General Question

La_chica_gomela's avatar

Why can't they make breast implants out of the fat a person already has?

Asked by La_chica_gomela (12537points) August 7th, 2008

I’ve been wondering this for a while, and I just asked Tim what he thought. He said “my girlfriend has ample boobs, I don’t know, and I kind of don’t care”. So, just to avoid a lot of wasted energy, everyone, I DON’T WANT (or need) FAKE BOOBS—you don’t have to talk me out of getting them. it’s okay! ;-) From a scientific point of view, what’s to prevent them from sucking the fat out of your thighs and sticking it in your breasts? They already take fat out of people’s butts and put it in their faces. What’s the difference?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

27 Answers

shilolo's avatar

The implants provide structure and firmness (thus the silicone or water bags). Simply injecting fat into the breast tissue would just make the breasts lumpy (not so appealing). In addition, a lot of the women who get implants aren’t necessarily fat, so there might not be enough fat to do the job (even though mechanistically I think it is impossible).

La_chica_gomela's avatar

I knew you would know the answer to this question, shilolo!! Awesome! wait but, boobs are already made of fat, right? why would putting more fat in them make them lumpy? what are you referring to being impossible?

shilolo's avatar

Check out the anatomy here. Breast tissue isn’t all fat. Fat alone injected into its normal location would make the breast bigger, for sure, but there would still be the firmness and sagging issue. To account for the later two concerns, doctors put the fluid containing implant either above or below the pectoralis muscle and attach it there, for structure.

emilyrose's avatar

I have actually heard of this being done but no idea if it was real or not…...

La_chica_gomela's avatar

Wait, so they put the saline bag below the layer of muscle in #2? That sounds SOOO painful!

So now I have another question, do women who have bigger boobs usually have more fat, or like bigger lobules and all that other stuff in there? or both?

shilolo's avatar

I think it depends on whether they have bigger boobs in association with being fatter or not, but probably a combination of both. It is certainly true that women who exercise a lot and have low body fat composition tend to have smaller breasts. Think runners, triatheletes, etc. On the other hand, when women get pregnant, their breast tissue proper expands, leading to bigger breasts (a similar thing occurs during the menstrual cycle).

La_chica_gomela's avatar

Meh, I think a higher percentage of female runners have smaller breasts because it must be more comfortable to run if your boobs aren’t so big. Even in the most “high intensity” rated sports bra they just bounce bounce bounce bounce bounce the whole time. (Sorry if that’s TMI but it’s true).

shilolo's avatar

Maybe (hold on, picturing image…........ok, done). I don’t think you have such direct control over the breast size if you are a runner. Mainly, losing weight (and thus fat), will cause you to lose breast size.

La_chica_gomela's avatar

I agree with what you’re saying, but if you’re already a healthy BMI when you start running, and you’re genetically predisposed to the body type that you are, not a whole lot is going to change.

The impression that that article left with me was one of being a load of b.s. That person should come check me out if they don’t believe it. Genetics are involved, not just this direct correlation with exercise and breast size that she implies. All the women on my mamma’s side of the family are like 5 feet tall, 100 lbs, and DDs. Lucky me got my dad’s height, and my mom’s… other characteristics. And if “spindly legs” really “gave out” under the weight of DDs, then wouldn’t all those fake boobed women be in wheel chairs right now? DDs weight like 2 lbs each…or less i can’t remember

shilolo's avatar

Well, I suggest you watch the Olympics and see for yourself. The sprinters, marathoners, swimmers, etc. are all going to be “relatively” small breasted, owing to all the training and super low body fat composition.

La_chica_gomela's avatar

Okay, sure, the Olympics, I’ll give you that, but those people have like 7% body fat. I guess I was talking about normal people. Those people don’t have boobs because they don’t have any fat. You win this round.

shilolo's avatar

Someone who is of normal build and who does an average amount of exercise will probably not see any difference. But, someone who is overweight (and whose breasts are big as a consequence), who then proceeds to lose a lot of weight will definitely see a reduction in their breast size.

La_chica_gomela's avatar

Sometimes, but not always. It’s not a simple formula. Every woman is different. Sometimes women lose weight, and all of it comes from their breasts, sometimes their breasts stay almost exactly the same, and the fact that they lost fat from the rest of their bodies makes it appear that their breasts got bigger.

shilolo's avatar

You need to figure out that formula. Might get you the Nobel Prize, or at worst, the Ig Nobel Prize.

La_chica_gomela's avatar

I think someone else is already working on that project. It’s called the Human Genome Project ;-)

shilolo's avatar

I’ve been thinking about working on stem cells for breast growth! I’d be a very rich man…

syz's avatar

I think what chica is trying to say is that those extreme athletes were probably genetically small chested as well as having a low body fat percentage. Those individuals who are genetically predisposed to being large-breasted would have washed out or sought out other avenues of physical activity that were more, um, kind to their physical type. Even when my body fat index was very low (for a non-professional athlete), I had D-cup breasts. Running was (and still is) an uncomfortable chore that I suffer through for the benefits.

(And my weight loss is always in my ass. It disappears completely. I am functionally assless.)

Judi's avatar

From the horses mouth.
I had pretty large breasts but I after 3 kids and multiple rides on the weight loss yo yo I had to roll them up from my belly to put them into my bra! I decided to get a lift when I lost weight in a healthy way, and became more active. I didn’t want to be any smaller or any bigger I just wanted them in the right place. I asked the doctor why I needed implants since there was obviously plenty of tissue there. He said just what shilolo said. He had to remove all the stretched out saggy stuff and replace it with an implant for structure. I absolutely love it by the way. I also got a tummy tuck while I was at it and at almost 50 I feel pretty hot for the first time in my life! The pain was nothing compared to the gain (for me.) The boobs were a piece of cake compared to the tummy tuck.

preggers's avatar

I’m not sure about the fat implants. But if someone could isolate the hormone(s) that make your breasts bigger when you’re pregnant (without all of the other side effects), they could probably make a lot of money.

shilolo's avatar

@preggers See my answer above. Stem cells…

preggers's avatar

@shilolo Sure beats silicone. But even if you could grow a whole ‘nother breast, you still have to add it. And depending on the surgeon, this could still look unnatural.

When you gain weight (and get larger breasts), you don’t gain more fat cells. They just get larger. And when you’re pregnant, the hormones change the existing breast tissue. It seems like the best way to get larger breasts would be to mimic what nature does, make the existing tissue larger somehow?

Though I guess with silicone, you wouldn’t have to worry about the side effects of the hormones. There wouldn’t even be an issue of the body rejecting it. Hrmm…

I’ll just say I knew you before you were a boob pioneer. ;)

shilolo's avatar

@preggers I don’t mean growing a breast externally, but internally via the injection of breast-creating stem cells. There would, of course, have to be some sort of regulation of the system (because we wouldn’t want breasts to keep growing and growing…), but I think we can do this!

joychaos's avatar

the fat tissue would be to lumpy…and no one wants lumpy boobs. id rather have the flat chest i have =(

empower's avatar

At this point they are limiting the area where this is done. http://empower2go.wordpress.com/2009/06/13/stem-cells-from-your-fat-can-restore-disfigured-breasts/ A lot of the fat resorbs and there are not a lot of stem cells in the fat unless the stem cells were cultured, multiplied and then reinjected…A possibility but right now people are trying to get treatment for neurodegenerative diseases and things like orthopedic conditions where traditional outcomes are not promising….as for the comment about the NG prizes I thought some of those were impressive LOL
Amy Price PhD

empower's avatar

Wouldn’t the stem cells that differentiate into breast tissue provide the form so they would not be saggy or lumpy? I am not sure how large they would grow though because the body and its cells have internal regulators and growth factors

La_chica_gomela's avatar

I was just reading the New York Times, and I came across this article saying that now they can! So I thought I’d share, in case anyone else is interested.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/fashion/03skin.html

tina_sausa's avatar

Yes, I know there are fat transfer to breast. You may find useful information when you google “Fat Transfer Breast Augmentation”. There are sites that can help you and people that have experienced this type of breast enhancement method.

I know that there are many girls like you who would want natural boobs, so there are several other ways to enhance, firm or lift your breast like breast massages and breast exercise.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther