I have to wonder about this. If the immune system can deliver all-out attack on foreign material in the body and create an infective response, there should at least be concern about possible low levels of chronic inflammation, which has all kinds of negative impact on health. In fact, I shouldn’t say possible, but virtually guaranteed. For example when you eat inflammatory foods, they can cause acute inflammation, e.g. you break out in hives or get some kind of severe skin or digestive reaction, etc. This is akin to getting an infection with an implant. Or it can cause low level inflammation like feeling tired, brain fog, generalized joint pain, etc., which is basically the body “sort of” rejecting the offending substance without delivering a full immune response. You don’t associate the food (or implant) to these low level symptoms but they are indeed evidence of the body being slowly damaged over time.
It’s not like the body gets used to the foreign (to the body) substance or material over time either and adapts or whatever, the inflammation will always exist on a sub-clinical level slowly wreaking havoc in the body, which is what happens to people who eat a s**tty diet over a long period of time not thinking it’s doing anything to their health. One day they wake up with a litany or health problems and wonder what’s causing it all, well it always starts with inflammation. What is inflammation actually? It’s the body fighting against something it’s engineered system has not been designed (by evolution) to expect or deal with, such as processed food or an IMPLANT.
So when I heard the story a while back about women with breast implants being diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome, it made intuitive sense to me and I wasn’t surprised at all.
Tbh I’ve been thinking for a long time about getting an implant for some body thingy I have (not facial), and I wish a really smart, holistic (no not the cheasy naturopath type) health expert could give a detailed answer on how an implant might cause low level inflammation. The problem is that certain people whom I have in mind who are super intelligent in multiple disciplines and could develop a sound answer to this question DON’T ever get asked a questions like this... only plastic surgeons do and we know what their answer is going to be. You can’t just ask a regular doctor either, they don’t know anything.
Your argument fails to distinguish between CHRONIC inflammation that arises from a steady supply of irritants from a ONE TIME introduction of a foreign material that the body walls off by the INITIAL inflammatory response to it's entry. For that reason, your contention that inflammation will 'always exist' (after introduction of a solid silicone implant), is NOT convincing to me. Here is why:
With silicone breast implants, the problem was their breaking where leaks of the highly viscous (thick) silicone within escaped. But initially, the women did not know that because the the breast volume from them looked the SAME. All they knew was that they were having a bunch of symptoms. Further diagnostic explorations revealed leaks from the implants which in turn were correlated with a CHRONIC inflammatory response associated with some of the health complaints. Such inflammatory responses are MEASURABLE as in high C reactive protein.
The body will have an INITIAL inflammatory response to any foreign material placed inside. But it peters out after it STAYS PUT and becomes encapsulated. So the body can get used to it where it does not kick up constant or chronic inflammation. Constant inflammation is chronic inflammation which is kicked off by a STEADY SUPPLY of irritants such as leaky silicone breast implants or food irritants. The inflammation process for constant introduction of irritants doesn't peter out. It becomes CHRONIC and can be MEASURED. Solid silicone implants are not associated with chronic or continued inflammation because they don't continue to introduce a steady supply of IRRITANTS into the immune system as do food irritants or leaking silicone. So, I'm not sure you distinguish the different between constant introduction of irritants that kick up chronic inflammation and a one time introduction of a foreign material encapsulated by the initial inflammatory process to wall it off.
A leaking silicone implant and daily intake of food 'irritants' ('s**tty diet') can kick up CHRONIC inflammation because they introduce a STEADY SUPPLY of irritants. But here, your ARGUMENT likens similar chronic inflammation to something (solid silicone face implant) AFTER it's totally encapsulated and not actually introducing a constant supply of irritants. Hence, I would not equate or conflate things that don't relate with chronic IRRITANTS arising from bad foods and leaking breast implants with solid silicone implants.
Not sure what is meant by 'low level sub clinical' inflammation other that it implies a type of inflammation low enough that CAN'T be measured. C-Reactive protein tests (CRP), of which there is a really sensitive one and sedimentation rate tests CAN measure levels of inflammation where all levels BELOW a certain range would be considered GOOD/EXCELLENT as in NO inflammation issue to fret about. So, if this 'low level sub clinical level' of inflammation you speak of is something that can't be measured BECAUSE it's below a level considered good/excellent, it is therefore nothing to worry about because having a level of inflammation that is so LOW it can't be measured clinically is a GOOD thing.
Your argument made here, fails to convince me because you don't distinguish chronic or continued inflammation (brought on by introduction of a steady supply of irritants) from the initial inflammatory response where a one time introduction of a material is walled off. It's not an argument that can be buttressed by 'possible sub clinical low levels of chronic inflammation'. WHY? Because inflammation that is so LOW where it's called 'sub clinical' or where it could not be measured (on a C-reactive protein test that measures levels of inflammation) would be nothing to worry about. I'm not sure you realize that a 'low sub clinical level of inflammation' (which you say could be a problem with solid silicone implants) would NOT be considered an inflammation problem at all if it defied clinical measurement.
You know that there are tests to measure levels of inflammation right?
