US-Study: Huge Escalation for Aesthetic Treatments Forecasted
"The NETWORK is strategically good orientated", commentary from NETWORK
Speaker Dirk Brandl
Next to the facts: The study with the title "Economic Analysis of the Future Growth of Cosmetic Surgery Procedures", was published in the June issue of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery magazine by Tom S. Liu und Timothy Miller.
The study props on the yearly statistical figures published by the ASPS (American Society of Plastic Surgeons) from 1992 to 2005.
The result: the number of all aesthetical treatments will quadruple by 2015. The authors come to the conclusion that other variables like economic development will have no effect on the result. Another conclusion of the study is: Minimal invasive und non invasive treatments are graining ground where operative practices are declining in comparison to minimal invasive therapy options.
As a born sceptic I would like to face the already intoned jubilations from the president of the ASPS, Richard D'Amico with common sense and detailed view.
1. I agree that for a lot of people their appearance is becoming very important then the individual is becoming a commodity and that their appearance has becoming an important economical factor in our capitalistic developed states. That even more people value their appearance is a sign of intuitive realization and reflection to this development.
2. The statistics show: we are getting older (in the industrial countries) and the population is increasing (in developing countries). The relative new Anti Aging field has its right. Equally entitled is aesthetical medicine that offers an important contribution, so that elder people have the ability to feel attractive and their well being and appearance can be changed. It goes too far to claim that aesthetical medicine is a branch of Anti Aging. These older people who are mentally fit, purse sports sometimes daringly, who enjoy life have the right to entitlement to aesthetical medicine and therefore pose a growing market.
3. Our members for a number of years have formulated that a rethink has had to happen because more patients prefer gentle form of aesthetical treatment. Operative practices are declining. The changes in the priorities were long foreseeable. Our members have experienced that patients have been treated with Injection-Lipolysis because Liposuction does not come in question. I believe that a good executed operation must not involve a high risk. Anaesthesia has developed better methods of narcosis and has reduced the risks. The emphasis is on a well executed operation independent of the medical field. Patients want indulgent treatments and doctors who have adjusted to this trend will successfully treat these patients and the example is our members who have developed and qualified.
4. The emerging changes are not considered sufficiently during qualification. There are next to no universities for minimal invasive treatment- the Dermatology primes in some countries a laudable exception - and the preparation and anchorage of standard treatment protocols are neglected. Every working aesthetical physician knows of these coherencies and when societies endeavour for changes and consensus conferences have recently taken place. However we are still a long way away from world wide acknowledged standards and independent qualifications. The firms and product orientated qualification through single devices and product manufacturers (Filler, Meso, Botulinumtoxin A, Laser, Peelings, etc) should be criticised and those who offer firm and product independent qualification such as those who sponsor our Globalhealth Academy should be praised. As always on our agenda is: The development of worldwide treatment standards and qualification according to the national conditions (the number of offered Fillers varies in Europe and the USA because of the differences in admission requirements vary). One thing can be certified: while the aesthetical market expands more physicians from other fields will offer aesthetical treatments the rising demands will be followed by numerical offer.
5. The statistical calculations should not block the view because the situation can change as prognosis. Keep an eye on the economical development. I believe a lot of factors could change this prognosis and that the global economy will play a critical role. The analysis in my eyes goes forward in a mechanistically approach. Network thinking and theory generation of the complex systems should motivate a different point of view that is sceptical. When we take our perceptions to the chaos theory seriously we should take into consideration that the smallest changes in linked networks can have aggravating effects (Butterfly Effect) and can influence the network structures. In the Network we have the development in our our hands and can influence it because we have recognised the immense possibilities which slumber in synergy education and cooperation, treasures that are there for the taking so we can take on the development contentedly.
Those of you who reconcile my elementary analysis should think about - together with us - how we can influence the future challenges in the world wide cooperation and solidarity and what necessary steps we need to take. We will continue the way which we have developed for our Network: worldwide protocols and objective training, independent training free from sponsorship interests, development of this therapy with many members without competitive thinking.
When capitalism at economic level forces us to be competitive, then synergetic thinking and acting is the right answer. Welcome to the Network.