Fw: Breast Implants: America's Silent Epidemic ~ Total Health Magazine

[Guest guest]

From our wonderful angel, Ilena....

From: ilena rose <ilena@...>

Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 1:27 AM

Subject: Breast Implants: America's Silent Epidemic ~ Total Health Magazine

Total Health for Longevity Magazine

November/December 2000

Volume 22, Number 6

pages 41-42

" We know how cruel truth often is,

and we wonder whether delusion

is not more consoling. "

~~ Henri Poincaré (1854-1912)

Breast Implants: America's Silent Epidemic

by Ilena Rosenthal

Daily my phone rings and my email overflows with urgent and painful calls

from women just awakening from the ether of their breast implants.

Although their first surgeries may have been decades ago, they are finally

emerging from the web of deceit that their plastic surgeons and the silicone

manufacturers have woven through the media for years, in a brilliant,

expensive public relations coup of enormous proportions.

Now reality has struck as they join scores of thousands of ill and

disfigured women in learning the hidden truth - their cherished breast

implants may cost them their insurance, their health, their beauty, their

vitality, their families, their careers, and too often, even their lives.

Everything I have ever done or thought or studied for 47 years brought me

to November, 1995 when I created a Newsgroup (alt.support.breast-implant)

on the Internet to provide an International Forum to discuss this

perplexing issue and create a place for the women to connect with each

other. I had no idea of the depth, breadth, or width of the Pandora's Box

I was opening. Five years later, after unknown thousands of communications

from women, doctors, loved ones, attorneys, supporters and tormentors

alike, I admit I am no longer without bias. I now know that a huge fraud

has and continues to be committed on women, and the background on this

issue reads like a non-fiction espionage bestseller.

No stranger to plastic surgery (first nose bob during my Dallas high

school years) I do not now, nor have I ever had implants. There, but for

the grace of God go I. A few million of our sisters have made that choice

for a variety of reasons. However, two common denominators remain the same

-- they were always assured they were " safe " and the " risks minimal, " and

eerily, they have come up against a medical establishment unwilling and

unable to cure their illnesses.

In 1992, after 30 years of unimpeded marketing, the FDA finally banned

silicone gel implants for most women. Because of the lobbying of the

manufacturers and plastic surgeons -- who flew in around 400 women to

lobby Washington DC on their behalf -- women post-mastectomy were and are

still allowed to get these unproven, highly risky medical devices.

Even though early studies were resurrected, long hidden by the

manufacturers, proving they knew that their implants would break, immune

reactions would occur, the gel would migrate, and even more disturbing,

could cross the placenta and affect the unborn fetuses, almost never did

this information make it to the women it could have protected.

They also hired visible spokesdoctors to misled the public into believing

that implant rupture -- a devastating medical event -- was " only 4-6%. "

They also claimed to examine and find " no association " between implants

and a myriad of painful and debilitating autoimmune diseases suffered in

disproportionate percentages. In fact, the Executive Editor of the New

England Journal of Medicine, Dr. Marcia Angell, chose to publish two very

flawed, small and short studies funded by those who stood the most to gain

by the results. She then promoted and defended these studies as if they

were gospel in her pro-manufacturer book, Science on Trial, and flooded

the media with this corporate science while branding a scarlet " Junk

Scientist " on any doctor who dared to dispute the " experts. " This PR

campaign includes labeling the women " crazies " and their leaders and

supporters " fear mongers " and " wackos " so desperate are they to destroy

the credibility of any of us who dared to speak out on the dangers. The

result is that for years, women have been lulled into a false belief, that

they had a 95% chance of being rupture free. The contrary is true.

Alarming, indisputable evidence was released in October 2000, when the FDA

published a landmark study of implanted women, many still without

symptoms. This objective work revealed that 69% of these women had at

least one ruptured implant, most without any knowledge of it, although

implanted a median time of less than 17 years.

Other studies had already revealed over a 90% chance of rupture within 20

years. Hardly, the " lifetime " product they were promised.

The cover up continues to fall apart . . .

Dr. al, director of the Center for Devices and Radiological

Health at the FDA, said it so clearly, " When it happens to you, the

rupture rate is 100 percent. "

By January 2000, over 127,000 women had written the FDA about the serious

complications from their silicone gel implants. The tragedy is that still

today, they are unable to get good medical care as the majority of doctors

refuse to believe the connection. Even worse, doctors don1t have a clue

what to do to heal these assaulted immune systems and rid women1s bodies

of the dozens of dangerous ingredients found in implants such as platinum,

silica, formaldehyde, plasticizers and organic solvents.

Implant formulations were frequently changed -- shells and gel thicker

then thinner then thicker again -- and " new and improved " was marketed so

often, it appears silicone merchants believed their own hype. In the 801s,

as " the " answer to capsular contracture, over 100,000 women received gel

implants with polyurethane foam glued to them. Not only did the foam

disintegrate, often within just weeks of implantation, but it broke down

into TDA, a known carcinogen, decades ago removed from hair dyes. These

women are amongst the most ill, and even when these dangerous implants

were hurriedly taken off the market in 1991, no recall or even courtesy

call was made to warn the implanted women.

The most recent implant disaster was exported to Europe, where well over

5,000 women, mainly in Britain, were implanted with soy oil filled

implants, unlovingly known as " tofu titties. " The American protocol for

this product required this new round of female " lab rats " to be past

childbearing age, but somewhere on it1s way across the Atlantic, this

requirement was dropped. Health advocates and cautious scientists were

warning of the serious potential dangers but were ignored and the

" experts " made fortunes implanting them even in very young women. Their

bubble burst as shocking reports and the rancid soy oil leaked out in

Spring of 2000, and all the women were advised to have them removed as

quickly as possible. The damage to many had already been done.

Now, like the millions with failed gel implants, they are faced with yet

another difficult decision, should they replace them with saline filled

implants?

Is Saline the Solution?

From her wheelchair, Jackie Strange, the former Deputy Postmaster General

of the United States spoke of the destruction of her life at hearings by

the Institute of Medicine at the National Academy of Sciences in

Washington, DC. Infections, peripheral neuropathy, and a myriad of

autoimmune diseases struck in both rapid and slow succession following her

implantation with saline filled, silicone implants.

Concurrently, the manufacturers and plastic surgeons were creating a

multi-media blitz touting saline implants from billboards, glossy

magazines and TV. With ads reminiscent of " You1ve come a long way, baby, "

young women were featured praising their implants and plastic surgeons did

the Talk Show circuit assuring women that saline was " natural " and leakage

benign.

In Spring, 2000, in spite of over 50,000 reports of serious adverse

reactions from water-filled implants, the FDA made the fateful decision to

give their highly valued stamp of " safety approval " on two brands of

saline implants, declaring them " safe enough. "

How can this be?

The manufacturers own studies show that within just the first 3 years,

nearly 40% of post-mastectomy patients had to have additional surgeries

with these implants. The complication rate for these women is around 80%

in just 4 years time. After cancer, invasive surgery to remove the tumors,

often radiation and / or chemotherapy, the body is simply not strong

enough to handle this foreign invader.

Even for women wanting implants just for augmentation to boost their

self-esteem, the complication rates are staggering. Glamour Magazine, in

their November 2000 issue published a full page photo revealing a saline

filled implant, entirely black with aspergillus niger and other fungi.

Breast Cancer and Implants - No Easy Answers

Nearly 200,000 American women -- our sisters, mothers, teachers, lovers,

daughters, friends --will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year.

Cancer and implant survivor, retired Professor of Health Education,

Henrietta Farber, recently summarized the feelings of many who know,

" The cancer was challenging.

The implants almost killed me. "

While the manufacturers press releases rage " The Case Against Implants

Collapses, " and try to close this ugly chapter in medical history, the

women, now united, have a plan of their own.

With the health of women and their offspring at stake, Martha Murdock,

Co-Founder of the National Silicone Implant Foundation in Dallas, with

four generations of her family affected by silicone toxicity, says it

best,

" It's not over 'til we win. "

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Risks of Breast Implants

1. Implants can rupture during mammography.

2. Implants make routine self exams and mammography more difficult. More

views are necessary, meaning additional radiation each time.

3. Implant rupture can go undetected for years and silicone is known to

migrate through the lymph system and has been found in the brains, spinal

fluid, ovaries, livers, and other organs of implanted women.

4. Implants are not lifetime devices, and may need to be replaced (even

without systemic problems) more than once a decade.

5. At any time infections are possible, including fungal and antibiotic

resistant bacterial infestations.

6. Loss of breast sensation, especially around the nipple area is

reported, as well as hyper-senstivity to touch.

7. Capsular contracture can be very uncomfortable, to the point of severe

pain and deformation.

8. Many women have experienced severe necrosis and other forms of breast

tissue loss.

9. Many women have experienced serious autoimmune diseases post

implantation including: rheumatoid arthritis, scleroderma, multiple

sclerosis,Sjøgrens Syndrome (severe dry mouth, eyes, etc.), and lupus.

Those women with pre-existing compromised immune systems are now warned to

avoid implants.

10. Disproportional numbers of implanted women have reported neurological

and cognitive complications, as well as endocrine disruption including

hysterectomies, miscarriage.

11. Children born of implanted women have experienced the same autoimmune

conditions and have been seriously inadequately studied.

12. Breast implants often negatively affect the ability to produce milk

for breast-feeding.

13. Health insurance carriers are routinely denying coverage for implanted

(and explanted) women.

~~~~~~~~~~

Ilena Rosenthal

Author of Breast Implants: The Myths, the Facts, the Women, Ms. Rosenthal

has been connecting, supporting and educating women harmed by breast

implants for over 5 years. As director of The Humantics Foundation for

Women based in San Diego, she created and heads the largest Breast Implant

Support Group in the world. E-mail: ilena2000@..., phone:

858/270-0680.