Testing for Silicon Hypersensitivity

[Guest guest]

--- Lana Transue <lanadearest@...> wrote:

> SiliconeKids

> From: " Lana Transue " <lanadearest@...>

> Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:40:25 -0800

> Subject: RE: [siliconeKids] Silicone Breast Implants

> and Injections

>

> I urge each and everyone of you that have not been

> tested for silicon

> hypersensitivity to get yourself tested and then

> send the test results to

> the FDA's Med-Watch program. This doctor is only

> charging $70 dollars for

> the test. These tests results completely changed our

> lives and the way the

> doctors respond to our illnesses that are related to

> the implants. Lana

>

>

> >From: Rogene S <saxony01@...>

> >Reply-SiliconeKids

> > < >,

> SiliconeKids

> ><siliconekids >

> >Subject: [siliconeKids] Silicone Breast Implants

> and Injections

> >Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:06:30 -0800 (PST)

> >

> >Thanks Lana!

> >

> >http://www.drmyhill.co.uk/article.cfm?id=86

> >

> >Dr. Myhill is in Great Britain . . . and outspoken

> >against breast implants! - Rogene

> >============================

> >

> >Silicone Breast Implants and Injections

> >

> >

> >I have now been consulted by over 100 patients with

> >chronic ill health following silicone breast

> implants

> >or injections. Silicone leaks (so called " gel

> bleed " )

> >out of the implant where it is picked up by the

> >reticulo-endothelial cells and distributed widely

> >throughout the whole body. The government body

> >responsible for licensing silicone, the Medical

> >Devices Agency, claims that silicone is inert and

> does

> >no harm despite this gel bleed. My clinical

> experience

> >and the scientific literature suggests otherwise.

> >

> >There are many problems with implants, of which the

> >most obvious is infection at the time of insertion.

> >However, the long term effects are far more malign.

> >This stems from the fact that silicone cannot be

> >broken down by any enzyme system in the body, is

> >engulfed by macrophages, carried to distant sites

> by

> >embolisation and there it acts as an immune

> adjuvant,

> >stimulating autoimmune disorders. This means that

> >these patients suffer from multisystem autoimmune

> >disease. In particular, clinically one sees:

> >

> >mixed connective tissue disease, demyelinating

> >conditions such as MS autoimmune endocrinopathies,

> >vasculitis, myopathies,

> >

> >- all of which eventually leads to a chronic

> fatigue

> >syndrome often including multiple chemical

> sensitivity

> >My clinical impression is that the silicone

> poisoned

> >patients suffer more from pain than the virally or

> OP

> >induced CFS. I have concluded from my own

> observations

> >that silicone causes a new disease unique to

> silicone

> >but resembling other diseases.

> >

> >All of these cases I have reported to the MDA. None

> of

> >these cases were reported to the MDA by either

> their

> >plastic surgeon or rheumatologist or oncologist.

> This

> >simply reflects the level of gross under-reporting

> of

> >side effects.

> >

> >It is well recognised that the silicone bleeds out

> of

> >the implants very readily and is widely distributed

> >throughout the body by the reticulo-endothelial

> >system. Silicone leaks out as soon as the implants

> are

> >put in. I know this because the Medical Devices

> >Agency, which is the government body responsible

> for

> >licensing these products, tells me so. However,

> where

> >we disagree is what happens to the silicone then.

> The

> >MDA maintains that it is inert, but actually

> silicone

> >is well recognised as being an immune adjuvant and

> I

> >suspect in susceptible individuals we get an

> >inflammatory reaction against the silicone which

> >results in multi-system disease. The Louisiana

> ruling

> >on 19.8.97 showed that Dow Corning was developing

> >silicone for use as an active pharmaceutical agent

> at

> >the same time as when it was being declared

> " inert " .

> >

> >There is no known mechanism by which silicone can

> be

> >excreted from the body. Silicone leakage is

> >accelerated when implants rupture, of which 50% do

> so

> >by 12 years and 95% by 20 years. Most of these

> >ruptures are spontaneous but some follow closed

> >capsulotomy, road traffic accident or whatever. A

> >recent Lancet paper November 1997) recommends that

> all

> >implants are replaced every 8 years. Silicone

> leakage

> >can be a problem locally whereby the body throws up

> a

> >scar capsule against the implant to try to prevent

> the

> >silicone from leaking. As this scar contracts this

> >causes local hardening of the breast, often with

> pain.

> >Surgeons treat this by crushing the breast between

> >their hands (often with no anaesthetic!) to rupture

> >the scar capsule (this unproven, extremely painful

> >procedure has been sanitised by giving it a name:

> >closed capsulotomy). The implant may also be

> ruptured

> >by this procedure. Once ruptured, the silicone may

> >migrate in a lump to the axilla and brachial plexus

> >causing pain and blockage of lymphatics, across the

> >breast causing a mis- shapen breast (one patient

> had

> >to have her nipples surgically re-sited), or down

> the

> >chest wall.

> >

> >Generalised effects of silicone are caused by

> silicone

> >migrating via the reticulo-endothelial system to

> the

> >rest of the body and causing inflammatory reactions

> >wherever silicone ends up. In the brain this causes

> a

> >multiple sclerosis-like syndrome, in the body it

> can

> >cause a range of autoimmune disorders, chronic

> fatigue

> >syndrome, chronic pain and multiple chemical

> >sensitivity.

> >

> >Tests For Silicone Poisoning Prof Garry's

> lab

> >in the USA offers antibody testing. He measures the

> >anti-polymer antibody levels. However, this is

> >expensive and is not specific for siliconosis. So I

> >rarely do this test nowadays. His address is Dept

> of

> >Microbiology and Immunology, Tulane University

> School

> >of Medicine, New Orleans, LA 70112 tel 001 504 587

> >2027 fax 001 504 584 1994. I can arrange the test

> if

> >this is easier - I can post the kit to the patient

> for

> >the blood to be taken locally and make arrangements

> to

> >dispatch the sample to America via a courier. The

> cost

> >is œ150 for the test and œ20 for the

> >transport.

> >

> >I have just had an extract of silicone made up for

> >skin testing and am getting interesting results!

> This

> >test is designed to look at the body's immune

> response

> >to silicone. The extract is a very dilute solution

> >(1:100) which is injected intradermally to bring up

> a

> >weal of about 7 by 7mm. Ten minutes later this is

> >measured. A complete non-reactor would have no

> growth

> >and flattening of the weal. Reactors show a growth

> in

> >the size of the weal. A positive reaction supports

> the

> >idea that the body is reacting positively to

> silicone.

> >Again I don't know the medico-legal aspects of this

> >test until I have done a reasonable number

> including

> >controls (i.e people who have never been exposed to

> >silicone). I don't see why it should not be

> possible

> >to try a desensitisation technique called

> >neutralisation from the test extract.For a list of

> >practitioners, visit www.bsaenm.org

> >

> >The most sensitive test available in this country

> to

> >assess the reaction of white cells to silicone in

> the

> >body is a lymphocyte chemical sensitivity

> (silicone)

> >test This just involves sending a blood sample to

> >Biolab in London. My clinical impression of tests

> done

> >so far is that the worst affected women have the

> >highest levels of sensitivity.

> >

> >Treatment I have been in direct contact with

> Professor

> >Radford Shanklin from the States who has been most

> >helpful with clinical management. We had a long

> >meeting at the Royal Society of Medicine where I

> could

> >pick his brains. The priority is to have the

> silicone

> >removed by a surgeon skilled in explantation.

> However,

> >the problem with explantation is that it is thought

> to

> >stir up a reaction against silicone and patients

> often

> >see a worsening of their symptoms which may last up

> to

> >3 years. Prof. Shanklin tells me that reactions

> >against silicone are medicated by T cells and

> >interleukin 2. He has been trying Plaquenil 200mgs

> >twice daily for 90 days before surgery and believes

> >this damps down the T cell activity and prevents

> this

> >post operative flare. Plaquenil is a standard

> >immunosuppressive drug used to treat rheumatoid

> >arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosis. It is a

> >fairly benign drug and it is felt that for short

> term

> >treatment no special monitoring is required

> although

> >it is probably medically prudetn to check a white

> cell

> >count and eye test before and during treatment.

> >

> >Explantation needs to be done by a skilled surgeon

> >aware of the need not to rupture the capsule

> >inadvertently. Furthermore, the scar capsule also

> >needs removing because it will be impregnated with

> >silicone. Insist on being given the implant after

> >surgery and don't allow the surgeon to make up an

> >excuse. I had one patient who was told the implant

> was

> >removed intact, but it was " scrubbed " to make it

> look

> >better and ruptured in that process, therefore it

> was

> >not available to be seen! Let's face it - you've

> paid

> >for it - it belongs to ysu!

> >

> >The CFS side of things I treat in exactly the same

> way

> >as I treat all my other CFS patients with fatigue

> >caused by viral infection or pesticide poisoning or

> >whatever. Namely rest, nutritional supplements,

> >elimination dieting, magnesium injections where

> >appropriate (blood test needed), B12 injections,

> >avoiding chemicals, etc.

> >

> >Second Generation Effects There is every reason to

> >expect silicone to cross the placenta into the

> unborn

> >child. The effects of this are uncertain. Prof

> >Shanklin has looked at a group of 190 women who had

> >babies before and after their implant. There were

> 127

> >pre-implant children of which 100 were in good

> health,

> >27 in fair health (minor transient problems) and

> none

> >sick. This compares to 252 post-implant children,

> of

> >which 78 were in good health 81 in fair health with

> 93

> >WHO WERE MORE SERIOUSLY ILL (compares to none in

> the

> >pre-implant group!). This experience certainly

> accords

> >with what I am seeing in my patients. However, I

> would

> >like to repeat this research in all my patients and

> >hope to attract some modest funds to allow me to do

> >this. I would do it myself if I had the time, but I

> >don't. I would need to employ somebody short term

> to

> >contact women. Any volunteers?

> >

> >See also: Neutralisation in FOOD ALLERGY section

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

>