Tag Archives: boobs

Plastic surgery finally starts making sense

It’s a conundrum I’ve pondered many times, most recently in Volume 3 of my series entitled Musings On Science, The Human Body, And the Failures Contained Therein Which I Have Seen At The Shopping Mall:

Since half of cosmetic surgery is taking stuff out of people, and the other half is putting stuff into people, shouldn’t we just put the stuff we take out of some parts into other parts?

According to the New York Times, the medical community is finally thinking along those same lines:

THE latest kind of recycling has nothing to do with soda bottles. It entails liposuctioning fat from, say, thighs or buttocks and injecting it into breasts to augment them. After being condemned in the early ’90s, this procedure is generating newfound excitement among the handful of doctors nationwide who offer it and patients keen to enlarge their breasts without resorting to implants.

The practice was condemned because doctors worried that injecting fat into peoples’ boobies would hamper mammograms. But since our communist death panel librul mooozlim president says women shouldn’t get those anymore, it’s time to reconsider. Or something:

But this year, the plastic surgery society reversed its former position. A report from its task force reviewed the limited research on fat grafting to the breast and concluded that it “can be considered a safe method of augmentation.” On the issue of mammography, the report said fat grafting “could potentially interfere with breast cancer detection; however no evidence was found that strongly suggests this interference.” Thus, the task force’s statement turned a red stoplight into a yellow one, signaling to plastic surgeons: Proceed with caution.

I know there are a lot of people out there who look down on those who opt for cosmetic procedures, and I think that’s pretty sad. On the other hand, this new “relocation” technique could make it a lot more difficult to tell who has been enhanced and who hasn’t. I think you should be required to disclose whether you’ve had this particular procedure done. That way your office mates can make up funny nicknames for you, like “Ol’ Butt Tits” and “Belly Boobs.” Look, I never said your office mates were funny. Jeez, get a new job already.

Your Own Fat, Relocated [NYT]

Leave a comment

Filed under science

The bra turns 100

We’re sure the Victorians had convoluted and painful ways of defying the soft tug of gravity, but it was not until 100 years ago that the word “brassiere” came into existence, according to the Star-Telegram.

funnybra.jpgThe paper celebrates the anniversary with a tribute by Samantha Thomson Smith, who uses the occasion to remind women to, um, er, well, uh, do right by their tits:

Fifteen years ago, the average American woman’s bra size was 34B. Last year, the average was 36C, says Norah Alberto, senior style director for Maidenform. Part of the reason is that Americans simply are getting bigger. But it’s also the result of more people getting fitted for bras and finding out they’ve been wearing the wrong size all along.

Here is some other bra-related material we didn’t know:

  • Most women own about 14 bras but only regularly wear six of them. The rest are for special occasions like funerals and moon landings.
  • Most bras wear out after 90 wearings or, in the case of teenagers, 15 awkward pawings.
  • Americans spent $6 billion on bras from September 2006 to August 2007, generating enough material to outfit the four gentlemen of Mt. Rushmore with their own over the shoulder boulder holders.
  • Boobs are awesome.
  • Never put bras in the dryer, as the heat wears down the elastic and you get yelled at by your wife.

 A salute to the bra, after a century of support [Star-Telegram]

1 Comment

Filed under history