Safety and candidacy
Who is a poor candidate, what can go wrong, how to tell the difference between an expected effect and a complication, and what to do about each.
Most of the risk in this procedure comes from injecting into a face rather than from the material. This chapter separates expected effects from side effects and complications, and sets out an escalation route for when something goes wrong.
- 4.1Who is a poor candidate
The most useful thing a practitioner can say is no. This article sets out the circumstances in which that is the right answer, so that you can recognise a consultation that reaches it and one that does not.
- 4.2Effects, side effects, complications
These three words are used interchangeably in consultations and they mean different things. Separating them tells you what to expect, what to tolerate and what to act on.
- 4.3Fish sourcing and allergy
The material comes from fish and the purification is designed to remove the proteins that cause fish allergy. That is a reassurance with a basis, and it is not a guarantee.
- 4.4Risks that come from injecting
Discussion of this treatment concentrates on the substance. A large part of the risk has nothing to do with the substance and everything to do with the needle, the skin and the setting.
- 4.5If something goes wrong
Written to be read quickly by someone who is worried. The urgent items are first.
- 4.6The history that should change the plan
A history form that is collected and filed has done nothing. This article sets out what should be asked, and what a practitioner should do with each answer.
Revisions to this document
This reference is revised when the evidence changes. Subscribe and you will be told what was revised, what the verdict was before, and what it is now.
One email when this document is revised, with what changed and why. Any sponsor line is labelled as such and can never influence an evidence verdict. Rates are published on the newsletter page. We do not sell, share or rent the list. Unsubscribe from any email.