Fw: MARCIA ANGELL, M.D. MEDICAL DEITY OR SILICONE SPIN DOCTOR

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: " Ilena Rose " <ilena@...>

<Recipient List Suppressed:;>

Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 2:45 PM

Subject: MARCIA ANGELL, M.D. MEDICAL DEITY OR SILICONE SPIN DOCTOR

> First published: 11/97

>

> MARCIA ANGELL, M.D.

> MEDICAL DEITY OR SILICONE SPIN DOCTOR

>

>

> She's got the degree, the title and she gives great press.

>

> As Executive Editor of the " highly respected " New England Journal of

> Medicine and author of a carefully crafted, prolifically publicized

> viewpoint as to the " safety " of breast implants, Science on Trial: The

> Clash of Medical Evidence and the Law in the Breast Implant Case, Marcia

> Angell is practically being canonized.

>

> Time Magazine has already honored her as one of the " 25 most influential

> people in America. " And on November 14th, the American Medical Writers

> Association (timed " coincidentally " with the second release of her book,

> now in paperback) - bestows upon her, two more awards. Hers is the

> omnipresent " unbiased " " voice of reason " on Frontline, Court TV, talk doc

> Dean Edell, the Press Club, ad infinitum.

>

> Unbiased?

>

> Self-described as being " quick to see the iniquities of large

> corporations, " she ignores any and all fraudulent behavior of the mighty

> silicone manufacturers.

>

> Further, she chides Dr. Kessler, former head of the FDA, as being

> " paternalistic " for having the courage to take from the market (for most

> women), this never approved medical device in 1992. After all, Angell

> grumbles, the manufacturers had " simply " not proven their safety.

>

> Dr. Kessler made this politically explosive decision, based in part on the

> mountains of evidence finally exposed during the Hopkins vs. Dow Corning

> case in the early 90's. Hidden by Dow for over 30 years were studies

> showing that Dow knew that silicone was bio-reactive, migrated throughout

> the body, crossed the placental barrier, and was a powerful immune

> stimulant. Documents were also uncovered revealing they knew the silicone

> bags spontaneously ruptured at a dangerously high rate.

>

> By then thousands of very ill women had brought suits against Dow (and

> other manufacturers) and had been paid off and their silence assured with

> " gag orders. " Dr. Kessler's decision was based on the revelation of Dow's

> own " dirty little secrets. " After years of appeals, all the way to the

> Supreme Court, the verdict of " manufacture of defective products, "

> " fraud, " and " concealment " stood.

>

> To date, no manufacturer has been able to prove safety of any breast

implant.

>

> The FDA has now on file over 23,000 serious " adverse reactions " from women

> with the " new, safe " saline implants.

>

> In mid-October 97, the FDA again refused unrestricted access of silicone

> gel. Y-Me, and other breast cancer groups - funded by the manufacturers -

> had laboriously lobbied to keep them on the market for mastectomy

> patients. Angell, too, supported lifting the ban. Ironically, they have

> never been removed from the market for these women.

>

> Over 103,000 women have reported severe complications from these silicone

> gel implants to the FDA.

>

> Angell boldly states in Lancet, " I have no financial interest in breast

> implants; nor have I been a consultant or witness in litigation. " Yet she

> has been named as an expert witness for the defense in at least two

> lawsuits. And what about royalties for her book? And although she publicly

> admonishes any expert witness who has any potential financial gain from

> the results of a study, she ignores the shameful dismissal of Dr.

> Schur (editor of Arthritis and Rheumatism) and other implant defense

> participants from the two " good " and " hard " scientific studies she

> published. What she fails to disclose is oft much more interesting than

> what she does.

>

> She is consistently inconsistent. While seeming stunned at the thought of

> the tobacco barons financing " good " scientific studies on the diseases

> wrought by tobacco, Angell notices no conflict whatsoever that the

> silicone manufacturers and the Plastic Surgeons Educational Fund helped

> finance the famed studies that she chose to publish - the Mayo and the

> Harvard Nurses Study.

>

> These two " rigorous " studies included records of fewer than 2,000

> implanted women. Some had been implanted less than one month. Not even one

> woman was examined. Further, the authors subjectively discarded 2 years

> of data collected after just one TV show (Connie Chung) publicized the

> dangers, and made conclusions on long term systemic diseases based on

> women implanted for fewer than 10 years. What happens year 12? Or 20? Or

> 30? The authors themselves do not claim these studies to be definitive

> evidence of no connection between implants and systemic disease, yet upon

> these studies she bases her book, her speeches, and her assurances.

>

> After all her research, the " best estimate " of rupture that Dr. Angell can

> muster is around five percent. Reputable surgeons, as well as Dr. Kessler,

> estimate in the 50-70% range over time. Indeed, a NEJM study published

> this year reported 6% rupture in just the first 5 years! More data

> revealed 450 additional implant related surgeries had to be performed on

> the 749 women studied within 8 years.

>

> Dr. Angell minimizes the devastating effects of rupture as just " local

> complications. " Often women must undergo multiple invasive surgeries to

> remove this toxic soup from their chests and many are left terribly

> scarred with no breast tissue whatsoever. Other known ingredients in

> various implants (there were hundreds of kinds - they never got it right)

> are silica, platinum, formaldehyde, freon, polyurethane, and organic

> solvents.

>

> Scientific theory demands all inclusiveness in evidence. Yet, the good

> doctor's is very restrictive. Myopic.

>

> Many implantees have requested that their medical records, MRI's, scars,

> nervous and immune systems be examined as proof of the damage wrought by

> implants. However, in pure Angellspeak non sequitur, she states, " these

> women are clearly NOT the evidence, " and with her magic wand ignores this

> confirmation of the destroyed health of at least a quarter of a million

> American women.

>

> Her diligent " scientific inquiry " ignores the study of the offspring of

> implanted women. Although physicians for 35 years have ensured potentially

> pregnant women that it was " safe " to breastfeed and reproduce with

> implants, upon what science is this based? None. Hidden studies reveal Dow

> knew in 1975 that silicone crossed the placenta. Yet, how many

> pediatricians have ever even asked whether the mother of the many children

> with esophageal dysmotility, acute chemical sensitivities, and autoimmune

> diseases have silicone implants? These doctors, too, believe Angell's

> declarations of 3silicone safety.2

>

> According to Angell, the real villains are the " rapacious " or predatory

> attorneys representing the injured women. Mentioning a few large jury

> verdicts in favor of the ill women, she advises, " follow the money. "

>

> Let's.

>

> For starters, Bristol-Myers Squibb, once a leading silicone manufacturer

> and present defendant in thousands of suits nationwide, is sponsoring The

> Harvey Awards Angell is receiving. For the public and potential

> jurors to believe her " unbiased " viewpoint could help exonerate them in

> the public eye. Their polyurethane foam covered implants were pulled from

> the market when it was discovered the foam broke down into a known, and

> already banned carcinogen - toluene.

>

> Yes, indeed, let's follow the money.

>

> Revenues for plastic surgeons for the 100,000 first implant surgeries

> estimated to be performed this year will bring in around a half billion

> dollars to them. Many refer to Angell's book as " proof " of implant safety.

>

> The Dows (Corning and Chemical) are spending multiple millions on PR with

> Burson-Marstellar (of Exxon Valdez, Bhopal, and 3 Mile Island infamy) to

> re-build their tarnished image and make the public believe the safety of

> implants - hoisted by Dr. Angell's ubiqitous media appearances.

>

> While she denigrates the examining doctors of these women, claiming their

> expert testimony to be motivated only by " greed, " she lauds the defense

> " experts " and their highly paid attorneys.

>

> The money trail is long and circuitous. Her concern for the health of the

> biomaterials industry seems to far outweigh her concern for implanted

> women and their offspring. Thousands of women have no means of removing

> their disintegrating and ruptured implants and taking care of their failed

> health. Insurance companies are now refusing to cover implanted women.

>

> Her role as Ringleader in the Scientific Media Circus, trying to exonerate

> the manufacturers' selling of defective, unrecallable products, is a

> public health catastrophe in the making.

>

> Perhaps when footing the bill for these ill and injured women, taxpayers

> will also realize that Dr. Marcia, is certainly no angel.

>

> Ilena Rosenthal is Director of the Humantics Foundation for Women and

> works directly with thousands of women harmed by silicone and has an

> extensive international Support Group. She has written an informative

> booklet, Breast Implants: The Myths, The Facts, The Women and can be

> reached at 858/270-0680 or ilena@....

>

>

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: " Ilena Rose " <ilena@...>

<Recipient List Suppressed:;>

Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 2:45 PM

Subject: MARCIA ANGELL, M.D. MEDICAL DEITY OR SILICONE SPIN DOCTOR

> First published: 11/97

>

> MARCIA ANGELL, M.D.

> MEDICAL DEITY OR SILICONE SPIN DOCTOR

>

>

> She's got the degree, the title and she gives great press.

>

> As Executive Editor of the " highly respected " New England Journal of

> Medicine and author of a carefully crafted, prolifically publicized

> viewpoint as to the " safety " of breast implants, Science on Trial: The

> Clash of Medical Evidence and the Law in the Breast Implant Case, Marcia

> Angell is practically being canonized.

>

> Time Magazine has already honored her as one of the " 25 most influential

> people in America. " And on November 14th, the American Medical Writers

> Association (timed " coincidentally " with the second release of her book,

> now in paperback) - bestows upon her, two more awards. Hers is the

> omnipresent " unbiased " " voice of reason " on Frontline, Court TV, talk doc

> Dean Edell, the Press Club, ad infinitum.

>

> Unbiased?

>

> Self-described as being " quick to see the iniquities of large

> corporations, " she ignores any and all fraudulent behavior of the mighty

> silicone manufacturers.

>

> Further, she chides Dr. Kessler, former head of the FDA, as being

> " paternalistic " for having the courage to take from the market (for most

> women), this never approved medical device in 1992. After all, Angell

> grumbles, the manufacturers had " simply " not proven their safety.

>

> Dr. Kessler made this politically explosive decision, based in part on the

> mountains of evidence finally exposed during the Hopkins vs. Dow Corning

> case in the early 90's. Hidden by Dow for over 30 years were studies

> showing that Dow knew that silicone was bio-reactive, migrated throughout

> the body, crossed the placental barrier, and was a powerful immune

> stimulant. Documents were also uncovered revealing they knew the silicone

> bags spontaneously ruptured at a dangerously high rate.

>

> By then thousands of very ill women had brought suits against Dow (and

> other manufacturers) and had been paid off and their silence assured with

> " gag orders. " Dr. Kessler's decision was based on the revelation of Dow's

> own " dirty little secrets. " After years of appeals, all the way to the

> Supreme Court, the verdict of " manufacture of defective products, "

> " fraud, " and " concealment " stood.

>

> To date, no manufacturer has been able to prove safety of any breast

implant.

>

> The FDA has now on file over 23,000 serious " adverse reactions " from women

> with the " new, safe " saline implants.

>

> In mid-October 97, the FDA again refused unrestricted access of silicone

> gel. Y-Me, and other breast cancer groups - funded by the manufacturers -

> had laboriously lobbied to keep them on the market for mastectomy

> patients. Angell, too, supported lifting the ban. Ironically, they have

> never been removed from the market for these women.

>

> Over 103,000 women have reported severe complications from these silicone

> gel implants to the FDA.

>

> Angell boldly states in Lancet, " I have no financial interest in breast

> implants; nor have I been a consultant or witness in litigation. " Yet she

> has been named as an expert witness for the defense in at least two

> lawsuits. And what about royalties for her book? And although she publicly

> admonishes any expert witness who has any potential financial gain from

> the results of a study, she ignores the shameful dismissal of Dr.

> Schur (editor of Arthritis and Rheumatism) and other implant defense

> participants from the two " good " and " hard " scientific studies she

> published. What she fails to disclose is oft much more interesting than

> what she does.

>

> She is consistently inconsistent. While seeming stunned at the thought of

> the tobacco barons financing " good " scientific studies on the diseases

> wrought by tobacco, Angell notices no conflict whatsoever that the

> silicone manufacturers and the Plastic Surgeons Educational Fund helped

> finance the famed studies that she chose to publish - the Mayo and the

> Harvard Nurses Study.

>

> These two " rigorous " studies included records of fewer than 2,000

> implanted women. Some had been implanted less than one month. Not even one

> woman was examined. Further, the authors subjectively discarded 2 years

> of data collected after just one TV show (Connie Chung) publicized the

> dangers, and made conclusions on long term systemic diseases based on

> women implanted for fewer than 10 years. What happens year 12? Or 20? Or

> 30? The authors themselves do not claim these studies to be definitive

> evidence of no connection between implants and systemic disease, yet upon

> these studies she bases her book, her speeches, and her assurances.

>

> After all her research, the " best estimate " of rupture that Dr. Angell can

> muster is around five percent. Reputable surgeons, as well as Dr. Kessler,

> estimate in the 50-70% range over time. Indeed, a NEJM study published

> this year reported 6% rupture in just the first 5 years! More data

> revealed 450 additional implant related surgeries had to be performed on

> the 749 women studied within 8 years.

>

> Dr. Angell minimizes the devastating effects of rupture as just " local

> complications. " Often women must undergo multiple invasive surgeries to

> remove this toxic soup from their chests and many are left terribly

> scarred with no breast tissue whatsoever. Other known ingredients in

> various implants (there were hundreds of kinds - they never got it right)

> are silica, platinum, formaldehyde, freon, polyurethane, and organic

> solvents.

>

> Scientific theory demands all inclusiveness in evidence. Yet, the good

> doctor's is very restrictive. Myopic.

>

> Many implantees have requested that their medical records, MRI's, scars,

> nervous and immune systems be examined as proof of the damage wrought by

> implants. However, in pure Angellspeak non sequitur, she states, " these

> women are clearly NOT the evidence, " and with her magic wand ignores this

> confirmation of the destroyed health of at least a quarter of a million

> American women.

>

> Her diligent " scientific inquiry " ignores the study of the offspring of

> implanted women. Although physicians for 35 years have ensured potentially

> pregnant women that it was " safe " to breastfeed and reproduce with

> implants, upon what science is this based? None. Hidden studies reveal Dow

> knew in 1975 that silicone crossed the placenta. Yet, how many

> pediatricians have ever even asked whether the mother of the many children

> with esophageal dysmotility, acute chemical sensitivities, and autoimmune

> diseases have silicone implants? These doctors, too, believe Angell's

> declarations of 3silicone safety.2

>

> According to Angell, the real villains are the " rapacious " or predatory

> attorneys representing the injured women. Mentioning a few large jury

> verdicts in favor of the ill women, she advises, " follow the money. "

>

> Let's.

>

> For starters, Bristol-Myers Squibb, once a leading silicone manufacturer

> and present defendant in thousands of suits nationwide, is sponsoring The

> Harvey Awards Angell is receiving. For the public and potential

> jurors to believe her " unbiased " viewpoint could help exonerate them in

> the public eye. Their polyurethane foam covered implants were pulled from

> the market when it was discovered the foam broke down into a known, and

> already banned carcinogen - toluene.

>

> Yes, indeed, let's follow the money.

>

> Revenues for plastic surgeons for the 100,000 first implant surgeries

> estimated to be performed this year will bring in around a half billion

> dollars to them. Many refer to Angell's book as " proof " of implant safety.

>

> The Dows (Corning and Chemical) are spending multiple millions on PR with

> Burson-Marstellar (of Exxon Valdez, Bhopal, and 3 Mile Island infamy) to

> re-build their tarnished image and make the public believe the safety of

> implants - hoisted by Dr. Angell's ubiqitous media appearances.

>

> While she denigrates the examining doctors of these women, claiming their

> expert testimony to be motivated only by " greed, " she lauds the defense

> " experts " and their highly paid attorneys.

>

> The money trail is long and circuitous. Her concern for the health of the

> biomaterials industry seems to far outweigh her concern for implanted

> women and their offspring. Thousands of women have no means of removing

> their disintegrating and ruptured implants and taking care of their failed

> health. Insurance companies are now refusing to cover implanted women.

>

> Her role as Ringleader in the Scientific Media Circus, trying to exonerate

> the manufacturers' selling of defective, unrecallable products, is a

> public health catastrophe in the making.

>

> Perhaps when footing the bill for these ill and injured women, taxpayers

> will also realize that Dr. Marcia, is certainly no angel.

>

> Ilena Rosenthal is Director of the Humantics Foundation for Women and

> works directly with thousands of women harmed by silicone and has an

> extensive international Support Group. She has written an informative

> booklet, Breast Implants: The Myths, The Facts, The Women and can be

> reached at 858/270-0680 or ilena@....

>

>