And he doesn't say *that* very often.

greater risk for.. for what??  For death?  No.  For rupture of an implant?
I'd hope so.  Kind of a stupid analogy, don't ya think?  Oh wait, you don't.

NOW President, Kim Gandy shows well the fallacy in Skeptics's (for
want of a better term) thinking ...

http://www.now.org/press/11-06/11-17.html
FDA Approval of Dangerous Implants During Lame Duck Session
Follows FDA Pattern of Favoring Money and Politics Over Science

November 17, 2006

Today the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued final approval to
manufacturers Allergen Corporation (formerly Inamed) and Mentor Corp.
for general marketing of silicone gel-filled breast implants to women
of all ages for reconstruction purposes and women 22 and older for
augmentation purposes.

"Women should be outraged by this reckless decision. Bush-appointed
FDA leaders are once again endangering the public health, this time to
enrich manufacturers and cosmetic surgeons," said NOW President Kim
Gandy. "Sadly, we are not shocked that this agency is swayed more by
money and politics than science and medicine. And I doubt it's a
coincidence the FDA issued approval during the 'lame duck session'
just before Congress is set to change leadership. The new Congress
would likely have exercised more oversight, in order to limit
political influence over decisions at the FDA. Without George W.
Bush's cronies in charge, it's much more probable that the next
Congress will take a close look at the FDA's highly suspect review and
approval process. But many more women will suffer until that happens."

In recent months, more and more evidence has accumulated that
manufacturers withheld critical information clearly demonstrating that
silicone implants are not safe. The FDA has shown little interest in
examining concerns expressed by their own scientists or the
allegations of industry whistleblowers.

A recently published peer-reviewed study showed that women with
implants, and their children, who are ill with autoimmune diseases and
other health problems, have high levels of a toxic form of platinum,
which was found in samples of their blood, tissue, hair, nail, urine
and breast milk. Rather than attempting to replicate the study, FDA
officials responded by dismissing it, following the lead of scientists
who are paid consultants to implant makers.

Unfortunately, the FDA has not required manufacturers to study the
impact of silicone implants on breast milk, breastfeeding, or the
health of offspring born to women with implants. At NOW, we have heard
from many women who believe that their silicone breast implants have
adversely affected their children's health. In the coming weeks, NOW
will be reviewing more than 1,000 questionnaires filled out by mothers
with implants who detail the deformities and illnesses found in their
children.

"It is impossible for women to give informed consent for implants if
the information they are receiving is inaccurate or incomplete," said
Gandy. "The very real possibility that women and their children will
be exposed to grave health risks is a serious matter. The FDA made an
unconscionable move today."

Gandy concluded: "The FDA has never rescinded approval for a medical
device after it has been approved, but that's not going to stop NOW
from trying. When the new Congress takes office we will petition our
representatives to initiate an immediate review of the FDA and this
dreadful, dangerous decision."

~~~~~~~~~~

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/