Ultrasound Guidance for Dermal Fillers: When Headlines Ignore Medicine and Fuel Misinformation

Mainstream media outlets have recently begun telling the public that dermal fillers should only be administered with ultrasound guidance.

BBC and Channel 4 aired segments suggesting ultrasound prevents damage to arteries and “new risks have been identified.”

On the surface, that sounds responsible.

In reality, it’s clinically inaccurate, wildly misleading, and dangerously distracting from the real issue.

🚨 FIRST — The Media Got the Story Wrong

Headlines claimed:

“Researchers used ultrasound to study 100 cases of filler injections that had gone wrong.”

“Clinics are being advised to use ultrasound before dermal fillers to avoid harming arteries.”

This implies ultrasound prevents complications.

That is false.

Here’s what ACTUALLY happened:

• The 100 cases were already complications.

• Ultrasound was used AFTER the occlusions happened.

• It did NOT prevent the problems.

• It was simply used to visualise the complication, which is not new.

So claiming “new risks have been identified” is a complete misrepresentation.

Vascular occlusion is:

• Not new

• Not a discovery

• Not emerging

• Not news

It is a known complication that medical practitioners study, prepare for, recognise early, and treat effectively — without ultrasound.

🧠 What Actually Determines Safety?

Not a probe.

Not a Snapchat filter.

Not TikTok.

Safety comes from:

• Anatomical knowledge

• Injection depth

• Injection plane

• Product rheology

• Pressure used

• Technique choice

• Appropriate cannula/needle selection

• Sterile environment

• Emergency protocol competence

• Training

• Experience

Ultrasound cannot replace any of these.

📡 Ultrasound Can Mislead Beginners

Let’s be brutally honest:

• Someone who lacks anatomical training cannot interpret an ultrasound image.

• Ultrasound can create false security.

• It does not teach anatomy.

• It does not make someone competent.

• It does not prevent occlusions.

Putting ultrasound into untrained hands is like giving an X-ray machine to someone who failed GCSE biology and assuming they are now an orthopaedic surgeon.

This is absurd.

💉 “But the nose is high risk!”

Yes — if done badly.

• Someone trained for one day using large boluses through incorrect planes?

  Dangerous.

• Someone medically trained, understanding:

  
  

  • nasal arterial pathways

  • injection plane depth variation

  • physiologic blood flow considerations

  • product selection

  • pressure modulation

  
  

Then the risk becomes extremely low — and ultrasound adds nothing.

Again, skill is the safety net, not ultrasound.

🌍 The Rest of the World Isn’t Doing This

In medically regulated countries:

• Only medically qualified injectors are permitted to inject

• Training standards exist

• Oversight exists

• Ultrasound is not mandatory nor even common

  Because competency replaces gadget reliance.

📺 UK Media: Scaremongering Instead of Protecting the Public

And here’s where the anger is justified.

The UK has:

• No regulation

• No enforcement

• No competency standards

• Anyone can inject anything into anyone

• No oversight even after catastrophic outcomes

And while the media shouts:

“Ultrasound will make filler safer!”

Reality shouts back:

“Regulation will make filler safer!”

Ultrasound is a red herring.

It’s marketing.

It’s misunderstanding.

It’s misdirection.

🪦 A Public Example of REAL Risk

A widely reported case (covered extensively by national newspapers) involved:

• A non-medical individual

• Performing buttock filler injections

• Resulting in a woman’s death

  
  

This person:

• Was not medically trained

• Had no prescribing rights

• Used non-medical products

• Performed the procedure outside medical standards

• And later continued to promote injectable treatments online

THAT is the danger.

Not the absence of ultrasound.

And guess what?

Despite the tragedy:

• There was no regulation change

• There was no national enforcement

• There was no preventative governmental action

But the media wants to talk about ultrasound.

It’s offensive.

It’s distracting.

It’s dangerous.

🧭 The REAL Conversation We Should Be Having

The public deserves:

• Regulation

• Clinical standards

• Medical-only injectors

• Minimum training requirements

• Licensed pharmaceutical-grade products

• Emergency management competence

• Accountability

Ultrasound is NOT the answer.

Ultrasound is NOT the solution.

Ultrasound is NOT a replacement for medical education.

The media could be campaigning for:

• Legislation

• Protecting patients

• Clinical competency

• Enforcement of standards

• Removal of illegal practitioners

Instead, they broadcast a narrative they do not understand, that misinforms the public, and misdirects concern away from the true causes of harm.

🧨 To the Media:

If you genuinely care about safety:

Campaign for regulation, not ultrasound.

If you want to protect the public:

Stop misinforming them.

If you want fewer complications:

Push for medically qualified injectors only.

Don’t mislead patients.

Don’t fuel panic.

Don’t pretend ultrasound solves a regulatory collapse.

Because it doesn’t.

It never will.

🧡 And to Patients:

The safest injector is not the one with:

• The fanciest equipment

• The ultrasound probe

• A TikTok following

• Buzzwords on a poster

The safest injector is the one with:

• Medical training

• Anatomical mastery

• Correct technique

• Regulatory accountability

• Emergency competence

• Experience

• Ethics

Safety is skill.

Not gadgets.

Can we offer it? Absoloutely. Are we trained? Yes. Do we offer it? Not routinely no, for the numerous reasons we have mentioned above.

🧭 END STATEMENT

We do not need ultrasound.

We need regulation.

We do not need panic.

We need knowledge.

We do not need headlines.

We need standards.