Took a Step Back-concerned About Other Issues Now - Pittsburgh, PA

Grace1234, just to point out Coolsculpting is NOT surgery, but a cosmetic procedure.

Is blasting kidney stones with sound waves cosmetic? Coolsculpting is the killing of cells via freezing. Saying it is cosmetic is medically incorrect and understating what it is and does.

The lipo helped a little. But it is still obviously worse than before the Coolsculpting.

That's a very good point. Saying something is "cosmetic' masks the potential dangers and side effects to a procedure. In fact saying that makes it sound like a simple easy in and out sort of thing. "Docs" can make their $$ and move on from the damage.

Well if you are going to get picky, then things like Botox, etc should be considered 'surgery'. I was trying to distinguish the fact that Coolsculpting is not 'surgery' in the true medical sense. Call it a Medical Procedure, but not Surgery.

If you are going to be picky, then things like Botox, etc is considered 'surgery'. Call it a Medical Procedure, but if you can find a Doctor that will refer to it as Surgery, I'm all ears.

It is not being "picky". It is being professionally and morally ethical.

Well you may have a point in calling Coolsculpting a "Medical Procedure." It should not then be called: Coolsculpting. That is very misleading. You can't 'sculpt' fat. Fat is a living organ. How does one 'sculpt' a living organ? I once had a wart removed from my thumb. The doctor froze it off. It was so incredibly painful I had to cry in my car before I drove home. The freeing killed the whole thing. So I imagine this machine that freezes cells in different areas probably freezes things other than fat cells. And kills them. That's probably why people experience such pain and the problems associated with it.

Agreed. Too bad there is a lacking of that in the world of cosmetic medical and surgical procedures.

This is helpful, and it is good for people to take positive action, but what is concerning to me is that in the marketplace, one liposuction (fat sucking; fat freezing; fat burning) device replaces the next. Based on the biology of fat, destroying fat is non-curative and harmful long-term.

Why?

Why?

Hi imispgh. Are you asking why, based on the biology of fat that destroying fat is non-curative and harmful long-term?

Yes

Yes

Liposuction under any name is not a miracle “cure”. Fat, (not obesity, but healthy fat), isn’t “stubborn”, it’s biologically essential. Fat is complex: for instance, brown fat helps metabolism: fat regulates hormones; and so on, and it would seem that sucking it out; freezing or burning it to death would not be helpful to the organism. Scientists are just learning about fat all of the time. There are studies (on both humans and rodents) that shows that liposuction causes an increase in toxic visceral fat; long-term fat mobilization; metabolic syndrome; increased insulin resistance, (which can contribute to type 2 diabetes); disturbing adipose tissue re-distribution. (The Belly Finds What the Thighs Lose). Visceral fat can marble through muscles and deposit around your organs. This is NOT good for one’s long-term health. This can lead to many disease processes and cosmetic disappointments that show up or worsen with time. Fat hypertonia and hypertrophy is possible. Liposuction, a non-curative surgery, also poses serious risks of irreversible structural damage. There are conversations on this site about skin adherence (the skin being grafted to the body); serious burns; life-threatening infections; punctured viscera; over-resection, etc. -- too many serious complications to mention here. This week I was told that a man I know lost his sister-in-law from fat embolus after liposuction. This came on the heels of finding out that someone else I know had a loved one die from blood clot from liposuction. In studying the history of liposuction in depth, it looks as though the field evolved without every being put through rigorous tests. One can see how the lack of a National or Global Registry has kept the public unaware of true statistics. Dr. Jeffery Klein (author of Liposuction 101) mentioned that even the doctors are in the dark about true statistics. It looks to me like the 2009 consent form put out by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons has five additional categories than the 2005 consent form had -- it seems to me that either liposuction is getting more dangerous, or the consent form keeps expanding in attempts to further protect doctors against the iatrogenic ills that are resultant from it.

I mean hyperplasia and hypertrophy.

I have hyperplasia from the procedure. And am looking at Lipo (again) to fix it. Could you please comment on that and the options?

Imispgh, I'm sorry you 're in this predicament. I share information I have learned about liposuction in general, but I can't advise anyone directly; each person's health care is their own decision. I have seen people "following the fat" with liposuction. I think it's a shame that this surgery exists. I have much more information I can share with you, but I'm trying to figure out how to get it to you.

imispgh@yahoo.com

Your comments are misleading. There are solid statistics documenting the safety of liposuction. Current data has a mortality rate in the 1:16000 range, which is roughly equivalent to driving a car for one year. Everything in this world has a risk, scare tactics though fun to read, are sensational, nothing more. Read the data. Just google liposuction safety statistics.

"Dr." Michaels, it appears you joint RS today and posted this one comment. That is a bit disingenuous. However, I would like to point out to you that you cannot compare mortality rates in the way you did. And "mortality" is not the only issue; in fact "morbidity" is the primary issue. We are concerned about the HARM that is caused by liposuction. I don't need to 'google liposuction safety statistics because I have researched it for the better part of year with a colleague. Plus, there are not reporting databases for liposuction harm or death. Just to follow your 'mortality' piece, for a bit, if a person got a fat embolism or blood clot that killed her, then that would be listed as the cause of death. Not liposuction (not usually). Also autopsies are hardly performed anymore. Where are these supposed statistics coming from? Are they valid? Are they rigorous and robust? That has not been what I have found. Because of the "White Coat Wall of Silence", blacklisting patients, and shaming, there are not statistics that we can reasonably point to with any efficacy as to the "morbidity" of the procedure. But there are studies that point to what can (and does happen). There are many stories here on RS that can prove that to you. These are not scare tactics. I mean that's like saying: Hey let BP go drill for oil in the Gulf of Mexico again and not worry about it! So I beg your pardon, but saying: read the data, and trying to evade real issues by labeling people as being sensational and using scare tactics is easily controverted. Due diligence is really important here; and I can say I have performed that.