@abs12 and @bfc1980
I am not minimising anything at all.
And yes - I researched the statistics but didn't just Google and quote the first numbers I saw - I went into depth on the cancer research site to properly understand what the baseline was and therefore what the increased risk meant in reality to try and cut through the hyperbole and fear mongering from people who were making up numbers to scare an already worried OP.
I work with data every day to support decision making in an area which can have a massive impact on thousands of lives and cost millions. Properly using data to understand risk and impact is absolutely crucial to deciding what action needs to be taken - whether it is a multi-million pound decision, what factor suncream to use or whether or not to eat bacon.
I'm not saying there is no risk and everyone should crack on and use sunbeds or sunbathe until they go mahogany.
I'm just trying to put the risks into context so people can make informed choices.
I am fully aware that melanoma is brutal. Of the four people I know who have had it, one is dead from secondary cancer years after their original stage 2 melanoma was successfully treated, two are immediate relatives and I'm married to the other. Two of the three I'm related to were stage 2 and have significant scarring and ongoing issues from the cutaway biopsies.
I also know, because I've taken the time to properly understand the risk factors, that having had two immediate relatives who've developed it, suffered a lot of sunburn when I was younger AND that I have a lot of moles, that my persobal risk for it is increased making me very aware of the signs to look for. I have already had one (thankfully benign) biopsy on a suspicious mole and fully suspect I will need more in the future.
My kids also have increased risk factors due to the genetic link, and obviously DH having already had it, so we are also very very careful about using suncream in our household.
I don't know what my personal risk % is exactly but it is higher than that of someone who doesn't have those same factors so a 50% increase for me would be more significant than a 50% increase for someone who has no genetic factors, has never been burned by the sun but has used sunbeds a couple of times.
Scientific peer reviewed is exactly where the data that I used came from and it is so important to put it into context.
For example - @abs12 you said that getting sunburned under 5 doubles the risk of melanoma. That is true but what does it mean for a worried parent, with health anxiety, whose child burnt their shoulders while playing in the garden? It could really cause them to panic, feel guilty, become hypervigilant without context.
What you didn't say is it is specifically blistering sunburn that doubles the risk not a mild burn that goes within a day or two. You also didn't say what it doubles the risk from and to? Doubling of a 0.5% risk is very different to doubling a 20% risk and understing personal risk factors is vital in that regard.
In the case of our hypothetical parent above re-assurance that they shouldnt worry and don't need to inspect every mole on their child's body for the next 10 years and gentle advice to cover up / keep topped up with suncream is much more relevant and helpful than talking % increases in risk.
Hyperbole around health statistics is a massive problem. Constant media headlines which scream about common, everyday things doubling or tripling risks to cancer without stating what that means in reality desensitises people to the point where they don't take any notice - even when a real and significant risk comes along.