PIP

While the toxicology work continues, it seems implant data is still saying the same thing, that PIP implants rupture more frequently than other implants, that in most cases there is no reaction, and when there is a reaction it’s obvious. Most significantly data confirms no resultant cancer.

BAAPS has issued a statement broadly supporting the conclusions of the Chief Medical Officer’s report into the PIP breast implant situation. The association is urging women to take up the offer of consultation and potential explantation, and urging the private sector providers to do exercise their own duty of care.

Sir Bruce Keogh, Medical Director of the UK’s NHS, has released his report on the PIP scandal, which reassuringly suggests the content of the implants, while being suitable for mattresses, is also non-toxic to humans. His advice to patients remains the same; If they’re troublesome, take them out.

Lord Howe’s report into the PIP breast implant scandal and specifically MHRA’s handling of it, suggests that the agency acted appropriately given the information available and the regulatory constraints existing at the time. A four year delay between first notification and ultimate action on the face of it looks like a long time, but Lord Howe seems satisfied enough.

The Amazonification of Boob Jobs…Patients who have their PIPs replaced might also like…

Lack of unnannounced Spot check provision in Medical Devices Directive seems like and easy fix.

MHRA counters Financial Times article and “raises questions” about the responsibility of “member states”.

European report says we don’t have enough data to conclude PIPs have a greater risk, but the data we do have raises concerns to the extent that health effects can’t be ruled out.

Unannounced spot checks would have given Notified bodies a chance of preventing the PIP scandal. Now French competent authority AFSSAPS signs up to the notion.

In a shameless attempt to add humour to a difficult situation, medlatest stoops low for a snappy headline.