Investigator Lee Chalmers alerts us to the existence of what he or she calls “The finest piece of plastic-surgeon’s porn ever published in a medical journal”. Chalmers faults us—correctly— for not including mention of it in the just-published special Body Parts issue of the Annals of Improbable Research. The study is:
“Concepts in aesthetic breast dimensions: Analysis of the ideal breast,” Patrick Mallucci [pictured here] and Olivier A. Branford, Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, vol. 65, 2012, pp. 8-16. The authors, respectively at The Cadogan Clinic and at the Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust, both in London, show numerous photos of bare-breasted women, and write:
“This article identifies the key parameters that define the aesthetic ideal of the breast. Whilst much has previously been written on the aesthetic characteristics of the breast, thus far objective indices of beauty have not been identified.
“Methods: In this observational study the breasts of 100 consecutive women in three quarter profile pose, having been chosen as topless models for the attractiveness of their breasts by editors of mass print media, were analysed to identify specific proportions common to all of them. Analysis of a series of less attractive breasts was subsequently carried out looking at divergence from the ‘norms’ identified in the first part of the study.”
BONUS: The Cadogan Clinic, where Dr. Mallucci plies his trade, has a web page that flaunts the headline “How Are We Different?”
