Powerful cosmetic surgery industry

Currently, the PS industry has a powerful ally in the medical industry. Unfortunately, in spite of the powerful propaganda, the decade long promotions, the information propagated by the PS and medical industry can be shown, on standard scientific peer review, to be scientifically groundless.

 

Furthermore, thanks to the publication of medical shill studies by PS affiliates, the pattern of misinformation and bias can be fully documented under review by psychologists, social scientists, and other individuals that have knowledge of the nature of propaganda techniques and other methods of information bias. This means that the entire PS developed, medically sponsored PS industry is built on a house of cards, regardless of how well entrenched it has become.

 

It is therefore quite logical that the legal responsibility for the iatrogenic damage caused by the breast reduction industry in the US should, justly, fall on the hands of the doctors who are responsible, not the insurance companies who were forced (by the system) to go along with this. Judging by history, it is quite possible that the PS/medical industry faction will attempt to render the insurance companies as a scapegoat so that they (PS) can be shielded from the consequences. Allowing this to happen would be a legal atrocity.

 

PS/medical industry sponsorship of this breast reduction money machine has already created major distortions in information, and has taken license to a degree that is virtually unprecedented. Allowing scapegoating to occur, as it did in 1991, will assure that the crimes of deception in the name of industrial profit will be further condoned by society, and will pave the way for the continued and greater growth of this variety of white collar, elitist led crime.

Dangers in breast reduction surgery

Furthermore, many of the problems created by breast reduction surgery are related to the obscuring the knowledge of the fat/breast size relation. For example, a woman who is fat all over, is, in the breast reduction promotional efforts, made to feel that it is specifically her breasts that are over large. If her ass is fat, her face is fat, her arms are fat, her back is fat, her upper abdomen is fat, it is certainly not surprising that her breasts will be fat.

 

But in the shills that started in 1992 (magazine articles, celebrities like Roseanne) the word was sent out that anything bigger than a D (such as DD and beyond) was the symptom of abnormality, and no mention at all was made of body fat content. Hence, the shills took advantage of body image issues related to fat and breast size to promote their surgery, using overweight women as the primary demographic.

 

Obviously, if they were to build an industry of breast reduction that matched the profits of breast implants, they needed a similar sized pool of potential clients to perform this on. If you are dealing with a population of women of healthy body fat, the small breasted women (potential clients for breast augmentation) will be many, many times the number of really big breasted ones, so there is no way on earth that the business profits of reductions will match those of augmentations.

 

In order to make the reduction profits match or exceed the augmentation profits (as has been the case in USA since the early shills of 1992), it was necessary to exploit the overweight women fully, and this was done by declaring *all big breasts as bad, regardless of body fat content*.

Different cosmetic procedure for different body sizes

So therefore, would not a large breasted woman have greater protection from injury that leads to back disability from a variety of causes? One also has to ask, is it big breasts that cause back pain, or is it instead big breasts combined with inappropriate posture that causes the pain? Logically, the combination of two factors is very different than just one factor. H2 is way different than H2O. But its easy to see confusion can result.

 

I for one agree that if a woman has large breasts, she must carry herself in a fashion that suits her proportions, else back pain is very likely.Of course, in many cases like these, the necessity for self-esteem and career counseling cannot be denied in addition to reconstructive surgery. As for purely cosmetic surgery, I think anyone will recognize that in most cases, there isn’t a severe appearance deficit that needs to be addressed. Most women who whine about their nose not being perfect have unrealistic expectations that are derived from fully made-up models in magazines, whose appearance bears little resemblance to reality. In this case, cosmetic surgery rarely helps their emotional condition, as it has very little to do with their appearance. Some women like this, who do have the money to afford surgery, start to go overboard and have one surgery after another in their futile personal pursuit of physical perfection and happiness, which naturally proves to be elusive.

 

I think most psychologists and psychiatrists would not recommend cosmetic surgery as the answer to the problem, but psychotherapy instead (which I think is covered, but I could be wrong…I’m not an American). Women who fret about their appearance to obsessive extremes are notoriously insecure and lacking in self-esteem and that is a psychological issue, not a physical one. I’m not that upset about my shrinking breasts..

 

.I can wear push-up bras. And if the time comes that I should want to do some surgical enhancement, I will expect to pay for it because it’s not essential to my well-being, physical or emotional. As for men who will see me naked over the next few years, well, if they can’t accept me as I am, it’s their loss. I think I look pretty damn good for my age regardless, but I’m not about deny that I have worked very hard at it

Medical reasons for breast reduction

Thank you for your honesty. As a matter of fact, in the United States, as far as official policy is concerned, over 90% of the breast reductions are done for medical reasons. But that’s what the insurance companies and the doctors say. The fact is that any woman with large breasts can get a free breast reduction just by claiming back pain. If she doesn’t claim medical problems, she must pay for it herself.

 

Every year, more and more women claim back pain, and less and less women claim cosmetic. Every year, doctors, who advise the breast reductions, make more money off of it, thanks to insurance companies, who must then deny the claims of other needy persons so that they can pay for breast reductions.

 

If you look at the zillion or so sites about breast reduction, all put out by PS’s, or you read the series of magazine shills begun in 1992 to compensate the surgeons for the financial ordeal they were experiencing with the implant scandle, or if you read the posts popping up in newsgroups by PS’s posing as women so they can drum up business, yes, they will nurture the notion that these problems are caused by being well endowed.

 

But actually, these are caused by overpriced, low-quality bras, put out by an industry that ignores the simple fact that big bras need to be designed differently than average size ones. But by blaming the breasts, instead of the bras, 1)the bra industry does not have to spend money on developing a product for a minority and 2) the breast reduction surgeons make about a thousand times as much as the bra industry could ever make on big breasted women.

Preventing litigation in breast augmentation

To obtain patient satisfaction and thus avoid exposure to liability claims in breast augmentation, the plastic surgeon must take pains to exert not only his or her surgical competence but also his or her medico-legal awareness. The recent breast implant crisis should have taught everyone a lesson. The surgeon should remember that the American legal system has more to do with showmanship than with justice, fairness, science, or truth.

 

In a chapter entitled “The Medical Construction of Need,” she hypothesizes that the existence of the technology created the need. The availability of a seemingly “natural” device for breast enhancement led to defining the perfect breast. In one study, only 13 of 100 women could claim this ideal form. It followed that those not so well endowed “would be happier if, somehow, they could have a pleasing enlargement from within.”

 

A medical construction, however, requires more than desire. It requires need. This was established through psychological studies demonstrating positive effects in women who underwent implant surgery. The breast was seen as “key to the gates of normal feminine activity, and social, economic and emotional fulfillment.”

 

It is unlikely that anyone beginning a 30- to 40-year career in aesthetic surgery will finish it without an encounter with the US legal system. Surgeons should supplement their CME with “DME” (defensive medicine expertise). Only by cultivating the absolutely crucial elements of patient rapport will surgeons be able to stay one step ahead of the plaintiff’s attorney.

Stacking breast implants in plastic surgery

PS industry does not approve of stacks as a group. So what else is new? Obviously, I do not assume that the medical industry or the PS industry is valid, or its doctrines are valid, merely because they are a big industry with the power of authority to claim that they are right. Medical industries have perpetrated large money making hoaxes and misconceptions on the American public.

 

But kindly explain: what is supposed to be the critical structural difference between saline and silicone implants that supports the above argument against stacking them. You provide an argument against shape, when the salines are not different in shape whatsoever. Silicone, vs saline is a matter of substance not form, so the argument you present, implying that substance is relevant to form, does not wash.

 

Meanwhile, allow me to clarify that I am not advocating stacks. I merely observed that they look, at least in clothes, more natural than single implants. Shaped breast implants, installed singly, may look good, unless they encapsulate, at which point their shape becomes a hard ball. Yeah, its true that if you manipulate the breasts in a certain way, you can get the two implants to move in different directions, and then you will see the difference. The question is, what do you expect, that somehow the implants will never reveal themselves, that somehow the woman can fool people forever. I don’t think this is at all realistic.

 

Its like the adjustable. The PS’s are often against those because they have a palatable valve. Well, that means that the woman just can’t fool her mate into believing that she is real. Why would she want to. Speaking of misconceptions, I never suggest that breast implants should be as big as possible in general. I only say that in the case of stacks, the stacks have to be big and proportioned because if they aren’t in there snug, there is a good chance of separation, and then, they will look unnatural. This is my opinion regarding stacks, not implants in general. I am fully aware of the stance of the PS industry, and I am also fully aware of the allegiance of the medical community to this PS standard, that big breasts are supposed to be bad. As a matter of fact, I have talked about this extensively, and have repeatedly said that it is invalid, a myth that has been adopted because it has proved to be worth billions of dollars.

Breast augmentation campaign

The perception is created amongst observers that the group of white overweight women has many times the incidence of ugly mispositioned figures than in any other racial group. Of course, it is not natural for people to make the conclusion that it is the PS industry that has created all this white fat ugliness. Most merely assume that white women, out of all the other races (black, Asian, Native American, Latino) just happen to be so poorly endowed compared to everyone else that they all look like hell when they get fat.

 

Breast augmentation is targeted at mainly thin women, so the breast implant industry also exploits confusion on the statistical relation of breast size and body fat. Breast augmentation is apparent to the trained eye when it has been done on thin women, but when augmentation is done on overweight women, it is very hard to tell. Conversely, the after effects of breast reduction are very hard to detect (identify on sight) when done on thin women.

 

But when it is done on overweight women it is pretty easy to detect. The breast reduction quite often renders the distribution of bodily proportions, which is apparent thru the body fat, into most unnatural states. The combined shape and size of the the breast reduced breasts, when compared against the overall frame of the woman to which they are attached, often tends to create a body shape that is conflict with what one would expect from the normal and natural biological physiological anatomical patterns of the development of organisms. I won’t pull any punches.

 

The effects of the breast reduction industry acting thru the hollowed medical industry have been absolutely stupendous. This is because the industry actually has a very limited resource to exploit. The breast reduction industry, since the silicone scandals of 1991, has managed to pull in more profits every year than has the breast implant industry (in the US). The PS’s have managed to assure that the growth of the breast reduction industry fully matches the growth of the breast augmentation industry, thereby exploiting the self esteem issues related to breast size to a maximum

Breast reduction and pregnancy

Make a simple statement (if this is too difficult to understand, check with your doctor) and somebody thinks its a chance to make a cheap and degrading joke. If you want jokes about breasts, go hobnob with the temporary help, or check out any one of about a billion pieces of pornography. But while we are talking about fashion, yes, fashion “conveniently” offers no acceptance of women who have breasts that do not adhere to “standards”, whether small or large. And no, you are not supposed to have big breasts.

 

You are not supposed to have small breasts. You are only allowed to have breasts that are either b or c. It wouldn’t take a genius to design clothes or proper undergarments for the 30% of women who fall outside the inside of the bell curve, but it is so much more “economic” to make them all suffer until they rush out to spend their money or their insurance on surgery to correct their “horrible abnormalities”: breast augmentation or breast reduction .

 

Breast reduction and breast augmentation are different operations done by the same people who happen to make a lot of money on exploitation of the female breast, and at heart its all the same old crap boosted by good old American Dollar. Unless you are one of those women that have near average breast size, anything that can be done to make you feel uptight about your anatomy is good for another BMW payment. Check recent statistics and do simple arithmetic and you will discover that surgeons are now making more money on breast reduction in the U.S. than they make on breast augmentation.

 

How convenient that insurance pays. And how fortunate that bra companies don’t have to waste their precious time and money designing and marketing proper “outsize” bras. How wonderful that clothing and fashion does not have to bother with those other nonstandard sizes. And do you know what the best part of the whole darn thing is? People swallow the whole thing without the slightest clue that they are being duped, conned, bribed, bullied and generally manipulated like slabs of meat. But seriously, if you have a hard time with the breast size pregnancy connection, do check with your doctor. Just make sure he doesn’t just happen to know a “good cosmetic surgeon that I can recommend to you”.

Augmentation breast therapy

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 susceptible 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 woman’s life, a burden that has tormented her since early adolescence. I myself have been astonished with this transformation in attitude The increase in confidence, self acceptance, openness and spirit is so powerful that it is more apparent than even the physical change. No wonder surgeons often talk about it as the best reason to get breast augmentation. The psychological effects are hard to miss.

The efficacy of breast augmentation

Another of Leroy Young’s studies showing the very high satisfaction level of implants. Does anyone have the full article that can be forwarded? Much appreciated! Dr. Young is the developer of the Tofu Titties, by the way, and stars in the recent Cosmo cover story on them. Does anyone know how long these women had their implants? The efficacy of breast augmentation: breast size increase, patient satisfaction, and psychological effects.

 

In this study designed to quantify the degree of breast enlargement produced by augmentation mammaplasty, 112 women who underwent breast augmentation were interviewed. The size increase that typically resulted from various implant volumes was measured by comparing preoperative and postoperative bra sizes. For the study group as a whole, the average increase was two bra sizes (either increased cup size or a combination of increased cup size and chest circumference), regardless of the implant volume inserted.

 

Patients also were asked a series of questions to evaluate the impact of the surgery on various psychological parameters, including body image, feelings of self-confidence, and interpersonal relationships. Along with having a very positive body image, the group reported decreased self-consciousness (86 percent) and heightened self-confidence (88 percent); in addition, 95 percent said they felt better about themselves after surgery.

 

The women’s satisfaction with the results of augmentation and the success of surgery in meeting their expectations also were measured. Eighty-six percent reported being completely or mostly satisfied with the postoperative results, 86 percent felt the operation was a complete success, and 95 percent said that augmentation met their expectations.