FDA advisers recommend lifting ban on silicone gel breast implants

**DONOTDELETE** · « **on:** October 15, 2003, 04:58:56 PM »

Eleven years after most silicone-gel breast implants were prohibited, government advisers recommended today that the ban be lifted despite lingering questions about safety and durability.

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/288/wash/FDA_advisers_recommend_lifting:.shtml

What do you all think? Especially the ladies who have or have had silicone.

Kowalski · « **Reply #1 on:** October 15, 2003, 06:11:05 PM »

Why don't they fill those implants with silicone that is semi-gelled? Instead of using that liquid goo. That way, if and when the implant ruptures, the silicone that escapes is gelatinous and removable, instead of a fluid that escapes into the body.

For that matter, why don't they fill the implant with "nodes" of gel silicone, mimicing the actual physical make-up of breast tissue (milk ducts)?

Now, where's my giant novelty-sized paycheck from Dow Corning?

rtpoe · « **Reply #2 on:** October 15, 2003, 09:23:17 PM »

It's a matter of feel, which is something we can all appreciate (silicone "feels" better and more natural than saline). And the orginal ban was done in spite of all the scientific evidence showing there was no correlation between the implants and the reported illnesses.

rtpoe

Tugboatcap · « **Reply #3 on:** October 15, 2003, 11:55:30 PM »

From everything me and my S.O. have researched and read about this issue from research that was conducted impartially, the percentage of women with silicone implants that experienced health problems related exactly to the same percentage of a like population of UNimplanted women and displayed the same kind of symptoms. This is just one example of the knee-jerk bad science coming out of some of our government agencies.

The same type of bad science was done with Asbestos in that there are two types of asbestos ore/fiber. A round fiber and a hook fiber. The round fiber made up over 90% of the asbestos products and was later PROVEN to not cause all the nasty problems that the Hook fiber causes. But what was the result? ALL ASBESTOS IS BAD. Ban all asbestos products no matter which type of ore was used. Ever hear of a brake mechanic with asbestosis? Ever hear of a lawyer looking for anyone but shipyard workers for lawsuits? Of course not because it was later proven that only asbestos pipe lagging contained the bad hook fibers and most of it was used in shipboard applications. Oh, and there has only been a few recorded instances of asbestosis in a NON SMOKER as this seems to be the catalyst for the disease.

<end rant>

Tugboatcap!

Zasha · « **Reply #4 on:** October 16, 2003, 01:14:56 AM »

Quote:

the percentage of women with silicone implants that experienced health problems related exactly to the same percentage of a like population of UNimplanted women and displayed the same kind of symptoms.

In addition, there was another study (perhaps in parallel?) that interpolated/extrapolated breast cancer rates in implanted versus non-implanted women by introducing extremely high concentrations of carcinogens onto/into lab rats, some of which had been implanted with miniatuized replicas of both silicone and saline breast implants.

The result? The implanted rats had a LOWER rate of developed cysts due to the increased concentration of white blood cells and antigens (?) that were already there, viewing the implant as a wound, and surrounding it to "heal" it (of course, the study was initiated and the carcinogens introduced after the implant incisions were completely healed).

solvegas · « **Reply #5 on:** October 16, 2003, 03:43:15 AM »

Don't forget the true villans in the whole mess , TRIAL LAWYERS ! They took a few cases , twisted the science to suit their needs and convinced large sections of the populace about a "crisis " to get money and destroyed CorningDow . THAT is the key to the whole mess .

Zorro · « **Reply #6 on:** October 16, 2003, 10:31:33 AM »

In one of my early classes at the University of Phoenix, my learning team was assigned to do research and write a paper on the "Dow-Corning Silicone Breast Implant Controversy".

To put that entire paper in here would be very tedious and boring, but our research was out of the school's vast resources and Dow-Corning itself.

I have that paper, plus a Powerpoint presentation for anyone who would like to see it. The paper is in both "Word" format and "richtext" file format.

I will send both files (Powerpoint) and the paper to anyone who would like to see it. Just email or PM me with your email address.

TheZookie007 · « **Reply #7 on:** October 20, 2003, 04:58:51 AM »

First of all, Zorro, you can get my email addy in my profile, and I would be happy to receive the results of your research.

And on the main point: yes, we all know that the FDA ban on silicone breast implants was largely based on bad science (or, to be more charitable, incomplete information)...but what I wanna know is, how soon will it be before the FDA allows the use of HUGE, Chelsea- or Keisha-sized implants to be used in the US as freely as they were in the past? And, how soon will they finally re-allow the use of silly-string?

Bigger and better boobs through chemistry...that's what I'm about!

melonie_charm · « **Reply #8 on:** October 20, 2003, 11:45:52 AM »

Even if silicone gel implants are approved for first time BA patients, they are still subject to the extensive FDA testing procedures required for every different model in every different size. This will do nothing to affect the current equation of $100,000+ in FDA testing costs versus extremely limited potential markets for implants larger than 1000cc over which to spread and recover those testing costs.

I doubt that string implants will ever be approved by the FDA, based on the unpredictable growth factor officially and based unofficially on the $10 cost of string implant material versus lost profits of $1000+ per pair of US made bag type implants.

MrHHH · « **Reply #10 on:** October 21, 2003, 11:12:56 PM »

Actually, that's not how business works. If you could get 10$ string implants though the FDA, that could replace regular implants (Not grow indefinitely), then implant makers would jump on them.

They would turn around and sell them for 900$ instead of 1000$ for a set of regular implants. And the profit would be incredible. Until they started price battling with each other. But there would be a huge incentive for the "First to market".

WONDERBOY · « **Reply #11 on:** October 22, 2003, 01:31:52 PM »

funny
http://www.theonion.com/3941/wdyt.html

Re: So Lift The Ban Already!!!!