Breasts Implants Belong in Quackery Museum

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

mercola.combreasts implants beOpen ↗
long_in_quackery_museum

Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions around.

Quackery is never invested in a particular treatment method.
It is a characteristic of claims that are made for them. The
implants did what they were supposed to do extremely well.
If manufacturers concealed knowledge regarding side effects
that has more to do with fraud than quackery.

Breast implants of some kind will always remain the optimal
way of dealing with unilateral or bilateral breast
underdevelopment or agenesis (absence) and they are
extremely helpful in simpler kinds of reconstruction after
mastectomy. That is not quackery either.

Peter Moran

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Breasts Implants Belong in Quackery Museum
From: "Peter Moran" [email hidden] Date: 4/9/2004 11:50
PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: <4077a749$0$609$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-
01.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au>

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

mercola.combreasts implants bOpen ↗
elong_in_quacke

ry_museum

Quoted message said:

Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions around.

No, that would be Barrett.

Jan

"Peter Moran" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

mercola.combreasts implants beOpen ↗
long_in_quackery_museum

Quoted message said:

Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions around.

Quackery is never invested in a particular treatment
method. It is a characteristic of claims that are made for
them. The implants did what they were supposed to do
extremely well. If manufacturers concealed knowledge
regarding side effects that has more to do with fraud than
quackery. Breast implants of some kind will always remain
the optimal way of dealing with unilateral or bilateral
breast underdevelopment or agenesis

(absence)

Quoted message said:

and they are extremely helpful in simpler kinds of
reconstruction after mastectomy. That is not
quackery either.

Peter Moran

Done with full knowledge of side effects. With a fully
approved FDA product.

On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 17:50:35 +1000, "Peter Moran" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

mercola.combreasts implants bOpen ↗
elong_in_quackery_museum

Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions around.

Quoted message said:

Peter Moran

In your dreams.

(Never seen your credentials posted Pete ... what are they?
Let's see your webpages.)

Thanks for your highly biased, Quackbacked two Aussie cents
worth ... (for those unaware ... Aussie cents have even less
value than US) ...

He is a very, very respected physician and researcher ...
and unfortunately, one of Quack Inc's targets for years. He
exposes the pharmaceutical cartels dangers ... and those of
the front groups funded by them.

I am very grateful to him for helping so many of the women
harmed by breast implants whose systems can not tolerate the
chemicals of pharmaceuticals.

(Jan) said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Breasts Implants Belong in Quackery Museum
From: "Peter Moran" [email hidden] Date: 4/9/2004
11:50 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: <4077a749$0$609$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-
01.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au>

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

mercola.combreasts implantsOpen ↗
belong_in_quacke

ry_museum

Quoted message said:

Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions around.

No, that would be Barrett.

Jan

Quack Inc head Barrett is also totally deceptive ...no where
on his many blasts at MCS and those working to help the many
harmed by chemicals ... does he admit that the Chemical
companies have funded ACSH who funded his one sided "get out
of jail free card" for industry.

May God protect those physicians and scientists he tries
to get shut down and who he calls for license
investigations ... he ... who has none and was NEVER board
certified when he did.

The epitome of what a Quack is.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ilena Rose said:

Quack Inc head Barrett is also totally deceptive ...no
where on his many blasts at MCS and those working to help
the many harmed by chemicals ... does he admit that the
Chemical companies have funded ACSH who funded his one
sided "get out of jail free card" for industry.

May God protect those physicians and scientists he tries
to get shut down and who he calls for license
investigations ... he ... who has none and was NEVER board
certified when he did.

It looks like I have to explain this yet again, as his
enemies seem to like to use these two red herrings to attack
Barrett, simply because they have a hard time addressing him
on substantive issues. First, many physicians let their
medical licenses lapse when they retire. Depending on what
state they are in, it can be very expensive to maintain
them, both from fees and money necessary to attend
continuing medical educations classes. In some states, it is
a requirement for licensure that a physician have
malpractice insurance, which can be a very large expense for
a retired doctor who is no longer practicing and therefore
no longer needs it. Consequently, Barrett's letting his
license lapse says nothing whatsoever about his level of
competence. I'll almost certainly let my medical license
lapse when I retire, many years hence. Second, Board
certification was considered optional for many specialties
when Barrett finished his training (back in the 1961).
Depending on their specialty, many doctors from that era
never bothered to get their Board certification and were
basically grandfathered in decades later, when it became
less optional to obtain Board certification (and in fact
became mandatory in many cities in order to get on a
hospital's medical staff or to enroll in various insurance
plans). Barrett's lack of Board certification says
absolutely nothing one way or the other about his level of
competence. It is completely neutral. It says absolutely
zero, zip, nada, about the competence of a doctor who
completed his training 43 years ago.

I have no problem with your disagreeing with Barrett.
However, please do so honestly on issues of substance, not
based on red herrings, such as the fact that he let his
license lapse when he retired or his choice not to get Board
certification back in a time when it was not mandatory and
in fact didn't even confer any significant advantage on a
young physician.

I realize that your hatred of Barrett is such that you'll
dismiss or ignore what I just said, but I say it anyway, for
the benefit of those who might not know that his letting his
license lapse at retirement and his lack of Board
certification say nothing whatsoever about his level of
competence when he did practice.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do
|you inconvenience me with questions?"

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Peter Moran said:

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

mercola.combreasts implants bOpen ↗
elong_in_quackery

_museum

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions around.

Quoted message said:

Peter Moran

In your dreams.

(Never seen your credentials posted Pete ... what
are they?

MB BS BSc(Med) FRACS FRCS(Eng)

I also have thirty years experience in breast surgery (but
never inserting implants myself) and assure you there are
many women who desperately need breast reconstrructions.
Your blind, complete rejection of the simplest way of
achieving that has more to do with with your own biases and
limited knowledge of the field than medical needs.

Non-biological implants of various kinds are playing a
larger and larger part in medicine, and it is inevitable
that an adequately safe beast implant will eventually be
developed, even if the presently available ones are proved
to have too many problems to enable their use in any but the
most needy patients. They are still, for example, in wide
use in England in post-mastectomy and other patients.

I am inclined to agree that plastic surgeons overdid their
use in women who proabably just needed counselling. Many
women had their breast augmented because they thought it
would save a failing marriage. It never did, in my
observations.

But medicine is always work in progress, with advances and
retreats, always getting there in the end. . There are many
examples where early technology was not up to the mark.

Quoted message said:

Let's see your webpages.)

God, woman, don't you know that any old rubbish can be put
up on web pages. Look at Mercola!! He is a nut. He claims
polio vaccination is unnecessary because you can't get polio
if you don.t eat sugar, aming other nonsenses.

Peter Moran

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ilena Rose said:

Quack Inc head Barrett is also totally deceptive ...no
where on his many blasts at MCS and those working to
help the many harmed by chemicals ... does he admit that
the Chemical companies have funded ACSH who funded his
one sided "get out of jail free card" for industry.

May God protect those physicians and scientists he tries
to get shut down and who he calls for license
investigations ... he ... who has none and was NEVER
board certified when he did.

It looks like I have to explain this yet again, as his
enemies seem to like to use these two red herrings to
attack Barrett, simply because they have a hard time
addressing him on substantive issues. First, many
physicians let their medical licenses lapse when they
retire. Depending on what state they are in, it can be
very expensive to maintain them, both from fees and money
necessary to attend continuing medical educations classes.
In some states, it is a requirement for licensure that a
physician have malpractice insurance, which can be a very
large expense for a retired doctor who is no longer
practicing and therefore no longer needs it. Consequently,
Barrett's letting his license lapse says nothing
whatsoever about his level of competence.

Perhaps Ilena is looking for another law suit, with lies
about Barrett never being licensed. Oh, I forgot, you can
get away even with propagating Tim Bolen's slanders if done
on the 'net.

I perhaps needed to have have mentioned that although
retired, I do maintain my own medical registration to
practice for now, in order to be able to provide simple
medical services to my family. But it is expensive, and like
Barrett I will have to drop it fairly soon.

Peter Moran ( for Ilena's benefit --- MB BS BSc(Med)
FRACS FRCS(Eng) medically registered as specialist in
General Surgery.)

In article <[email hidden]>,

Peter Moran said:

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

mercola.combreasts implants bOpen ↗
elong_in_quackery_museum

Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions around.

Hear, hear. The whale.to website is worse, but Mercola is
bad enough. The article about the horrors of microwave
cooking is sufficent all by itself to prove that Mercola is
an idiot. (I know he didn't write the article, but he put it
on his web site.)

Quoted message said:

Breast implants of some kind will always remain the optimal
way of dealing with unilateral or bilateral breast
underdevelopment or agenesis (absence) and they are
extremely helpful in simpler kinds of reconstruction after
mastectomy. That is not quackery either.

They also aren't any kind of "alternative" treatment, which
makes Ilena's fanatical insistence on posting in m.h.a all
the more incomprehensible, though I admit she's nearly as
loony as Jan and a lot more self-important.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ilena Rose said:

Peter Moran said:

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

mercola.combreasts implantsOpen ↗
belong_in_quackery_museum

Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions around.

Quoted message said:

Peter Moran

In your dreams.

(Never seen your credentials posted Pete ... what are they?
Let's see your webpages.)

Thanks for your highly biased, Quackbacked two Aussie cents
worth ... (for those unaware ... Aussie cents have even
less value than US) ...

He is a very, very respected physician and researcher

In *your* dreams. Mercola's web site contains some of the
most preposterous medical articles I've seen on the web.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my
opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I
have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were
standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

In article <[email hidden]>,

Peter Moran said:

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Peter Moran said:

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
>

mercola.combreasts implantsOpen ↗
belong_in_quackery

_museum

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions around.

Quoted message said:

Peter Moran

In your dreams.

(Never seen your credentials posted Pete ... what
are they?

MB BS BSc(Med) FRACS FRCS(Eng)

I also have thirty years experience in breast surgery (but
never inserting implants myself) and assure you there are
many women who desperately need breast reconstrructions.
Your blind, complete rejection of the simplest way of
achieving that has more to do with with your own biases and
limited knowledge of the field than medical needs.

Non-biological implants of various kinds are playing a
larger and larger part in medicine, and it is inevitable
that an adequately safe beast implant will eventually be
developed, even if the presently available ones are proved
to have too many problems to enable their use in any but
the most needy patients. They are still, for example, in
wide use in England in post-mastectomy and other patients.

I am inclined to agree that plastic surgeons overdid their
use in women who proabably just needed counselling. Many
women had their breast augmented because they thought it
would save a failing marriage. It never did, in my
observations.

We might postulate that Ilena, being flat-chested herself,
has concluded that because she can get along without 'em, so
can everyone else.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my
opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I
have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were
standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 23:49:15 GMT, [email hidden] (David

Wright) said:

In *your* dreams. Mercola's web site contains some of the
most preposterous medical articles I've seen on the web.

-- David Wronger Than wright

Try the Quack sites healthwatcher.net and quackwatch.com ...
it will expand the meaning of preposterous for you.

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 07:24:06 +1000, "Peter Moran" <[email hidden]>
wrote:

Your blind, complete rejection of the simplest

Quoted message said:

way of achieving that has more to do with with your
own biases and limited knowledge of the field than
medical needs.

I have no blinders on with regards to implants... there is
no shortage of information on the benefits ...

The manufacturers and PS's hire plenty of propagandists to
implant into the media the benefits ... and I've
communicated with thousands and thousands of women worldwide
with implant experience.

It's the huge downside that concerns me .... especially to
women post mastectomy ... the worst candidates.

With at least one of these women 3 women needing even more
surgery within just 5 years ... and the high rejection
rate ... the risks are considerable. I've had women tell
me that they've lost their breasts three times... once in
surgery, then when their first implants fail ... then the
second set goes.

The women are left scarred and in worse shape ... and having
endured several surgeries ...

What medical need does a breast implant fulfill?

Quoted message said:

Non-biological implants of various kinds are playing a
larger and larger part in medicine, and it is inevitable
that an adequately safe beast implant will eventually be
developed, even if the presently available ones are proved
to have too many problems to enable their use in any but
the most needy patients. They are still, for example, in
wide use in England in post-mastectomy and other patients.

They are in wide use in the US ... with horrific
consequences.

Quoted message said:

But medicine is always work in progress, with advances and
retreats, always getting there in the end. .

O really ...?

"David Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article

<407865f6$0$697$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-
02.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au> ,

Quoted message said:

Peter Moran said:

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 17:50:35 +1000, "Peter Moran"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>"]news:[email hidden]...
>>

Quoted message said:

mercola.combreasts implantsOpen ↗
belong_in_quacker

y

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

_museum

Quoted message said:

>
>Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions around.

>Peter Moran

In your dreams.

(Never seen your credentials posted Pete ... what are
they?

MB BS BSc(Med) FRACS FRCS(Eng)

I also have thirty years experience in breast surgery
(but never

inserting

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

implants myself) and assure you there are many women who
desperately need breast reconstrructions. Your blind,
complete rejection of the simplest way of achieving that
has more to do with with your own biases and

limited

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

knowledge of the field than medical needs.

Non-biological implants of various kinds are playing a
larger and larger part in medicine, and it is inevitable
that an adequately safe beast

implant

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

will eventually be developed, even if the presently
available ones are proved to have too many problems to
enable their use in any but the most needy patients. They
are still, for example, in wide use in England

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

post-mastectomy and other patients.

I am inclined to agree that plastic surgeons overdid
their use in women

who

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

proabably just needed counselling. Many women had their
breast augmented because they thought it would save a
failing marriage. It never did, in

my

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

observations.

We might postulate that Ilena, being flat-chested herself,
has concluded that because she can get along without 'em,
so can everyone else.

One does wonder. You would expect Ilena to have some
sympathy for at least some of her sisters who seek implants,
or at least some type of reconstructive breast surgery. That
is of necesssity more major if implants are not used, with
much more extensive scarring,. .

A young women with a nicely formed right breast and a
completely absent left breast; what do you do? Post-
mastectomy, women can't go swimming or wear a nice evening
gown because their chest is so lopsided.

Everyone will have a different threshold at which they might
think surgery for appearance sake only is justified. Mine
was always a good bit higher than was the norm about ten
years ago, but the results were often so brilliant, and
there were so many women showing off new breasts to their
mates that plastic surgeons could scarcely keep up. There
were bad results too, of course..

Peter Moran

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 07:24:06 +1000, "Peter Moran"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

Your blind, complete rejection of the simplest

Quoted message said:

way of achieving that has more to do with with your own
biases and

limited

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

knowledge of the field than medical needs.

I have no blinders on with regards to implants... there is
no shortage of information on the benefits ...

The manufacturers and PS's hire plenty of propagandists to
implant into the media the benefits ... and I've
communicated with thousands and thousands of women
worldwide with implant experience.

It's the huge downside that concerns me .... especially to
women post mastectomy ... the worst candidates.

With at least one of these women 3 women needing even more
surgery within just 5 years ... and the high rejection
rate ... the risks are considerable. I've had women tell
me that they've lost their breasts three times... once in
surgery, then when their first implants fail ... then the
second set goes.

After mastectomy is one of the most difficult areas for
augmentation terms of complications epecially if there is
also radiotherapy, but it is also one of the most needy. You
do not seem to be able to appreciate that trade-offs can be
involved, and that you cannot judge a procedure by its worst
results. We are contantly being being told this with regard
to the alternative treatment of cancer and other medical
conditions.

Quoted message said:

The women are left scarred and in worse shape ... and
having endured several surgeries ...

Yes, I have seen these, and the patients will still often
front up for some other procedure that offers them prospects
of a breast mound so that thee can wear bathing costumes and
low-cut dresses if they want..

Quoted message said:

What medical need does a breast implant fulfill?

That you ask that question reveals much about your position.
Where would you draw the line between a justifiable medical
procedure to improve appearances and a pure and unnecessary
cosmetic procedure?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Non-biological implants of various kinds are playing a
larger and larger part in medicine, and it is inevitable
that an adequately safe beast

implant

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

will eventually be developed, even if the presently
available ones are proved to have too many problems to
enable their use in any but the most needy patients. They
are still, for example, in wide use in England

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

post-mastectomy and other patients.

They are in wide use in the US ... with horrific
consequences.

Quoted message said:

But medicine is always work in progress, with advances
and retreats,

always

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

getting there in the end. .

O really ...?

Wait and see.

Peter Moran

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ilena Rose said:

On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 23:49:15 GMT, [email hidden]

(David Wright) said:

In *your* dreams. Mercola's web site contains some of the
most preposterous medical articles I've seen on the web.

-- David Wright

Try the Quack sites healthwatcher.net and quackwatch.com
... it will expand the meaning of preposterous for you.

Already been there. They're too dogmatic sometimes, but at
least they don't put out anything like the insane [censored]
you can find on Mercola's site.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my
opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I
have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were
standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

In article <[email hidden]>,

Peter Moran said:

"David Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article

<407865f6$0$697$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-
02.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au> ,

Quoted message said:

Peter Moran said:

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 17:50:35 +1000, "Peter Moran"
> <[email hidden]> wrote:
> >
> >"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> >"]news:[email hidden]...
> >>
mercola.combreasts implantsOpen ↗
_belong_in_quackery_museum
> >
> >Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions
> >around.
>
> >Peter Moran
>
> In your dreams.
>
> (Never seen your credentials posted Pete ... what are
> they?

MB BS BSc(Med) FRACS FRCS(Eng)

I also have thirty years experience in breast surgery
(but never

inserting

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

implants myself) and assure you there are many women who
desperately need breast reconstrructions. Your blind,
complete rejection of the simplest way of achieving that
has more to do with with your own biases and

limited

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

knowledge of the field than medical needs.

Non-biological implants of various kinds are playing a
larger and larger part in medicine, and it is inevitable
that an adequately safe beast

implant

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

will eventually be developed, even if the presently
available ones are proved to have too many problems to
enable their use in any but the most needy patients.
They are still, for example, in wide use in England

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

post-mastectomy and other patients.

I am inclined to agree that plastic surgeons overdid
their use in women

who

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

proabably just needed counselling. Many women had their
breast augmented because they thought it would save a
failing marriage. It never did, in

my

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

observations.

We might postulate that Ilena, being flat-chested
herself, has concluded that because she can get along
without 'em, so can everyone else.

One does wonder. You would expect Ilena to have some
sympathy for at least some of her sisters who seek
implants, or at least some type of reconstructive breast
surgery. That is of necesssity more major if implants are
not used, with much more extensive scarring,. .

The real irony of some of Ilena's massive hostility
towards me is that I actually agree with her on a number
of points. I think the failure rate of breast implants is
scandlous, for example. I also think plastic surgeons push
them too hard, and I don't think they look particularly
good in many cases. You can amuse yourself by looking at
the late-night softcore skinfests cable channels like
Cinemax (in the US, at least) and pick out the obvious
implants. When a woman is lying on her back and her
breasts are still pointing straight up at the ceiling, no
shifting at all, well, I think you can be pretty sure
they're not real. The whole thing looks amazingly silly
once you realize what you're seeing.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my
opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I
have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were
standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]... [...]

Quoted message said:

I am very grateful to him for helping so many of the women
harmed by breast implants whose systems can not tolerate
the chemicals of pharmaceuticals.

But yet they can tolerate the chemicals of untested and
unregulated supplements and neutraceuticals? How does that
work exactly? You'll be happy to explain that, won't you?

May God protect the breast implant women from voo doo
medicine pushers like Ilena and Mercola.

"Jan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Breasts Implants Belong in Quackery Museum
From: "Peter Moran" [email hidden] Date: 4/9/2004
11:50 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id:

<4077a749$0$609$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-
01.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au

Quoted message said:

"Ilena Rose" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

mercola.combreasts implantsOpen ↗
_belong_in_quacke

ry_museum

Quoted message said:

Mercola is one of the most unreliable opinions around.

No, that would be Barrett.

What qualifications does Mercola have that would make his
opinions reliable? Other than writing a book and running a
woo woo medical center, that is?