Re: info to give your doctors

[Guest guest]

Rogene, I don't want to sound like I'm fighting you, but mailing articles to docs will not get to them. An email will, and chances are they will more than likely read it. However, sending an article via snail mail will not get their attention, no matter how you mark the envelope. The doctors rarely open their own mail unless it's personal. Otherwise, the secretary/receptionist opens it, and usually it gets thrown on the docs desk with all the other papers they have to look at and/or sign and/or read. When they get an article from a pt, chances are it will be thrown in the trash, if it isn't thrown in the trash by their secretary. Trust me, I know. We have a hell of a time just trying to get docs to sign our orders. Sometimes I have to call docs 2-4 times to remind them to sign an order or orders, and half the time they tell me they've "lost" the orders, and I need to resend them. Now, the exception would be a doc that knows you well, knows your health problems and hx, and while he/she may not be a believer in implants causing health problems, has an open mind. Otherwise, if you send an article to a doc you don't know well, 99% of the time they won't even bother to read it. Or, it may be set aside for later reading, then forgotten, and eventually lost in the midst of all the other paperwork, or accidentally (or maybe not) thrown away. I wish there was some way to get docs to pay more attention to our plight. But as I mentioned before, articles aren't going to do it. Docs want to see hardcore research, and not just one or two articles. They want to see several large multicenter studies, or something very scientifically similar. And again, until even one ps stops placing implants and can speak out as to why he/she is not placing them anymore, doctors will never have any reason to believe us. And again, I'm not saying that no doc will listen to us, or that our complaints and concerns will always fall on deaf ears, because there are many decent, kindhearted docs out there who do have our best interests at heart, and want to help us get better and learn more about implants and illness. But because the ps' are contradicting themselves (even the best ones like Huang and Feng) by putting implants in and taking them out, there is no sound reason to believe articles or ps'. The burning question I have and so do doctors, is "How can ps' say implants are potentially dangerous and cause health problems, yet still continue to implant women if they know that they could potentially be doing more harm than good?" e ----- Original Message ----- From: Rogene S Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 8:21 AM Subject: info to give your doctors I like this article because it's in plain English,covers many of our problems, and is concise.I suggest calling your doctors, asking for their emailaddress so you can send them this article. If theywon't give you and email address, mail it and mark theenvelope in a way to get their attention.If we get this info out to ENOUGH doctors, maybe thetide will turn.Hugs to all,Rogene===============================Silicone Implant Disease by Ron Kennedy, M.D., Santa, Californiahttp://www.medical-library.net/sites/framer.html?/sites/_silicone_implant_disease.htmlSilicone breast implants were introduced in 1962 andhave been surgically implanted in an estimated 2.5million American women since then and many moreworld-wide. Some women get them as part of breastreconstruction therapy following mastectomy for breastcancer, but the majority get them because they wantlarger breasts.Now, 38 years later, it is clear that siliconenhancement of breasts can be hazardous to the healthof the recipient. The real cost of cosmetic breastenhancement may not be the $10,000 in surgical fees toimplant them, but a host of autoimmune symptoms andstrange illnesses that can crop up, typically withinabout seven years of implantation.Silicone is a biologically active and toxic substance.The original statement by the Dow Chemical Company inthe 1940s (repeated hundreds of times since) thatsilicone is biologically inert and nontoxic, was basedon a single one-week study of rats and guineas pigs.(In 1943, Dow Chemical Company and Corning Glassworksformed Dow Corning Corporation to market silicone andsilicone implants.)The basic gel implant filler - DC 360 silicone fluid -was once considered worth following up for developmentby Dow Corning scientists as a potent insecticide, oneof the few known substances capable of killingcockroaches.Dow Corning researchers also studied silicone as apossible better chemical warfare and riot controlagent, according to a 1969 internal memorandumobtained by the PSC (Public Safety Commission).Silicone gel is not a single substance but a fluidcomprised of numerous different versions of silicone,and is better termed a "silicone chemical soup."Research collected by the PSC shows that silicone hasmarked effects on the adrenal glands and liver,induces chronic inflammation, and degrades intosmaller molecules, including silica. Silicone fed torabbits produced widespread toxic effects includingkidney and spleen damage within four months. (StanfordMedical Bulletin, 10:1 [1952], 23-26) That silicone istoxic in both animals and man is well proven, states S. Sergent,M.D., and colleagues in The Textbook of Rheumatology(W.B. Saunders Company, 1993).Silicone degrades into silica, usually at the surfaceof the gel implant, then fragments and subdivides intomillions of microdroplets capable of migratingthroughout the body (PSC Records No. 1352, 7017).These are documents produced by Dow Corning innational litigation). Silica in thebody is a toxic,carcinogenic substance, damaging the immune system,killing cells, and producing silicosis.Silicone and its contaminants which bleed through itssurrounding implant envelope into neighboring tissuehave the potential for significant toxicity in theimplant recipient.(Seminars in Arthritis andRheumatology 24:1 Suppl 1[August 1994], 11-17)According to research gathered by attorney , of the Law Firm in San ,California, Dow Chemical and Dow Corning have beenaware of the toxic effects of silicone and silicasince the 1950s, based on their own studies, but neverpublished the data. They knew these substances werebio-active, immunotoxic, and inflammatory whenintroduced into the human body, according to. (Update on Breast Implants, January 1998,website:http://www.consumerlawpage.com/article/dow.shtml)Researchers at the University of California at LosAngeles School of Medicine concluded in 1995: From apathophysiological perspective, silicone should beexpected to be a bio-active materials and thephysico-chemical and immunological data at theexperimental level are compelling. (Journal ofBiomaterials Science, Polymer Edition7:2 [1995],101-13)Implants will likely rupture and leak within tenyears of placement.In 1995, then FDA Commissioner A. Kessler, M.D.,stated that the rupture rate of silicone implantsranges between 5% and 51% and that unfortunately we donot know with any confidence where within that rangethe real rupture rate lies." Even if it is 5% that isa risk too great to justify the use of silicone inhuman beings.When 51 implants were removed, one to 17 years afterimplantation, 2 were found to have ruptured, 7 wereleaking, and only 17 were in good condition; allimplants older than ten years were leaking orruptured. (Plastic Reconstructive Surgery 91:5 [April1993], 828-834)Based on an examination of 350 silicone implants,doctors found that 63% of those implants in place for12 years or more were not intact. (Plastic andReconstructive Surgery 99:6 [1997], 1597-1601)According to Lu-Feng, M.D., of Mt. Sinai MedicalCenter in Cleveland, Ohio, in evidence presented tothe PSC, 11% of implants which have been in the bodyless than seven years rupture, but of those in thebody more than seven years, 61% rupture.Deformities such as holes or cracks were found in 40%of 1,717 breast implants after six years of use and in95% after 12 years of use. (Canadian Journal ofPlastic Surgeons, Spring 1997)When breast implants from 300 patients were examined,71% had either rupture or silicone bleed, or both, and63% of 592 implants, when removed, were found to haveruptures. This led researchers to conclude: We havefound and predict that most implants have lost or willlose the integrity of the silicone shell between eightand 14 years, leaving free silicone [in and out of thecapsule] in the breast. (ls of Plastic Surgery34:1 [January 1995], 1-6)Based on an examination of 217 silicone implantsremoved during a four-year period, physiciansconcluded that, either from leakage or rupture, 40%failed within six years of implantation, and 95%within 12 years. (Canadian Journal of Plastic Surgery4:1 [1996], 55-58)Using magnetic resonance spectroscopy, researchersfound that among 39 women with implants, 20 (51%) hadruptured implants and 27 (69%) had evidence ofsilicone in their livers. (Radiology 201:3 [December1996], 777-783)Complications of implants requiring further surgeryare likely within five years, based on a study of 749women with silicone implants. During a median span of7.8 years after implantation, 27% of the womenunderwent 450 implant-related surgeries; 79% of thesesurgeries were needed to address a complication, mostfrequently among which were capsular contraction(tightening of scar tissue around the implant) andrupture. (New England Journal of Medicine 336:10[March 6, 1997], 677-682)French researchers found that the well-describedleakage occurring through the silicone envelope allowsthe silicone gel to diffuse to multiple anatomic areasin the body, producing a cellular response thatincludes the formation of a capsule around theimplant. (Revue de Medecine Interne 18:12 [1997],955-966)Silicone migrates from the rupture site throughout thebody.As early as 1956, Dow Chemical researchers knew thatliquid silicone, when injected into the body, migratesto all the major organs, including the spleen, heart,lung, and brain. (PSC Record No. 0006) Studies by bothDow Corning and Dow Chemical in 1970 confirmed thatsilicone, after injection, migrates to the bone marrowof animals and changes brain weight. They also showedthat silicone particles migrate from a human fingerjoint into the lymph nodes. (PSC Record No. 0018,7038)Researchers at Baylor College of Medicine in Texasfound that silicone is widely distributed throughoutthe body of mice after a single injection, migratingto ten different organs from the brain to the uterusand persisting in these organs over time. (AmericanJournal of Pathology 152:3 [March 1998], 645-649)Researchers at the Medical College of Wisconsin inMilwaukee found that following silicone implantrupture, silicone gel migrated into the arm of awoman, where it produced nerve pain, dysfunction, andfibrosis. (Plastic Reconstructive Surgery 89:5 [May1992], 949-952)Physicians at Massachusetts General Hospital intown, using magnetic resonance imaging, foundthat a significant amount of free silicone hadmigrated from an implant (not noticeably ruptured)into the liver and spleen of a woman. (MagneticResonance Medicine 36:3 [september 1996], 498-501.Researchers also found that silicone in the livercould be detected in the first three to four yearsafter a woman received her implant. (MagneticResonance Medicine 33:1 [January 1995], 8-17)Of 39 women with silicone implants, 27 (69%) showedsigns of silicone in their livers, and of the 20 whoseimplants had ruptured, silicone was detected in thelivers of 17 (85%). In other words, whether theimplants rupture or not, silicone leaks and migratesto the liver. (Radiology 201 [1996], 777-783; PSCRecord No. 0050)In 1989, studies by Dow Corning showed that silicone,given orally to rats, increased liver size and weightby up to 45% and suggested the enlargement might beinterpreted as a carcinogenic response. (PSC RecordNo. 0482)Silicone produces abnormalities in immune systemfunctioning.Silicone elicits antibody responses and immunologicalabnormalities, according to a study of 40 women whohad received implants more than ten years earlier.Among these women, 60% had an elevated ratio of helperT cells to suppressor T cells; 20% had a blockage inparticular functions of T cells and natural killercells. (Toxicology Industrial Health 8:6[November/December 1992], 415-429)Scientists at the University of California at reported that evidence suggests that the degradationproducts of silicone inactivate CD8+ suppressor Tcells (key immune cells) and thereby lead to aninflammatory state in the body. (Food and ChemicalToxicology 32:11 [November 1994], 1089-1100)The activity of natural killer cells is significantlysuppressed in at least 50% of women with siliconeimplants observed in a study; this puts the women at ahigher risk of developing cancer. The same effect wasdemonstrated in animals; it was reversed upon removalof the silicone. (Toxicology and Industrial Health10:3 [May/June 1994], 149-154)High levels of anti-nuclear antibodies (ANAs), immunemarkers associated with lupus erythematosus, wereobserved in ten of 11 women with implants reportingautoimmune symptoms. (Lancet 340:8831 [November 28,1992], 1304-1307)When 500 women with silicone implants were examined,30% tested positive for ANA levels; those women alsohad rheumatic symptoms. The results strongly suggestedimmune activation in women with siliconeimplants.(Current Topics in Microbiological Immunology210 [1996], 277-282)Based on a study of 3,380 breast implant recipients,scientists state there is a six-fold increasedlikelihood that testing these women will show elevatedANAs; the longer the implant has been in place, thegreater the likelihood. (Current Topics inMicrobiological Immunology 210 [1996], 337-353)In a study of 111 women (with and without implants),those with implants had a statistically significantelevation of anti-silicone antibodies (immune cellsfocused against silicone as a foreign substance in thebody); the highest levels were observed in women withnoticeable implant rupture or leakage. (FASEB 7:13[October 1993], 1265-1268)Researchers at the University of Wisconsin at MadisonSchool of Medicine reported that autoantibodies ofunclear significance may be found in 5% to 30% ofwomen with silicone breast implants.(Archives ofInternal Medicine 153:23 [December 1993], 2638-2644)Researchers at Monash University in Clayton, ,in Australia, found that women with silicone implants(70 were studied) have elevated levels ofautoantibodies to collagen, in a manner highly similarto women with lupus and rheumatoid arthritis. (CurrentTopics in Microbiological Immunology 210 [1996],307-316)Among 310 symptomatic women with silicone implants,there were elevated levels of novel auto-reactiveantibodies to silicone associated antigens (a specifictype of heightened immune response) compared tohealthy women without implants. (Current Topics inMicrobiological Immunology 210 [1996], 327-336)Scientists at the Technical University of Munich inGermany examined 239 breast implant recipients andfound the following immunological abnormalities:levels of complement C3 were elevated in 42% of thewomen; complement C4 was elevated in 21%; andanti-thyroglobulin (an antibody that attacks asubstance in the thyroid gland) was higher in 28%.(ls of Plastic Surgery 36:5 [May 1996], 512-518)When silicone leaks from implants, immune cells formgranulomas (microscopic lumps) around the droplets;the granulomas are capable of severely disrupting theimmune system. Silicone plays the role of an adjuvant,providing constant nonspecific stimulation of theimmune system.(Journal of Investigative Surgery 9:1[January/February 1996], 1-12)Silicone produces a classifiable new disease marked byautoimmune symptoms.Among physicians willing to credit silicone withtoxicological and immunological effects, a variety ofnames for silicone-induced disease have been proposed:siliconosis, undifferentiated or atypical connectivetissue disease, silicone related disease, siliconereactive disorder, silicone disease syndrome, andsilicone implant disease (SID).Typical symptoms associated with silicone includecognitive dysfunction, short-term memory loss,Sjögren's syndrome (dryness in glands, such as themouth, kidneys, eyes, and lungs), scleroderma,rheumatoid arthritis, dermatomyositis, severe jointand muscle pain, incapacitating fatigue, swollen lymphglands, skin problems, peripheral numbness, multipleallergies, headaches, hair loss, sunlight sensitivity,central nervous system disorders (similar to multiplesclerosis), and others.Among 176 breast implant patients examined by doctorsat the Hospital for Joint Diseases, OrthopaedicInstitute, in New York City, the most frequentlyreported symptoms were chronic fatigue (77%),cognitive dysfunction (65%), severe joint pain (56%),dry mouth (53%), dry eye (50%), hair loss (40%), anddifficulty in swallowing (35%). (Seminars in Arthritisand Rheumatology 24:1 Suppl 1 [August 1994], 29-37)A study of 50 women with implants revealed that 89%complained of fatigue, 75% of generalized stiffness,71% of poor sleep, and 78% of joint pain. PositiveANAs were found in 38% of these patients. (Seminars inArthritis and Rheumatology 24:1 Suppl 1 [August 1994],44-53)A study of 56 women with silicone implants andscleroderma (skin thickening which damages tissues)revealed that scleroderma symptoms developed anaverage of nine years after implantation. Of these,77% also had Raynaud's phenomenon (extreme skin pallorand coldness in hands and feet), 53% had swallowingdifficulties, 47% had lung problems, and 83% hadantinuclear antibodies. (Current Topics inMicrobiological Immunology 210 [1996], 283-90)Doctors at the Comprehensive Care Clinic in Houston,Texas, found that 26 women developed a systemicdisease with central nervous system involvement(resembling multiple sclerosis) an average of 5.7years after receiving silicone implants. (SouthernMedical Journal 89:2 [February 1996], 179-88)Doctors at the Louisiana State University MedicalCenter at New Orleans examined 300 women (average age,44) with silicone implants and musculoskeletalcomplaints. The symptoms developed an average of 6.8years after receiving the implants; 83% had symptomshighly suggestive of an underlying connective tissuedisorder; and 54% met the criteria for a fibromyalgia(chronic muscle pain) diagnosis. (ClinicalRheumatology 14:6 [November 1995], 667-672)According to R. Shanklin, M.D., and L.Smalley, M.D., both professors of pathology at theUniversity of Tennessee at Memphis, there is little ifany difference between the effects of direct injection[of silicone] and the effects of gel-filled devices[implants]."In either case, the human body reacts to the presenceof this alien substance" by forming granulomas whichthen produce a chronic inflammation. Direct injectionof silicone into the breast for enlargement wasoutlawed because it produced serious, toxic effects inwomen; it is illogical, state Drs. Shanklin andSmalley, that this practice is still permitted viaruptured leaking implants. (Science and Medicine 3:5[september/October 1996], 22-31)Silicone-associated symptoms go away when implants areremoved.Doctors at the University of Alabama at Birminghamobserved that 103 of 142 women attributed a variety ofsymptoms to their implants and that 50% of these womenreported improvement in their health problems when theimplants were removed. (ls of Plastic Surgery 34:1[January 1995], 1-6)Of 33 women who underwent implant removal (average age44), 24 experienced significant improvement innumerous silicone-associated symptoms within 22months. (Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatology 24:1Suppl 1 [August 1994], 22-28)Among 300 women with implants and musculoskeletalcomplaints, 70% who underwent implant removal reportedimprovement in their systemic symptomatology.(Clinical Rheumatology 14:6 [November 1995], 667-672)Dermatologists at the Medical University of SouthCarolina at ton report that when a woman, 46,with scleroderma had her implants removed, thescleroderma gradually resolved.(Archives ofDermatology 126:9 [september 1990], 1198-1202)Doctors at the University of California, Schoolof Medicine report that for a woman with debilitatingmultisystem sarcoidosis (multi-organ granulomas), herclinical condition dramatically improved, after hersilicone implants were removed. (InternationalArchives of Allergy and Immunology 105:4 [December1994], 404-407)Canadian researchers polled 100 women for healthchanges they experienced after having their siliconeimplants removed (mean age 41) after having had theimplants for a mean of 12 years. After an average of2.7 years, 45% of 75 women in this group (those whohad lost nipple sensitivity) believed, in retrospect,their implants had caused permanent health problemsand 43% were suing the implant manufacturers.Those women who had no previous signs of autoimmunesymptoms responded most favorably to explanations 80%reported major improvement in their symptoms and 93%said they had a significantly improved psychologicalwell-being.(ls of Plastic Surgery 39:1 [1997],9-19)Surely there is enough evidence to support the casethat silicone breast implants pose a serious potentialhealth threat, if not for every woman, at least formany. Isn't it therefore prudent to side withcaution-h aving the implants removed and residualsilicone detoxified from the body-if the healthramifications of a procedure are that uncertain?Legal ActionNot everyone sees it this way of course. The subjectof silicone breast implants is clouded andcontroversial, marked by denial, cover-up,stonewalling, suppressed research, bankruptcy, andclass action lawsuits. There is also much sufferinginvolved.The manufacturers and most plastic surgeonsstrenuously insist silicone breast implants pose nohealth danger; most women apparently believe thisbecause 87,704 more American women received implantsin 1996. Between 1992 and 1997, the number of breastaugmentation surgeries increased by 275%, according tothe American Society of Plastic and ReconstructiveSurgeons.The majority were saline implants in a siliconecasing; the only women still getting silicone implantsare those who opt for breast reconstruction followingmastectomy and agree to be part of the FDA's clinicaltrials on silicone implants. However, many othercountries have not banned silicone implants andmillions of women are still regularly exposed to thefull force of not only the silicone bag which is usedwith saline implants but also the silicone gelchemical soup inside. In fact, I was inspired to postthis article after a woman from Paraguay came to myoffice with severe fatigue four years after receivingsilicone implants. On Live Blood Cell Analysis severalbundles of foreign crystallized substance could beseen in each high powered field, occupying at least 5%of her blood volume! She returned to Paraguay to haveher implants removed.Thousands of women who have had their implants for oneor two decades now are seeking medical help formysterious symptoms which resemble arthritis,fibromyalgia, scleroderma, connective tissuedisorders, and/or immune dysfunction and seem to beassociated with their implants. Anyone skilled with adark field microscope can show you large numbers ofmysterious chunks of foreign particles floating aroundin the blood of many women complaining of thesesymptoms.In 1992, the FDA declared a moratorium on sales ofsilicone breast implants, citing the lack of clinicalstudies proving their safety. However, the FDA did notsay silicone implants were unsafe, hedging as usual onthe side of manufacturers and against the public,calling lamely for more studies.6,849,810 Network hits since January 15, 1999. © 2002The Doctors' Medical Library, AllDocuments Protected under Copyright Law; ReproductionForbiddenPlease click here for inquiries of a medicalnature.Web Design by The Web Doctor.===========================================e R. Wahl, Ph.D., C.N.C.Int'l. Resource Centerfor Chemically Induced Immune DisordersPh. (847)678-5934 e-mail: allenew@... cause of immuneepidemic:http://members.tripod.com/immune_disorders/index.html__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

e,

I know getting info through to these doctors is a

tough nut to crack!. . . But I can't stop trying.

There are a growing number of doctors who are taking

us seriously now, and we have to keep trying.

In my case, I want to send info to the doctors who

made so many misdiagnoses for me and tell them how

much better I'm doing now . . . after learning about

the source of my problems were implants and doing what

I had to do to get better.

Granted, 90% of them may get thrown out, but if the

doctor listens, we will eventually get our voices

heard.

Hugs to all,

Rogene

__________________________________________________