FDA - let them have implants

Finally, after this string of bad (PR-wise) FDA news, the FDA does something to bust the trend.  

This wonderful FDA news -- for men:  
Breast implants, with suspicious history, finally approved!  (For women)

http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0922-02.htm

So you can made to look ripe enough, through miracles of elective surgery, for those slow motion Bay-Watch movies while women are waiting for other FDA health decisions.  But read the above article for just how safe those implants really are.  Potential trophy wives considering their life-expectancy might recalculate their cost/benefit ratios.

Hmmm...one might argue that these Biggie McBoob implants are really only there to please men.  

More below...

FDA still won't release the plan B morning-after pill even after the scientific support is behind it.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/1/131239/1136

FDA burns 430,000 British MRE's flown from Great Britain rather than let these feed starving Katrina survivors, or even go to another country.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/21/14165/0429

FDA relaxes protective rules aimed at stopping mad-cow spread by allowing even more cow parts to be included in cow feed:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/6/132626/6581

Yes, and we already know most plans and Medicare cover Viagra, Cialis, etc. We've got major public health concerns with bird flu, West Nile virus, AIDS, and FDA focuses on boobs, in a way the FCC can't allow portrayed.  Interesting priorities showing up for America's public health.

Hmm...are these implants approved for use by men?  Maybe as a hiney-enhancement?  Embed a 6 pack in abdomen to gain that permanent 6 pack ab look?  Toss a pair into arms to bulk up biceps and triceps?  Between the ears of FDA officials?

•  Awesome

  Did they approve those extra huge sizes as well?  When will women start getting them?

  by bink on Fri Sep 23, 2005 at 10:41:24 AM PDT

•  Another -- female -- perspective

  I am a breast cancer survivor.  For me to do reconstruction, I need one of those breast implants.  Without them, they will have to take part of my body to recreate a breast.  Which would you rather have done?  Those implants are not just for men, they are for women like me.  I understand your point, but this is not as simple as you think it is.  

  by flo58 on Fri Sep 23, 2005 at 10:45:07 AM PDT

  •  My point - corporate cronyism vs. personal safety

    My concern is that women's health and safety may have been overlooked in favor of the corporate interests hurrying to get their product to market or back on the market.  This focus on a superficial appearance item when so many more urgent needs swirl around us was what goaded me to write.  I was cynically joking about the male butt enhancements...I hope everyone realizes that.

    I have no intention of disregarding the needs of cancer sufferers, nor to block access to something that could help.  My own mother died of cancer.  I know well all the concerns about degrading appearance.  Even with that, I won't claim to know what your suffering is like, or what your needs are.

    Maybe we can discuss this:  Should the FDA be allowed to tolerate risky products approved for the sake of appearance, if they are just for people with potentially terminal illness?  Maybe we should leave that choice over risk up to a cancer sufferer when they know they have but a short time to live.  

    But those otherwise healthy really ought to know the questionable quality of testing and review behind that product.  One must wonder what else is getting FDA approval that has such iffy background.  Remember how Celebrex, etc. was repeatedly asserted to be safe, only to be finally taken off the market as evidence poored in from those who suffered heart problems.
    

    by antirove on Fri Sep 23, 2005 at 11:06:05 AM PDT

    •  Agree that safety

      issues within FDA may need to be addressed.  Given the cronyism in Washington, it would be nice if some legislators took this up to investigate FDA on this point.

      <<sounds like grayscale should email her legislators>>>

      by grayscale on Fri Sep 23, 2005 at 11:15:35 AM PDT

  •  I'm also a survivor

    I didn't need reconstruction but if I did (or do in the future) I would prefer a transflap but couldn't do it because of my level of physical activity.

    But that doesn't mean I'd want a silicone implant. No implant is going to last (certainly not for me, since I'm young). Better to have saline leaching into your body than silicone.

    by emptywheel on Fri Sep 23, 2005 at 11:17:16 AM PDT

    •  Saline don't work for me

      They are not big enough, frankly.  I need silicone or none.  It is the way that they are designed and they way that they "hang" for lack of a better term.  Saline just can't do it for me -- according to my surgeon.  At this point it is tummy tuck or nothing.  

      My point is that you can't just assume that there is no reason for large silicone implants other than pure cosmetics.  I admit there is a cosmetic element for me, but it is not something I would have considered or needed before I lost my breast.  As it is now, there is no exception to the bar on silicone for people like me.  I think there should be.

      This is not black and white and there are probably thousands of women potentially in my position.  

      by flo58 on Fri Sep 23, 2005 at 11:25:58 AM PDT

•  No problem

  I don't have a problem with breast implants, penile implants, nose jobs, lipo, facelifts, or anything else. I wouldn't go under the knife voluntarily myself, but many people desire cosmetic surgery for a variety of reasons. Yeah, there's some "research" out there that women who get implants have higher rates of depression, but I don't know the validity of any studies like that.

  And I don't know enough about the (?silicone) implants, but I thought they were already on the market, taken off for testing, and now being reintroduced. ??

  I just don't have a problem with it.

  by grayscale on Fri Sep 23, 2005 at 11:10:01 AM PDT

•  simplistic

  I agree there are lots of problems with the FDA but this isn't one of them. Silicone implants such as those banned in the US since the 90s have been passed as safe in virtually every other country, and are industry standard for both cosmetic and reconstructive surgery across the world. It is about time the FDA got around to passing them in the US too.

  It is completely simplistic to suggest that breast implants are just for men's pleasure. In addition to cancer survivors, women sometimes have highly asymmetrical breasts, lose most of their breast tissue after breast feeding, or experience various other problems of breast shape and development. While cosmetic, these problems have a HUGE psychological impact on a  woman's sense of her femininity, and corrective surgery can change a person's life. It irks me that debate in this topic often takes up a view of the world as celebrity magazines represent it, when we know in any other context that this is hardly representative. Kneejerk responses demonize thousands of women for whom this surgery is a serious decision.

  by prettythings on Fri Sep 23, 2005 at 11:49:16 AM PDT

  •  Si implants are the symbol of junk science

    ...in the court room.
    

    They never should have been banned in the first place.
    

    by Samulayo on Fri Sep 23, 2005 at 12:51:29 PM PDT