Silicone bounces back
After being driven off the market by the FDA in 1992 after bogus scares connecting them with connective tissue diseases, silicone breast implants might be poised for a comeback, the Los Angeles Times reports today. The Times article provides a decent quick overview of the tangled history and debunked science behind the silicone scare. Reason's former editor Virginia Postrel explained why this issue is important back in our January 1996 issue.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Interesting commentary by Ms. Postrel. I maintain that a woman should be happy with the body that God gave her or, if she is not happy with it, she should do things within the realm of nature (i.e. eat more natural foods, get more physical exercise) to improve upon it. Silicon implants have always represented the pinnacle of low self-esteem.
yeah most guys prefer real, not sure but i think there are studiest that have proven it
I guess I've always had to wonder why some men think breast size is such a huge determining factor in a woman's attractiveness. Isn't it really a package deal.
Guess I'm just a "New Millenium" kinda guy.
Just make sure the fake breasts don't include cyclamates.
I guess I'd subscribe to the 'package deal' approach as well. It is kind of ridiculous to see a petite, tiny woman get huge implants. The artificialness of it is apparent. I also tend to appreciate the variety of shapes women's bodies come in naturally; it would be a shame if they all used scientific enhancement to look like Barbie dolls.
That being said, I can see instances where someone wouldn't have to be a shallow, attention-starved or emotionally immature to want breast implants. Some women who are very underdeveloped and have always been self-conscious about it may want them just to be normal sized so they feel more confident, whether for meeting men or just for their own self-image. Also, women who have had mastectomies for breast cancer often benefit from this technology to make them look 'normal' again.
Grown-ups should be able to do whatever they want, but I find implants grotesque myself.
When done tastefully I think they can look great. If a responsible adult wants to have plastic surgery I say go for it.
I've got a secret - this beer gut of mine isn't real - it is a silicon implant to make me look more at home with the men at the corner bar.
What? For the record: implants look great, tattoos and body piercing look awful.
The implant scare not only took down Dow Chemical, but under some theory of liability, reached Dow Corning which had nothing to do with silicone. I think we have reached the point where most judges and nearly all jurors cannot contemplate the science needed to come to an informed judgement. The government schools have spawned generations who can't understand the science.
A few of us can, and the science eventually gets debunked, but far too late to be of any good. Unfortunately these issues get into courts before the debunkers get sufficient press. (I know, Reason? covers it timely.)