January 7th, 2009
I have saline breast implants. Since I had them put in 3 years ago I
have had a compromised immune system. I get sick way more often and
for longer periods, catching every cold and flu that comes my way. My
hair started falling out, and I then contracted Mononucleosis ("Mono")
which left me increadibly fatigued and now I am thought to have
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. I have had every test done by every kind of
specialist and "NOTHING" is wrong with me ( I don't want to know what
other thing might be causing these symptoms, I just want information
on my questions asked below). My MD is recomending for me to have my
implants removed believing that the silicone lining (made up of dozens
of other chemicals) may be leaching chemicals into my system and
causing my body to work harder than usual to clean itself out. Since
I am an EXTREMELY SENSITIVE person ( a 1/2 cup of decaf coffee gives
me a buzz) she feels as though my body is reacting negatively to the
implants even when other bodies would simply purge themselves of any
toxins. I have a surgery in one week to have them removed and
although I feel that this is the best solution for me, I would like
some more information on this subject.
My question is, can someone's health be adversely affected by a saline
breast implant? And if so, what are the typical symptoms one
experiences when suffering from such poisoning? And once removed, has
the patient reported improvement in health? And if so, how long did
it take?
Thank you,
AndreaHello Hultz,
This is one of those controversial topics. Doctors and scientists
have been arguing the safety of breast implants since their
invention. Some literature denies that symptoms women get
post-implant are psychosomatic, but I have found more evidence to
prove the opposite. There are chemicals in the implant shell, they can
become infected with bacteria and/or mold/fungi. Numerous women have
suffered similar symptoms, and gone on to recover after explantation.
From the FDA:
?Widespread reports of adverse reactions to silicone gel-filled
implants and a lack of evidence supporting their safety led the Food
and Drug Administration to order the devices off the market in April
1992. They remained available only to women in clinical studies,
mostly women seeking breast reconstruction after breast cancer
surgery. Saline-filled implants were allowed to remain on the market
for all uses.?
?Although many of the local complications of gel-filled implants are
also associated with saline implants, the latter were permitted to
remain on the market unrestricted for both reconstruction and
augmentation. FDA considers saline-filled implants less risky, because
although they have the same silicone rubber envelope as gel-filled
implants, leakage or rupture would release only salt water, not
silicone gel, into the body.
Nevertheless, FDA is requiring manufacturers to collect data on the
saline implants as well, because the incidence of known risks (for
example, deflation and capsular contracture) is not well defined. When
the Medical Device Amendments were passed, it was determined that
these devices would also eventually require premarket approval. In
January 1993, FDA notified saline implant manufacturers that they
would have to submit safety and effectiveness data for their products.
In December 1994, the agency told them what type of safety and
effectiveness data were needed, and delineated objectives and time
frames for the trials. Saline implants will stay on the market while
the studies are conducted, but the companies must report the
laboratory, animal and clinical data in stages, and must provide
written information on the known and possible risks of their
products.?
"Women considering saline implants should ask their doctor for a copy
of the manufacturer's information sheet, a copy of the product insert
sheet for the specific implant to be used, and a copy of the hospital
informed consent form," says Barbara Stellar, FDA's breast implant
information and outreach coordinator.?
Let?s hope your implants were made after 1991: ?About 110,000 women
have silicone gel-filled implants with a polyurethane coating,
intended to reduce the risk of capsular contracture. In April 1991, an
FDA analysis showed that polyurethane foam could break down under
human body conditions to form a chemical called TDA, which can cause
cancer in animals. As a result, the manufacturer immediately stopped
selling the product.
Recently, however, a study to measure TDA in women with polyurethane
implants found that a woman's risk of cancer from exposure to TDA
released by the implant is negligible--about one in a million over a
lifetime. FDA considers it unlikely that even one woman would develop
cancer from these implants. The study supports the agency's original
recommendation that women who are not having problems should not have
the implants removed solely because of concern about cancer from TDA
exposure.?
Risks of implants:
? ?Autoimmune-like disorders--signs include joint pain and swelling;
skin tightness, redness or swelling; swelling of hands and feet; rash;
swollen glands or lymph nodes; unusual fatigue; general aching;
greater chance of getting colds, viruses and flu; unusual hair loss;
memory problems; headaches; muscle weakness or burning; nausea or
vomiting; and irritable bowel syndrome.
Recent studies have shown, however, that there is not a large
increased risk of traditional autoimmune, or connective tissue
disease, from silicone gel implants.
? Fibrositis/fibromyalgia-like disorders (pain, tenderness and
stiffness of muscles, tendons and ligaments).
http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/995_implants.html
?Over time, the outer silicone elastomer shell is attacked and
literally devoured by the immune system?s macrophages. In this way,
the shell, which is made of highly toxic fumed silica, is distributed
throughout the body and stored in major organs.?
?It is very clear to us that Health Canada has no alternative but to
place a moratorium on saline breast implants, especially those
manufactured by Mentor, or risk being sued by women who have already
suffered or will suffer damages from this medical device. Health
Canada is derelict in its duty to enforce the Food and Drug Act
regarding saline breast implants. It is also failing to report the
damages of saline breast implants to the Provincial Ministries of
Health, and thence to GPs and plastic surgeons.?
http://www.info-implants.com/BC/0030.html
?Once a saline breast implant has deflated, it can not be refilled. If
yor implants have not caused any health problems before they deflate,
ruptured saline implants are relatively safe if there is no mold,
bacteria, or fungus. If any of these are present, you will probably
notice symptoms of infection or allergic-type symptoms.?
http://www.breastimplantinfo.org/augment_4faq4.html
?Capsular Contracture: Almost every woman with breast implants has
scar tissue surrounding her implants. This scar capsule doesn?t show
-- it?s inside her breast, and is her body?s natural way of protecting
her from a foreign object. Sometimes, however, that capsule is too
tight for the implant. Capsular contracture is when the capsule is too
tight and feels like it is squeezing the implant.
? It can happen with either saline or silicone gel breast implants
? It can be slightly uncomfortable or very painful
? It can change the shape of your breast, or make it look round and unnatural
? You may need surgery to fix it
? Once it is surgically fixed, it is likely to happen again
?Everyone agrees that implants can cause local complications, such as
those listed above. There is much more controversy about whether it
can cause diseases or disorders. Some women can have implants for many
years and never have any problems, but as the years go by, many women
with implants become seriously ill. Common symptoms include joint pain
or stiffness, memory problems, trouble concentrating, fatigue,
flu-like symptoms that don?t go away, or pain throughout the body
(fibromyalgia). Auto-immune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis,
lupus, and scleroderma are also problems among women with implants.
Are these symptoms caused by implants, are women who are susceptible
to these illnesses more likely to get them if they have breast
implants, or would these women have become ill even if they didn?t
have implants?
Research has not yet answered those questions. Women with implants are
more likely to have these diseases and symptoms in some studies, but
not others. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) summarized 17
epidemiological studies that attempted to answer this question, but
unfortunately, most of the studies included relatively small numbers
of women who had implants for very short periods of time. Longer-term
studies conducted after the IOM report have found some risk of
diseases among women with implants. That is why the IOM study is not
proof of implant safety. For more information on the IOM study, please
see http://www.breastimplantinfo.org/what_know/iom_crit.html.
Only one study has been performed on women with rheumatoid symptoms:
?In the only study of women with rheumatology symptoms who had their
implants removed, doctors found that 97% of women with pain and other
rheumatology symptoms felt better after their breast implants were
removed and not replaced. Many symptoms lessened or disappeared over
the next few months. In contrast, 96% of the women who did not have
their implants removed became even more ill. This study was conducted
by a physician (Dr. Noreen Aziz) at the University of South Florida
Colleges of Medicine and Public Health, who now works for the National
Cancer Institute.
Studies published in 2001 by other scientists at the National Cancer
Institute raised questions about the long-term safety of breast
implants. Unfortunately, many doctors are not aware of these recent
studies. One study found that women who had breast implants for at
least eight years were twice as likely to die from brain cancer, three
times as likely to die from lung cancer or other respiratory diseases,
and four times as likely to commit suicide, compared to other plastic
surgery patients. A second study found that women with breast implants
for at least eight years were 21% more likely to be diagnosed with
cancer compared to other women their age.?
http://www.breastimplantinfo.org/what_know/having_problems.html
?I knew I was healing, but it was a very long and slow process,
predictable bad days, with brain fog one of the symptoms that was the
slowest to resolve. My blood work, although not entirely normal, had
become closer and closer to normal numbers, which gave me hope. The
diagnosis of Hashimoto's autoimmune thyroid disease was the final
piece of the puzzle that was needed in order to get the final
treatment that would allow me to feel nearly 100% healed.
Today, I feel very much alive and my body has regained energy and stamina!
I no longer feel dreadfully poisoned and lethargic and have seen
continual improvements in my health as lifestyle changes became
incorported into my
daily routine permanently.
I live a full and active life, and can almost finally forget that
implants had nearly destroyed my health completely.
Now that I am 6 and a half years post explant, hindsight has given me greater
vision for offering hope for other women harmed by breast implants.
Healing can happen---that I know from my own experience.
What needs to be remembered through this nightmare of illness brought
on by implants is that healing is a process which requires much
patience, and a dedication to principles of healing which respect the
body's innate healing capabilities, while at the same time prompting
the body to give up the toxins that seek to take up residence in our
cells.
Proper explant is a must, with a totalcapsulectomy. That is the first step.
Subclinical infections, whether fungal or bacterial in nature, must
be addressed.
And finally, detoxification and nutritional rebuilding must be incorporated
into a lifestyle change that will become a lifelong endeavor.
My life has been forever changed by having breast implants.?
http://www.humanticsfoundation.com/patty.html
?Could saline implants?hardening, leaking, deflating and turning black
with fungus?be making women desperately ill? Former implant recipient
Kathryn Gordon thinks so, and a growing number of doctors agree.
Glamour investigates.
The squishy mound blackened with fungus in Kathryn Gordon?s fridge
isn?t a lump of cheese gone bad. It?s what the 33-year-old former
actress from Atlanta wore next to her heart, inside her bosom, for 11
years?a breast implant she claims made her so desperately ill, she
almost committed suicide.?
?"When I opened her up, her breast tissue was very inflamed, and the
implants looked black," recalls Dr. Kolb. "It was the third time I?d
seen black implants in the 100 saline [implant] removals I?ve done. I
believe the implants were darkened by a fungus, which then migrated
into Kathryn?s bloodstream to cause the symptoms she was
experiencing." Six weeks after Dr. Kolb removed Gordon?s implants and
treated her with antibiotics and antifungal drugs, Gordon felt fine.?
?[Picture of Kathryn Gordon?s reflection [head and shoulders] looking
back from mirror; caption: Tests showed that Kathryn Gordon?s implant
was full of fungus and contained an entire teaspoon of bacteria.]?
http://www.info-implants.com/Quebec/Charest/hope.html
?DURING the hearings, women displayed implants that had been taken
from their bodies that were blackened with fungus and which they said
had caused infections, breast pain and repeated surgeries. Even so,
plastic surgeons have touted the implants as a safe and effective
option for women since 1992, when the FDA banned use of
silicone-gel-filled implants after receiving reports that they
triggered autoimmune diseases. Silicone-gel implants are available
only to women requiring breast reconstruction after breast-cancer
surgery. "Women are grown-ups and capable of making the decision of
whether or not they want saline breast implants," says breast expert
Susan Love MD, author of "Susan Love's Breast Book" and founder of the
breast-health Web site www.susanloveMD.com." There's no evidence that
they're life-threatening, and as long as women are completely informed
of the risks that they may rupture or cause an infection there's no
reason why they shouldn't remain on the market.?
http://implants.clic.net/tony/Video/04.html
Silicon is a semimetallic element, and silicone is a family of
silicon-based organic compounds, of which the poly(dimethylsiloxanes)
(PDMS) are prominent members. PDMS compounds are polymers, and the
length and cross-linking of the polymer chain(s) affect the physical
properties of these substances. Implant shells are made from an
elastomer, that is, a high molecular weight, cross-linked rubbery
substance, and they are filled with silicone gel, a less cross-linked
spongy substance permeated with lower molecular weight silicone
fluids. Other fillers are possible and include primarily saline.
Chapter 2 describes in summary fashion the chemical steps in the
manufacture of breast implants; Chapters 2 and 4 discuss the extensive
presence of, and wide exposure of citizens in developed countries to
silicones in foods, cosmetics, lubricants for machinery, hypodermic
syringes and other products, insulators, and a wide array of consumer
products.?
?Some investigators have asserted that platinum catalysts in breast
implants may diffuse through the implant shell, be present in
multivalent states, and provoke toxic reactions. The evidence
currently available suggests that platinum is present only in the zero
valence elemental state. Evidence does not suggest there are high
concentrations in implants, significant diffusion of platinum out of
implants, or platinum toxicity in humans. In general, the committee
has concluded that a review of the toxicology studies of silicones
known to be used in breast implants does not provide a basis for
concern at expected exposures.?
?Breast implants, like any foreign body, incite a surrounding fibrous
tissue reaction. This fibrous capsule may contract, distorting the
appearance of the implanted breast and causing pain. Contracture may
be apparent as early as a few months after implantation, and the
committee finds that it most likely continues over prolonged periods
of time. As with any biologic reaction, some variation in contracture
may be expected. The severity of contracture can differ in the breasts
of the same woman. The exact frequency of contracture is not known
because it has varied from 100% with pre-silicone implants to much
lower prevalences, depending on a number of factors, as modern
silicone implants have evolved. Few studies that have measured
contracture have controlled all except one study variable.
Silicon or silicone levels are elevated in capsular and sometimes
breast tissue around implants, and this may contribute to capsular
contracture. The committee has found suggestive evidence that
contracture frequency is lessened by saline implants and barrier
shells that, among other things, diminish the exposure of peri-implant
breast tissue to silicone. Construction of an implant shell with
projections, known as texturing, also appears to control contracture.
The committee reviewed the evidence on the effects of adrenal
corticosteroids on capsular contracture. Although some data suggest
that they may reduce contractures, steroids also cause damage to
surrounding breast tissue, are not an FDA approved or
manufacturer-recommended usage, and may weaken elastomer implant
shells?
?A number of studies have shown that bacteria can be cultured from
normal breast tissue, even at some depth below the surface of the
skin. These bacteria are skin flora that reside in the lactiferous
ducts of the normal breast, and often can be cultured from implants,
where they may contribute from time to time to infections. There is
suggestive evidence that the presence of bacteria correlates with
contracture. A few investigators have reported finding an association
between the presence of bacteria around implants and systemic symptoms
or breast pain, although this evidence is limited. Hematomas, or
collections of blood around implants, have also been proposed as
causes of contracture. Evidence for this is insufficient. Significant
contractures are reported considerably more frequently than clinically
observable hematomas. Pain is also a problem in some women with
implants. A number of studies report pain that has resulted in
considerable discomfort and led to the removal of implants.?
This is a very detailed report. Please read the entire report for
further information on immune system problems.
http://books.nap.edu/html/silicone_safety/
Note that the article stated ?they have the same silicone rubber
envelope as gel-filled implants?. So, lacking a rupture, saline
implants still expose your body to the silicone rubber that the
?shell? contains. For absolute certainty, you would need to check with
the manufacturer of your brand of implant. After you read this answer,
you may be interested in reading an answer I did recently about
silicone/plastics reactions.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=594792
?Risks from these products are unacceptable in the light of the
benefits they provide by any standard of measurement. If there was
forthright disclosure of the side effects, few women would be willing
to assume the risks of saline inflatable technology. Cultural and
fashion pressures operating in an environment where the public is
compelled by media to believe in medical miracles presents a
regulatory dilemma with respect to the breast implant trades. Only
agencies with long established credibility with the public, such as
the FDA, are in a position to offset what has become outrageous
promotion of the medically absurd.
Saline breast implants gradually lose the saline filling charge
because of filling port failure, shell perforation, creasing and
material deterioration. They are ephemeral devices. As the implants
age, their shells become porous and valves incompetent. This not only
causes outflow of the filling fluid but allows blood products and
occasional micro-organisms to enter the filling charge. This process
sets in insidiously well before deflation is noticed. Growth of
bacteria, fungi and algae then takes place stimulated by decaying
blood and proteins from the host. The growing organisms often reach
florid quantities several year after insertion in the user. The shells
ultimately fail releasing grossly contaminated fluid into the host.
According to prevailing views on infection control, micro-organisms in
implants that leak fluid are perceived as incubation reservoirs and
sources of infective fluids. Low grade infections around implants and
their debilitating sequelae are common. They are regarded in some
quarters as "normal" and users are subjected to chronic treatment with
antibiotics and anti inflammatories. Because of fluid leakage, the
organisms spread to the space around the implants and promote
symptoms. The users re-enter the health care system with common
complaints. Antibiotics may be prescribed to resolve the problems but
symptoms recur with time. Diagnosis is difficult as symptoms appear
unrelated to the faulty implants. In more severe cases, the space
around the implant and the upper chest becomes filled with infectious
fluid and the device may extrude through the skin. Such situations are
frequently life threatening.?
?Long term saline inflatable implant use is associated with
mineralization of the surrounding tissue. The problem affects at least
30% of users within ten years, assuming the device remains in situ
that long. The mineralization frequently takes the form of sharp,
abrasive structures which mechanically excoriate the shell causing it
to leak grossly. In the late part, calcification phenomena affect the
elastomeric material which is penetrated, swollen and rendered porous
by the process. This has been noted in saline inflatable prostheses
for more than twenty years. The mechanism is related to base-initiated
hydrolysis of the silicone elastomer at an elevated intracapsular pH
which prevails in long term users with calcific deposits.?
Because of restrictions I can post no more from this site,
but I think you?ll find the entire article fascinating.
http://implants.clic.net/tony/Blais/037.html
One woman?s story made before the FDA Advisory Panel in March 2000:
?In 1987, 13 years after my first surgery, I finally consulted
specialists at the University of Michigan Medical Center, who assured
me that they could solve my problems once and for all. They didn't. I
had several other surgeries, including getting my first set of saline
implants in 1992. They told me saline implants were the safest kind,
but my worst problems started after that surgery.
On July 18, 1995 I had my third set of saline implants put in, which
were described as a new, greatly improved type of saline implant. I
still had a great deal of deformity from all the previous surgeries
and the infection of 1986. That was my most recent breast invasion and
reconstruction. There needs to be another. My doctor tells me I have
to have these implants taken out of me because my health has severely
declined since 1992.
I stand before you now, a recipient of social security disability
trying to live my life on $512.00 per month. I was granted disability
status in 1997 when I could no longer hold down a full time job or
work to support myself. I had been a relatively successful freelance
writer, a highly promising student in sculpting, working also as a
crisis intervention counselor for a substance abuse facility. I lost
my jobs because I kept getting sick. I had to quit college. In order
to survive, I had to sit in a courtroom with the Social Security Judge
and listen to people talk about me as though I were one of the most
inept human beings, an incapable member of society. This was a most
significantly tragic day for me.
There is not a single insurance company who will insure me. I'm
considered high risk because of my saline implants. This entire mess
has cost well over a quarter of a million dollars. Why? Because I,
like everyone else I believed saline solution encased in silicone
shells did not cause problems.
I have to get up everyday and face chronic fatigue, Reynaud's
syndrome, and moments of excruciating chest pain that has had doctors
sending me to the emergency room. My immune system has been
compromised. I've developed what is known as chemically induced
asthma. I have blood in my urine and no one knows why. My muscles
weakened. I get sores on my skin that don't readily heal. I have
episodes of severe depression. I've been told to limit the use of my
arms to avoid the very real possibility of capsules forming again. I
can't even pick up my grandchildren!... My current doctor ran some
tests and thinks all my health problems are implant-related. I am
afraid of another surgery but I am afraid not to have these saline
implants removed for fear of additional medical complications. I can't
afford to have these implants taken out but will when I can.?
http://www.breastimplantinfo.org/per_stories/melindac.html
It appears you can regain your health, but it may take several
years. Following a healthy diet, exercise, proper amount of sleep, and
not smoking or drinking can accelerate the process. Don?t fall for
scams that claim to rid your body of the toxins ? your body will do it
in its own time.
This site has graphic images****
?Silicone implant disease (also called human adjuvant disease or
silicone-induced illness) is a new illness category developed by
physicians now treating women with implants. There has been a great
deal of controversy regarding the safety of silicone breast implants.
For the women who have implants, conflicting media reports can be a
source of considerable stress. There are still many unanswered
questions regarding the safety of silicone breast implants. Studies
are ongoing, but results may not be available for several years.
Education may help relieve some of the anxieties until results become
available. Breast implant manufacturers knew of multiple risks
associated with implants, and responded by terminating studies,
sponsoring only research they could control, and by misrepresenting
the risks to the users, physicians, and regulatory agencies.
Silicone had been successfully used for many years in a host of
medical devices, with virtually no bad publicity regarding biological
or autoimmune incompatibility. So the medical establishment embraced
the practice of placing foreign silicone objects into women's bodies
before those objects were rigorously tested for safety. Before the
disclosures of industry and the media forced the issue to a head,
patients assumed that silicone-gel implants had long ago been deemed
safe. It was revealed that few plastic surgeons reviewed possible
systemic risks in any significant detail and unless specifically
requested, they had not provided patients with the package inserts
that came with the implants. While many women believed that what was
being implanted into their bodies had been given the FDA's approval,
in truth the implants had slipped through a strange regulatory
loophole.
As of January 1982, however, silicone implants had been only
preliminarily (not officially) placed in Class III by the FDA--which
meant the devices would be evaluated and regulated to assure safety
and effectiveness--given that the FDA believed the devices posed "a
potentially unreasonable risk of injury." Safety data from
manufacturers--due to the 1976 grandfather statute--did not require
research findings to be submitted for FDA review.?
?The shell for both gel- and saline-filled implants is made of the
same silicone material. Since congregations of macrophages (the cells
which ingest, kill, and digest foreign substances in the body), are
found on the surface of silicone implant jackets after explantation,
it appears that these immune-system cells attack the jacket
itself--whether or not silicone is leaking from it. This process can
be likened to gophers chewing into and through the implant's wall,
chiseling off microscopic pieces of silicone, which then lodge in
neighboring body tissue. Eventually, this cellular assault weakens the
outer envelope to the point where it may rupture. Silicone has been
found in tissues peripheral to the breast even in the absence of
implant rupture, which further implies that attacking macrophages can
cause bits of the silicone envelope to break off.
Numerous reports in the medical literature, as well as findings by
manufacturers, have shown that a certain amount of silicone leaks, or
"bleeds" through the outer casing of the implant jacket in every case,
even when there is no rupture. This means that all women with silicone
implants will experience some exposure to the gel. Silicone particles
may come off the outside of the envelope, perhaps creating potential
hazard for women with saline-filled silicone envelope implants as
well.?
?Far more sophisticated and expensive technologies, such as
high-powered electron microscopy/X-ray dispersive analysis, can be
used to identify silicone in the body, but this is far beyond what is
generally available in most doctors' offices. Additionally, the early
signs of silicone disease are often nonspecific, the types of symptoms
that can occur in anyone. Later, as the illness proceeds, its symptoms
often evolve into conditions that appear similar to
non-silicone-induced rheumatic diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis,
lupus, and scleroderma ( a fibrotic thickening of skin and vital
organs). This combination of nonspecific and rheumatic symptoms, all
of which appear to be similar to other illnesses, makes misdiagnosis
easy. What's more, a physician who sees only an occasional silicone
disease patient may easily misdiagnose her symptoms as a rheumatic
ailment not linked to her implants. But, should the physician develop
an interest in silicone disease and see hundreds of patients with the
same patterns, the pattern of silicone-induced signs and symptoms soon
becomes clear.
It is important to understand that modern specialization and
subspecialization in medicine lead physicians to develop exceptional
skill in one area and little in others. Many of the plastic surgeons
who insert breast implants stay away from any involvement in the
postoperative, implant-induced medical complications of their
patients, and most rheumatologists are not trained or experienced in
plastic surgery procedures. Simply put, surgeons tend to focus on a
single problem or area of the body. They will take a generally healthy
patient, address a specific surgical problem--an infected gallbladder,
for example--remove it, and be finished. Medical problems that might
occur following surgery would normally be referred to an internist,
family practitioner, or other medical specialist, because that's not
what the surgeon handles. Because plastic surgeons only occasionally
track their patients' recovery beyond a short time after surgery--more
than a year or two is uncommon--many of those surgeons who used
silicone-gel implants never knew that some of their patients developed
silicone-related disorders later on. In one USF study, however, the
average woman developed the onset of silicone disease symptoms about 4
1/2 years after implantation. Patients who suspect that they may be
getting ill from silicone need to recognize the inherent complexity of
this medical question as well as the training and orientation of their
physician.?
?Typically there is a clustering of symptoms including any of the
following: severe weight loss, hair loss, liver dysfunction, lymph
node swelling, fatigue, weakness, granulomas, breast and nipple
inflammation, skin shedding, circulation problems, arthritis pain,
autoimmune symptoms, chronic muscle pain and stiffness. When the
silicone leaches throughout the body, it wants to stay in the body.
Any foreign matter, including silicone, is not easily transported out
of the body. The body needs help in ridding itself of any potentially
harmful agent. Studies are showing that the longer the silicone
implants have been leaking or ruptured prior to removal, the less
likely the women are to get well. As with arsenic--you can recover
from a little, but after a long period of taking arsenic daily you may
not fare so well. Women have died from the complications of this
disease. If you have silicone implants, show this article to your
doctor if he or she is not listening, or better yet, find another,
more ethical and informed doctor.?
http://tuberose.com/Breast_Implants.html
?There is no doubt that the implants were harming me in a terrible,
terrible way. It has now been almost 2 years since explant, and I
have no more fatigue, my mind is much clearer, I am active and feel
good most of the time. I still suffer from occasional brain fog and
pray that I do not have permanent neurological damage. The
rheumatologist claimed that the rheumatoid factor (elevated to 117 in
April 1998, and 159 in August 1998) will return to normal over time.
I have not been retested, but feel certain that the rheumatoid factor
has improved, as my health has. I have been working so hard to get
my health back.?
http://www.homestead.com/sosalines/patty2.html
Additional Information
======================
?In light of this new evidence, it is obvious that breast implants,
both saline-filled and silicone-filled, are potentially hazardous to a
woman's health and well-being, and women need to be properly informed
of this fact. We need more independent research on the adverse effects
of breast implants and the information needs to be made readily
available to women in order to counter the advertising campaigns by
the plastic surgery community and the manufacturers, and the social
pressure that drives so many women to believe that their bodies should
conform to an unrealistic ideal. Neither breast augmentation nor
reconstruction surgery is a life-saving procedure, but rather an
elective cosmetic surgery to change a woman's appearance, and every
woman needs to have unbiased information so that she can decide if the
benefits outweigh the risks.
In addition to health risks, there are severe financial risks
associated with breast implants. Many women with breast implants have
suffered financial ruin as a result of debilitating health problems
that have prevented them from working. Many have been turned down for
coverage by Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid programs
because there has not been adequate rigorous, independent scientific
research to recognize and define the diseases linked to breast
implants.
That the U.S. government recognizes the financial burden resulting
from breast implants is evidenced by the fact that the Department of
Justice is seeking reimbursement from the Dow Corning bankruptcy
settlement for the SSI funds that the government spent on disabled
silicone implant patients. Several major health insurance companies
routinely deny coverage to women with breast implants because they
know that they have a much higher risk of medical complications. If an
insurer does agree to cover an implant recipient, the rates are often
much higher and the coverage is restricted to illnesses that are not
in the area of the breast. This means that if a woman who has breast
implants contracts breast cancer, she may not be covered by her health
insurance policy.?
http://www.now.org/issues/health/alerts/implants.html
?The primary saline implant manufacturers are currently McGhan Medical
Corporation (Inamed), Silimed S.A., Mentor H/S Corporation, NovaMed
Inc., Poly Implant Protheses (PIP) S.A. and Progress Mankind
Technology (PMT) GmbH. The U.S. is dominated by Mentor and McGhan who
share the market. Secondary distributors include Hutchinson
International and Sierra Medical Technologies Inc. There is an influx
of unsanctioned foreign products imported and inserted in U.S. users
at offshore clinics which advertise within the continental U.S.
All salines use basically the same concepts, components and materials.
Dominant suppliers of silicone intermediates include McGhan Nusil
Corporation (Inamed), Applied Silicone Corporation (Rhodia) and Dow
Corning Corporation. Stock parts for some valved devices are supplied
as commodities from U.S.-based corporations.?
http://implants.clic.net/tony/Blais/037.html
Shari?s story:
==============
SHARI'S SYMPTOMS:
severe debilitating headaches (they have become less frequent since explant)
neck stiffness and severe pain
shoulder and upper back stiffness and pain
severe muscle spasms in neck & shoulder area (shown on 2 separate
MRI's taken over a year apart)
extreme anxiety
severe depression
trouble concentrating
low body temp
low blood pressure
severe forgetfulness and lack of short term memory
joint pain and stiffness all over
night sweats
breast pain before and after removal
heart palpitations
dizzyness & falling
livedo retcularis
costochondritis in the ribs after removal
rashes and bumps on chest and upper arms
severe sinusitis
severe yeast infections
hand and feet swelling
hand and feet numbness and tingling in the morning
fevers for no apparent reason
Fibromyalgia
Swollen lymph nodes especially in neck and underarms areas
elevated thyroid tests
lupus like rashes on face (tests are inconclusive)
dry skin and red patches on hands that crack and bleeds with no injury
dark circles under eyes
sleeplessness
leg muscle twitching - sometimes in arms
extremely cold hands and feet
menstrual period abnormalities - very heavy periods usually 2 x per month
http://www.humanticsfoundation.com/shari.htm
More stories:
http://www.humanticsfoundation.com/
http://www.info-implants.com/Quebec/Charest/saline.html
The Glamour Magazine article
http://community-2.webtv.net/lany25/GlamourMagazineNov/
I hope this answer contains the information you were seeking. I
purposely left out articles from breast implant doctors and clinics.
If any part of my answer is unclear, I will be happy to assist you
further before you rate. Simply request an Answer Clarification, and I
will answer as soon as possible.
The best of luck to you!
Sincerely, Crabcakes
Search Terms
=============
Saline implant + explant
Saline breast implants + complications
Saline breast implants + mold
Saline breast implants + fungi
Side effects + saline breast implants
Immune system + saline breast implants#If you have any other info about this subject , Please add it free.# |
|
Posted in kerrybushpolls.com | edit
