About this site.

The mission.

Dermatology Scan Guide exists to help a reader understand the current state of dermal scanning and skin imaging with enough clarity that they can tell a diagnostic tool from a cosmetic one, and a well-validated device from a marketed app. The site does not sell anything, collect contact information, or maintain a directory of clinics or practitioners. It is three pages of cited education, nothing more and nothing less.

The content is written in the voice of a clinical educator... precise about what the evidence supports, careful about what it does not, and clear that the tools described on this site are adjuncts to a dermatologist's care, not substitutes for it.

Editorial independence.

This site is evidence-first across every page. Because there is no clinic directory on Dermatology Scan Guide, there is no directory-based editorial exception, and no paid placement of any kind appears on the site. The only two clinical references that appear are the link from this page to Michael's own practice, hummelmed.com, which exists for direct patient inquiries about DermaSensor scans, and the link to dermasensor.com, which points readers to the DermaSensor practitioner finder when they are looking for a clinician in their area. Both links are labeled, disclosed, and unpaid.

No advertising. No affiliate revenue. No sponsored content. No email capture. No analytics sold to third parties.

About Michael.

Michael Hummel, NMD, is a board-certified naturopathic physician and the founder of Hummel Medical in Ashland, Oregon, a practice focused on regenerative wellness and longevity. He also sees patients one day per week via telemedicine through Denver Naturopathic Clinic. He holds bachelor's degrees in Chemistry and Biology from Northern Arizona University, earned his naturopathic medical degree from Sonoran University of Health Sciences, completed a three-year residency split between Cameron Wellness Center in Salt Lake City and Envita Medical Center in Scottsdale, and then spent five additional years in intensive integrative oncology training in Scottsdale, Arizona.

He is the creator of the Bountiful Herbs Botanical Medicine Database, has co-authored dietary books and medical studies (including work on COVID-19 and Lyme disease), and co-hosts the SpiritRx Podcast with Dr. Luke, a chiropractor. He maintains a parallel creative life as an essayist at venturesinwisdom.com.

Michael's clinical interests include integrative oncology, chronic infectious disease (including Lyme), bioidentical hormone therapies, botanical medicine, naturopathic adjustments and physical medicine, and healthy aging. Dermatology Scan Guide is an extension of his broader educational work... a careful, cited, reader-first resource designed to help people understand a technology category that is often marketed with more confidence than the evidence supports.

Why the diagnostic vs. cosmetic line matters so much on this site.

The site's editorial spine is a single line, drawn bright, between a diagnostic tool and a cosmetic one. That line matters for three reasons.

First, language. Consumer marketing in this category frequently borrows clinical language for cosmetic purposes. "Our scan sees beneath the skin." "AI-powered skin analysis." "Detect early signs." When that language is applied to a cosmetic tool, it misleads readers into treating a cosmetic scanner as if it has performed a cancer-risk assessment. It has not.

Second, evidence. The FDA-cleared diagnostic-adjunct devices (DermaSensor, SciBase Nevisense) carry specific, published performance data... sensitivity, specificity, NPV, intended use, study populations. Cosmetic skin analysis systems are validated against a different target and a different regulatory pathway. Reading a published device sensitivity into a cosmetic system is a category error.

Third, consequences. A reader who leaves a cosmetic scan thinking "my skin looks good" may miss the appointment that would have caught a melanoma. That is the risk the site is designed to reduce.

The editorial rule, stated plainly: when in doubt, the site defaults to the stricter, more medically conservative framing. A tool is presumed cosmetic unless evidence and FDA clearance place it elsewhere, and a negative result from any scan is never presented as reassurance about cancer.