Connect with us

Awareness

Breast Implants: The Ticking Time Bomb In Millions Of Women’s Bodies

Published

on

“They do not last. They rupture. And the longer they’re in the body the more likely they are to rupture. The statistics are kind of scary, because around about 50 percent are ruptured by 10 years. And when it gets to 15 to 20 years you’re looking at almost 90 percent of implants that are ruptured.

advertisement - learn more

What is most worrisome is that while most of the silicone is contained within the capsule, some of it leaks out, we don’t know where it goes, we don’t know what it does, we have no idea.”

– Dr. Ed Melmed, board certified plastic surgeon

Each year in the United States approximately 300,000 women and teenagers undergo breast augmentation. It’s thought that the total number of implants carried out each year worldwide is anywhere between 5 to 10 million.

Before the operations women are often told by their surgeons that it is a safe procedure with “very little” risk. The FDA also says breast implants are relatively safe.

Most of these women don’t know that this is simply not the case.

advertisement - learn more

There is in fact a growing body of evidence, in conjunction with thousands of horror stories from women all over the world whose implants ended in disaster, to prove that they are not safe and are actually causing debilitating autoimmune disorders and other physical problems in many women.

If you have breast implants, or are considering them, I urge you to take this article very seriously. And if any of your friends or family members already have implants, please show them this article. Their health and life (as well as your own) may depend on this knowledge.

This is a lengthy article but much has to be shared with you so that you can have a deeper level of knowledge.

pamelaquote

Like many women, I grew up feeling insecure about my body. At age 30, after gaining some weight, I chose to have breast implants. The surgery, whilst extremely painful, went “very well” according to the surgeon.

I was pleased to hear that I could have mine in for the “rest of my life,” so I wouldn’t have to spend any more money on them.

But what I didn’t know is that this was a lie. My surgeon actually gave me extremely dangerous and possibly deadly advice.

The truth is, no implant on the market today can last a lifetime. Every type (each of which I will cover shortly) is prone to leaking and rupturing, and in cases of the saline valve implants, they can even become black with mould, causing a systemic fungal problem in a person’s body.

What women don’t know is that while they may be happier with how their breasts look, they may end up with auto-immune disorders that are so bad they end up in wheelchairs, or develop arthritis, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, and a whole host of other problems.

In the eyes of some plastic surgeons (typically the ones that are cleaning up the damage from implant operations), breast implants are a ticking time bomb that put all women are at risk.

breast-implant-placement-2

Typical Breast Implants Placement

Silicone Breast Implant Scandal

We’ve known from fairly recent history that breast implants have caused serious health problems, but for most of the public, that problem is assumed to be an historic one, and that because those implants were removed from the market, the current implants on the market must be very safe.

While the FDA now openly mentions problems that often occur in many women with breast implants, such as leaking and rupturing, they fail to warn the public about the more dangerous connection to auto-immune disorders.

The FDA actually allowed implants to be put onto the market for over 40 years without formally approving them, so it’s not always wise to trust what they say. (1)

You may remember hearing in the media about the huge lawsuit in the late 90s involving 450,000 American women who took to court Dow Corning, one of the world’s main manufacturers of silicone implants.

While Dow Corning never admitted that their implants were dangerous, they paid out enormous amounts to the victims. Their implants of the 1970s had a very thin outer shell, were “greasy,” and had a high leakage rate. Many women even lost their lives from illness caused by these implants, while waiting for the court to fine Dow.

It was also found that, according to a whistleblower, staff at Dow Corning knew for a very long time that their implants were toxic, yet covered it up for as long as they could.

v18nspea04f07

In their own animal studies, researchers found that silicone could easily leak into the body, and caused tumours in up to 80% of the rats that were being tested on. The numbers were so alarming that the FDA, instead of being concerned, called these studies “erroneous,” which basically means they ‘must’ have been incorrect. The FDA then approved the Dow Corning implants, despite protests from some staff members that there were troubling warning signs.

We’ve also heard about the now infamous French PIP implant scandal that hit worldwide news recently. These implants (which were found to contain toxic chemicals used in mattresses and not approved for human use) are now banned, and women in the UK were offered free treatment to have them removed.

Silicone Implants Now Back on the Market

Despite the huge lawsuits that affected the main silicone manufacturers Dow Corning, Bristol-Myers Scribb, and Baxter Healthcare Corporation (who were sued a whopping 3.7 billion combined), silicone implants are now back in use. They have been added back on the market without adequate long term studies, and the available data on their safety is very concerning.

Shocking Ingredients Found in Dow Silicone Implants

When women are told that their implants contain silicone or saline, they often don’t tend to ask if anything else is being used alongside it. They certainly aren’t told this by the surgeons, who more than likely don’t even know themselves.

Check out the long list of alarming ingredients used in Dow’s silicone implants which came out during their court case when they were forced to disclose what was in their dangerous implants:

  • Methyl ethyl ketone (neurotoxin)
  • Cyclohexanone (neurotoxin)
  • Isopropyl Alcohol
  • Denatured Alcohol
  • Acetone (used in nail polish remover and is a neurotoxin)
  • Urethane
  • Polyvinyl chloride (neurotoxin)
  • Amine
  • Toulene
  • Dicholormethane (carcinogen)
  • Chloromethane
  • Ethyl acetate (neurotoxin)
  • Silicone
  • Sodium fluoride
  • Lead Based Solder
  • Formaldehyde
  • Talcum powder
  • Oakite (cleaning solvent)
  • Methyl 2- Cynanoacrylates
  • Ethylene Oxide (Carcinogen)
  • Xylene (neurotoxin)
  • Hexon
  • 2-Hedanone
  • Thixon-OSN-2
  • Stearic Acid
  • Zinc Oxide
  • Naptha (rubber solvent)
  • Phenol (neurotoxin)
  • Benzene (carcinogen/neurotoxin)
  • Lacquer thinner
  • Epoxy resin
  • Epoxy hardener
  • Printing Ink
  • Metal cleaning acid
  • Colour pigments as release agents
  • Heavy metals such as aluminium (neurotoxin linked to Alzheimer’s and auto immune disorders)
  • Platinium
  • Silica * (2)

It’s frightening, to say the least.

What’s in Implants Today?

The problem we have currently is, we just don’t know. Its very difficult to find out exactly what is in current implants in use today. I cannot find any information that shows a full ingredient list. I have asked plastic surgeons to tell me and they have “never seen a full list.” I have looked at implant websites, and none disclose what is in their products. It seems impossible to find out. The fact that ingredient information is not at all easy to find tells me that the manufacturers might not want us to know.

I asked Dr. Susan Kolb about current ingredients used, and she said, “The above list reflects what was in the silicone implants (not just Dow, but all silicone) at the time of the moratorium. It is possible that the list is still accurate if Dow Corning is still manufacturing the silicone that is used to make the implants.”

Some scientists have been taking an in-depth look at the platinum, a toxic salt, found in silicone implants and its connection to ill health. However, after looking at this list above, it seems ludicrous to suggest that one individual ingredient would be the sole cause of these health problems. It’s clear that breast implants are completely toxic.

Its important to know that saline implants ALL have silicone outer shells, so these too can leak silicone and other ingredients into the body, either through rupturing or when the textured surface flakes off.

Absolutely-Safe-3

One to watch: Absolutely Safe – A documentary on the dangers of implants – click the image to go their website

Types of Breast Implants Used Today

Silicone Implants

Many women opt out of having silicone implants due to the Dow Corning Lawsuit. But a growing number of women are now choosing to have them again due to the implant’s ability to look more natural than other types. These implants have an elastic type envelope that is pre-filled with a sticky, clear, jelly-like form of silicone. There are a few varieties of shapes to choose from, with smooth or textured surfaces.

With the FDA allowing silicone implants to come back on the market, it is very concerning to know that statistics show (according to Nancy Bruning, author of Breast Implants — Everything You Need To Know) that almost half of all women who have this type of implant will experience a rupture within 6-10 years, and one in five women were found to have silicone migrate to other parts of their bodies.

According to Dr. Susan Kolb, world expert on breast implants, silicone implants should be completely avoided.

saline-breast-implant

Saline implants – silicone outer shell, saline liquid inserted during surgery by surgeon

Saline Implants

Saline implants are commonly thought to be safer, yet according to Dr. Kolb, they too have their own problems, which I will cover further on. Saline implants have a silicone shell filled with a saline water, which is salt-based and ‘sterile.’ Some types are inserted empty, which the surgeon will inflate during surgery with this saline liquid. There is another type of saline implant, which also has a silicone shell, but the inside contains a gel-like substance. There are smooth surface saline implants and textured surface saline implants.

According to Nancy Bruning, 60% of women with these types of implants have complications within four years, and one out of five require additional surgery within three years. This is worrisome, since we are commonly told that implants either never need to be removed or should be removed every ten years.

textured-and-saline-breast-implant

Other types of saline implants

Video: Dr. Melmed and the FDA showing a severely ruptured implant

Possible Side Effects After Having Implants Inserted:

This is what your surgeon won’t tell you may happen.

  • tenderness, lumpiness, or discomfort around the implants
  • change in the shape of your breast(s)
  • change in the consistency of your breast, such as increased softness
  • change in the way your breast moves — all of these symptoms may be a sign your implant has ruptured.
  • hardening of breast tissue
  • muscle pain
  • pain and swelling of the joints
  • pain in the soft tissues
  • a burning sensation of pain
  • tightness, redness, or swelling of the skin
  • swollen glands or lymph nodes
  • unusual, extreme, or unexplained fatigue
  • swelling of the hands and feet
  • unusual hair loss
  • rashes
  • skin thickening or hardening
  • dry eyes, mouth, or vagina
  • loss of memory, mental confusion, or ‘fogginess’
  • autoimmune disorders such as fibromyalgia, rheumatoid arthritis, scleroderma, multiple chemical sensitivity disorder, cancer, and biotoxicity problems.

This list was found in the book Breast Implants – All You Need To Know by Nancy Bruning.

Ruptured_silicone_implant

A ruptured silicone implant. The red is tissue that had to be removed from the patient. The sticky consistency on the right is what comes out when ruptures and leakage occur.

“It’s rare that something shocks me. But I sat on the panel in ’92 and that was 11 years ago. How we could have come from 11 years ago, where we were going to collect data, to a point where we have a year’s data simply boggles the mind.”

— FDA Panelist Nancy Dubler in 2003 at the hearings on implant safety

Breast Implants Can Cause Cancer 

It might not surprise some of you reading this to learn that there is a link between cancer and implants. Just recently in France, their National Cancer Institute released a study that found a “clearly established link” between Anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) and breast implants.

French officials have now recommended that breast implants in their country must carry a “cancer warning.”

There is also more evidence to back this connection now that a study conducted by Cambridge University in the UK found that nearly all cases of ALCL were discovered in women who had breast implants.

When you think about how breast implants are inserted — indeed it is quite gory and gruesome surgery — and about the horrific chemicals they are comprised of, it makes sense that they would, of course, pose a cancer risk. And now we have the data to support this.

breastimplantrisks-2-665x1024

Systemic Problems Caused By Mould

Another little-known but very serious problem associated with breast implants is that they can grow mould and bacteria, which can wreak utter havoc on the immune system. This is why Dr. Kolb feels saline implants could be just as dangerous as silicone implants. If you have the saline implants that have a valve — designed to allow the solution to be inserted during surgery — and if that implant is damaged later on due to a car accident, hard bump, or mammogram, serious bacterial and fungal problems, known as “biotoxicity,” can ensue.  Dr. Kolb discussed this with Dr Mercola:

Once the valve is damaged, especially in certain implants, mold and bacteria can grow inside the implant. If the valve damage causes the implant just to deflate, then the woman will go ahead and get it changed out, and she won’t become ill. But in some implants, the valve injury does not cause the fluid to leak out, but can allow bacteria and especially mold and fungus inside the implant.

I’ve had patients who have had inside the saline in this implant a mold called pennicillium growing. Whenever somebody hugged them too hard or even [due to] breast exams … the patient can become very ill, specifically because she was allergic to penicillin. She would have an anaphylactic-type reaction whenever her implant was manipulated. It can be very, very serious.

… In general, women who have this … bacterial and mold infection in their chest are deathly ill. The mold produces a biotoxin that’s also a neurotoxin. Many of my women come in in wheelchairs. They come in with the diagnosis of MS and lupus together. Fortunately, they have neither.

But some of them are incredibly ill. They have severe mental clouding. They can’t even have a conversation. They can’t hold their head up … Many doctors have said they’re going to die, but of course, they find me and come in.

implant_infected

An originally clear implant which turned black with mould

Video: Breast Implants Can Poison Body With Black Mould

Suicide Risk

Another little known factor about breast implants is that there is a connection to suicide. While this connection might be more about the woman’s mental status prior to having the surgery (perhaps she suffered from low self esteem and thought implants would make her much happier), it could also be because of the stressful impact the implants have on the body and its many important systems. As we have seen above, implants are linked to neurological disorders, amongst other concerns.

Women who have implants are at least three (some sources say four) times more likely to commit suicide than those who do not have them.

Doctors Who Say “Absolutely Safe” Profit From Breast Implants

Sadly, most surgeons will tell unsuspecting women that breast implants are very safe. With the FDA only really focusing on rupture or leakage problems, then this too also makes the surgeons think the problems are only in one main area.

Perhaps many of them are in denial. They simply do not want to believe that implants are in fact dangerous, can cause cancer, and trigger immune problems in many women. They probably have never looked into it further than what the FDA tells them.

Let us not forget that most plastic surgeons make the majority of their money from this increasingly popular operation. Who wants to be told that something that earns them hundreds of thousands of dollars a year may in fact be incredibly harmful to their patients?

Check out this video below from a wealthy American plastic surgeon, Dana Goldberg, who went out of her way to make a YouTube video saying that “breast implants are safe and that there is no cancer risk” and that the information going around is just “scaremongering.”

Plastic Surgeon Dana Goldberg’s “Breast Implants Are Safe” Video

I personally would worry that any concerns I raised with her or a surgeon like her would be dismissed.

Breast Implant Studies

It may come as no surprise to discover that most of the breast implant studies that ‘prove’ the safety of this procedure come from the manufacturers themselves. Diana Zuckerman, Ph.D, was involved in more than a dozen congressional investigations (in the 90s) that discussed breast implant safety (and its serious lack thereof). She raised questions about the huge lack of safety data about implants. This is what I found in Nancy Brunning’s book Breast Implants – Everything You Need To Know:

The poor quality of these studies is why I keep saying we don’t know whether implants are safe over the long term, because the studies were not well enough designed to be persuasive. The information on the IOM panel studied was based on studies that had substantial flaws. There was no federally funded research until recently. Virtually all research done was paid for by the manufacturers or plastic surgeons, and, not surprisingly, their research found that implants were safe. If the only research on cancer and smoking we had was funded by Philip Morris, we would still be listening to the scientists who were saying there’s an association but that doesn’t mean causation.

There have been federally funded studies into longer term safety about breast implants. One of them, which was the first study to ever follow women with ruptured implants, was conducted by the FDA. The researchers found that the women who had this problem were more likely to report also having fibromyalgia or other “potentially fatal” autoimmune diseases or related illnesses such as dermatomyositis, hashimotos thyroiditis, polymyaligia and polyositis, and pulmonary fibrosis. This was because the silicone gel had migrated from the scar tissue into the body. (2)

Another two separate studies, both of which were conducted by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), found the following alarming information: Women who had breast implants, compared to other plastic surgery operations, were three times more likely to die from cancer of the lung or suffer with emphysema or pneumonia. They were also twice as likely to die from brain cancer.  (3)

The other study by NCI found that women with implants experienced a 21% increased cancer risk. These types were mainly brain cancers, cervical cancer, leukaemia, vulvar cancer, and respiratory cancer. This often fatal lung-disease connection is from ruptured implants causing an increased incidence of lung disease. (4)

While there has been an improvement in the quality of studies, we cannot guarantee that they are all being done accurately. More recently, in 2013, Dr. Zuckerman released a statement regarding the FDA’s quiet approval (which did not have a public Advisory Committee meeting to discuss data, unlike other breast implant approvals) of a new type of silicone implant called Natrelle 410, manufactured by the company Allergen. This is part of what she wrote:

Unfortunately, Allergan has not done a good job of doing post-market studies once their implants have been approved. And, even if they do these studies, by the time these studies are done to find out what the risks are, hundreds of thousands of women could have these inadequately studied devices in their bodies, and could have been harmed by them.

The FDA even admits that Allergan’s own studies didn’t compare the effectiveness and safety of their new implant to other previously approved silicone gel-filled implants on the market.

Not very reassuring, is it? Other studies have been performed to examine what happens to some of the autoimmune disorders and other unwanted symptoms after the implants are removed or have not been removed.

97% of women reported vast improvement after removal, and in the 96% that did not have them removed, their symptoms worsened.

I think it’s safe to say, at least in my own opinion, that breast implants are simply a danger to the body.

Mammograms Can Rupture Breast Implants

Mammography

Mammogram on a patient without implants – note how squashed the tissue is. How would this be okay for a breast in general, let alone ones filled with implants?

If you have implants, you need to be aware that having mammograms can actually do serious damage to them. Because the procedure involves intense squashing down of the breast tissue, it has been known to cause ruptures, and if the implants do begin to leak, what is inside them will likely leak into your body.

Video: A lady’s experience with ruptured implants caused by mammogram 

It must be said that there is also alarming information that mammograms are not safe to have, even if you don’t have implants.

Video: Dr. Mercola interviews world renowned expert on the dangers of implants Dr. Susan Kolb, MD., F.A.C.S., A.B.I.H.M, who is also the author of The Naked Truth About Breast Implants 

Is There a Safe Implant?

If you absolutely must get implants, then according to breast implant expert Dr. Susan Kolb, the safest type is the saline implant that has a smooth surface and does not have a valve. This is because the textured implants have been found to have particles flake off into the person’s body, which can then attack the immune system. And if there is a valve, as mentioned previously, a systemic fungal infection can ensue. But even with this type, problems can happen down the road. I personally believe there is no such thing as a safe implant.

Checking Up on Your Implants

A good way to check up on your implants is to use ultrasound testing.

If you already have implants, I’d be willing to wager that, like myself, you were never told to have them checked for leakage or problems every few years. But this is what we should have been told.

There are a few ways to monitor any possible problems. The first is by ultrasound and the second is by MRI scans. Both of these can pick up on ruptures and leaking. I would personally go for the ultrasound, as MRIs have their own risks, too. I urge you to consider having checkups done so you can keep an eye on how they are doing inside your body.

And, I am very sorry to say this, but even checkups can not give you a guarantee that the implants are not causing you problems. Some women who developed auto-immune reactions to their implants had them checked and scans were ‘all clear.’ Because tiny particles can flake off and the chemicals they are made of can be easily absorbed by the body, the scan’s aren’t able to tell you the full story.

2AD151B900000578-3173992-image-a-4_1437780342136

Reality TV star and wife of music genius David Foster, Yolanda Foster has had her breast implants removed. She is also suffering from Lyme disease.

Removal Process: Difficult, Risky, and Surgeons Often Have Not Done Many Correctly

If you decide to have your implants taken out, it might not be as simple as you would like to think. If you have health problems associated with your implants, such as leakage or mould, you will need a surgeon who is highly skilled in the removal process. Dr. Kolb was interviewed by Dr. Mercola about this:

I would advise people to ask a surgeon how many explantation surgeries they’ve done. Unlike putting implants in, taking them out is very technically difficult, especially if they’re under the muscle. There can be a very thin layer of tissue between the lung and the capsule. You have to know how to do this correctly, or you can get what we call pneumothorax or entering into the chest cavity, which is where you’re not supposed to be.

Surgeons who have not done at least 50 explantations do not know about all the different things you might encounter, and are not comfortable removing the entire capsule. They probably should not be doing the surgery. Leaving the capsule behind is quite dangerous in terms of the patient not getting well. There is not only silicone in that scar capsule, but there’s a biofilm of bacteria, fungi, and other elements we don’t know. Biofilm is very difficult to treat with anything other than surgery, and women simply don’t get well.

Many surgeons don’t use drains. Surgeons not using drains are not good because that fluid needs to drain out because after all, fluid in the chest wall is a nice warm, dark space that can grow fungus. It can grow bacteria. Women often become way more ill after surgery because their surgeons gave them antibiotics without giving them antifungals. I tell all my patients, “For the rest of your life, you’re going to need to take antifungals whenever you take antibiotics.” And it’s so true.

You must also be aware (and rarely do the surgeons stress this to you) that when you sign up to have implants, they must be changed every 8-10 years so that they remain in the “best and safest” condition.  

I was personally told by my clinic in Europe that mine would “last a lifetime.” I was also told they were so robust that they would not burst and could even have a car driven over them! I now feel very cheated knowing this is dangerous and highly incorrect advice.  

What they should have said to me is this: “All breast implants will eventually break, but it is not known how many years the breast implants that are currently on the market will last. Studies of silicone breast implants suggest that most implants last seven to 12 years, but some break during the first few months or years, while others last more than 15 years.” (5)

If you are contemplating having implants, it’s wise to think realistically about the longterm cost of breast implants, as they are not just a one-time procedure. If you are to do it as ‘safely’ as possible, and have them replaced every decade or so, then you could be looking at spending tens of thousands of dollars over a lifetime. Can you really afford this, or the care that is needed if something goes wrong?

You must also remember that there are no guarantees that they will even be safe for those ten years — you could run into problems months or even a few short years after initial implantation.

You’ve got to ask yourself, is it really worth all that money, pain, and possible risks to your health?

Getting Them Out May Not Be Immediately Possible 

As someone who has implants myself (I have entered into my 9th year, which is now creeping right into the danger period of when problems can occur), it’s incredibly frightening to have this knowledge, and of course as soon as I did this research, I wanted them taken out immediately.

However, just like having many mercury fillings in your mouth — and realizing you want them removed immediately yet can’t afford to — removing implants with a skilled surgeon is a very costly procedure and has to be done by someone highly qualified (who might not be that easy to find).  

And if, like me, you also don’t have the money, it becomes extremely difficult to just suddenly decide, “I am going to have them out ASAP.”

Personally, I have two problems right now: One is a lack of funds, and the other is that even if I had the money, I am soon to be expecting my second child in just a few weeks’ time, so I now cannot possibly have them removed, as I want to breastfeed.

Worryingly, information is now emerging that mothers having breast implants may be risking the health of their children!

Baby-breast-feeding

As discussed in the article “What You Need To Know About Breast Implants,” the authors wrote about the concerns with breastfeeding and toxicity:

According to the Institute of Medicine (IOM), women with any kind of breast surgery, including breast implant surgery, are at least three times as likely to have an inadequate milk supply for breastfeeding. Concerns about the safety of breast milk have also been raised, but there has not been enough research to resolve this issue. A study of a small number of women with silicone gel breast implants found that the offspring born and breastfed after the mother had breast implants had higher levels of a toxic form of platinum in their blood than offspring born before the same women had breast implants.

I’m taking measures to decrease my toxic load until I have my implants removed, yet I still worry about what I could be doing to the health of my daughter and any future babies. I will be testing both my children for heavy metals and ensuring they are on a very good diet and supplement protocol.

11060470_1571070396510923_4839663338610845104_n

Actress Jennifer Connelly, another celebrity who is rumoured to have had their implants taken out. She is much thinner in the right picture but the breast size difference seems to be more than just losing weight.

Research Thoroughly Before You Decide

Before I had my operation, I spent hours trying to find the ‘right’ clinic and surgeon. But none of my research involved looking at this other, darker side to breast implant surgery. If only I had looked into this more before I made such a serious decision.

Perhaps I never looked into this side because my vanity took precedence over safety. Even with this alarming information I have presented, many women may still want to ignore it because the thought of having their implants taken out — and what that will do to their self esteem — worries them more than these health risks.

“Dr Frank Vasey suggests that the cosmetic and psychological benefits of implants are so powerful that they keep women in denial, reluctant to even consider the possibility that in order to get healthy, they may have to give up their implants. I find this true even when we experience definite physical symptoms such as pain, tightness, and hardness. Most of us love(d) our implants. We got them because we wanted them; we were willing to undergo surgery for them – some of us many times. Symptoms, no matter how severe, have a tough time outweighing the desire to be whole again or to fulfil our society’s standard of beauty.”

– Nancy Bruning 

Ladies, if you want bigger breasts because you don’t think what you have is good enough, please think very carefully about having breast implants for just that reason. They may end up causing you much more trouble than they’re worth. 

There may well be a place for breast implants, especially for those who have suffered breast cancer or serious disfigurement, and as I have covered previously, there is a type of implant that is thought to be the ‘safest,’ but even then, these implants may in fact put women’s lives at further risk.

These women would need to regularly check that their implants were not leaking or have ruptured and it would also mean getting them replaced within the specified time. They would also really need to gauge their health and see how they feel as time goes on. 

Please check out Susan’s nightmarish experience, which is still affecting her health today. Below is a picture of her recently-removed implants.

10408693_516470035186407_6632726130872222195_n

Susan’s implants, which were removed back in April this year. The one on the left was so ‘jelly like’ it had to be scraped off her ribs. The right one, although it looks quite normal, actually had a small rupture too. The red tissue is what the surgeon also had to remove to ensure all the silicone was gone.

003poshDM2711_468x467

Victoria Beckham is amongst many celebrities who have had their obviously fake implants removed. Doesn’t she look so much better?

The Urgency to Change Society’s Obsession With Appearance

As a society, it is urgent that we stop making women (and young girls especially) feel they are less than perfect if they don’t measure up to the air-brushed models and celebrities we see in magazines. Living in our superficial world today is much more challenging for young people, who are growing up seeing so much emphasis placed on looks; it’s no wonder that they have such low self esteem and often think, “If only I were prettier, richer, famous, had bigger boobs — then I would be much happier.”

We’ve got to somehow stop our children and teens from becoming narcissistic and obsessed with beauty. We need people to see what breasts are really for, and that is for feeding children. They have become so sexualized that we have collectively forgotten their purpose.

It’s great to see many famous celebrities opting to have their implants taken out. I am sure you might agree with me that they look much better with their natural, smaller breasts.

Why do we want to mess with our breasts (and our bodies in general), cause unnecessary stress on our health, and risk developing cancer and debilitating autoimmune disorders, just so we can look better?

scarlett-johansson-breast-reduction

Actress Scarlett-Johansson, who is rumoured to have had her breast implants taken out. Another person who looks better without them!

“No one told me there were risks in having implants. I was young and did not think having foreign objects in my body could cause any problems. I was wrong. My breast implants started to cause me a lot of pain and then they ruptured. I became extremely sick and at first didn’t know why.

As I look back 15 years ago, the year I got my saline implants under my muscle, I had many health issues. I had my gallbladder out due to illness, a staph infection & a terrible flu. Was it all due to the fact that my immune system was compromised because of these foreign objects called implants?

No one warned me. I am lucky that I came across information about the dangers of breast implants. My original surgeon said that they were not the cause of my problems. He was wrong. There is evidence out there to prove their is a connection. There needs to be information given to every woman out there.

How many women right now are suffering similar problems yet are being told it’s all in their head. Women who undergone mastectomies and have implants after having breast cancer often have no idea that putting these chemically based products into their bodies CAN CAUSE further health problems.”

– Leigh, Laguna Beach, CA

If you’d like to join my Facebook group, called Breast Implants — The Ticking Time Bomb, please click here: 

References and further research resources:

51T+wzx3TdL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_

(1) FDA Allowed Implants Onto Market Without FDA Formal Approval

(2),(3),(4) Breast Implants – Everything You Need To Know by Nancy Bruning

(5) The Naked Truth About Breast Implants, Kolb S 2010.

 

Further Research:

Video: Breast Implants & Health Problems with Dr. Ed Melmed on Know The Cause 

Books: The Naked Truth About Breast Implants by Susan Kolb MD

Breast Implants – Everything You Need To Know by Nancy Bruning

Helpful Websites:

History of Breast Implants
www.humanticsfoundation.com
www.breastimplantinfo.org
What The FDA Says About Implants (mentions ruptures and the need to replace them, but nothing about autoimmune disorders)

Explant Website

Articles:

Breast implants and cancer
What You Need To Know About Implants
Explant Breast Implant Removal
Breast Implant Ruptures
Breast Implant Horror, Leaky, Scarring, Black With Mold 

Support Groups:
Breast Implant Removal & Detox

World Wide: List Of Highly Skilled Explant Surgeons

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Awareness

Cancer is Now the Leading Cause of Death

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Cancer has surpassed heart disease as the No. 1 cause of death in high-income countries, highlighting the urgent need to change the way this disease is prevented and treated.

  • Reflect On:

    Rather than being a random result of DNA mutations, it's possible that cancer could have much deeper roots that would be better targeted with natural therapies than toxicity.

This article was written by the Greenmedinfo Research Group, originally published by Greenmedinfo.com. Published here with permission. 

Cancer has dethroned heart disease to earn the nefarious title of leading cause of death in high-income and certain middle-income countries.[i] While heart disease remains the No. 1 cause of death globally among adults aged 35 to 70, in high-income countries, which included Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Canada and Sweden, cancer caused twice as many deaths as heart disease.[ii]

Some middle-income countries, which included the Philippines, Iran, South Africa, Colombia, China, Brazil, Malaysia, Turkey, Poland, Argentina and Chile, also saw cancer become the leading cause of death.

While the U.S. was not included in the new analysis, research published in 2018 suggested, “the United States is in the midst of an epidemiologic transition in the leading cause of death,” moving from heart disease to cancer.[iii]

That study, too, found that cancer was quickly outpacing heart disease as the top killer, with high-income counties transitioning first. In fact, while only 21% of U.S. counties had cancer as the leading cause of death in 2003, this rose to 41% in 2015.

“The shift to cancer as the leading cause of death was greatest in the highest-income counties,” the researchers explained,[iv] echoing the current study, which also cited “a transition in the predominant causes of deaths in middle-age” in high-income countries.[v]

advertisement - learn more

“The world is witnessing a new epidemiologic transition among the different categories of noncommunicable diseases, with CVD [cardiovascular disease] no longer the leading cause of death in HIC [high-income countries],” lead author Dr. Gilles Dagenais, professor emeritus, Laval University, Quebec, Canada, said in a statement.[vi]

Why is Cancer a Top Killer?

The study suggested cancer is rising to the top because heart disease is better treated in high-income countries, saving more lives from heart disease and paving the way for cancer deaths to flourish. But perhaps a better question is why cancer continues to kill so many.

Even globally, cancer still comes in as the second leading cause of death behind heart disease, responsible for 26% of deaths worldwide.[vii] In the U.S., Americans have a 1 in 3 risk of developing cancer at some point in their lifetimes, along with a 1 in 5 risk of dying from the disease.[viii]

In early 2019, it was announced that cancer death rates in the U.S. declined 27% since 1991,[ix] a statistic that makes it seem as though we’re winning the “war on cancer.” But most of these declines can be attributed to reductions in smoking — and perhaps a limited measure of increased early detection and treatment — and are not a sign that conventional medicine’s model of surgerychemotherapy and/or radiation to treat cancer is, on the whole, working.

While death rates from certain cancer have declined, others have increased. Overall, cancer deaths in the U.S. in 2016 were similar to those in 1930[x] — despite all the “advances” in detection and treatment.

Changing the Way We Think About Cancer

It’s becoming increasingly clear that in order to conquer cancer, it’s necessary to change the way we think about it. Cancer is found in virtually all animals, suggesting it has evolutionary significance.[xi] It’s possible that cancer is an ancient survival program unmasked — even a process the body undergoes in order to survive nutrient deprivation and exposure to toxins.

Rather than being the result of an accumulation of DNA mutations that create rogue cells that multiply out of control, cancer could be cells that have flipped an epigenetic switch into survival mode in the form of a tumor. In the journal Physical Biology, researchers theorized:[xii]

“[C]ancer is an atavistic [primitive] condition that occurs when genetic or epigenetic malfunction unlocks an ancient ‘toolkit’ of pre-existing adaptations, re-establishing the dominance of an earlier layer of genes that controlled loose-knit colonies of only partially differentiated cells, similar to tumors.”

If this is true, it makes sense that conventional cancer treatments aimed to poison or “kill” the cancerous cells may only make the problem worse by creating an even more toxic environment, which could trigger the cancer to reach back into its “ancient toolkit” to find additional means of survival.

This explanation may be overly simplistic, as there are many factors that contribute to cancer, but there is evidence to suggest that natural substances and therapies that support the body’s overall health can be useful in the fight against cancer.

Nearly 1,000 Natural Substances Have Anti-Cancer Potential

GreenMedInfo has a database of 986 substances that have been researched as potential cancer prevention and treatment strategies. There are undoubtedly many more out there that have yet to be discovered. At the top of the list is curcumin, the active ingredient in the curry spice turmeric, which targets cancer stem cells while leaving normal stem cells unharmed.[xiii]

Another top contender is vitamin D, which you can get for free from adequate sun exposure. Higher vitamin D levels are not only known to lower your cancer risk but also to improve outcomes if you’ve already been diagnosed.[xiv] Fiberresveratrolsulforaphane and vitamin E — all substances you can get from your diet — also show anti-cancer promise, as does coffee, perhaps because it improves the body’s ability to efficiently repair DNA damage.[xv]

So if there was one silver lining to the news that cancer is now the leading cause of death in some countries, it would be that it’s a condition that has many promising natural avenues for prevention and treatment. Current conventional cancer treatments are failing, but that doesn’t mean cancer is unstoppable — it means it’s time to broaden our research into and usage of traditional therapies.

Many natural substances, like noni leaf,[xvi] have even been shown to work better than chemotherapy, highlighting why, if we’re going to win the war against cancer, we’re going to need to do it with nature on our side.

For more on how to naturally fight Cancer, visit the GreenMedInfo database on the subject.

Originally published: 2019-09-14

Article Updated: 2019-11-05

References

[i] The Lancet September 3, 2019

[ii] CNN September 3, 2019

[iii] Annals of Internal Medicine December 18, 2018

[iv] Annals of Internal Medicine December 18, 2018

[v] The Lancet September 3, 2019

[vi] Medscape September 3, 2019

[vii] Medscape September 3, 2019

[viii] American Cancer Society, Lifetime Risk of Developing or Dying From Cancer

[ix] CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians January 8, 2019

[x] CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians January 8, 2019

[xi] Front. Oncol., 10 January 2019

[xii] Physical Biology February 7, 2011

[xiii] Anticancer Res. 2015 Feb ;35(2):599-614.

[xiv] Br J Cancer. 2017 Mar 16. Epub 2017 Mar 16.

[xv] J Nutrigenet Nutrigenomics. 2015 ;8(4-6):174-84.

[xvi] Mol Cell Biochem. 2016 Apr 22. Epub 2016 Apr 22.


For more info from Greenmedinfo, you can join their newsletter by clicking here.

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Awareness

Man Fasts For 382 Days Straight & Loses 276 Pounds

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Angus Barbieri, a man who, in June of 1965, began a fast under medical supervision for exactly 382 days. He remained completely healthy for the duration of the fast.

  • Reflect On:

    Today, it's firmly established in scientific literature that fasting can have tremendous benefits, if done correctly. It can also be used to treat a variety of diseases. Perhaps it's not emphasized because you can't make money off of not eating?

A study published in the Post Graduate Medical Journal in 1972 brought more attention to a gentleman by the name of Angus Barbieri, a man who, in June of 1965, began a fast under medical supervision for exactly 382 days and, at the time the study was published, had since maintained his ordinary weight. In his case, “prolonged fasting had no ill effects.” Barbieri’s weight decreased from 456 to 180 pounds during the fast.

This isn’t the only example that’s available in the literature, it’s similar to an earlier patient prior to Barbieri who reduced his weight from 432 to 235 pounds during 350 days of intermittent fasting (Stewart, Fleming & Robertson, 1966). Researchers have also fasted patients for 256 days (Collison, 1967, 1971), 249 and 236 days (Thomson et al., 1966) as well as  210 days (Garnett et al., 1969; Runcie & Thomson, 1970), all of which are cited in the 1972 study.

Since the publication of this time, there are many documented examples of prolonged fasting done by highly obese people. Here’s one recent example of a man who fasted for 50 straight days, while being medically supervised and tested the whole time.

When you fast, your body switches from burning glucose, to burning fat. Fasting lowers insulin levels which allows the body to access its fat stores for energy. When you eat, food is converted into glucose and that’s what we usually burn. This is why fasting has become a therapeutic intervention for many people with type two diabetes, and more doctors, like Dr. Jason Fung, a Toronto Based nephrologist, are having great success with utilizing fasting as an appropriate and necessary health intervention. Fung has many great articles regarding the science of fasting, you can access them here if you’re interested in learning more. This article references some of the leading scientists in the field so you can learn more by looking them up as well.

The graph below depicts what happens to your protein while fasting. Interesting isn’t it? People often believe that if you fast, you will experience a tremendous amount of muscle loss during fasting, but that’s simply not true. This graph is from Kevin Hall, from the NIH in the book “Comparative Physiology of Fasting, Starvation, and Food Limitation.”

“It seems that there are always concerns about loss of muscle mass during fasting. I never get away from this question. No matter how many times I answer it, somebody always asks, “Doesn’t fasting burn your muscle?” Let me say straight up, NO.”  – source Dr. Jason Fung

advertisement - learn more

But what about Angus Barbieri? Obviously we’re not saying long term fasts for this long are healthy, obviously for many people they will probably be unhealthy and unsafe unless medically supervised. In  the 1972 study doctors measured a number of concentrations within the body. For example, plasma potassium concentrations over the first four months decreased systematically. As a result, they provided a very small daily dose that increased his potassium level. After another 10 weeks, no potassium was given, and from there on in until the end of the fast, plasma potassium levels remained normal. Cholesterol concentrations also remained around 230 mg/ 100 ml until 300 days of fasting, but increased to 370 mg/100 ml during refeeding.

Plasma magnesium levels decreased over the first few weeks of the fast but then went up and stabilized. This is interesting to note as there is nothing going into the body, yet levels still stabilized after the initial decrease.

Normal plasma magnesium concentrations, despite magnesium ‘depletion’ in muscle tissue, have been described (Drenick et al., 1969) during short-term fasting (1-3 months). The only other relevant report is a remark (Runcie & Thomson, 1970) that one patient who fasted 71 days had a normal plasma magnesium level of 2-2 mEq/l at the time when she developed latent tetany. The decrease in the plasma magnesium concentration of our patient was systematic and persistent.

Furthermore:

The excretion of sodium, potassium, calcium and inorganic phosphate decreased to low levels throughout the first 100 days, but thereafter the excretion of all four urinary constituents, as well as of magnesium, began to increase. During the subsequent 200 days sodium excretion, previously between 2 and 20 mEq daily, reached over 80 mEq/24 hr, potassium excretion increased to 30-40 mEq daily and calcium excretion increased from 10-30 mg/24 hr to 250- 280 mg/24 hr. Magnesium excretion (which was not measured during the first 100 days) reached 10 mEq/ 24 hr between Days 200-300. Phosphate excretion, which had decreased to under 200 mg/24 hr, also increased to around 800 mg/24 hr, even exceeding 1000 mg/24 hr on occasion. Peak excretions of all these constituents were seen around Day 300, after which there was a marginal decrease, but excretion remained high.

Obviously, this is an extreme fast and such fasts have only been tested on people of tremendous obesity, and it shows that people with a high body fat percentage have the ability to fast longer simply because their body has more stores to pull from.

The study concluded in 1972 that:

We have found, like Munro and colleagues (1970), that prolonged supervised therapeutic starvation of the obese patient can be a safe therapy, which is also effective if the ideal weight is reached. There is, however, likely to be occasionally a risk in some individuals, attributable to failures in different aspects of the adaptative response to fasting. Until the characteristics of these variations in response are identified, and shown to be capable of detection in their prodromal stages, extended starvation therapy must be used cautiously. In our view, unless unusual hypokalaemia is seen, potassium supplements are not mandatory. Xanthine oxidase inhibitors (or uricosuric agents) are not always necessary and could even be potentially harmful (British Medical Journal, 1971) perhaps particularly in the long-term fasting situation.

It’s almost 2020, and the literature, studies and research that’s been published since 1972 is vast. We’ve learned a lot more about it and if done correctly it can be extremely beneficial. Shot term fasting  presents minimal to no health risks, and so does long term fasting that lasts more than 24 hours, that is unless a person already has an underlying condition. That being said, it’s not easy to start. Most people are used to eating three meals plus snacks every single day, therefore they are never adapted to burning their fat stores, something that appears the human body was meant to do.

“Why is it that the normal diet is three meals a day plus snacks? It isn’t that it’s the healthiest eating pattern, now that’s my opinion but I think there is a lot of evidence to support that. There are a lot of pressures to have that eating pattern, there’s a lot of money involved. The food industry — are they going to make money from skipping breakfast like I did today? No, they’re going to lose money. If people fast, the food industry loses money. What about the pharmaceutical industries? What if people do some intermittent fasting, exercise periodically and are very healthy, is the pharmaceutical industry going to make any money on healthy people?” – Mark Mattson (source)

Fasting has also been shown to be effective as a therapeutic intervention for cancer. Fasting protects healthy cells while ‘starving’ cancer cells, it’s now being used as an intervention that’s being combined with chemotherapy. Fasting has also been shown to greatly reduce the risk of age related diseases like Parkinson’s Disease, and Alzheimer’s disease. Mark Mattson, one of the foremost researchers of the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying multiple neurodegenerative disorders has shown through his work that fasting can have a tremendous effect on the brain, and can even reverse the symptoms of multiple neurodegenerative disorders. You can watch his interesting TED talk here.  Scientists have also discovered strong evidence that fasting is a natural intervention for triggering stem cell-based regeneration of an entire organ or system.

Fasting has actually long been known to have an effect on the brain. Children who suffer from epileptic seizures have fewer of them when placed on caloric restriction or fasts. It is believed that fasting helps kick-start protective measures that help counteract the overexcited signals that epileptic brains often exhibit.  (source)

The list goes on and is quite long. At the end of the day if you do your research, fasting, under proper medical supervision, can have tremendous health benefits that go far beyond what’s mentioned in the paragraph above. Every single study that has looked at fasting as a therapeutic intervention for several diseases has shown nothing but positive benefits. Even studies conducted regarding caloric restriction, something completely different than fasting, have shown promising results in all animal models.

According to a review of fasting literature conducted in 2003, “Calorie restriction (CR) extends life span and retards age-related chronic diseases in a variety of species, including rats, mice, fish, flies, worms, and yeast. The mechanism or mechanisms through which this occurs are unclear.” Since this study was published, a great amount of research has been conducted from many researchers, and the mechanisms are being discovered and have become more clear. If you want to further your research, apart from the names listed above, Dr. Valter Longo and his research is another great place to start.

The body has a tremendous amount of storage, and it hangs on to what it needs during a fast, and uses up ‘bad’ things, repairs damaged cells, and more. When you fast and deplete all your glycogen, your body is going to start using fat for energy, it’s going to use damaged cells for energy, it’s basically going to use all of the bad things first, before it gets to the good thing…Your body will not burn protein, as protein is not a fuel source while fasting.

I bring this up because it’s interesting to see what the body loses and hangs on to during a fast.

The Takeaway

The truth about fasting is that it’s not dangerous at all. Intermittent fasting and short term fasting can be done by just about anybody. From what we’ve seen with regards to prolonged fasting, it’s also not very dangerous when it comes to obese people doing it under medically supervised conditions. Theoretically, based on the science alone, any relatively healthy human being should be able to do a prolonged fast without any harmful consequences.

Obviously, prolonged fasts that are not medically supervised can be very detrimental. We are obviously not recommending this and you must do a lot of research and talk to your doctor if you’re interested in fasting, before trying it. For starters, a little bit of intermittent fasting here and there is a no brainer, and not dangerous at all if you have no underlying health conditions, but everybody’s body is different.

Fasting is making a lot of noise, and has been making a lot of noise within the health community, but it’s still not appropriately taught and used by the mainstream medical industry. Why is this so? The answer is simple, you can’t make money off of fasting.

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Thousands Gather To Mark The 33rd Anniversary of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act

Published

on

Government’s gift to Pharma of liability-free vaccines puts children’s health at risk states Children’s Health Defense (CHD) Chairman, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Washington, DC – Thousands of advocates for children’s health will gather Thursday at the Vaccine Injury Epidemic (VIE) Event on the National Mall to mark the 33rd anniversary of National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA). The rally on Nov. 14th will spotlight the devastating impact NCVIA has had upon the state of children’s health. While children continue to be injured by vaccines daily, vaccine makers cannot be held accountable, thereby eliminating incentive for vaccine safety.

In his remarks, RFK, Jr. will address the ramifications of NCVIA and honor those whose lives have been impacted by vaccine injury and death. “It’s time to call out Congress, the CDC, and drug companies for allowing industry profits to trump children’s health,” said Kennedy. “There is no crisis more urgent than the epidemics of chronic health conditions among our nation’s children.”

Following NCVIA’s passage creating the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), the childhood vaccine market sparked a gold rush for Pharma as more vaccines for routine childhood illnesses were developed. Coterminous with the burgeoning vaccine schedule, chronic health conditions in children rose from 12% to 54%. As vaccine industry profits grew to $50 billion annually, so did diagnoses of asthmaautismADHDallergiesanxietydepressiondiabetesobsessive-compulsive disorder and auto-immune diseases.  Here are the facts:

  • An HHS-funded study found only 1% of vaccine injuries are reported.
  • Despite NVICP’s high burden of proof and two out of three claims dismissed, over $4.2 billion has been paid for claims of vaccine injury or death.
  • The vaccine-injured find NVICP to be a years-long, litigious program with no jury, discovery and precedent. While medical bills mount, the injured are up against DOJ lawyers and HHS “Special Masters” that act as judges.
  • The Department of Justice and the NVICP are accused of fraud and obstruction of justice in the Autism Omnibus Proceeding.
  • The Institute of Medicine reports that the vaccine schedule as recommended has never been studied for long-term health effects despite independent research suggesting that unvaccinated children are healthier.
  • Modern medicine acknowledges that not everyone responds the same to vaccination and the “one size fits all” vaccine policy is not science based.

Children’s Health Defense’s created these six steps to vaccine safety. RFK, Jr. interviews are available upon request.

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

advertisement - learn more

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod

Censorship is hiding us from you.

Get breaking conscious news articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!