Breast Implants

[Nicolasd]

And, if it takes ' fake boobs ' to get a man - then sadly ( for both the man and the woman ) - that speaks for itself IMO.

Implants make women more attractive in the eyes of the large majority. Attractiveness plays a part in many social interactions, and more attractive women have an easier time getting men.

Those are the simple, irrefutable facts. You can try to make snide remarks about it, but that's how it is.

 

[Wrangell]

Implants make women more attractive in the eyes of the large majority.

Agreed.

To which I have said before, sadly, speaks for itself.

I suspect, there are just as many that find implants to be a ridiculous proposition and a complete turn-off.

Attractiveness plays a part in many social interactions, and more attractive women have an easier time getting men.

But the simple fact is, you don't need implants to get a man - that is my point. However, some woman think they do.

The ' attractiveness ' of a women is not underscored by the size of her ' fake ' breasts...to suggest otherwise trivializes women IMO.

Those are the simple, irrefutable facts. You can try to make snide remarks about it, but that's how it is.

Those might be the ' facts ' in your world - but ( thank goodness ) not in mine.

 

[Nicolasd]

Agreed.

To which I have said before, sadly, speaks for itself.

I don't get the moral judgement here. Humans are like all other animals wired to find certain physical properties attractive. That's just how it is. I don't see anything sad about it.

I suspect, there are just as many that find implants to be a ridiculous proposition and a complete turn-off.

I guess that differs a lot from one group of people to another. But tbh I know a few guys who feel that way about implants and get really indignated when you talk about it - but when there's someone with implants in the room they're all eyes.

But the simple fact is, you don't need implants to get a man - that is my point. However, some woman think they do.

Of course no one needs them. But they're an advantage in most cases. The same argument goes for looking fit, wearing make-up, smart clothing etc. You don't need them, but they help.

The ' attractiveness ' of a women is not underscored by the size of her ' fake ' breasts...to suggest otherwise trivializes women IMO.

Didn't you start out agreeing to it?

 

[Wrangell]

I don't get the moral judgement here. Humans are like all other animals wired to find certain physical properties attractive. That's just how it is. I don't see anything sad about it.

The sadness is in thinking it takes ' fake boobs ' either to make one feel attractive or to find someone attractive - at least in my IMO.

If you think large ( fake or natural ) boobs is a prerequisite toward considering a woman attractive - you certainly are entitled to your opinion. I just don't share that view.

I guess that differs a lot from one group of people to another. But tbh I know a few guys who feel that way about implants and get really indignated when you talk about it - but when there's someone with implants in the room they're all eyes.

Speaks for itself.

Of course no one needs them.

Some women and men would disagree.

But they're an advantage in most cases.

Depends on who you talk to I guess.

The same argument goes for looking fit, wearing make-up, smart clothing etc. You don't need them, but they help.

Correct. That is one possible argument.

Didn't you start out agreeing to it?

Not that I recall

 

[evolution]

I guess I don't get it. What does it matter if a woman gets breast implants? Why should we judge whether it's sad or improper if they get breast implants or some how imply that because something they alter about themselves and makes them feel better about themself is wrong?

Regardless if it's surgical or not surgical, it's an altering of one's self. We alter ourselves visually by-
waxing bodyhair, shaving bodyhair, gettig tattoos, breast implants, lifting weights, getting low bodyfat percentages, etc

I guess I put it in the general field of bodily changes. And I don't chalk it up as "oh that's bad" or "yeah, that's okay".

 

[Wrangell]

I guess I don't get it. What does it matter if a woman gets breast implants? Why should we judge whether it's sad or improper if they get breast implants or some how imply that because something they alter about themselves and makes them feel better about themself is wrong?

Good questions.

Obviously, women have to make their own choices for their own reasons.

That said, both men and women should be able to express clear pro and cons views on the merits / pitfalls of having breast implants - as they would with any other topic.

One person might think it is wrong to have implants - another might think it is fine. As with any topic, opinions will differ.

Regardless if it's surgical or not surgical, it's an altering of one's self. We alter ourselves visually by- waxing bodyhair, shaving bodyhair, gettig tattoos, breast implants, lifting weights, getting low bodyfat percentages, etc I guess I put it in the general field of bodily changes. And I don't chalk it up as "oh that's bad" or "yeah, that's okay".

Good point.

And I think it might be relevant to examine ' why ' surgery is required to " altering of one's self ".

Reasons differ, but I think cutting into your body for the sake of appearance or psychological issues may involve reasons more complex and substantial than simply wanting to get into shape or remove body hair.

Just my personal opinion, but I think in some cases women may feel somehow ' inadequate ' as a woman, and they feel that implants are somehow going to miraculously " fix " their lives for the better by removing these feelings of inadequacy. Some of this might stem from the fact that there is this notion held by some out there that women with larger breasts are more attractive than women with breasts of a lesser size - which is ridiculous IMO. Which then sort of begs the question, what should a " normal " body look like, and why is a normal body inadequate, what is ' attractive ' etc. etc. I'm sure there are many simple and complex reasons for women wanting implants, but sometimes you have to wonder if implants actually address the real reasons for getting implants. For example......

" Women who get cosmetic breast implants are nearly 3X as likely to commit suicide as other women ".

" Women with breast implants also had a tripled risk of death from alcohol and drug use "​

....which may mean nothing , or mean a great deal - either way - it certainly does give one pause for thought.

 

[Nicolasd]

" Women who get cosmetic breast implants are nearly 3X as likely to commit suicide as other women ".

....which may mean nothing , or mean a great deal - either way - it certainly does give one pause for thought.
​

So women with psychological problems leading to suicide have a higher probability of getting breast implants than the rest of the population. That's interesting for psychiatrists I suppose.

But it doesn't say anything about normal women who get implants.

I'm sure people who drink alcohol have higher suicide rates too. That won't stop me from drinking with my friends.​

 

[Wrangell]

So women with psychological problems leading to suicide have a higher probability of getting breast implants than the rest of the population. That's interesting for psychiatrists I suppose.

But it doesn't say anything about normal women who get implants.

I'm sure people who drink alcohol have higher suicide rates too. That won't stop me from drinking with my friends.

Actually, all the study was suggesting, is that of the population of women who got implants - that group- experienced 3X the suicide rate and had 3X the risk of death from alcohol and drug use...compared to women who don't have implants. Simply an observation.

Simply an observation - you can draw your own conclusions to why this might be the case.

 

[Nicolasd]

So you're throwing out this "women who have implants have 3x risk of suicide", and then say vague things like "it gives pause for thought, make your own conclusions".

That is a rhetorical trick to give credence to weak or irrelevant arguments.

The numbers in that survey say that the increased risk of suicide affects less than 1 in 300. That's a very small number. Quoting relative changes in small probabilities is most often very misleading. The absolute change - just 0.3% - is much more meaningful, since it illustrates how small the number is to begin with.

Furthermore, nothing says that the causality is that getting breast implants gives you higher risk of suicide. It might just as well be that the same psychological problem that causes suicide also makes those people more likely to get breast implants - this is even what the scientists who did the studies cite as the likely reason.

It was also in that context you posted the study, to strengten your argument that women get it because of low self esteem. If that is the case, then it is completely irrelevant to normal, mentally healthy women. In fact it is completely irrelevant to a discussion about breast implants, since the suicide rate is caused by mental problems and not the implants.

You don't even have a control group of women wanting breast implants but not getting them. Studies of post-ops show that most women get increased self esteem from the implants, so you might well see that a control group who didn't get implants had even HIGHER suicide rates and so implants actually reduces the risk of suicide, and so could be seen as a cure. Of course that's pure speculation.

 

[Wrangell]

So you're throwing out this "women who have implants have 3x risk of suicide", and then say vague things like "it gives pause for thought, make your own conclusions".

Yes, when you read an article title that says " Breast implants linked with suicide in study " - it DOES give one pause for thought IMO.

The 3X suicide risk reference was simply a direct quote from that article - and a link of the article was provided to supply the context of the quote.

I suspect no one really knows why this ' 3X ' is the case - so yes - you can make your own conclusions as to why this might be the case.

That is a rhetorical trick to give credence to weak or irrelevant arguments. The numbers in that survey say that the increased risk of suicide affects less than 1 in 300. That's a very small number. Quoting relative changes in small probabilities is most often very misleading. The absolute change - just 0.3% - is much more meaningful, since it illustrates how small the number is to begin with.

Well, if you have an issue with the numbers, probabilities etc. then I suggest you have more of an issue with the journalist who wrote the article or the scientists who formed the study.

If you think there are flaws in the study design, findings,etc. or flaws in how the article was written - fair enough.

Furthermore, nothing says that the causality is that getting breast implants gives you higher risk of suicide.

No one is suggesting implants " cause " anyone to commit suicide - that would be ridiculous.

It might just as well be that the same psychological problem that causes suicide also makes those people more likely to get breast implants - this is even what the scientists who did the studies cite as the likely reason.

Yes, it might be.

It was also in that context you posted the study, to strengten your argument that women get it because of low self esteem. If that is the case, then it is completely irrelevant to normal, mentally healthy women. In fact it is completely irrelevant to a discussion about breast implants, since the suicide rate is caused by mental problems and not the implants.

earth to Nicolasd...........earth to Nicolasd

No one is suggesting the increased suicide rate is " caused " by implants.

You don't even have a control group of women wanting breast implants but not getting them. Studies of post-ops show that most women get increased self esteem from the implants, so you might well see that a control group who didn't get implants had even HIGHER suicide rates and so implants actually reduces the risk of suicide, and so could be seen as a cure. Of course that's pure speculation.

The group / rate that the suicide rate was compared to was " the average population " rate - and it was 3X higher.

Actually, I don't doubt at all that post-ops results resulted in increased self esteem.

But then again, in the context of suicide , the focus is long after they have had the implants for many years...i.e " The increased risk of suicide was not apparent until 10 years after implantation "

 

[aeonteal]

both of you are discussing important issues and neither viewpoint is irrelevant. it only becomes irrelevant (IMO) when someone else thinks they have the right to make a decision for others- that people should/shouldn't have breast implants.

i hope that everyone who has breast implants is also thinking about these issues and considering all the research out there and all the reasons that they want to have the procedure. NOT because there is anything inherently wrong with plastic surgery but because i hope that people are making informed decisions (weighing the risks/rewards) from a realistic standpoint based on their own life experiences, goals and desires. to do so, you have to look at all the risks, studies and research to get the full picture. not everything out there is accurate or helpful but i think having a firm grasp of as much research as possible and being able to discuss these issues candidly with your doctor or other women who have had the procedure is critical to educating oneself prior to and during the decision making process.

no one in this thread is advocating that women should get implants or that all women who get them are mentally stable. no one here is saying that it's possible to live outside of society and that there isn't an element of social ideals that are impacting the decisions to have implants (in the same way that people might workout, wear make-up, get hair weaves, fake nails, dress in the latest trends, drive "nice" cars, want to be attractive etc). that's obvious. the only thing that anyone can do is to try to live his/her life in the way that he/she thinks is right and will make him/her happy. if someone is unhappy, they are the best person to make decisions toward their own happiness. for some people, breast implants fit into this equation. and, on the same token, there are many reasons why a woman might get implants but the only thing that makes sense and can be applied to all situations is that it's an individualized choice. it's just as rude and irresponsible to accuse women who have breast implants of being psychologically unstable as it is to advocate that women who are psychologically unstable are good candidates for implants.

(this is just my opinion in addition to what you all are saying - not in opposition)

 

[Wrangell]

both of you are discussing important issues and neither viewpoint is irrelevant. it only becomes irrelevant (IMO) when someone else thinks they have the right to make a decision for others- that people should/shouldn't have breast implants.

i hope that everyone who has breast implants is also thinking about these issues and considering all the research out there and all the reasons that they want to have the procedure. NOT because there is anything inherently wrong with plastic surgery but because i hope that people are making informed decisions (weighing the risks/rewards) from a realistic standpoint based on their own life experiences, goals and desires. to do so, you have to look at all the risks, studies and research to get the full picture. not everything out there is accurate or helpful but i think having a firm grasp of as much research as possible and being able to discuss these issues candidly with your doctor or other women who have had the procedure is critical to educating oneself prior to and during the decision making process.

no one in this thread is advocating that women should get implants or that all women who get them are mentally stable. no one here is saying that it's possible to live outside of society and that there isn't an element of social ideals that are impacting the decisions to have implants (in the same way that people might workout, wear make-up, get hair weaves, fake nails, dress in the latest trends, drive "nice" cars, want to be attractive etc). that's obvious. the only thing that anyone can do is to try to live his/her life in the way that he/she thinks is right and will make him/her happy. if someone is unhappy, they are the best person to make decisions toward their own happiness. for some people, breast implants fit into this equation. and, on the same token, there are many reasons why a woman might get implants but the only thing that makes sense and can be applied to all situations is that it's an individualized choice. it's just as rude and irresponsible to accuse women who have breast implants of being psychologically unstable as it is to advocate that women who are psychologically unstable are good candidates for implants.

(this is just my opinion in addition to what you all are saying - not in opposition)

Good post.

 

[spicypumpkin]

I highly doubt that implants increase the risk of suicide. People who get them could be more likely to commit suicide in the first place. The statistics only show a correlation between the too. They don't state whether one causes the other.
Heck, suicidal women could be more likely to want implants. That could explain the statistic.

 

[Wrangell]

I highly doubt that implants increase the risk of suicide. People who get them could be more likely to commit suicide in the first place. The statistics only show a correlation between the too. They don't state whether one causes the other

Exactly. I agree.

 

[Nicolasd]

Yes, when you read an article title that says " Breast implants linked with suicide in study " - it DOES give one pause for thought IMO.

Let's imagine an article called:

"Steroid abuse linked with exercise"

It's about a study that documents that people who exercise are much more likely to be steroid abusers than the general population. I think we can all agree that this is the case.

Would that give you pause for thought about your exercising?

I don't think so. It is obvious that most people who exercise are normal individuals - that people who do steroids also exercise are completely irrelevant.

This false syllogism goes along the same line
- Wolves have grey hair
- Bob has grey hair
= Bob is a wolf

Well, if you have an issue with the numbers, probabilities etc. then I suggest you have more of an issue with the journalist who wrote the article or the scientists who formed the study.

If you think there are flaws in the study design, findings,etc. or flaws in how the article was written - fair enough.

I don't have an issue with the numbers, I have an issue with the way you throw it out there to support your idea that women who get breast implants must have bad self esteem issues. The article suggests nothing of that kind.

since the suicide rate is caused by mental problems and not the implants.

earth to Nicolasd...........earth to Nicolasd

No one is suggesting the increased suicide rate is " caused " by implants.

I normally try to refrain from snide remarks, but:

Earth to Wrangell, earth to Wrangell - that's what I wrote!

Earth to Wrangell, earth to Wrangell - because of that your study is only interesting in the context of women with psychological problems getting breast implants. And lacking a control group or something similar you can't even evaluate if this group of mentally ill people have a changed risk of suicide because they got implants. So in effect the study doesn't even say anything interesting about implants even for mentally ill women getting them.

Actually, I don't doubt at all that post-ops results resulted in increased self esteem.

But then again, in the context of suicide , the focus is long after they have had the implants for many years...i.e " The increased risk of suicide was not apparent until 10 years after implantation "

What's your point here? That the self esteem boost only lasted 10 years, after which their suicide tendencies started to surface again, so it is only a temporary cure? Or that there's some spooky long term psychological effect of implants that causes normal women to go suicidal? Or just more vague insinuations "doesn't this sound strange and dangerous"?


In these types of studies, you often get artefacts like the correlation between suicide and implants. However the study doesn't uncover why that correlation is there. You have no way of knowing if you're doing a "Bob is a wolf" syllogism. It is simply an irrelevant artefact. If it gives you pause for thought it's because you're making unwarranted conclusions on insufficient data, either because you're biased on the subject or just misunderstood the data.

 

[Wrangell]

Let's imagine an article called:

"Steroid abuse linked with exercise"

It's about a study that documents that people who exercise are much more likely to be steroid abusers than the general population. I think we can all agree that this is the case. Would that give you pause for thought about your exercising? I don't think so. It is obvious that most people who exercise are normal individuals - that people who do steroids also exercise are completely irrelevant.

"Steroid abuse linked with exercise" - quite right.

In my view, of the population people who actually " abuse " anabolic steroids, a majority of these " abusers " are somehow involved in amateur or pro " exercise -related " activities - be they wrestlers, track stars, bodybuilders, football players, or average gym rats. In other words, among the population of exercisers, the rate of steroid abuse is higher than the general population overall. It is quite reasonable to speculate then, that the " exercise population " might abuse steroids to a higher degree / rate ( i.e 2X, 3X, 4X - who knows ) than the general population.

However, you cannot say, that of the population of people ( or even women ) who commit suicide, the vast majority of these people have implants.

This false syllogism goes along the same line
- Wolves have grey hair
- Bob has grey hair
= Bob is a wolf

That's simply fallacious reasoning irrelevant to the study.

And, it clearly has nothing to do with the studies' findings pertaining to suicide rates and breast implants.

But I'll bite.

Give me the equivalents from the study that highlights that the study is embracing your alleged " false syllogism " .......

Wolf = .......' ? ' in the study
Bob = .......' ? ' in the study
Grey hair = .' ? ' in the study​

I don't have an issue with the numbers, I have an issue with the way you throw it out there to support your idea that women who get breast implants must have bad self esteem issues. The article suggests nothing of that kind.

I never said the article did.

And it isn't the case that women who have breast implants must have self-esteem issues , but my personal view is that self-esteem / self - image issues may play a role at times.

Women get implants for all kinds of reasons after all - but I happen to think self-esteem / self - image are among them.

I normally try to refrain from snide remarks, but:

Earth to Wrangell, earth to Wrangell - that's what I wrote!

Earth to Wrangell, earth to Wrangell - because of that your study is only interesting in the context of women with psychological problems getting breast implants.

No - the study simply made the observation of higher suicide rates for those with implants compared to the general population - no one reason really knows why this is the case ( if it is at all ) - psychological problems may be a minor or major reason - or no reason at all. It's all speculation since the " why " hasn't been properly studied

And lacking a control group or something similar you can't even evaluate if this group of mentally ill people have a changed risk of suicide because they got implants. So in effect the study doesn't even say anything interesting about implants even for mentally ill women getting them.

You just said " I don't have an issue with the numbers " in the study - now you are questioning the study again. Which is it ?

What's your point here? That the self esteem boost only lasted 10 years, after which their suicide tendencies started to surface again, so it is only a temporary cure?

No point other than to point out that suicide rates became noteworthy only after 10 years. You made the claim of close to immediate benefits - post op boosts in self esteem.

Or that there's some spooky long term psychological effect of implants that causes normal women to go suicidal?

Not again.

For the third time .....no one is suggesting implants CAUSE anyone to commit suicide.

The study is not implying CAUSALITY - in any way.

Or just more vague insinuations "doesn't this sound strange and dangerous"?

Your quote - not mine.

In these types of studies, you often get artefacts like the correlation between suicide and implants. However the study doesn't uncover why that correlation is there.

Well, I suspect that's simply because trying to come with " why " was not within the scope of the study.

There could be countless reasons for any observed relationship between implants and suicide - assuming a correlation really does exist.

You have no way of knowing if you're doing a "Bob is a wolf" syllogism. It is simply an irrelevant artefact. If it gives you pause for thought it's because you're making unwarranted conclusions on insufficient data, either because you're biased on the subject or just misunderstood the data.

I made no definitive conclusions...that's why I said the findings " may mean nothing , or mean a great deal ".

 

[Nicolasd]

It seems that you agree that the study is irrelevant to this subject, but still have to make it seem like you disagree with me. I guess it's unreasonable to expect anything more than that.

Sorry that I got a little bit pissed, but when people try to support their point of view by quoting irrelevant stuff just because it sounds ominous, I just have a pet peeve with that. Politicians do it all the time, being "worried" about this and that, grrr.

 

[Wrangell]

It seems that you agree that the study is irrelevant to this subject, but still have to make it seem like you disagree with me.

Wrong.

I never said it was ' irrelevant ' ....if it was, I wouldn't have pasted in a link to the article in the first place.

Any study that suggests the population of women with implants may experience a higher rate of suicide and death from alcohol and drug use is noteworthy IMO. And, if nothing else, such findings certainly provide the impetus for further study.

However, as for disagreeing, I don't agree with some of your interpretations of the study.

I guess it's unreasonable to expect anything more than that.Sorry that I got a little bit pissed, but when people try to support their point of view by quoting irrelevant stuff just because it sounds ominous, I just have a pet peeve with that. Politicians do it all the time, being "worried" about this and that, grrr.

Well, it wasn't irrelevant to my point of view IMO.

 

[Nicolasd]

Any study that suggests the population of women with implants may experience a higher rate of suicide and death from alcohol and drug use is noteworthy IMO.

Well, we're not discussing if it was noteworthy - we're discussing if it had any relevance to the subject at hand. And anyone with even a superficial knowledge of statistics will tell you that a simple correlation like that says nothing meaningful at all. For all we know from that study, breast implants might lower the risk of suicide for some groups of women. I'm not saying that's the case, I'm just saying that nothing meaningful can be gleamed from the study.

Let me give you another example, since you didn't seem to get the steroids one.

Let's say that people who get "compound X" into their bloodstrem, we see that they have a much increased risk of death from cancer within the next 5 years than the general population. We have no control group of people with similar profiles to compare their cancer mortality. Is compound X good or bad for people?

Well, compound X could obviously be a carcinogenic, which would be bad for people.

But compound X could also be a new chemotherapy drug given to cancer patients. A proper study would include a control group of similar patients getting older drugs, and this group would have an even higher mortality rate, so compound X would be good.

But alas, we're stuck with just the mortality rate from people taking compound X and we don't have a control group or other data to compare it with, so we can't say anything meaningful about it at all.

Just like with the study you're referring too. You have 1 statistical correlation - without anything else to put it in context. That makes it meaningless in itself.

I'm afraid that you're just not aware of some basic principles behind what conclusions can be gained from statistics.

 

[Wrangell]

Well, we're not discussing if it was noteworthy - we're discussing if it had any relevance to the subject at hand. .

Correct.

The topic of the thread was discussing breast implants - and the study examined one aspect ( suicide rates ) of women who had breast implants - relevant.

And anyone with even a superficial knowledge of statistics will tell you that a simple correlation like that says nothing meaningful at all.

Correct.

The stats simply suggest some form of correlation may exist - nothing more.

No conclusions or definitive interpretations were establiished based on the results.

For all we know from that study, breast implants might lower the risk of suicide for some groups of women. I'm not saying that's the case, I'm just saying that nothing meaningful can be gleamed from the study.

Well, I guess we agree to disagree.

Let me give you another example, since you didn't seem to get the steroids one.

Actually, I did get it.

And that's why I think it was as stupid example.

Let's say that people who get "compound X" into their bloodstrem, we see that they have a much increased risk of death from cancer within the next 5 years than the general population. We have no control group of people with similar profiles to compare their cancer mortality. Is compound X good or bad for people?

Simply, compare their cancer mortality to those ( all other things being equal ) that never had "compound X" - that can serve as an initial benchmark.

Well, compound X could obviously be a carcinogenic, which would be bad for people.

Agreed.

I suppose that is one of many possibilities

But compound X could also be a new chemotherapy drug given to cancer patients. A proper study would include a control group of similar patients getting older drugs, and this group would have an even higher mortality rate, so compound X would be good.

The comparison you suggested is to made against the general population - " people who get "compound X" [ have ] increased risk of death from cancer within the next 5 years than the general population "

It may also be that the death rate from those " who get "compound X" " is the highest from among those who take "compound X" along with newer drugs - remove "compound X" - the death rate is lower.

But alas, we're stuck with just the mortality rate from people taking compound X and we don't have a control group or other data to compare it with, so we can't say anything meaningful about it at all.

You don't need a control group - you are simply comparing the women with implants suicide rate to the general population suicide rate.

Just like with the study you're referring too. You have 1 statistical correlation - without anything else to put it in context. That makes it meaningless in itself.

Not meaningless at all - the rate suicide rate of women with implants was found to be 3X that of the suicide rate in the general population and women with implants also had a death rate from alcohol and drug use greater than the general population.

I'm afraid that you're just not aware of some basic principles behind what conclusions can be gained from statistics.

I'm well aware of them actually - and why you consistently take issue the stats of the study - sadly - speaks for itself.

For example, you gave an example earlier of ....

- Wolves have grey hair
- Bob has grey hair
= Bob is a wolf​

Give me the equivalents from the study that highlights that the study is embracing your alleged " false syllogism " above .......

Wolf = .......' ? ' in the study
Bob = .......' ? ' in the study
Grey hair = .' ? ' in the study