news E
xperts writing in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine disagree with the conclusion that PIP breast implants do not show any
evidence of significant risk to human health. This was the decision reported in June 2012 by the panel appointed to investigate the PIP breast implant scandal chaired by NHS medical director Sir Bruce Keogh. Disputing this, the authors point to
evidence showing that the PIP implants were found to contain a higher proportion of a group of small-sized molecules than the norm, including one referred to as D4, which has been identified as an endocrine disrupting chemical (EDC). In low doses, EDCs are known to cause damage to a developing foetus. Co-author Andre Menache, Director of consumer protection organisation, Antidote Europe, said: 'Considering these known risks and the fact that most women receiving breast
Social media is all about image. Who hasn’t spent hours deliberating over the perfect profile picture or strategically un-tagging less-than-flattering photos? In this age of photo-sharing, we are constantly bombarded with our own image, which can result in a more self-critical eye and intense scrutiny. According to a new survey by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (AAFPRS), a greater number of people are
| NEWS
A round-up of news stories in the aesthetic and anti-ageing medicine industry
EXPERTS DISPUTE CONCLUSIONS OF PIP BREAST IMPLANT SCANDAL INVESTIGATION
GROUP CLAIM CHEMICAL FOUND IN IMPLANT COULD AFFECT FOETUS DEVELOPMENT
concerns, including that the report bases much of its evidence on animal data rather than readily available human-based methodologies. 'This is surprising given the current level of knowledge of the human genome,' says Menache. 'Furthermore, the report is inconsistent
with its reliance upon animal-based data, accepting some results while dismissing others without providing human-based support tests as back up.' The authors also raise concerns about the make-up of the expert panel, which contained just one toxicologist. 'A panel appointed to investigate a scandal of this nature is expected to contain more than
implants were of reproductive age, we would expect the MHRA and the [UK] Department of Health to fulfil its duty of care and thoroughly investigate these risks as well as provide full information to patients.' The authors raise a number of other
one toxicologist,' says Menache. Menache concludes: 'Based upon the
evidence presented here we feel that the PIP breast implant scare is an example of regulatory and quality control failure that urgently requires addressing.'
SOCIAL MEDIA FUELS INCREASE IN REQUESTS FOR SURGERY 'Thanks to photo-sharing sites
turning to plastic surgery to get camera-ready. The annual study found that
there was a 31% increase in requests for surgery as a result of how patients perceive how they look online. Social media sites centre around photos and everyone wants to put the most attractive version of themselves on display. They want fast, perceptible results that will instantly make a visual difference in their online presence and erase any perceived imperfections.
like Facebook and Instagram, patients are seeing themselves more often in photographs, which in turn increases the probability of them discovering flaws and focusing on insecurities,' said New York Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeon, Sam Rizk, MD, and member of the AAFPRS. 'The photos presented on social media are often the first impression you are offering to new 'friends' and prospective employers, so everyone wants to
be seen as beautiful and youthful.' According to a survey in the
May issue of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, social media is making its way into the business end of cosmetic practices as well. The survey revealed that a little more than 50% of plastic surgeons reported using social media regularly as a marketing tool and forum for patient education and feedback. Facebook is the most popular platform, followed by LinkedIn, Twitter and YouTube.
prime-journal.com | June 2013 ❚ 9
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84