Important Info on Brinton Study by Nurse Boone & Cristy W.

Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 22:42:25 -0700

Brinton Study Already Under Attack ~ Houston Chronicle

alt.support.breast-implant:25517

(that means the 25,517th message on alt.support.breast-implant).

Critics argue the study is biased because of the way women have been recruited to participate

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but from what I remember about this study, the participants were random patients, pulled from the files of certain doctors. The reason Dr Brinton ever talked to the women or the attorneys was because support group leaders across the country found out that the company that was chosen to pull those files was ABT ASSOCIATES, and they had previously done work for Dow Corning.

Leaders were cautioning women about this finding, because we did not feel we could trust a company that had any connection to Dow.

The only recruitment was to encourage women to participate if they were chosen because it was going to be one of the largest studies and it would give the best data so far. Who knew if the women that were chosen were sick or healthy. Attorneys were also concerned about women getting into the study, and women wouldn't give consent for their records unless the attorneys told the women it was okay to get involved.

These attacks on Dr. Brinton are unfounded. The manufacturers fear the study because they didn't have control of criteria, the questions, or the length of time the women had been implanted. Critics also say the study's director, Dr. Louise Brinton, may have formed her conclusions before the study even began.

This statement is also unfounded. Dr. Brinton's name was on the "Nuts and Sluts" study, that was a judgemental sentence against implanted women, comparing lifestyles to those without implants. I did not hear one comment from the manufacturers about her bias when that study came out. If she already had an opinion, I would think that study would have biased her against us, not for us.

The quarrel is rare because it erupted even before the study results have been published.

Which shows the lengths the manufacturers will go to protect the silicone and plastics industry. That is what this issue is about. Not implants, but the billions in plastics. They are only blowing smoke to cloud the issue.

One critic, Dr. Sidney Wolfe , asserts that the NCI study has the best chance of drawing "accurate" conclusions because it is the largest study to date of women with implants.

Go Dr. Wolfe! -- And it is not controlled by the manufacturers and plastic surgeons. God, please give us the truth.

@-->-->-- @-->-->-- @-->-->-- @-->-->--

**From: womnhlth@mindspring.com (Cristy Warschaw)

alt.support.breast-implant:25518

Funding NIH

12,000 women in the 2nd protocol having undergone breast Augmentation in Atlanta and Orlando, other sites may be in San Deigo, Miami,Phoenix and New Orleans with women having implants more than 10 years.

Co-herts will be in the same practices 4,000 no chin or cheek implants will be included average age 30 We have these numbers that link all of this togeather including calls with the manufacturers and Louise Brition and Dr. Jack Fisher. UC San Diego an area they are considering?

CD-Rom numbers ASP004969, ASP0023986, ASP023986-023989 ASP037720, INM028757, INM028755-INM028758, DCCKKA000279-000262-264 INM028755-28758, ASP004965-4966, ASP004968, INM023589,

Jack Fisher was involved in the Origional study Protocol but was erased in the second protocol,

Ted Colton was the Original Epidemiologist for the Manufacturers and the NIH Study.

ABT Associates was involved in both studies as well they were going to share information.

I exposed all of this I Chicago to the ABT Represenative in 1995-1996 and All these people were taken away from the study. But the Asprs and Other Manufacturers already had a say in the questions on the study which could not be erased.

Cristy