As a woman, I could never imagine getting breast implants. Thecost would be too much, the surgery too invasive and the painafterward too severe.
But for some women, such factors are easy to overlook. Theirreasons to undergo the surgery -- be it low self-esteem, wanting toplease a partner or losing a breast to disease -- are enough tojustify the costs.
For the last 11 years, these women have been given only onechoice when it comes to their implants: saline. Saline implants,made up of a salt-water fluid, are considered safer than theirformer silicone counterparts because, once ruptured, the fluidreleased is absorbed by the body and in most cases is not hazardousto the recipient's health.
But the FDA may soon place the banned silicone implants back onthe market, a decision that would follow an FDA advisory panel's9-6 vote last week in favor of such a move. The implants wereremoved from the market in 1992 by the FDA commissioner because ofsafety concerns at the time.
During the two days of hearings that preceded the panel'sdecision, members of the panel listened to testimonies from anumber of women who had received silicone breast implants and whohave since been emotionally and physically scarred from botchedjobs or ruptures that caused severe damage to their bodies.
Despite these women's damning evidence as to the dangers of theproduct, the panel went ahead with their "yes" decision, declaringthe new silicone devices made by the California-based Inamed Corp.safe.
In a recent article in USA Today, Inamed representatives at thetrial reportedly presented two years of data from an ongoing studyof 940 women who had received silicone implants. Satisfactionlevels among these women ranged from 89 percent to 96 percent, withonly about 4 percent of the implants reported as ruptured.
In consideration of the rupture factor, the panel added safetyprovisions to their approval, like making Inamed provide allpatients with a consent form before surgery that would outline anypossible health risks associated with their product.
But are such "safety provisions" really enough? Inamed's studyhas followed the women with these implants for only two years.Who's to say that, in another five years, more of these women'simplants won't rupture, causing the same ugly side effects as theirpredecessors?
Secondly, if the FDA goes ahead and gives its approval to thesenew implants, millions of women will believe they are safe just asmillions before them were told the same thing by doctors whom theytrusted. These women are now paying the price for theircleavage.
Don't believe me? Go to a Web site likewww.siliconeholocaust.org for proof.
There you will find shocking stories and photos of women whoreceived silicone implants and who now suffer from diseases likecancer and fibromyalgia because the toxic substance leaked intotheir bodies, causing irreversible damage.
While it is true that every woman deserves the right to decidewhat kind of product should enter her body, hopefully the FDA willrealize that an implant without enough long-term research shouldn'tbe one of them.
Write to Gail at glkoch@bsu.edu
Read More
Three Air Jam teams take home the win
October 12, 2012Nineteen teams shimmied, shook and flipped for a sold out John R. Emens Auditorium on Thursday night during the 25th annual Air Jam.
Bill Clinton Speaks at North Central High School
October 12, 2012Former President's Speech Could Have Effect on State Senate Race
