If Women Only Knew How Implants Could Change Their Lives!

[Guest guest]

http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070102/HEALTH/70101024

Silicone breast implants get boost as ban is liftedProponents say quality better than salineBy PerkesMcClatchy News Service Originally posted on January 02, 2007

SANTA ANA, Calif. — sat in her plastic surgeon’s office recently, flipping through a dog-eared Playboy to pick out what size breasts she wants.She wavers between a C cup and a D.But one thing she knows for sure — she wants silicone, not saline.“I have a couple friends that have the saline. I know they’re not too happy with them,” says , who doesn’t want the ripples of saline. “I don’t want to look unnatural.”Some women, like , delayed breast augmentation surgery while they waited for the Food and Drug Administration to lift a 14-year ban on silicone implants. In November the FDA did just that. The reversal also was highly anticipated by Allergan Inc. of Irvine, Calif., which in 2006 bought one of only two domestic manufacturers of silicone implants.The earlier silicone models banned in the early 1990s were prone to leakage, triggered lawsuits by thousands of women, and sent manufacturer

Dow Corning into bankruptcy.In lifting the ban, the FDA noted the extensive safety research on the new silicone, but also cautioned that women will need regular MRI exams to ensure the implants haven’t leaked.Still, plastic surgeons and company officials say it’s a new era for silicone, though it may take time to dispel the bad name. Some health advocacy groups, though, are concerned that more problems are in store.After heard the announcement, the 34-year-old mother of two made an appointment with Dr. Domanskis in Newport Beach, Calif. “I don’t think it’s going to be an overwhelming flood of new patients,” Domanskis says. “The whole silicone controversy has been so sullied. It’s going to take time to get it out of patients’ minds.”, who works for a collections agency and lives in Rancho Cucamonga, Calif., wants implants to reverse the sag from breast-feeding her daughters.“I’m a little bit

conservative,” she says. “I don’t really wear anything low-cut. I think I would be more confident in that way and wear cuter tops that show it off a little bit.”Last year, about 364,610 women underwent breast augmentation, up 9 percent from 2004.In 2006, Allergan bought Inamed of Santa Barbara, Calif. In 2005, Inamed sold $230 million worth of breast implants worldwide.Like Domanskis, Allergan executives expect to see demand grow gradually.“I think we should enjoy a steady growth of the market going more toward the silicone route,” Allergan president Ball said in an interview in November. “Outside the U.S., where women have access to both implants, they choose silicone 90 percent of the time. We do expect a ramp up.”Not everyone supports a shift away from saline.The nonprofit National Research Center for Women and Families called the decision a “triumph of corporate lobbying” over women’s

health.“My center hears from women every single day with broken implants, saying, ‘I don’t know what to do,’” said Zuckerman, the group’s president. “Some of them say, ‘I have a broken implant and I can’t afford surgery to have it taken out.’”Zuckerman also worries that women won’t pay $2,000 for chest MRIs, which the FDA recommends every few years as a way to detect ruptures.Federal officials said possible complications include: hardness, breast pain, reduced nipple sensation, implant rupture and the need for additional surgery. But most women studied reported being satisfied with their silicone implants.Domanskis, who years ago removed the oozing silicone from the chests of women, gives patients a rundown of the pros and cons of the different types of implants.“I feel the saline implant is going to be a thing of the past, really almost relegated to museum status,” he says.In his consultation

with , he explains that the old silicone resulted in firmness about 40 percent of the time. Now, that risk has dropped to about 15 percent.He says saline not only can appear rippled, but the implant size can deflate. Domanskis pulls out a jiggly saline implant and a soft but denser silicone gel implant for her to feel. asks if they will need to be replaced.“If there isn’t a problem, you don’t need to replace them,” Domanskis says. “It’s a good thing for you as a consumer to be aware just because you have an implant doesn’t mean it’s going to last the rest of your life.”, who will spend about $2,000 for the silicone implants, $3,500 for the surgery and $1,500 for the operating room, said that’s not a drawback.“I would be willing to replace it,” she says. “I’m hoping they’ll last for a long time.”The FDA decision didn’t make silicone available for all women.Brittany

Vonlossberg, 20, started saving money after hearing about the FDA’s decision. But then she found out women must be at least 22 to receive the implants.“I wanted them for my 21st birthday,” said Vonlossberg, who lives in Huntington Beach, Calif. “I was really bummed out. Now I have to wait a whole other year.”