THERE is no convincing medical data that suggests women who have intact PIP breast implants need to have them removed, a report into the scandal has concluded.
A report by European health officials has found there is currently no medical or toxicological evidence to justify removal of intact implants.
Almost 50,000 women in the UK and some 400,000 worldwide were affected by the scandal, which came to light after doctors found unexpectedly high numbers of women were suffering from ruptured implants.
There was uproar when it emerged that the French firm Poly Implant Prothese (PIP) had been making implants using industrial-grade silicone intended for use in mattresses.
Jean-Claude Mas, the founder of PIP, was jailed for four years last year for fraud at a court in France.
And now the European Commission's Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks has made its final report into the scandal.
It also found there was no reliable evidence that ruptured PIP implants create a greater health risk than ruptured silicone breast implants from another manufacturer.
The findings back a 2012 review by NHS medical director Professor Sir Bruce Keogh, which concluded the implants were neither toxic nor carcinogenic.
Commenting on the report, John Wilkinson, director of medical devices at the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, said: "We recognise that the criminal PIP episode has been very distressing for women who have had breast implants, and I hope this final European report provides some reassurance for them."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article