WOStavelot

Personally, I wonder if those wrting here have read the study. Not only does it address all the concerns voiced here, which are valid, but for me it fits perfectly into all the current evidence coming out of Molecular Biology that relates directly to melanoma. The legal aspects of this don't concern me, but I doubt that was an issue when these investigators formulated their hypothesis.

The "numbers" are more than adequate when one reads the report. "Big numbers," which this study has, aren't the goal nor the final determinant of value in medical research : it's usually investigator insight.

When Alexander Breslow, (I had the pleasure and true opportunity of being one of his students), reported in 1969 on the importance of thickness in cutaneous melanomas, he did so quite humbly, based on 98 patients at GW. Not a huge number when compared with meta-analyses commonly seen today. But his results remain one of the guiding lights of Staging and Prognosis in melanoma care. By comparison, many huge meta-analyses have come and gone with the wind. But the statistics in his "little study" were good and supported his claims that cutaneous melanomas less than 0.76 mm thick had neither recurrence nor metastases,and that one could use thickness to predict outcome.

The numbers, and conclusions as stated in this study on Viagra and melanoma are good as well.

Don't be scared away by all the biomolecular terms for how this medicine, and melanoma initiation "works." It doesn't explain, or try to explain, everything about these relationships. But it's a good study. It teaches more about making inroads into countering melanoma.

Does an attorney you know take Viagra? One could hope so …

Personally, I wonder if those wrting here have read the study. Not only does it address all the concerns voiced here, which are valid, but for me it fits perfectly into all the current evidence coming out of Molecular Biology that relates directly to melanoma. The legal aspects of this don't concern me, but I doubt that was an issue when these investigators formulated their hypothesis.

The "numbers" are more than adequate when one reads the report. "Big numbers," which this study has, aren't the goal nor the final determinant of value in medical research : it's usually investigator insight.

When Alexander Breslow, (I had the pleasure and true opportunity of being one of his students), reported in 1969 on the importance of thickness in cutaneous melanomas, he did so quite humbly, based on 98 patients at GW. Not a huge number when compared with meta-analyses commonly seen today. But his results remain one of the guiding lights of Staging and Prognosis in melanoma care. By comparison, many huge meta-analyses have come and gone with the wind. But the statistics in his "little study" were good and supported his claims that cutaneous melanomas less than 0.76 mm thick had neither recurrence nor metastases,and that one could use thickness to predict outcome.

The numbers, and conclusions as stated in this study on Viagra and melanoma are good as well.

Don't be scared away by all the biomolecular terms for how this medicine, and melanoma initiation "works." It doesn't explain, or try to explain, everything about these relationships. But it's a good study. It teaches more about making inroads into countering melanoma.

Does an attorney you know take Viagra? One could hope so …

Personally, I wonder if those wrting here have read the study. Not only does it address all the concerns voiced here, which are valid, but for me it fits perfectly into all the current evidence coming out of Molecular Biology that relates directly to melanoma. The legal aspects of this don't concern me, but I doubt that was an issue when these investigators formulated their hypothesis.

The "numbers" are more than adequate when one reads the report. "Big numbers," which this study has, aren't the goal nor the final determinant of value in medical research : it's usually investigator insight.

When Alexander Breslow, (I had the pleasure and true opportunity of being one of his students), reported in 1969 on the importance of thickness in cutaneous melanomas, he did so quite humbly, based on 98 patients at GW. Not a huge number when compared with meta-analyses commonly seen today. But his results remain one of the guiding lights of Staging and Prognosis in melanoma care. By comparison, many huge meta-analyses have come and gone with the wind. But the statistics in his "little study" were good and supported his claims that cutaneous melanomas less than 0.76 mm thick had neither recurrence nor metastases,and that one could use thickness to predict outcome.

The numbers, and conclusions as stated in this study on Viagra and melanoma are good as well.

Don't be scared away by all the biomolecular terms for how this medicine, and melanoma initiation "works." It doesn't explain, or try to explain, everything about these relationships. But it's a good study. It teaches more about making inroads into countering melanoma.

Does an attorney you know take Viagra? One could hope so …