Great result by the looks Richard for either an AK or superficial BCC. Thanks for sharing and reminding people of the importance of looking after our skin and getting it checked.
This responded really well and looks to have healed completely. Give the time frame and response this was probably an Actinic keratosis but difficult to say conclusively so keep an eye on it for any further changes in the future.
The rainbow-colored graph showing radiation from the sun outside the atmosphere and on the ground for different wavelengths is good information. It implies that the extent to which the atmosphere blocks radiation is a function of the wavelength of radiation and the length of the path through the atmosphere of these electromagnetic waves. This function seems to exponential: a function of the path length, where the latter is the exponent.
I presume you're talking about the banner plot that goes out with all my posts. Yes, at shorter and shorter UV wavelengths the absorption by ozone does indeed increase exponentially. Losses due to scattering by air molecules are also important. Those extinction losses are inversely proportional to the 4th power of wavelength, so radiation at 300 nm is scattered 8 times more efficiently than radiation at 600 nm (which is why the sky is blue). More on that in an upcoming post.
Great result by the looks Richard for either an AK or superficial BCC. Thanks for sharing and reminding people of the importance of looking after our skin and getting it checked.
This responded really well and looks to have healed completely. Give the time frame and response this was probably an Actinic keratosis but difficult to say conclusively so keep an eye on it for any further changes in the future.
The rainbow-colored graph showing radiation from the sun outside the atmosphere and on the ground for different wavelengths is good information. It implies that the extent to which the atmosphere blocks radiation is a function of the wavelength of radiation and the length of the path through the atmosphere of these electromagnetic waves. This function seems to exponential: a function of the path length, where the latter is the exponent.
I presume you're talking about the banner plot that goes out with all my posts. Yes, at shorter and shorter UV wavelengths the absorption by ozone does indeed increase exponentially. Losses due to scattering by air molecules are also important. Those extinction losses are inversely proportional to the 4th power of wavelength, so radiation at 300 nm is scattered 8 times more efficiently than radiation at 600 nm (which is why the sky is blue). More on that in an upcoming post.
But not that ugly - BCC’s can be uglier as the three that were removed surgically 3 weeks ago. Teenage years in the Sun and surf - sigh.
Oh dear. Makes my trials pale into insignificance. Good luck! Stay out of those statistics!!
Not pretty