What started as a discussion around the behaviour of those manufacturing the faulty PIP breast implants and the regulation of such products, is now being used to vilify women choosing to have cosmetic surgery.

At a time of crisis for 30, 000 British women who suspect they may have the PIP implants, certain women, some of whom are fully paid up members of the ‘sisterhood’, are leaping on the bandwagon to make pitying points about Barbie-doll bodies and arrogant remarks about self-esteem.

Shame on them. Women who chose to have implants have done nothing illegal. They made a choice and they have been let down, and the last person that let them down is themselves.
From my point of view I want to give women a degree of reassurance, " he said. He hoped the expert group, chaired by the NHS medical director, Sir Bruce Keogh, give greater assurance about the official advice by the end of the week.

Chastising some private providers for the "inadequacy and inconsistency" of their data so far, Lansley said any woman who had been given the implants in the private sector should expect "exactly the same" response and help as her counterparts in the NHS. The scandal, he added, had raised the question of whether there should be a register for breast implants.

More than 40, 000 women in the UK have been given Poly Implant Prosthese (PIP) implants.

The Independent Healthcare Advisory Service (IHAS), which represents all of the major cosmetic surgery chains, has called on the government's expert working group, which begins its investigation on Wednesday, to look carefully at figures it has obtained from an audit of all its members. The figures, from thousands of patients, show a rupture rate within the accepted norm, of 1%-2%, the IHAS says.

The organisation is publicly distancing itself from the figures supplied before Christmas by Transform, an IHAS member and one of the biggest cosmetic surgery chains. Transform reported a rupture rate of around 7%, from a group of around 100 clients, triggering the government inquiry.
But a panel formed by Australia's top medical watchdog, the TGA, says it has found no evidence that the implants carry an increased risk of cancer or leakage.

The president of the Australian Society of Plastic Surgeons, Associate Professor Rodney Cooter took part in the panel.

RODNEY COOTER: Based on the evidence that's available to the TGA, there's no reason for raising any further alarm to Australian women with PIP implants.

The decision overseas was based on toxicology studies but the studies that have been done on the gels and the shells of these implants by scientists here at the TGA in Australia have not shown any results that would suggest that we should alter our stance at the moment and that is to reassure women that if they have no problems and the implant is not ruptured, there's no immediate cause for concern.

DUBRAVKA VOLODER: As many as 9, 000 Australian women are believed to have received the French-made breast implants before they were banned worldwide 18 months ago.

There are now 20 confirmed cancer cases in France in women who've had the implants but there are no known cases in Australia.

Carol Bennett works for the Consumer Health Forum.

CAROL BENNETT: The thing that's comforting to me is that the TGA have done a review of these products and they've made the call that these products don't pose a greater risk than the failure rate that would be expected for this kind of device.

DUBRAVKA VOLODER: She says she believes the panel's decision will be comforting to many women.
But Dr Wollaston is not alone. She is joined by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown in the Daily Mail who pities the women with ‘inflated breasts as a passport to happiness’ and Cristina Odone in The Telegraph who takes a particularly hard line concluding that if your breast augmentation goes wrong, ‘that’s just tough’.

Why are all these women taking such a tough line? Would they be so judgemental on other choices? A tattoo gone septic? An eye infection from a contact lens? A muscle tear from weightlifting? The government is considering a fat tax on food. Why not go further and have a tax on those with cirrhosis of the liver through too much alcohol; those with cancer through smoking; breaking your ankle through jogging; those that play rugby and end up in casualty or the obese?

There will be those of you who believe that this should happen. Let’s hope you never put a foot wrong.