The role of the MHRA in the PIPS scandal

I've been following this whole saga very closely for a few years now. About 2-3 years back all of the BJ forums on the web (no other names mentioned here - but you know who I mean!) were full of posts about whether or not PIPs were a reliable product. Many of the high street companies had 'scam' posters on all the different forums saying how brilliant PIPs were and how amazing the surgeons and companies implanting them were too.

Anyway, the truth has finally come out. But what I find so sickening is the way the MHRA are STILL squirming and wriggling out of their responsibility as the supposed REGULATORS of the cosmetic industry. The latest thing in this scandal is a call to establish an impant registry so that it's easier to gather good data on the safety of implants. See this link:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8991267/Breast-implant-scandal-Andrew-Lansley-indicates-support-for-register.html

Well guess what - there WAS an implant registry until the MHRA abolished it. Why did they abolish it? Because the clinics weren't providing decent data! Not because of the 'women didn't want it' reason given in the article. As the regulator it's MHRA's responsibility to ENFORCE standards on the clinic and get decent data!

See this link for a discussion we had here ages ago about the culpabilty of MHRA.

https://boobjobsupportforum.forumotion.co.uk/t9285-report-on-pip-implants-in-private-eye

I find it quite shocking the way that they are saying there's 'no evidence' for removing the implants and that the rupture rate for PIPs in the UK is still equivalent to other implants. The reality of the situation is that they don't have any data to make that decision. And why don't they have it? Because they let the companies get away with doing their own thing for years on end! Germany, France, Israel and Czech Republic are now all in agreement that their data shows the rupture rate for PIPs is too high. Yet MHRA is clinging to it's own deeply flawed data to say there is 'no evidence' that this is the case.

The media spotlight should now turn on the MHRA as much on the clinics.

A

A very interesting read Annie, wow you really know your stuff.Thanks for opening my eyes a little more to whats been going on.The whole thing is just so horrible it makes me feel so upset and angry that this has happened! x

Thanks for that Annie, finally the truth has been revealed!

I think all of us oldies (and I mean that purely in the sense we've been around these sites for years) are happy to breathe a sigh of relief. We started this forum so girls could be informed about this potantially risky, life-changing surgery.

I can imagine it feels like a few of the girls (and surgeons) have been banging our heads against brick walls, trying to help women who are having surgery to see that PIPs are in inferior product.

I firmly believe the MHRA should stand and be counted. While there might not have been formal details about rupture rates, we knew from experience, the women who had to go through the trauma of ruptured implants, cancer scares, damage to lymph nodes etc, that they were sub standard.

I'm just so glad this information is now out there.

And without you roxy I for one would be none the wiser x