Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
I enjoyed reading Minerva's cheery approval for the breast implants
based on a recent paper on the meta-analyses of the relationship between
silicone breast implants and the risk of connective tissue diseases
(Janowsky et al, NEJM 2000;342: 781-90). She remarked "nothing of any
clinical importance came up", failing to take note of a statement where
the authors had acknowledged that they could not confidently exclude the
risk of Sjogren's syndrome. I quote their statement from my memory since I
do not have the NEJM issue right in front of me: "on the basis of research
to date, no association is evident between breast implants and any of the
individual connective tissue diseases, all connective tissue diseases
combined or the other autoimmune or rheumatic conditions with the possible
exception of Sjogren's syndrome".
May be, Minerva has drawn her conclusion without reading the fine
prints (i.e. the relative risk figures for Sjogren's syndrome). Don't tell
now that Sjogren's syndrome does not exist in women with silicone breast
implants only because it is difficult to prove the clinical diagnosis as
suggested by the authors.
Always read the fine print
I enjoyed reading Minerva's cheery approval for the breast implants
based on a recent paper on the meta-analyses of the relationship between
silicone breast implants and the risk of connective tissue diseases
(Janowsky et al, NEJM 2000;342: 781-90). She remarked "nothing of any
clinical importance came up", failing to take note of a statement where
the authors had acknowledged that they could not confidently exclude the
risk of Sjogren's syndrome. I quote their statement from my memory since I
do not have the NEJM issue right in front of me: "on the basis of research
to date, no association is evident between breast implants and any of the
individual connective tissue diseases, all connective tissue diseases
combined or the other autoimmune or rheumatic conditions with the possible
exception of Sjogren's syndrome".
May be, Minerva has drawn her conclusion without reading the fine
prints (i.e. the relative risk figures for Sjogren's syndrome). Don't tell
now that Sjogren's syndrome does not exist in women with silicone breast
implants only because it is difficult to prove the clinical diagnosis as
suggested by the authors.
Competing interests: No competing interests