely racist in outcomes. No one is saying that every doctor is explicitly racist. But racist beliefs, like black people feel less pain, or darker-skinned people are unreliable witnesses of their own symptoms, are common even among black members of staff because they are often taught to doctors in textbooks and by older doctors. The systems are racist on an institutional level. And as a result outcomes for black people are worse than necessary. Those are facts that have been repeatedly measured and documented. You don't have to be "woke" or "progressive" to point them out, you just have to be objective.
I wish this doctor would update her understanding of my disease, endometriosis. In her most recent book she published a severely outdated definition, and she pushes debunked and outdated info on her social media. She's not a specialist in the disease, and being such a huge influencer she has a lot of influence on public understanding
I agree. Also, the pretentious manner in which she speaks is like nails on a chalkboard (to me). It may just be her affinity to 'chirp' into her higher vocal registers, but, I also believe it's far more than that.
@@Novastar.SaberCombat Agreed. I usually mute videos and read subtitles because most RU-vidr voices annoy me. Her pretentious facial expressions did it for me. I had to come looking for time-stamps just to get the info.
The chocolate vs acne thing reminded me of an issue I had with my skin. I used to get really big, red pimples full of goo on my back. Dermatologist (a university professor) told me to cut chocolate and soda. I cut both, but the issue remained. I realized that it was because of butter. I cut butter from my breakfast diet, and that went away. Still don't consume soda, and consume chocolate less than I used to. Still butter or anything that has fat in it (like peanut, pistachios, nuts) gives me pimples.
For me it is chicken fat. I can eat chicken just fine, but if I eat really fatty chicken like chicken thighs without any other fats, I get painful red pimples. To get pimples from chocolate I have eat a massive amount, like 250+ grams a day for weeks.
5:18 Chocolate is one of the foods that causes acne for acne-prone people though, sugar+dairy+caffeine =recipe for inflammation. People who tend to be caffeine sensitive also seem to be lactose intolerant _and_ sensitive to sugar. Everyone's ancestors ate differently so we all have different reactions to foods, which is why the studies will never be conclusive.
Sensitive to sugar? I think you meant sensitive to insulin-growth factor 1, both excess sugar and diary. But guess what, all obese americans I ever saw, mostly online, never had any skin issues like that.
Please do some case study on south of India if I did not get skin cancer I dont understand how I escaped. My entire childhood I baked myself in the sun with no sunscreen..
Yeah, it’s strange that for thousands of years we never needed this product, but suddenly we need it to be on our body every hour of the day.... sounds like capitalism to me. And before folks go on about how humans are living longer now: what about those centenarians alive right now? Did they always have sunscreen on every hour of their life? I doubt it.
@@jujugarcianyc I don't know where you're from but, I can tell by your name that you're Latina as I am. Our ancestors used oils and natural gels in their bodies to protect against the sunlight. Based on this a scientist tried to mimic this substance to protect the men during the war. We always relied on something to protect our skin, nowadays it's easier since we have it commercially available.
@@jujugarcianyc Many things happened in these thousands of years. 1. People didn't travel as much so you would find people in the region they are naturally adapted for. 2. The depletion of the ozone layer increases the UV radiation. 3. People didn't get diagnosed. They still had skin problems but they were not documented, identified or diagnosed. And regarding the centenarians alive right now - well it doesn't mean that not using sunscreen automatically gets you skin cancer because there are many factors involved (diet, sun exposure, genetics, race etc.). SPF is just the best way to reduce the risk of skin cancer and other skin-related issues.
studies about the link between sunscreen and vitamin d loss are mostly inconclusive, but you usually wont cause any deficiencies by wearing suncreen, you'll still absorb everything you need. however, if you are still concerned you can get vit D from foods like tuna, canned fish, whole milk, beef liver, mushrooms, orange juice and almond milk.
Sometimes they take minutes, hours or even days to be generated and become available. I check back if later if I require them. In most cases, they will be there eventually. Have a good day.
Unfortunately RU-vid, in their endless wisdom, removed the ability for the community to suggest captions which the channel could then approve. It was not uncommon to see science and educational videos with English, Spanish, German, French, Russian, and Arabic captions. It would take a long time, like 10X a video's runtime, so it wasn't very common, but on large channels where every video would eventually be translated, people who needed those captions would know to wait a few days after upload for it to be made and approved. Now only the channel can supply captions, so some large channels hire the services of companies based in places where labour rates are much lower than in the developed world. For scripted content, it's usually just a matter of aligning the script to the timing of the video.
It makes sense that we should always wear sunscreen to protect our skin, but doesn't sunscreen prevent us from making vitamin D? If so, how are we supposed to get vitamin D? Is it better to have limited sunscreen-free exposure, or to just take a supplement?
Watching this feels weird, especially when they say all of us need Sunscreen. Why didn't we/our skin evolved to take care of something as common as sun by default ?
I dont think black people get damage from sun. Look at africans and hottest places on earth. Maybe because humans are engineered by aliens and not so by nature itself:
Well you're very unlikely to die of skin cancer before you're able to produce offspring so there wasn't a major need to develop complete sun resistance. The only adaptive mechanism is that people living in areas with lots of sun exposure have more melanin in their skin wich offers some protection while people in less sunnier areas developed lighter skin to produce more vitamin D.
I'm a bit confused by Myth #4: You can shrink your pores. If you CAN enlarge pores from skin irritation, but you cannot shrink them, does that mean than any pore enlargement is permanent? Because if not, I would say that going from the state of having irritated enlarged pores to non-irritated normal-sized pores could be described as "shrinking" your pores.
I believe that they were trying to talk about the 'pore shrinking' advertisements that are prevalent in a lot of skincare brands. Your pores can become enlarged if they are irritated and you can help to combat this by partaking in a skincare routine that is made for your skin. however, there is a misconception that you can shrink the normal size of your pores (before they become enflamed), usually for cosmetic purposes, which is really not possible because your genetics play a large part in determining pore size. Hope that that helps! :)
I think Eric and Michelle are both right, it’s a clever marketing strategy to use vague language so someone’s personal interpretation can make them more likely to buy the product. I don’t remember those ads saying anything about shrinking the size of healthy pores specifically, they just say “shrink your pores” and people with big irritated pores think it’ll work on them and people with “big” non-irritated pores think it’ll work on them too. Vagueness is one of the things I look for when I’m trying to figure out whether someone’s a snake oil salesman or not. Especially vagueness with a touch of random science that’s not well-explained.
"Dermatologists are mostly white " add in your country, dermatologists in each country are trained to care for for skin conditions seen in persons in that area. African dermatologists are trained to recognise pathologies on black skins as well as white ones. It's the reason for the residency.
@@zeeblue1220 I am just super tired of systematic racism being tossed around for freaking everything. If they can do it I can to. The only thing this video proves is systematic is stupidity. The comments sections really bring out the low IQ folks. My comment was obviously in jest.
Way to miss the point. The point is that because most doctors and their patients are white, and because skin conditions can show up different in different ethnicities, it's prudent to have a wide range of examples while training doctors and nurses, so we can avoid preventable deaths and diseases among different ethnicities. If you feel this is about calling people racist, and not about acknowledging the racial implications of of the current system, when we have data that demonstrates disparities between ethnicities even when controlling for factors such as socioeconomic status, then that's *your* problem, not hers.
@@deus_ex_machina_ and the point is that isn’t racist. I find it ironic that you tried to insult me by saying, “way to miss the point” when it was you that missed the point.
@@gregcarlson8438 Again, it's not about calling people racist, it's about *racial disparities.* There _needn't be any racist intent_ for this to be the case.
US dermatology associations recommend to basically NEVER expose skin to sun except if not protected, which is nonsense. There are no more melanoma diagnosed in Europe from UK to Italy, even though we are suggested to put sun cream just on sunny days. Not even the australian recommendations suggest to avoid weak sunlight if un protected. Of course, diet is key in all this and is alwayz better to be precautious but putting sun cream on cloudy days is just paranoid - and not suggested by medical associations of other countries!
It's not the cloudiness that tells you whether your skin can be damaged or not, it's the UV rating - which (depending on your area) can be high on a cloudy day in summer for example, and low on a sunny day in winter. If the UV rating is 3 or above, your skin can be damaged.
@Zoe D valid point. It is a shame the doctor in the video didn't explain that. UV index is higher in summer, and we should take into account the reflected sun on the surfaces of snow, water and sand! Most weather apps will tell you the UV indication and it is a neat tool to know how intense the sun is and how much protection you really need. Should you stay out of the sun that day? Check the app.
Really appreciate this series from TED. Waiting for a video about Intermitten Fasting. There is a great deal of conflicting information that makes me so confused about whether there is any true benefit when it comes to fasting.
The chocolate experiment was originally funded by a confectionery company, and included only cocoa powder. This result has been taken by dermatologists who stated for DECADES that "There is no evidence that acne is caused by diet." even though they only tested cocoa powder. This was trash science. Things have improved a bit. For myself I found that my acne greatly improved when I changed my diet.
3:40 (Excuse the wall of text) I don’t think the term “racism” is correctly used here. For one thing the reason most dermatologists are taught on how to diagnose skin cancer on white people, is because most people are white. That way dermatologists are the most useful to the largest swaths of the population. Not because most dermatologists are white. As for black people believing that they don’t need sunscreen, I believe this to be a misconception not rooted is racism, but rather misunderstanding how much extra melanin protects you from the sun.
Chapters (Powered by ChapterMe) - 00:00 - Common myths about our skin 00:19 - Myth #1: Healthy skin is the skin that looks flawless 02:02 - Myth #2: You only need sunscreen on sunny days. 02:58 - Myth #3: People with darker skin don't need sunscreen. 04:24 - Myth #4: You can shrink your pores. 04:57 - Myth #5: Chocolate causes acne.
Up until the chocolate I believed every world, but then you lost my trust completely. When I eat chocolate (100-200grams) at once, I can immediately see acne on my face the next day! And more so, If my diet is full of oil I start to have fungal around my mouth and next to my ears. So for the future try to be less confident! I have tested my claims many times and it always is the case.
The excessive use of sunscreen promoted in this video is actually a dilemma: UV contributes to skin cancer whilst many UV filters found in sunscreen can increase breast cancer risk. So would the solution if you want to reduce risk for both of these horrible diseases avoid sun exposure altogether?
Most dermatologists actually recommend using clothing and hats for sun protection and staying in the shade as much as possible. Sunscreen is for those times when you can't avoid sun exposure (e.g. swimming or other outside exercise) or body parts you don't want to cover all the time. And carcinogens in general are pretty complicated, they definitely increase the risk of getting cancer but at the same time that doesn't mean that they automatically kill you after any exposure to them. Often research just shows that extreme amounts of them cause cancer but that doesn't always tell us how an individual will react to sporadic exposure to more reasonable amounts.
The way the word racism is used so frequently takes away the horror behind it. Racism was once defined in a way that said, if you think there are different human races and you estimate their value differently, you're racist. Am I misguided? No offense meant. Just teach me if I'm wrong.
You are 100% on point. What she is referring to is an issue with medical studies being skewed based on % of population. If the medical field were truly racist there wouldn't be any doctors in prominently dark completion populations because her definition of racism only goes from white > non-white. Half the family doctors I have had in my life were Indian. Not native to the USA and their schooling was both in the US and abroad. Not only were they able to diagnose me just fine even though I had a differing skin, but they didn't present a hit of racism. With skin conditions it is much harder to detect with the blemishes we are told to look for are the same color as the surrounding skin. For this very reason when a melanoma exists on a white person but it lacks dark pigment, it too is missed. It isn't that the systematic racism effected the diagnosis, it is that the damn mole or blemish was the same color as the surrounding skin and harder to detect. Some illnesses effect primarily one ethnic group and on rare cases go outside this group. When that happens it is very common for that illness to take forever to diagnose. This isn't proof of systematic racism in the medical field. This is proof that the scientific method was followed and the probability was factored into the diagnosis.
I googled a bit and all i found is basicly saying the same : Even tho UVB radiation is essential for vitamin D, you will still get enough of it even if you use your sunscreen optimally.
I wish videos like these are not USA-centric and are more global. More context is always better than being limited to know what the USA is suffering from.
Myth 6: You need toxic suncream all over your largest organ A: Eliminate seed oils and dont spend 6 hours out in the sun and guess what, no skin damage or melanoma. Fact check me bitches
For a doctor to misdiagnose a condition on a patient with a profile that he or she has less experience with is the most natural thing in the world. Calling that "racism" is not particularly helpful as it implies a certain willful attitude of the doctor toward the patient. The problem is not attitude, but experience. Would I trust a doctor that has been working for 20 years more than one fresh out of school? If I do, does that make me ageist?
I totally agree with Dr. Jen, that we have to take care of the skin properly to keep it healthy. Currently, many young people are easily influenced by information spread on the internet and can endanger themselves. Therefore, finding out the truth of an information is very important. Especially regarding the skin which is the main appearance of a person, and for some people who have sensitive skin, of course it will be dangerous if they do things they shouldn't. After watching this video I got a lot of new knowledge, thanks for the excellent explanation.
Dermatology is racist, of course, like everything else. So vitamin D in very important, but getting any amount of the sun is hazardous? I think not. Some amount of sun is good for you.
I used to have the worst skin out of anyone I knew, it was only until I eliminated refined sugar and drank lots of water and green tea that it got better (with a few other things as well tbf). If you have bad skin there's a good chance it's your diet that's the main cause unless you have a condition.
I Appreciate The Truth We Often Listen To What People Say Without Any Doubts. Most Research Are Funded By Companies That Advertise The Product And Add On Additional False Benefits. We Must Open Our Eyes & Analysis What We Are Being Told. Thank You Dr. Jen Gunter . You Have Gain A Subscriber.
I have dry skin and flawed collagen (suspected EDS, waiting for diagnosis), so my aloe vera plant has become my best friend. And basically anything made with aloe, it's so hydrating and soothing without being slimy. I've had some weird skin things due to that, like freckles getting so itchy they fell off (like the skin is now lighter), and odd scarring and discoloration. My doctor keeps telling me it's just that I heal weirdly, but it's very strange looking and feeling. I suspect that after the connective tissue specialist sees me, I might get some answers or maybe a dermatologist referral. I already know what causes reactions (mostly laundry detergent causing rashes), but beyond that, no clue.
I very much liked, how she did not answer the chocolate myth directly, but was emphasising a healthy diet. It sounds paradoxical, but I found this both subtle and clear. Great choice of words and strategy.
Once I went camping and had no skincare routine whatsoever for 6 days/nights except for water on my face. I came home and my skin looked and felt...better. The body recovers and doesnt need half the stuff we consume. Great honest talk! 👍
I continue hearing that doctors learn only (mostly) about white skin. This statement persists. I was trained in the 90s and we trained on all pigments (although many textbooks show mostly light skin). Maybe because I’m an NP and we work more in minority communities? I think this is changing. Or maybe Im just in a bubble, with many brown-skinned health care providers.
What you are referencing is reality. Today many of the "woke" culture are so disconnected from reality that they themselves commit the sin of being racist in the defense of the very people they seek to protect. I have seen people of color nearly in tears when asked about their scholarships. Not knowing if they are good enough to get where they are without an immutable characteristic is terrible. All of this woke culture stuff will die soon enough if it doesn't cause the country to burn before then.
So, not to say that wearing sunscreen isn't a good idea, but how did we survive healthy lives, much more outside than modern life, before the invention of sunscreen if it is so necessairy?
Well, obviously not all people lived healthy lives. And there is a number of other methods to protect yourself, like clothing, not going out for a prolonged time when the sun is strongest and most direct (in a Mediterranean country that would be around 12 to 3 p.m.). Also, there is also the factor of global warming, which is a modern problem.
I don't completely agree with point 2. Sunlight provides vitamin D, heats up the body and has many other benefits. Therefore, you do not need to be too careful in applying sunscreen. If possible, get outside for fresh air, exercise, or sunbathe when the sun is low in intensity (morning or sunset, etc.). You need a healthy body more than an untanned skin.
I'm not doubting anything she's saying, but what I don't understand is how the sun (which has been there for the human race's entire existence) is so damaging that not wearing sunscreen can be life threatening. Has something changed over the past 100 years or so to make the sun more harmful to us? Or were humans always afflicted with skin cancer from the sun and we just didn't have a name or diagnosis for it? I'm sure she is correct (my grandfather got a benine skin cancer on his nose, my grandmother said he never wore sunscreen on his face), I just don't understand how something that we should have evolved to be resistant to after millennium of existence can still kill us.
She is forgetting about shade and cover. Why do people in the Middle East really cover up? To protect their skin from the elements. Why does South Europe has so many shaded pavements? Same reason. Why did people working in the field have those big hats?
Saturated fats in chips and high sugar foods/drinks absolutely can aggravate pimples. It's a simple thing to try for yourself and see :) Eat healthy for two weeks and check the results.
I'm a bit jealous of this lady because her glasses prescription is just enough to make her eyes bigger without it looking unnatural. 😍 I'm nearsighted, so my eyes look smaller through my glasses.
My father died of melanoma in 2007. It started as a lump on his ankle, surgery didn't get it all, he was diabetic and didn't heal well. Then lumps appeared in his calf, then in his thigh and the writing was on the wall. He was 78.
