The Mexican population is used here as an example of a Latin American population. This population is used as an example of the dermatologic cosmetic procedures that may be used among Hispanics in the United States and other populations of Latin American origin living elsewhere.
Many Latin American individuals have darkly pigmented skin; this means that the clinical manifestations of photoaging are less apparent than among fairer-skinned individuals.
In Mexican patients with Fitzpatrick skin types III, IV, and V, the most frequently obtained cosmetic procedures are chemical peels (for treating melasma and dyspigmentation), botulinum toxin, and laser therapy.
The cosmetic use of botulinum toxin has become more accessible. Patients are interested in procedures that will not only improve their facial features but also ensure a more youthful appearance without permanent side effects.
Superficial chemical peels are used to increase the results of cosmetic procedures because they are a low-cost adjuvant treatment. However, for treating depigmentation, these peels should not be used by themselves.
The main challenge of treating patients with skin phototypes III, IV, or V with laser therapy is to deliver efficacious and reproducible results while minimizing unwanted adverse reactions.
The term Latino denotes an ethnolinguistic group with origins in the countries of Latin America as well as individuals in the United States who self-identify as Hispanic. Although many people blend racial and ethnic categories in describing Latino/Hispanic individuals interchangeably, these terms actually indicate an ethnic category, rather than a particular race. It is therefore important to understand the differences between these two terms. According to Coon1 in a 1962 publication called The Origin of Races, there are four major races of humans: Asian/Mongoloid; Australoid; Black/Negroid; and White/Caucasian.
However, in 1950, in the first of four statements on issues of race commonly known as The Race Question, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) stated that “National, religious, geographic, linguistic and cultural groups do not necessarily coincide with racial groups and the cultural traits of such groups have not demonstrated genetic connection with racial traits.”2 UNESCO then went on to suggest that the term race should be dropped altogether and that ethnic groups be used instead.2 Subsequently, the 1951 revised version of the UNESCO statement went on to clarify the issue. While it was still agreed that “race, as a word, has become coloured by its misuse in connexion with national, linguistic and religious differences, and by its deliberate abuse by racialists,”2 experts nevertheless were of the opinion that the term was still needed as an anthropologic classification of groups showing definite and characteristic combinations of biological, physical, and physiological traits.2
In 1964, the third UNESCO statement proposed that differences between individuals within a race were often greater than the average differences between races; they continued by stating that no national, religious, geographical, linguistic, or cultural group constituted a race ...