Australia and New Zealand share the highest incidence rates of melanoma worldwide. Despite the substantial increase in public and physician awareness of melanoma in Australia over the last 30 years-as a result of the introduction of publicly funded mass media campaigns that began in the early 1980s -mortality has steadily increased during this period. This increased mortality has led investigators to question the relative merits of primary versus secondary prevention; that is, sensible sun exposure practices versus early detection. Increased melanoma vigilance on the part of the public and among physicians has resulted in large increases in public health expenditure, primarily from screening costs and increased rates of office surgery. Has this attempt at secondary prevention been effective? Unfortunately epidemiologic studies addressing the causal relationship between the level of secondary prevention and mortality are prohibitively difficult to implement-it is currently unknown whether increased melanoma surveillance reduces mortality, and if so, whether such an approach is cost-effective. Here I address the issue of secondary prevention of melanoma with respect to incidence and mortality (and cost per life saved) by developing a Markov model of melanoma epidemiology based on Australian incidence and mortality data. The advantages of developing a methodology that can determine constraint-based surveillance outcomes are twofold: first, it can address the issue of effectiveness; and second, it can quantify the trade-off between cost and utilisation of medical resources on one hand, and reduced morbidity and lives saved on the other. With respect to melanoma, implementing the model facilitates the quantitative determination of the relative effectiveness and trade-offs associated with different levels of secondary and tertiary prevention, both retrospectively and prospectively. For example, I show that the surveillance enhancement that began in 1982 has resulted in greater diagnostic incidence and reduced mortality, but the reduced mortality carried a significant cost per life saved. I implement the model out to 2028 and demonstrate that the enhanced secondary prevention that began in 1982 becomes increasingly cost-effective over the period 2013-2028. On the other hand, I show that reductions in mortality achieved by significantly enhancing secondary prevention beyond 2013 levels are comparable with those achieved by only modest improvements in late-stage disease survival. Given the ballooning costs of increased melanoma surveillance, I suggest the process of public health policy decision-making-particularly with respect to the public funding of melanoma screening and discretionary mole removal-would be better served by incorporating the results of quantitative modelling.