After a little persuasion from my husband and a few close family members, I finally decided to join Facebook last week.  Facebook is a social utility that connects people with friends and others who work, study and live around them. People use Facebook to keep up with friends, upload an unlimited number of photos, share links and videos, and learn more about the people they meet.

What I didn’t realize about Facebook before I signed up, was that it is much more then just putting up a profile, uploading pictures and getting back in touch with old friends.  Facebook includes hundreds if not thousands of “applications” that you actually “add” to your page. The applications are anything from adding “the quote of the day” to your page, to adding little “stickers,” various quizzes that you can take to test your knowledge on different subjects, to sending and receiving various “gifts” to and from your friends. The “gifts” include anything from flowers, to little hatching eggs, to drinks, to “karma.”

As I was learning the ins and outs of Facebook over the last two weeks, I was browsing the pages of my friends, and to my surprise and shock, one of my friends had received various “boobies” from her friends. I learned quickly that people are sending each other photos of different breasts and adding the photos straight to their page.  After my shock wore off a bit, I decided to take a closer look at this facebook “application.” In order to do this, I had to add the application to my page. So, I pressed the button to add the application, did my research, and quickly deleted the application before anyone noticed that I added it.  What I found through my five minutes of  research was that there were about 45 different types of “boobies” that you could send and receive. A few of the boobies included the following:

Motivational Boobies

Fake Boobies (though ALL of the boobies were fake, so I really didn’t get that one.)

Sporty Boobies

Now, I don’t know about the rest of you, but I found this particular application extremely annoying, to say the least. Who, but an immature teenager would think receiving and sending photos of fake breasts is interesting, cool, or “okay” for that matter? Aren’t we inundated with fake breasts ENOUGH? What is this teaching the millions of teenagers that are part of Facebook, that women’s bodies and breasts are just objects? Come on Facebook, you can do better.

Cosmetic Surgery Today posted a blog today entitled “Safety of Breast Implants Spark Fiery Debate“.  They mentioned a Beauty and the Breast post, which acknowledged that women are often “sold” on the idea of breast implants after visiting a plastic surgeon.  Although I’m thrilled that they are giving attention to the negative side of breast augmentation and asking women to thoroughly research the procedure, I’m not pleased with the site that they linked for research. 

I thought that everyone deserves  to know that there is an independent informational site that is dedicated to truly informing consumers.  It’s not sponsored by plastic surgeons or manufacturers, rather it is a product of a non-profit think tank that is dedicated to analyzing existing research.  If a person wants to know science-based information regarding breast augmentation, then www.breastimplantinfo.org is the place to visit.  If you haven’t checked it out yet, it’s a must read for women, doctors, and the media.

~Kacey

I read about a ‘new’ and I use that term loosely, breast implant called the Ideal Implant.  These implants are currently under clinical trials.   They are described as having an inner core or lumen similar to the double lumen implants that were essentially a silicone gel implant surround by a saline implant.   

The companies mission statement made me laugh a bit as I just thought this was another way of making women think they are doing something ’safe’.  Just like I was told when I had my saline implants 10 years ago.  The mission statement reads:

To offer women a breast implant that combines a natural, tissue-like feel with the safety of saline as the filler, for Peace of Mind.

Okay, for Peace of Mind?  I think not.  The company claims that they have used all the same materials for these implants that are in other implants.  If you remember from other posts those materials are TOXIC.  Really the only difference is a saline implant within a saline implant.  They also state that the implant is inserted empty and filled once placed inside the body with saline.  So I must ask myself what is so different other than having 4 saline implants in your body? 

Let me show you some pictures to show you just how UNSAFE saline implants are.  I had my implants for 8 years and was completely disabled just after 5 years.  Take a look at some of these so called safe saline implants.  No, these aren’t the ‘Ideal Implants’ but in my opinion there is no difference since the company claims that they used the same materials as in other saline implants. 

This first set almost killed the woman they were removed from.  She is still fighting to regain her health and yes, that is saline that you see in there.  Saline and a very toxic mix.

This set was removed from a lady that is also struggling with her health.  These implants made her very ill.  Yes, another set of saline implants.

Lastly, my implant, at least the worst one.  Keep in mind it looks not nearly as bad as the implants shown above.  However, after having them analyzed, my chemist said that there were chunks, yes chunks of bacteria and white mold growing inside.  These implants that are so commonly referred to as being safe changed my life forever.  Disabled at age 40 and explanted three years later because my doctors continued to mis-diagnose me.  Once I had the implants removed, my health started to improve and yes, these implants also came very close to taking my life.

I want to make it perfectly clear that saline implants are not safe.  Also, all these women used board certified Plastic surgeons.  

Anything having to do with saline breast implants do not give me ‘Peace of Mind’. 

This article, “Over 60 per cent of GPs have seen patients after cosmetic procedures have gone wrong,” which talks about the result of a survey conducted in the UK, is very important, because it clearly reveals the fallout from plastic surgery that has a significant effect on the rest of the medical profession. We often hear about the wonders of plastic surgery, but the problems usually slip through the media cracks. Dr. Douglas McGeorge, president of the British Association of Aesthetic, admits that a lot of surgery will lead to complications. “GPs are being exposed to some of the downfalls of plastic surgery,” he said. “When people travel abroad for surgery for example, it is the GP who picks up the pieces.”

Precisely! They are talking about complications that we in the Beauty and the Breast community have known about for years!

When I had my problems, I didn’t consult my plastic surgeon. Why, you may ask? Because the problems seemed medical, not surgical. I was feeling sick, so I went to my general practitioner. I had rashes, so I went to a dermatologist. When I was having heart issues, off I went to the cardiologist. When I became chronically tired and suffered from fevers, back I went to the MD, who then sent me to a… therapist. The big issues with breast implant complications come not so much from the “local complications” we hear so much about - scary enough in themselves - but from the internal, systemic problems implants create. And how could doctors know enough to treat them when plastic surgeons who are making fortunes off this cash business won’t even acknowledge that they are real problems?

So many women still don’t know the signs of chemical poisoning, which are slow and creep up over years. It felt like a slow death to me. No one knew what was wrong with me. Not even my doctors. I hope more doctors learn about this survey and realize they need to learn more about treating silicone diseases.

TAGS: cosmetic surgery

File this is under the “HERE WE GO AGAIN!” category, girls.

This Reuters article, “Cell Phones, Coffee Not High Cancer Risks,” tells us about a risk ranking system devised by Australian cancer specialist Professor Bernard Stewart to debunk popular myths. The five-point system “lists the risk of cancer from proven and likely, to inferred, unknown or unlikely” causes. And of course in the very first paragraph, after cell phones and coffee, “having breast implants is unlikely to cause cancer.”

When did anyone ever say that breast implants cause cancer? Why is this outdated myth being debunked AGAIN? Of course, this plays right into the manufacturers’ marketing strategy of lobbing distractions at the public to keep us from paying attention to breast implants’ real risks, like the fact that detecting cancer could be impeded because layers of silicone or saline are in the way.

(more…)

I could rattle off a million reasons why women should not get breast implants. But at the top of my list, and what I have spent my life working on, is the issue of informed consent – a patient fully understanding the risks of this cosmetic surgery before going under the knife. Of course, in my biased opinion, anyone who chooses to undergo breast augmentation clearly does not have a good understanding of what could happen or they wouldn’t do it! But there are very real obstacles in the way of women getting all the necessary information and being able to conduct a good risk assessment, some of which I would like to lay out here:

No one really knows how long implants actually last and what their long-term effects could be.

Breast implants are indeed one of the most researched medical devices, but the research (predominantly paid for by implant manufacturers) has been “front-loaded.” Almost all the safety data collected thus far has been from women who had implants for a relatively short time, less than five years. Implant recipients, however, keep these devices in their bodies for decades. In a recent New York Times article, Dr. Stephen Li, who has served on three of the FDA’s panels that reviewed implant safety, acknowledged that silicone implants are “a device that you have only three or four years of data for,” and admitted that “we don’t know specifically how long implants last.”

There still critical work to be done in looking at the long-term health risks of breast implants. The absence of research in the longer time frame, however, is a fact not widely known or understood, even among plastic surgeons. How, then, can it be conveyed to women?

(more…)

What is “annuity medicine?” Annuity medicine refers to the fact that once a patient walks into a doctor’s office, the doctor gets an annuity because he knows the statistics that will bring her back for operation after operation. She becomes his insurance policy for a great practice.

Well, three cheers for the New York Times for identifying breast implants, the most popular cosmetic surgery in this county, for what it is: annuity medicine! Today, the venerable newspaper published an important and timely article on the front page of its Fashion and Style section, which brings some much-needed attention to the many important issues around breast implants, issues that have largely disappeared from the public discussion. The article’s focus is on the ongoing financial costs of breast implants, which is very appropriate as American families feel the pinch of a slowing economy.

(more…)

Myrl’s terrific post about what we learned about product liability law suits from the breast implant litigation prompts me to sound the alarm for what’s happening today. The Supreme Court is poised to make a decision with far-reaching consequences for consumers and could very well affect you someday.

This spring, the Court will hand down its decision on Riegel v. Medtronic. Charles Riegel underwent coronary angioplasty in 1996. During the procedure, the balloon ruptured, and advanced cardiac life support and emergency coronary bypass surgery were needed. He and his wife are suing Medtronic, claiming that the device was defective and the labeling inadequate, but Medtronic is arguing the because the FDA approved the product, it can’t be held responsible or culpable for injuries, even if the product is faulty.

(more…)

For more than a decade now, I have watched women who harmed by silicone breast implants try to sort out the illness and symptoms they experienced post-implantation, try to separate real dragons from the paper ones. What disease and symptomatic conditions really do come from silicone and breast implants? Since 1995, I have been a conduit of scientific studies and evidential material that fall into my hands, distributing the information among women made ill by implants. More than one doctor or scientist has appeared on the scene heeding the call for help figure it out, but they have mostly been beaten down or back by an army of defendant-supported doctors and scientists. So, who is right and who is wrong?

Looking back (and for many years, I have) has allowed me some clarity. I would like to share a little of it here, for the benefit of those who find themselves corralled in monstrous product-liability class action suits, which are not so different from those breast implant victims have endured for so many years.

(more…)

NewsRX.com tells us about a new study in the Annals of Plastic Surgery. Here’s the synopsis:

A report, ‘The safety of silicone gel-filled breast implants: a review of the epidemiologic evidence,’ is newly published data in Annals of Plastic Surgery. “Few implantable medical devices have been studied for their safety more extensively than silicone gel-filled breast implants. We summarize the epidemiologic evidence on the safety of breast implants, most of which is drawn from large cohort studies with long-term follow-up,” scientists in the United States report.

Hmm, they’re pulling out that old line — “Few implantable medical devices have been studied for their safety more extensively than silicone gel-filled breast implants” — AGAIN? We often hear this as a defense of the manufacturers and plastic surgeons. I can’t tell you how many times I heard it at the FDA hearings. I wonder where the results of these “extensive” studies are? We know the manufacturers did not come up with any data longer than two to three years. So WHERE is this “safety” data? Why wasn’t it presented at the hearings?

The old paid-for-by-the-manufacturers studies have been looked at and reviewed over and over again, but NO NEW studies have been done that are peer-reviewed or credible. There has been press covering the controversy for years, and the FDA’s own studies have shown connective tissue problems and horrible local complication problems in the longer term.

It is so annoying that these companies can keep putting out this information like it’s true. And people read it and BELIEVE it must be so. If they say it enough, you start to believe it!!!

Well, we KNOW this is not true. Scrutiny is not science.