YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollections

Money, Medicine Mix in Breast Implant Debate : Research: Doctors take sides in the argument over silicone. Fees raise the appearance of conflicts of interest.


BOSTON — Some doctors say silicone breast implants are perfectly safe. Others argue they make women sick. But on this they can all agree: The money for offering these opinions is excellent.

"This has been a growth industry for rheumatologists," said Dr. Bruce Cronstein.

Himself included.

This New York University Medical Center specialist, like many prominent in rheumatology, has chosen sides in the breast implant controversy.

Cronstein happens to be a consultant for Dow Corning, the biggest maker of silicone breast implants. Many of his colleagues have joined the other team, working for the plaintiff attorneys suing Dow Corning and other manufacturers.

No one denies these doctors believe in their positions, whether for implants or against. But accepting fees that range from $300 to $600 an hour at least raises the appearance that money might influence opinions.

The scientific data about silicone's health effects are murky, and although there is no clear evidence that implants are harmful, no one can say beyond all possible doubt that they are completely safe, either.

A definite answer is obviously important to the estimated 1 million American women who have had their breasts enlarged or replaced with silicone.

But many worry the issue will never be settled, in part because so many of the researchers who could divine the answer appear to have a financial stake in the outcome: Their research, no matter what they find, will be tainted by the suspicion of bias.

"The money involved is so big that it's really almost impossible on either side to find anybody who is totally clean," said Dr. Stuart Silverman of UCLA, who treats patients sent by attorneys. "I don't know anyone who could do the research who is neutral."

For their part, doctors often say they enjoy the intellectual challenge of expert testimony or see a civic duty to educate lawyers and juries.

"It's important that first-class scientists be able to present material in a courtroom in a way that the public can understand," said psychiatrist James Hudson of McLean Hospital in Belmont, Mass., a witness for Dow Corning.

Some deny money is even a factor.

"I don't believe any of the people involved are doing this for financial reasons," said Dr. Luis Espinoza of Louisiana State University, who works with plaintiff attorneys. "We are involved, pro and con, because we feel it's right."

Doctors profit from their relationships with lawyers by accepting consulting fees to review medical reports, by testifying in court and by relying on them to send in patients. Whether they form these alliances for the money or not, the resulting work can represent a sizable part of some doctors' income.

Hudson, for instance, testified that $189,000 of his $232,000 total income in 1993 came from consulting for attorneys, mostly in breast implant cases.

Some doctors specialized in filling out paperwork for women who want to be included in a $4.25-billion settlement. In a trial last year, Dr. Nachman Brautbar of USC said he has seen about 1,000 of these patients and typically charges $950 for consultation and legal papers, which adds up to nearly $1 million.

"If you have $4.25 billion flying around, it will stick to a lot of fingers. That's what I see happening," said Dr. Marcia Angell, executive editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.

In fact, $4.25 billion is just the start of it. Without admitting wrongdoing, the manufacturers agreed to pay that much to settle the thousands of lawsuits filed after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration took silicone implants off the market three years ago.

About 350,000 women have registered for the settlement, most of them in the event they get sick during the next 30 years. Perhaps 8,000 to 11,000 more are suing the companies on their own.

In two jury verdicts this year, one woman was awarded $5.2 million and the other $6 million. The companies' total liability from the remaining suits could be billions more.

At trial, the testimony of doctors and the weight of published medical research are crucial, so lawyers try to line up the best experts they can afford. The list of manufacturers' experts adds up to more than 175 names, including prominent physicians at Johns Hopkins, Duke, Baylor and Georgetown.

Some question, however, whether doctors conducting seemingly evenhanded studies of silicone's effects, often with federal research dollars, should ever get cash from lawyers for manufacturers or plaintiffs.

"I firmly believe that anyone who is doing science that is financed by public money cannot take a stance in that kind of adversarial role," said Dr. Norman Anderson of Johns Hopkins University. "Otherwise, they are violating the public trust and the ethics of science."

Los Angeles Times Articles