Naked Science Forum
Life Sciences => Physiology & Medicine => Topic started by: juliemr on 31/01/2009 17:31:51
-
What do i do know ? i have 15 year old silicone breast implant have been ill for a long time just found out i have high silicon and nickel in my blood i have read about people who have died with this my GP is sending me back to the NHS breast surgeon who first put them in but this surgeon told me last year that he will not change or take them out not until they rupture i have had a ultra scan about 3 months ago which said my boobs are ok so i am worried to say the leaset what can they do to get this stuff out of my blood ???
-
It almost sounds like they are leaking and seeping out into your Blood stream...Are they sure that's where it is coming from...perhaps the X-rays or scans just did not detect a leak.. but this should not prevent the doctor from removing them! I would think this would go without saying given the circumstances.. Now I am no Doctor but I would insist they be removed if they were doing this! If he refused I would go else where!.. It is an elective surgery to get them and to my notion and elective procedure to remove them.. especially if they are making you sick!! I would not waste time but would get Doctors to do something right away!
Not being an alarmist I still say Go see another Doctor if he refuses to remove them!
I wonder if there are there other things that can cause these things to be found in your blood?
-
Where is the nickel from?
Heavy metal poisoning is a much more likely cause of illness than silicone.
-
Where is the nickel from?
Human illness as a result of toxicity of silicone gel breast implants is an evolving and controversial area of medical investigation. The nature of any toxicity has not yet been fully characterized but, at least in part, it appears to be consistent with a hypersensitivity process. The medical community is moving away from early reports of an autoimmune process but has not yet offered a clear explanation for complaints registered by patients who have had the devices placed. There is also significant uncertainty with respect to any responsible agents of toxicity.
Silicone breast implants consist of a shell encasing a gel. Both the shell and gel are complex formulations that include carbon and silicone and traces of many other elements. Saline implants are comprised of a saline fluid contained in a silicone shell casing. From an Occupational Medicine perspective, notable among the agents present in both gel and shell are the metals chromium, nickel, aluminum, and platinum. The presence of platinum in the implants occurs as a result of its use as a catalyst in its hexasolvent form (H2PtCl6) in the production of gel and shell
http://www.info-implants.com/BC/0007.html
Juliemr may be referring to antibodies to silicon and nickel in her blood, rather than silicon and nickel themselves.
This was the mainstream view in 2000 ...
Meta-Analyses of the Relation between Silicone Breast Implants and the Risk of Connective-Tissue Diseases
Esther C. Janowsky, M.D., Ph.D., Lawrence L. Kupper, Ph.D., and Barbara S. Hulka, M.D., M.P.H. [16 March 2000]
ABSTRACT
Background The postulated relation between silicone breast implants and the risk of connective-tissue and autoimmune diseases has generated intense medical and legal interest during the past decade. The salience of the issue persists, despite the fact that a great deal of research has been conducted on this subject. To provide a stronger quantitative basis for addressing the postulated relation, we applied several techniques of meta-analysis that combine, compare, and summarize the results of existing relevant studies.
Methods We searched data bases and reviewed citations in relevant articles to identify studies that met prestated inclusion criteria. Nine cohort studies, nine case–control studies, and two cross-sectional studies were included in our meta-analyses. We conducted meta-analyses of the results of these studies, both with and without adjustment for confounding factors, and a separate analysis restricted to studies of silicone-gel–filled breast implants. Finally, we estimated the annual number of new cases of connective-tissue disease that could be attributed to breast implants.
Results There was no evidence that breast implants were associated with a significant increase in the summary adjusted relative risk of individual connective-tissue diseases (rheumatoid arthritis, 1.04 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.72 to 1.51]; systemic lupus erythematosus, 0.65 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.35 to 1.23]; scleroderma or systemic sclerosis, 1.01 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.59 to 1.73]; and Sjögren's syndrome, 1.42 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.65 to 3.11]); all definite connective-tissue diseases combined (0.80; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.62 to 1.04); or other autoimmune or rheumatic conditions (0.96; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.74 to 1.25). Nor was there evidence of significantly increased risk in the unadjusted analyses or in the analysis restricted to silicone-gel–filled implants.
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/342/11/781
-
Where is the nickel from?
the nickel and the silicon can only come from the silicone implants the test results said lymphocyte sensitivity to silicones and marked sensitivity yo nickel the test said (silicone 305 and nickel 470) refrence intervals up to 100=normal,100-200=borderline,over 200=definite sensitivity this test was from cumen these second results are just for silicon has is from frimley hospital silicon serum 20.60(2.0-10.0 umol/L)
of contamination.
Human illness as a result of toxicity of silicone gel breast implants is an evolving and controversial area of medical investigation. The nature of any toxicity has not yet been fully characterized but, at least in part, it appears to be consistent with a hypersensitivity process. The medical community is moving away from early reports of an autoimmune process but has not yet offered a clear explanation for complaints registered by patients who have had the devices placed. There is also significant uncertainty with respect to any responsible agents of toxicity.
Silicone breast implants consist of a shell encasing a gel. Both the shell and gel are complex formulations that include carbon and silicone and traces of many other elements. Saline implants are comprised of a saline fluid contained in a silicone shell casing. From an Occupational Medicine perspective, notable among the agents present in both gel and shell are the metals chromium, nickel, aluminum, and platinum. The presence of platinum in the implants occurs as a result of its use as a catalyst in its hexasolvent form (H2PtCl6) in the production of gel and shell
http://www.info-implants.com/BC/0007.html
Juliemr may be referring to antibodies to silicon and nickel in her blood, rather than silicon and nickel themselves.
This was the mainstream view in 2000 ...
Meta-Analyses of the Relation between Silicone Breast Implants and the Risk of Connective-Tissue Diseases
Esther C. Janowsky, M.D., Ph.D., Lawrence L. Kupper, Ph.D., and Barbara S. Hulka, M.D., M.P.H. [16 March 2000]
ABSTRACT
Background The postulated relation between silicone breast implants and the risk of connective-tissue and autoimmune diseases has generated intense medical and legal interest during the past decade. The salience of the issue persists, despite the fact that a great deal of research has been conducted on this subject. To provide a stronger quantitative basis for addressing the postulated relation, we applied several techniques of meta-analysis that combine, compare, and summarize the results of existing relevant studies.
Methods We searched data bases and reviewed citations in relevant articles to identify studies that met prestated inclusion criteria. Nine cohort studies, nine case–control studies, and two cross-sectional studies were included in our meta-analyses. We conducted meta-analyses of the results of these studies, both with and without adjustment for confounding factors, and a separate analysis restricted to studies of silicone-gel–filled breast implants. Finally, we estimated the annual number of new cases of connective-tissue disease that could be attributed to breast implants.
Results There was no evidence that breast implants were associated with a significant increase in the summary adjusted relative risk of individual connective-tissue diseases (rheumatoid arthritis, 1.04 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.72 to 1.51]; systemic lupus erythematosus, 0.65 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.35 to 1.23]; scleroderma or systemic sclerosis, 1.01 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.59 to 1.73]; and Sjögren's syndrome, 1.42 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.65 to 3.11]); all definite connective-tissue diseases combined (0.80; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.62 to 1.04); or other autoimmune or rheumatic conditions (0.96; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.74 to 1.25). Nor was there evidence of significantly increased risk in the unadjusted analyses or in the analysis restricted to silicone-gel–filled implants.
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/342/11/781
-
As i have said i have 15 year old breast implants i am very ill and i have been ill for a long time but as time goes go i am so much worse some days i feel like i may be dieing.i have been diagnosed with fibromyalgia and muscuioskeletal and ME.but blood test in the past have always come back ok i had no idea what was wrong with me until i had a NHS blood test the results said Silicon-Serum 20.60 (2.0-10.0 umol/L) contamination. so after these results i decided to get a privet blood test the results said number of cells examined 37 mean result (linear scale)330.
normal is 100,mild sensitivity is 100-200,and my result was 305 with silicon and another test said nickel sensitivity 470.
i know i feel real ill but how ill could i be with these results ??? and do i need to have these implants removed ??? i have had sans on my bobs to see if there was a rupture but i am told there is no rupture please tell me what you think with kind regards from julie
-
just to let people know that i had my implants removed a year ago,i was told by the surgion that my right implant had no caseing on it at all and that it took him 7 ltr of cleaning fluid and 9 pairs of gloves to remove what looked like glue from my chest, and this was just from my right breast so looks like the scans that i had was wrong i had raw silicone inside of me and everything els that was in it, what i would like to know is were in my body is the silicone caseing and how do i get rid of it, as for my health i am still ill but a a few better days then i did befor the op guss i will fell ill for ever now
-
Hi I had silicone gel implats 4 yrs ago i am now sick all the time fatigue muscle pain and have severe arthritis I am on a lot of medication and think the implants are the cause. I am 25 and was fit and healthy before this but its not possible to get them removed on the NHS any information or help would much apprectiated thanks
-
Assuming that the NHS did not pay to put them in, why should they pay to take them out?
However, it sounds like you have some serious health issues. You should probably get them removed. Or, is it possible to use an MRI or something to look for leaks?
I thought silicone had been banned in the USA for eons, except, perhaps for post cancer mastectomy.
Saline implants have much less overall health risk.
-
I am from the uk and have the allergan cui mhp silicone cohesive gel implant. I think the nhs should remove them as I am dying from silicone implant disease (sid) and seen as the alcoholics and drug users get help to get there life back why shouldnt I, every 1 deserves a second chance and so do I, I was not aware of any complications like this and was told they were the safest implants around, I have worked and payed tax since age 17 i havnt worked for 2 yrs have no savings and dont recieve benefits the thing is nhs already pay around £12000 pa and thats just for me to inject once a month to save my joints stiffenng up so in the long run it will save them a fortune. I am not proud of sponging of the nhs but if not i die so I picked to take the medicine am sure you would to. and nhs wont send me for a mri scan as to also expensive
-
Here is some info about implants.
http://www.breastimplantinfo.org/what_know/before_you_get.html
I found it very surprising that the conclusion was that it was "normal" to have the implants removed or replaced within 10 years, often due to ruptures, or other failures.
The point that they do mention is that for non-reconstructive surgery, the insurance companies are reluctant to pay to have them either installed or removed, so the removal or otherwise modification cost should be considered part of the cost of the initial surgery. Unfortunately that may not be mentioned, or part of a waiver that isn't thoroughly discussed.
I don't see any point in waiting any longer... You already know that they need to be removed.
Talk to the company and see if they will pay to have them removed. Threaten a lawsuit if necessary. Your doctor may also have some liability if he was aware of relatively short-term risks without informing you. A implant life expectancy of less than 10 years for implants being provided to a 21 yr old is very short.
I don't agree with the tactics of the bottom-feeding lawyers that advertise that they will pursue medical malpractice for a variety of issues... at least in the USA. But, perhaps they would be able to help in your case if nobody else will listen.
Talk to your parents, friends, family, whoever, and figure out how to get them removed if you are convinced that they are causing your illness.
I suppose one should also keep in mind that there are people who get fibromyalgia, arthritis, and etc, with never getting breast implants, so leaking implants may not be a causative factor. However, I don't think I would take the risk.
-
some useful information on that website, I am trying everything i can to get them removed, thank you for u'r help and advise.
-
the insurance companies are reluctant to pay to have them either installed or removed
Not clear of course how relevant "the insurance companies" are here, except possibly those insuring the implant/surgery companies. Most in the UK don't have (or need) private health insurance.
FWIW it seems to me that it's probably sensible that the NHS should remove implants if there is any reason to think they're causing health problems: aside from the fact that the NHS is free at the point of need to smokers and drug users and other people who've done foolish and expensive things and then come unstuck, and it seems to me that this is an analogous case, any health problems that people suffer as a result of inappropriate implants are going to fall on the NHS for treatment and if these are caused by implants, it's clearly a provident use of NHS resources to stop them getting worse.
That said, I don't know what the cosmetic (as opposed to health) implications of implant removal, but I wouldn't favour extensive reconstruction work being carried out, and the NHS should be going after the cosmetic surgery cowboys for the full cost of any surgery (at least where it can be demonstrated that there was something wrong with the implant). The NHS mustn't be viewed by the companies making a fortune out of exploiting women's poor body image as a no-cost fallback in case of something going awry later on.
Not relevant to people who've already got implants, but I do think that anyone who's getting an implant of any sort (NHS, private, whatever) should be given the information about the expected lifetime of the product, any warranties, what they will have to do if they have any problems or worries about the implant within/beyond the after-care period, etc. And there should be strong regulation to enforce sensible rules.
-
Increasingly the NHS is not automatically providing services to people leading self-deleterious lifestyles; alcoholics with cirrhosis are not offered a liver transplant if they are not abstinent; smokers with peripheral vascular disease are warned to stop smoking or they will not be treated; morbidly obese people are being told to lose weight before surgery as the anaesthetic risk outweighs (excuse the poor pun) the surgical benefit.
Consequently, if someone managed to raise the money to have implants put in in the first place, I think the first thing they should be asked to do is to pay for them to be removed. It amazes me that, in the present financial climate, we are looking to provide what amounts to cosmetic reassurance to people who, when motivated to do so, managed to find money to have the things put in in the first place; it also amazes me that people seem to think that there are no risks to doing things like breast augmentation to their bodies. Any intervention is a risk; it's up to the person to make a choice and then accept the consequences. Perhaps people should keep money aside when they have cosmetic work done in the firts place to pay for the revisions they will ultimately require later. Because mark my words, there are enough trout pouts and faulty facelifts about to keep plastic surgeons busy for years to come. Looked at another way, who do you want to deprive of care, the cancer sufferer who, through no direct fault of their own has developed a malignancy that needs a drug that costs half a million, or the breast enlargement recipient who may be at no risk but wants the reassurance of having their implants - that they chose to have put in - removed at the taxpayer's expense?
-
I do think the plastic surgeons need to be a bit more forthright about longterm risks, and I assume most are.
$10K to get them put in.
10 years down the road, $10 to $20K to get them out, and things may not look right after that. Or, getting them replaced.
Saline implants... scarring, and perhaps "not so natural" feel.
Silicone implants... leakage, and some very vocal complaints about odd issues that may be related.
I know when my father got his knee replacements, the Doctors didn't really want to do it until he was about 60 or so... as some people need revisions after about 10 years... so perhaps choose an age where the revision would not be necessary. But, those were done because he was really suffering at the time.
-
Hi I've had silcone implants for 3 year but for the last 18th months I've had tingling in my hands & feet, swelling in my fingers morning & night, muscle pain all over, tiredness I've had so many blood tests done which have all come back clear & seen so many doctors & they just kept on telling me they can't find anything but I knew I was ill but felt like they didn't believe me