In This Article
30-Second Summary
Headline Links: Fig. folds but lipodissolve still going strong
Background: Lipodissolve defies its critics
Reactions: Plastic surgeons speak out
Opinion & Analysis ‘It is an ethical question, not a financial one.’
Reference Material: Quackwatch and the FDA
Related Links: Fat removal in Kansas
Subscribe to Health Updates
Fat-Dissolving Procedure Outlives Safety Warnings
by
findingDulcinea Staff
A chain of "lipodissolve" clinics offering to melt away fat close their doors following criticism from medical groups and consumers. Nonetheless, the procedure continues to attract interest.
30-Second Summary
There seem to exist few balanced appraisals of lipodissolve’s effectiveness and safety. A Google search of the term returns hundreds of Web sites on which the product is either touted as a miracle or denounced as a potentially dangerous scam.
The treatment itself involves injecting into the body a soybean-based substance that kills fat cells.
The BBC reports that the procedure is very popular in Hollywood because it leaves no scars and produces results quickly. Internet show hostess CC told the BBC that it is “the new Botox.”
The procedure has continued to gain traction all over the United States despite the fact that it has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
In fact, the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts proposed banning the procedure in September 2007 after receiving complaints from patients.
Nonetheless, Fig., the most widely known chain offering the treatment, told The New York Times in September 2007 that the company alone had performed over 100,000 treatments in the last three years.
Doctors remain divided on the issue. While some providers have adopted the procedure, and profited from it, others have denounced it, citing a lack of research into its safety.
However, there have been questions about whether plastic surgeons oppose the treatment because it cuts into their business. Dr. Michael Olding, plastic surgery chief at George Washington University, refutes that suggestion. To The Washington Post, Dr. Olding said, “It is an ethical question, not a financial one.”
The treatment itself involves injecting into the body a soybean-based substance that kills fat cells.
The BBC reports that the procedure is very popular in Hollywood because it leaves no scars and produces results quickly. Internet show hostess CC told the BBC that it is “the new Botox.”
The procedure has continued to gain traction all over the United States despite the fact that it has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
In fact, the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts proposed banning the procedure in September 2007 after receiving complaints from patients.
Nonetheless, Fig., the most widely known chain offering the treatment, told The New York Times in September 2007 that the company alone had performed over 100,000 treatments in the last three years.
Doctors remain divided on the issue. While some providers have adopted the procedure, and profited from it, others have denounced it, citing a lack of research into its safety.
However, there have been questions about whether plastic surgeons oppose the treatment because it cuts into their business. Dr. Michael Olding, plastic surgery chief at George Washington University, refutes that suggestion. To The Washington Post, Dr. Olding said, “It is an ethical question, not a financial one.”
Headline Links: Fig. folds but lipodissolve still going strong
Fig., widely known as the lipodissolve chain, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Jan. 7. The company had been forced to close 17 of its 18 clinics around the country the month before. Fig.’s largest creditor is Integrated Media Solutions, a New York advertising firm.
Source: St. Louis Business Journal
Fig.’s Web site said financial difficulties had forced it to close. According to The New York Times, the company said it had performed over 100,000 treatments before closing its doors. The procedure cost $2,000 per body part. In three years, the Better Business Bureau of Greater St. Louis received over 145 complaints from the clinics’ clients.
Source: The New York Times
Background: Lipodissolve defies its critics
Nesita Kwan, from Chicago’s NBC affiliate, ranked lipodissolve as the number one health topic of 2007. The non-surgical method of fat removal has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration, and has drawn a lot of criticism because of the various side effects experienced by patients. Nonetheless, the procedure remains popular.
Source: Chicago’s NBC affiliate
‘Lipodissolve Proves Popular Despite Lack of FDA Nod’
In September 2007, The American Society of Non-Surgical Aesthetics said that between 50,000 and 100,000 procedures have been performed in the United States and Europe. It is unclear where the fat cells go once they are dissolved. The Kansas State Board of Healing Arts proposed banning the procedure in August. "We don't know much about this product, because it has not been clinically studied. There might be some longer-range problems, but again, we don't know. If this product is as effective and safe as its proponents say, then let's have some clinical research," said Mark Stafford, general counsel of the Kansas healing arts board.
Source: USA Today
‘Fat Fighting, Los Angeles Style’
A BBC report on the lipodissolve procedure found that it is the number one non-surgical method of removing fat in the United States. Apparently people in Hollywood prefer it because it is said to yield rapid results while leaving no scalpel marks.
Source: The BBC
Reactions: Plastic surgeons speak out
Both the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and the American Society of Plastic Surgeons have said that they do not recommend using lipodissolve. In a Dec. 14, 2007, press release, the two groups said they would not approve the procedure until further studies on its safety have been completed. The press release also said that patients experiencing complications as the result of a lipodissolve treatment should contact the nearest emergency room.
Source: PR Newswire
Opinion & Analysis ‘It is an ethical question, not a financial one.’
On June 28, 2007, Dr. Michael Olding, plastic surgery chief at George Washington University, took questions from Washington Post readers about lipodissolve. In response to a question about whether surgeons are objectively speaking out against lipodissolve, Olding said that, “It is an ethical question, not a financial one.” He said that few studies exist on the safety and effectiveness of lipodissolve, and that the ones that are available have not been investigated thoroughly. Olding also said that individuals who consider undergoing body-shaping procedures should always consult a physician or a plastic surgeon approved by the American Board of Medical Specialties before making a decision.
Source: Washington Post
Reference Material: Quackwatch and the FDA
The substance used in lipodissolve is phosphatidylcholine, usually marketed as Lipostabil. In Germany, it is used to treat blockages in blood vessels by dissolving fat. It is not licensed for use in cosmetic surgery. Plastic surgeons and dermatologists in the United States are opposed to the procedure because there is insufficient proof of its effectiveness and safety. Quackwatch is a non-profit watchdog whose professed mission is to expose medical fraud and fallacies
Source: Quackwatch.org
The Food and Drug Administration’s Web site provides information on approved drugs, cosmetic procedures and medical devices. The substances used in lipodissolve are not on that list.
Source: The Food and Drug Administration Web site
The FDA has a detailed section on liposuction, a procedure often confused with lipodissolve. It explains the risks and benefits of liposuction, and lists conditions under which the procedure cannot be performed. It also offers tips on how to research other fat removal techniques.
Source: The Food and Drug Administration Web site
Related Links: Fat removal in Kansas
In recent years, the city of Lawrence, Kan., has seen a boom in demand for cosmetic services. According to Mark Stafford, general counsel to the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts Doctors, doctors are not required to have special licenses for performing cosmetic procedures, nor are they required to seek any special training. However, “If a patient or another person feels that a physician is providing a service without professional competence, or if there is fraud or false advertising—some kind of misrepresentation—we certainly would take the complaint,” Stafford said.
Source: Lawrence Journal World & News
Most Recent Beyond The Headlines
© 2012 Dulcinea Media, Inc.
