Finding the best plastic surgeon

Actually, there’s plenty of good plastic surgery around — you just can’t spot it, like a good toupee or hair weave. . People who have their eyes done in their mid-thirties, to buy a few years before the crows feet are engraved into their skin, then follow that up with a tiny face lift 7-8 years later. . There is a point, however, when you stop.

 

It’s great to look 45 when you’re 53. But you ain’t ever going to look 30 again, and it’s those who try who look the scariest. . Angela Lansbury did very well for a long time — she started out with an old looking face — in her twenties she looked 40, so that gave her an advantage. She basically got to look 40 for an extra 15 years.

 

She needs to stop now, however, or she’ll be scary looking. . The lady who plays the grandmother on Promised Land also looks great — Celeste Holm. Yes, she’s obviously had plastic surgery. She’s not fooling anybody — yet you couldn’t spot it from 100 feet away, either. She still looks like somebody’s grandmother. . The trouble with most socialite facelifts is that they don’t get them to look like a very young grandmother, but to look like they looked when they were young parents, and there’s only so much that can be done.

 

After the last trial, he moved to Mexico, where he devoted his life to good works, ministering to the sick by bringing them their insulin and so on. In very short order, news of his good works reached the ears of the pope, and CvB was canonized. Now known as *Santa* Claus, he will be arriving at your house shortly.

Horrific cosmetic surgery

I was in a bookstore yesterday and saw the latest issue of New York magazine, which has a picture of a woman on the cover who has had hands down the most horrific cosmetic surgery I’ve ever seen. She’s the wife of some bigtime art dealer in New York, and apparently she had this facial work done to remain youthful and attractive (it didn’t work; her hubby cheated on her anyway), but the results look appalling to me. She has cheekbones and lips that bulge out grotesquely, her eyes seem to have been narrowed to give her a feline look, and the effect is more Martian than human.

 

Has anybody seen this picture? it beamed itself into my mailbox monday. the article is really sad; what a desperate, pathetic woman. her name is jocelyn wildenstein. some fun facts from the article: one, there’s a mention of her going into the plastic surgeon’s office (HE won’t admit to doing all the work) and a woman walking out, changing her mind at the sight of jw’s surgery. and two, jw doesn’t think her look is all that dramatically different from her pre-surgery look.

 

I also wonder about the ethics of a doctor who would mutilate a woman as he has done, even at her request. any articles i’ve read about surgery talk about all this extensive pre-surgery counselling, but i guess when you’re talking about a woman with a $200000 a month allowance, all medical ethics go out the window. what a sad testament to a woman who’d do this to hang onto an ugly, cheating, but ultra-wealthy creep.

Minor cosmetic surgery

I think minor cosmetic surgery at the hands of a very trustworthy trained surgeon could be potentially wonderful. I believe the problem with the “cat woman” is that our surgery technology just doesn’t measure up to most peoples expectations when it comes to more extreme facial mods.We are great at age defying tucks and wrinkle removing but not at totally rearranging ones features to appear to be another species.

 

I mean if she wanted to look like a cat and our medical technology could give her an anime cat look we (or at least I) would think that was really fantastic. As an nurse I can tell you cosmetic surgery can be just as painful as any other surgery during recovery. I hear breast implants and nose jobs are the worst of the lot. But on the other hand if you are worried about your eyes and you can afford it and it would make you feel better. Hell, go for it. It doesn’t really matter what anyone else thinks.

 

If you think you would FEEL better about yourself then it is worth the money and recovery time to not have to think about it when you look in the mirror every day. My best advice is to do your homework regarding your surgeon. Visit several about it. Remember you want the best guy or gal you can find. Ask people you know for referrals. Doing your homework before you get it done can save you some trouble in the long run.

 

I consider minor cosmetic surgery to be no different than tattoos, hair dyes, etc. Sure, it’s more permanent but if you know you want to be that way the rest of your life. . . I think as the technology gets better and safer and easier we will see more and more of this.

Breast augmentation prior to this decade

Prior to 1991, the now big and influential PS industry in America was supported on the single foundation of breast augmentation. Breast implants, done with the silicone gel that was said to have a more realistic feel than saline, were contributing to the economics of certain cities, such as Houston, much as they now do in LA *now*.

 

Breast implants were the candy of the surgeons, stimulating women to go in for other PS industry products. Then, in 1991, with the legal battlements, the manufacturer, Dow became the legal scapegoat for a back-load of *human suffering* that had been caused by industry. The PS’s however, thanks to the distraction of this now long bankrupt scapegoat, escaped scot free, with protections from their friends in the medical industry (PS’s are doctors, you know).

 

The only shortcoming for them was that the scandal had shrunk the breast augmentation business down to a third or so of what it had been in its glory days, and to save them from a drop of living, a new industry pillar was almost immediately erected. And thinks to an orchestrated cascade of breast reduction shills (agents or articles of deception designed to increase demand for a product) the quick fix of the breast reduction industry almost immediately made up for the profit shortfall.

 

Since the breast reduction brought in more money annually than total breast augmentation starting in only 1992, thereby more than doubling the money just brought in from implants, the act was successful…PS’s barely had to miss a payment on their Mercedes or half million dollar realist ate holdings.

Exploitation and cosmetic surgery industry

The study, which violated the major protocols of science, all in an intent to promote breast reduction surgery amongst young girls (a very successful promotion, if the nineties are evidence) was so blatant that it caused the major backlash against breast reduction that occurred three years ago.

 

A study aimed at exploiting young girls for breast reduction profits might have fooled some people, but others looked at it and decided it was time to question the medical establishment and industries right to manipulate and mine human lives for profit. Unfortunately, the propagandists that created this “breast reduction is good for young girls” campaign were living in an illusion that they could easily fool everyone with such junk science.

 

The ones that weren’t fooled were very alarmed that you guys would freely advocate the permanent lifelong damage of girls who trust in the authorities. BTW, independent scientists have found no evidence whatsoever that there is a *causal* connection between back syndrome and large breasts. More important issues are raised by meta studies of the so called studies of the PS funded researchers, which reveal overriding of scientific rigor on several counts.

 

Clearly, no study like that would fail to receive major peer review criticism if it were on anything other than breast reduction, yet the breast reduction studies can freely do these violations without drawing fire from the medical community. Meta research of these studies therefore leads to a clear hypothesis of causal connection between the promotion efforts of the PS industry and the promotion efforts of the medical industry.

More augementation for teens

Also, the total breast reductions in teen girls are twice the number of breast augmentations. The contributions of the medical industry to this are great, but other sources need to be credited. When the PS industry experienced a two thirds drop in their breast implants profits following the silicone scandle, several important media promotion campaigns appeared, two of which were very successful. Of relevance would be the Soleil Moone Frye breast reduction campaigns, which advocated breast reduction in teen girls.

 

Now, thanks to this, Soleil Moon Frye is known as much for her breast reduction as she is for Brewster. Also very helpful in ensuring a good market for the breast reduction surgery amongst teen girls was a later study put out at reputable institutions by reputable persons who were well paid by the PS industry contributions, that demonstrated, using several biasing methodologies, that breast reduction was beneficial to the social and psychological well being of teen girls, and was highly recommended as a method of solving their problems.

 

This study was a good example of a series of similar studies that were put out over a period of time, designed to convince the medical, the insurance, and the public that breast reduction was good for the health and that large breasts, even to the minor standard deviation in the normal diversity distribution, were unhealthy and freakish.

 

These studies were most exceptional in the way they were able to greatly distort data, avoiding many of the protocols of rigor that are fundamental to science, while managing to get the medical community to ignore the fact that they were most obviously (to a first year university statistics course or elementary science introductions) completely non scientific. The series of studies made major breakthroughs in information biasing, and the manufacture of truth using technological means, surely a brilliant light in the proper management of the masses in the name of the enlightened corporations.

Reconstrutive cosmetic surgery

I can see it being justified in the case of reconstructive surgery, as in the case of women who have a large portion of their facial structure removed due to malignancy. I have seen the results on one reasonably attractive woman and she walked around for years horribly disfigured, stared at and taunted by children before she could afford the surgery required to rebuild at least some of the appearance she once had.

 

However, nothing could fully restore her appearance after so many years of her skin adjusting in the sunken position it remained for several years after her nasal, jaw and cheekbones were removed. Many cosmetic surgeons recognize the psychological and emotional needs of women who have been physically abused into disfigurement by former spouses and donate their services to women in shelters to restore their faces and their self-esteem so they can become productive and rebuild their lives. Only in extreme cases like these (especially where little or no money can be recovered in cases where intentional injury has caused the disfigurement), can I see coverage being provided.

 

People know *what* they feel, but they don’t necessarily know *why* they feel it. A woman with breast implants suffering from MS may feel certain that it is her implants that caused her suffering, even though this has nothing in reality to do with it. A large breasted woman with back troubles can feel certain that the cause is her big breasts, when in reality, the problems were caused by the way she carried her baby or the fall she had when she was fifteen, or any of a number of problems.

 

Back troubles are extremely common in human beings, to the point that most everyone will suffer them sooner or later. Yet most of the big breasted women might blame their breasts, whilst most of the small breasted women, or men, will blame other factors

Cosmetic surgery for heavier people

I would say that IR and overweight goes hand in hand in many cases….at least to some extent, because that is the pattern it tends to follow, but there always exceptions to every rule…such as my DIL, diagnosed type 2-not really overweight at all for his height though he lost a little and became skinnier after taking metformin. My MIL is also a type 2 that treats for diet alone and she has not been really fat either–she has to stay slim, if she gets just a little plumb, her sugar goes up.

 

I am maybe 25-35 lbs over what I need to be (depending on whether I go by the older weight/height chart or the newer one) and am PCO and diabetic, yet I know much heavier people are not diabetic–though some may be IR and not know it, some may not–our bodies are a mystery and there seems to be exceptions to every rule. As far as the really overweight people who don’t become diabetic.

 

I think that they are IR (especially if they have the apple shape), but that their pancreas can keep up with the high insulin needs, and they still keep their blood sugar under good control. I think the type II diabetes is a mix of IR and a pancreas that cannot keep up with producing larger than normal amounts of insulin. I was 130 pounds overweight when I got diabetes. I have lost 50, and I am hoping that when I lose the other 80, I will no longer get blood sugar values out of normal ranges. I plan to still take meds for the IR so that they will help me to not be overweight.

Adolescence and breast reduction

The question is, does this condition cause you intense pain? (either emotional or physical) Do you find it very difficult to function psychologically due to this condition? Is this condition contributing to neurotic syndromes? Is it acting as a handicap to your normal life functioning? Is this the prognosis of a medical doctor (a psychiatrist)? If so, then clearly, your insurance should cover liposuction to correct it.

 

It won’t of course, but this is not right. I am perfectly open minded to the notion that fat on the back can in theory cause psychological pain that is equal in magnitude to the physical pain that necessitates breast reduction. But a qualified representative of the medical community needs to clear this. I would tend though to believe that “fat backs” would in all likelihood not be considered a sufficient problem to be classed as medical, based on my experience with our current culture.

 

I can imagine exceptions, or even an alternative culture where this is considered so *important* that it *would* cause trauma and disability. My guess would be that small breastedness is not sufficient to entail a medical diagnosis on the basis of psychological condition, but flatchestedness is. Perhaps the fault lies in our culture. But how does this cure the individual who is susceptable to this pain? Surgery, it would seem, would be the most direct and reliable method of treating it.

 

And it works. Surgeons, and other observers, report a tremendous, immediate, and apparent relief of this type of burden in some breast augmentation recipients. A powerful transformation in attitude is really quite common. This has all the earmarks of a lifting of a great burden from the womans life, a burden that has tormented her since early adolescence.

Breast reduction for emotional reasons

No, but if the surgery is necessary to relieve severe emotional pain then it is certainly just as medically necessary as is a surgery needed to relieve physical pain. Liposuction to lose weight hardly qualifies as a relief of severe emotional pain, but there is little doubt that flatchestedness can be the source of great trauma.

Another thing to consider is sagging breasts. If a woman has children, and her breasts end up deflated, this surely can be a source of great trauma. Furthermore, breast augmentation to relieve this syndrome, which has a medical *name* (ptosis) has to be classed as a *restorative* procedure. This means it should be called *reconstructive* surgery, since it merely restores what the woman lost.

The analogy is breast reduction, which is classed as reconstructive surgery, even though it alters the condition of the breasts into a shape and size that the adult woman may never have had. Another analogy would be adult male circumcision, which alters the male sexual organs into a condition that is not natural at all, but is covered by most insurance plans.

 

What amazes me is the number of newsgroup posters that have large breasts or have had breast reduction, have the option of, or have had this, paid for easily by HMO’s, then go on about how wrong *breast augmentation* is, yet how very *right* breast reduction is. Must be nice to be a member of such a privileged class of people. Get to get surgery for free, then get on the box and tell us how *their* surgery and *their* needs are valid, while everything else is *wrong*.