Robert Whitfield MD discusses implanted device risks including genetic differences in how bodies detoxify, immune system distraction, infection, and silicone rupture. He emphasizes the need for informed consent before surgery and the importance of removing failed implants.
Now, why is that? Well, genetically, they already don't detox well, and they have a device in place that furthers a distraction to their immunity. You can see how the balance will get off much more quickly in those patients.
So given all of that, what do you wish was being said in that very first consult? I would love to see a summary of what you just shared. Like, hey, this is important. This over. You have informed consent, but is there any other piece that you think must be said in that initial consult in order to have real informed consent?
Right. I think overall I would do it the same way that actually I was taught, like, any device can get infected. It's not meant to be a lifetime device. And if it it's a silicone device, it can rupture. And because it's silicone, not saline, it's not going to deflate. It's going to potentially migrate and affect the other tissues. It's not supposed to be as big of an issue because it's cohesive and more like jello rather than syrup. But still, if a woman with breast cancer reconstruction came in with a ruptured implant, I of course, would get her on the schedule to get it taken care of, because you don't leave broken things in people. A broken knee or a broken hip implant isn't left in someone. You wouldn't be able to walk. So we shouldn't be leaving broken devices in anybody for any amount of time. That's unwarranted.
