You now have a nice pair ... then what?!

 So, you now have a nice pair! Well, you’re certainly not the only one! At least 100 000 canadian women also have a nice pair (Baines Report, 1992). Unfortunately, Mother Nature forgot to give you this particular feminine attribute, along with all those other women who, like you, weren’t born with what is considered the ultimate feminine beauty trait. Rather, plastic surgery took over where Mother Nature hadn’t been quite as generous! Waking up the day after the surgery, you must have been proud to finally be more acceptable to society. There’s just one little problem: the surgeon never told you that the implant’s membrane could break, and the silicone gel it contains could spread and cause serious problems. The short term effects were described in a brochure that the surgeon was supposed to give you (Dow Corning Wright).

 Moreover, the surgeon didn’t know about the long-term effects of exposure to silicone. Who’s to blame? The whole medical community, who let a product onto the market without knowing about its long-term toxicity. A class-action suit against Dow Corning is about to be settled. Damages will be paid out to Ontario and Québec women according to the secondary effects that they have suffered. But, do we know about all the secondary effects of long-term exposure to silicone? In a word, no.

 For example, among canadian women with implants, probably about 25% smoke (Cook and coll., 1997). So, what is the commulative effect of exposure to tobacco smoke and silicone? You might answer that they have nothing to do with each other! After all, silicone is in my breasts, and smoke is in my lungs! In any case, scientists, for their part, forgot to ask the question. Women with silicone implants have a dysfunctional immune system. Among other toxic effects, silicone leads to decreased cytolytic activity of NK cells (Campbell and coll., 1994). These cells destroy tumoral cells that form in the organism. It is therefore plausible, but not proven, that the dysfunctional immune system in women who have breast implants and also smoke is incapable of destroying cancerous cells caused by tobacco smoke, and thus contributes to a more rapid development of tobacco-induced lung cancer. Research into silicone toxicity came up against a polarization of researchers into 2 groups more interested in proving their personal theory on the harmlessness or danger of silicone than in determining its degree of toxicity. The controversy surrounding the toxicity of silicone continues to serve certain special interests, even more openly than before. There are still too few researchers who have explored objectively the real risks, or have seriously studied the immunotoxic mecanisms, of silicone.

Sure, you have a nice pair, but don’t ask the canadian medical community to give you any more information about the possible consequences of long-term exposure to silicone. It’s unlikely that research into silicone will make much progress in Canada. The amount of money set aside for the prevention of tobacco addiction, or for the study of the long-term toxicity of silicone, is pathetic. For grant organisms like the National Cancer Institute (Canadian Cancer Society) or the Medical Research Council of Canada, the problem of silicone toxicity was resolved with the 1992 moratorium that abolished silicone gel-filled implants!

André Castonguay, Ph.D.

Professeur titulaire

Laboratoire d’étiologie et chimioprévention du cancer

Faculté de pharmacie

Université Laval

Dow Corning Wright. Patient Information Booklet, breast implant.

Campbell A, Brautbar N and Vojdani A. (1994) Suppressed natural killer activity in patients with silicone breast implants: reversal upon explantation. Toxicol. Ind. Health 10: 149-154.