1. It is not covered by insurance and is undergone by a population who tend to be low income and require it for any medical procedure

  2. Surgeons are supposed to completely remove any mammary tissue and glands (leaving less than a typical males who would still grow boobs under circumstances) so taking estrogen (and assorted) hormones after the procedure will not signal any estrogenic tissue to mature and you will remain flat chested or growth will be non-uniform in the future

  3. You could need tissue expanders bc they sew the skin pretty tight normally, the nipples are at more of a risk of falling off after being re-grafted on once before. Which is a relatively advanced surgical skill.

  4. Getting implants for cosmetic reasons is bad, they need to be replaced every 10-20 years which means if your patient gets a mastectomy at 12 years old and wants to maintain prosthetics for her life (ideally like 60 years) she will have to go under general anaesthetic five to ten times, maybe they will have to have her chest operated on a few more times than that because of complications etc. This is dangerous and again outrageously resource expensive for ppl that are low income.

If you get a mastectomy for cancer or for aesthetic reasons I'd advise you just to leave it. It doesn't look bad or anything or make you less of a woman. Also related that breast cancer surgeons are now more likely to do a flat mastectomy than automatically leaving the breast skin empty for future implants as it's less stressful for the patient

[–] Moonpriestess 12 points Edited

Don't forget that they're shoving bags of foreign matter under the skin, so there's always the chance that the tissue around the implant will scar and become hard.

The implant can rupture, or even worse, have a leak. If it's silicone, good luck. If it's saline, it can get mold and bacteria growth from fluids getting into it. In both cases you can get sick or die.

You are absolutely right that implants are a huge risk for women, and they're nothing to be blasé about.