Soulgirl75 Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Wooooah! I don't have a complaint - I was just putting my personal view across. People seem to think they shouldn't be removed due to them being a 'vanity' item....... I was merely trying to point out to those people that that is not a reason not to treat them. I think the government's stance is spot on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 All " iffi " breast implants should be paid by the French company or by the French Government. I'm not sure the company still exists; some people have said it went bankrupt, but I've seen nothing official about that either way. People do seem to be forgetting in all this, that silicone is an inert and completely harmless compound. The worst that can possibly happen if an implant ruptures is that it will lead to mis-shapen breasts and some scarring - not a good thing, but not remotely dangerous in the sense of being a threat to life and health. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucifer Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Wouldn't it be better to have bigger nipples grafted on, there is a limit to what you can get in your mouth without getting lockjaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leah-Lacie Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Did I hear that right? The NHS are removing and REPLACING the ones put in by them, private companies will only remove, not replace? (i.e, make the woman have a new set and pay again £££$$$) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Did I hear that right? The NHS are removing and REPLACING the ones put in by them, private companies will only remove, not replace? (i.e, make the woman have a new set and pay again £££$$$) I don't think you did. (Private companies are not, as yet, under any legal obligation to do anything.) The NHS will remove, but not replace, any implant that was put in by a private clinic. The grounds for that decision are that the ones installed by private clinics never met NHS grounds for the operation to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leah-Lacie Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Oh was he from the NHS? I went in kitchen and came back and thought they were talking to a private doctor, for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Oh was he from the NHS? I went in kitchen and came back and thought they were talking to a private doctor, for some reason. A private doctor probably has as much information as you. The issue isn't medical so much as politics. HN it seems is getting it bang on, mainly due to facts rather than sentiment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leah-Lacie Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 A private doctor probably has as much information as you. The issue isn't medical so much as politics. HN it seems is getting it bang on, mainly due to facts rather than sentiment. Any idea what started it to begin with? Whats supposedly wrong with them, leaking? My sister has a pair, she hasn't mentioned anything about it, she might not know, or care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Any idea what started it to begin with? Whats supposedly wrong with them, leaking? Breast implants are made from silicone. (There are actually a whole bunch of different silicone compounds, but they all share the same characteristics so let's let that go for now.) Silicone is inert and harmless, so far as the body's concerned; you could drown in it, and a ton weight of the stuff could crush you, but it isn't poisonous. Implants are supposed to be made from medical-grade silicone, for obvious reasons; the ones manufactured by this French company were made from industrial-grade silicone, which was not certified as safe for use in human bodies. They were banned in 2010. The question at issue is whether they are more likely to rupture than medical-grade silicone implants, which have a failure rate of only about one in a hundred. French reports show a failure rate of about 7 per cent, which has prompted the French government to order a recall of all such implants. Reports in other countries show a failure rate of only about 1 per cent - normal for breast implants - and therefore most other governments have not ordered a recall. Britain has not ordered a recall, but it has said that any woman who is not happy with having one of these "substandard" implants, should be allowed to have it removed free of charge. In cases where the NHS fitted the implants, they will of course replace them; in cases where a private clinic fitted them, the onus should be on the private clinic to replace them. If said clinic refuses, the NHS will remove them free of charge, but will not give a replacement implant. "Dangerous" in the context of this subject means "more likely to rupture than medical-grade implants." There is no danger of serious harm to health; as I said before, a ruptured implant may lead to scarring, and misshapen breasts, and possibly some pain and irritation, but they can't kill you. Now I'm no world-leading expert on breast augmentation; I get my information from the BBC, here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stranza Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 I'm not sure the company still exists; some people have said it went bankrupt, but I've seen nothing official about that either way. People do seem to be forgetting in all this, that silicone is an inert and completely harmless compound. The worst that can possibly happen if an implant ruptures is that it will lead to mis-shapen breasts and some scarring - not a good thing, but not remotely dangerous in the sense of being a threat to life and health. There is plenty of people who would disagree with your worst case scenario. When implants leak silicone into the body along with migration and lumps people report pain, pins and needles, numbness, lethargy and a good few other symptoms (the pins and needles/ pain/ numbness symptoms are often how they discover the leakages) and that's medical grade silicone. The stuff in these implants hasn't been tested in a medical setting and also no one is sure what IS in the implants, they only have some sketchy information from the manufacturer and tests what have been conducted on the implants that are removed. I agree with your view on the response from the government this is as much as they can offer. They are not leaving women with no options and are not penalising people for companies that have gone bust. The cosmetic vs medical (cancer) argument has been negated by the Gvt committing to replacement of NHS implants and not just removal. The NHS didn't just implant for people who had had mastectomy's they also implanted for augmentation so how they are going to justify removing private implants and thus scarring the lady and therefore qualifying her for an NHS operation in the future? IMO the insurance, regulators, surgeon's groups and the industry groups need to step forward and cover these costs, not just the private costs but the NHS ones too. And then maybe the medical device industry would be scrutinised more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.