Government, get abreast of cosmetic surgery!

No doubt many of you have seen this week’s main news story relating to the 40,000 UK women with breast implants filled with a type of industrial-grade silicon used to fill mattresses.

The implants in question were manufactured by Poly Implants Protheses (PIP), a French company and were sold to clinics around the world, allegedly at a fraction of the cost of the medical-grade silicon filled implants.
Were the managers and surgeons of the private/public clinics where the procedures were carried-out, too blinkered by pound notes to implement the necessary checks to ensure that the implants were medically safe? And, why did the BMA and the medical regulators allow this to happen?

In my personal opinion, successive UK administrations have spent too much time and money on ridiculous legislation and regulations while failing to address serious issues like the current breast implant scandal.
A case in point – the legislation, introduced in August 2010 forcing retailers to ask for ID from people buying Christmas crackers, classifying them as a category 1 firework meaning there is an age restriction of 16 and cashiers are required to check the age of those buying them. Stores face financial penalties and individual cashiers can face fines of up to £5,000 and six months in prison for selling crackers to underage customers.

We can send a cashier to prison for six months for selling crackers to a minor, but we can’t prevent 40,000 women from living with potential ticking bombs in their chests.
Utter madness! >:(

There has been a lot of blowing out of proportion with media speculation on a lot of this Ken .... News is only news if its out there to scare and horrify and of course make people look like idiots, turning your average punter against any woman who unwittingly had breast augmentation , expecting the 'normal' risks associated with medical grade silicone then finding out that they could have the industrial silicone in instead.

Who should pay for it ? The NHS I guess should pay for the removal and look to be reimbursed by the surgeons who performed the original surgery , that is if the patient had her work done in this country, but that still leaves many who went overseas for theirs to be done , I'd imagine when the pound was a lot stronger getting more bounce for your buck ;)

Many will argue that women going into this knew the risks and should pay to have them removed, but they only agreed to something that was going to be medically safe to be inmplanted. This really should be a legal case to get the surgeons to remove and replace with a safer implant as their goods are potentially dangerous.

They have shown the implants on television being cut open and the gel moves as a solid entity rather than the dripping that some patients claim to have experienced .... I'm sure the only ones that drip and leak that way would be filled with saline and that is as safe as houses .

Personally I think the surgeons / clinics should be held to account and they can seek reimbursement from the manuafacturer and in turn offer free removal and replacement of the implants to any patients with them , including covering the cost of their work not just the implant, after all, even if they are Cosmetic Surgeons, they are still doctors and it is their job to protect, preserve and save life... regardless of their current speciality.

Anyway a lot of the claimed incidences will be from women wanting compensation seeing as this has become a nation of 'Where there's a blame, there's a claim' sorts, looknig for compensation from nothing incidents ..... (the amount of trips, slips , falls and whiplash claims will have rocketed in the last 10 years I'm sure )

Quote:

---

Personally I think the surgeons / clinics should be held to account and they can seek reimbursement from the manuafacturer and in turn offer free removal and replacement of the implants to any patients with them , including covering the cost of their work not just the implant, after all, even if they are Cosmetic Surgeons, they are still doctors and it is their job to protect, preserve and save life... regardless of their current speciality.

---

I have a feeling the private companies who fitted the majority of implants will not want to pay out for the removal/replacement as it will hamper their profits.

The NHS should not be there to pick up this problem left behind by private medical companies, or should I say more problems left being by private medical companies.

I can see long court cases could arise from this as the company in France who made the implants is no longer trading, who will they try and sue the UK regulator for letting them in? AFSSAPS in France who I guess would have licensed the product? I guess only time will tell.

I bet the big private health care companies have got their advisers running round the House of Commons trying to get them off the hook for paying for this. It would be interesting to see if donations from the private health care companies to the political parties rise in 2012 as they do business the way most corporations do these days, to get what they want.

Lisa, I think the media are often guilty of blowing news stories out of proportion, but not in this case.

Tim Goodacre, one of the members of the government-commissioned panel investigating the scandal, said that rupture rates found by the country’s biggest cosmetic surgery company were ‘unacceptable’.


Mr Goodacre, president of the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons (BAPRAS) and an Oxford University lecturer, said that if the panel confirmed the findings – in which almost one in 14 implants had leaked – then they should all be taken out in every case.


“With this sort of level of implant failure, particularly with this sort of material that isn’t medical grade, it’s sensible that they be removed,” he told The Daily Telegraph. “I think that would be a reasonable way forward.”

I cannot even begin to imagine the distress this must be causing the women cocerned. >:( >:( >:(

Thee are so many potential jokes that could be attributed to this thread, but for once, I do actually feel that it's worthy of being serious.

The companies that put them in will almost definately never be brought to trial. If they do, they will be dissolved etc, records lost, people who made decisions gone 'missing'. So it will be left to us taxpayers to pick up the bills.

Many of the women who had them will no doubt be quite embarrased and not want to come forwards to complain and be dragged through courts - they'll just want rid of them. And many wouldn't be able to afford the extortionate legal fees to chase compensation.

It's a lose/lose situation...

It seems these implant companies have made complete tits of themselves... 8-)

(I'm sorry - I tried REALLY hard not too, but in the end I couldn't help myself)

Taffy,

while the company in question has gone under, you would have thought the surgeons and companies would have insurances to cover themselves against such incidents happening.

Nobody should have to put up with faulty or dangerous goods , least of all those put into their bodies beneath the skin. Its not like a dodgy batch of contact lenses that you can take out and throw in the bin then replace... It has the added risks of going under general anesthetic AGAIN and for longer this time as they will have to remove the offending object, clean out any damaged tissue or seeped silicone then if the woman wants it , put in replacement implants (safe ones hopefully this tmie)

Its not just the cost of the implant and the surgery , its the trauma caused by surgery this time NOT elective but forced upon them .... This really does need addressing and patients I guess could take this up with Injury Lawyers as it isn't what they signed up for , I do wonder how many 'No Win , No Fee' Solicitiors will take this up as there has to be a high chance of winning the case, after all, the patients signed up for a known risk , not one involving none surgical approved silicone.