gastric bypass etc
Replies
-
Paul, see above, I apologized. You should be proud of your wife.
Sofa..i spent 6 hard years defending the right for me to vent and you to reply but mostly for me to vent......single huh, go figure....
Wow, well you just stuck your foot in your mouth. *smh* I suggest you quit before you insult anyone else!0 -
Anyone who doesn't understand bariatric surgery simply hasn't bothered to read about it. The evidence is overwhelmingly in support of the procedure(s) without any controversy in the medical literature. A good starting point for self-reading:
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/ccf/media/files/Bariatric_Surgery/schauerbest.pdf
Two selected stats from that paper:
95% of patients post-op report an improved quality of life - you won't find that among MFP users.
Schauer et al, Annals of Surgery, 2000
Risk of death within 5 years of observation is reduced by 89% in the surgery versus no-surgery cohort of patients.
Christou et al, Annals of Surgery, 20040 -
Of_Monsters_and_Meat wrote: »What hard work and sacrifices have you made op?
Bad choices got me where I was. I started eating better and working out 5 days a week. I would love to eat ice cream everyday and watch tv instead of run most days but I cant do that. Everything wrong with me is my own fault (except for a family of diabetics). I dont blame anyone for my bad choices and I am not having a pity party. I was just venting. Apparently you cant do that on here. I am working hard to improve my health and keep it that way. I'm glad everyone else on here is too. I new this would start a *kitten* storm, just didnt realize it would be so quick and one sided. No worries, 6 years in the Marine Corps gave me thick skin.
You are allowed to vent.
We are allowed to react.
Why do so many people forget this bit?0 -
Anyone who doesn't understand bariatric surgery simply hasn't bothered to read about it. The evidence is overwhelmingly in support of the procedure(s) without any controversy in the medical literature. A good starting point for self-reading:
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/ccf/media/files/Bariatric_Surgery/schauerbest.pdf
Two selected stats from that paper:
95% of patients post-op report an improved quality of life - you won't find that among MFP users.
Schauer et al, Annals of Surgery, 2000
Risk of death within 5 years of observation is reduced by 89% in the surgery versus no-surgery cohort of patients.
Christou et al, Annals of Surgery, 2004
Thanks for this. Husband is borderline considering it and complications scare me. A scientific paper goes a long way in my book!0 -
What I've observed in a family member who had gastric bypass surgery: She didn't get less hungry. She didn't get fewer cravings. She didn't become blessed with better habits or a different attitude towards food. She has thrown up in many restaurant parking lots due to eating one bite too many. If she doesn't want to continue that, then she has to do exactly the same thing as people who haven't had the surgery. There is nothing easy about it. Their mind is exactly the same after the surgery as it was before, and the mind is the primary road block to weight loss.0
-
I don't mean to offend anyone but I'm sure I will. That being said, it irritates the $ hit out of me when people that have had surgery to lose weight give advice like eat small meals, walk, whatever. It may all be valid but that's not how you did it so don't tell other people how to do it. Congrats on doing something to be healthier but don't confuse that with the hard work and sacrifice others are going thru.
I don’t think surgery is necessarily “easier.” More than couple doctors recommended it for me. In the end I decided not to go that route for a variety of reasons.
I know 2 people that (over the last 12-24 months) had surgery.
One person approached it with the right frame of mind – she knew that surgery was only an initial step and success would require hard work and a lifestyle change. She lost some weight before the surgery and “worked” at her eating / exercise habits after surgery. More than 1 year later she is still doing great and enjoying life.
Sadly – the other person did not do as well. I’m guessing this person thought “the surgery” would control the eating, so they “couldn’t” over eat etc. Lifestyle changes were short-lived. What weight this person had lost was quickly regained (with added poundage) in only a few months.
Surgery or no surgery – eating right & exercising can be a formidable challenge with lots of self-discipline being required. After losing my first 100 pounds, I knew I was going to “make it.” But the true test will be my “maintenance”…
Good luck to you.
0 -
.jgnatca wrote:I had to follow sensible eating and exercise before surgery, and to maintain I must keep it up afterwards.
Me too.SergeantSausage wrote:I gotta ask (no offense) but then: why the surgery?
Just keep up the "sensible eating and exercise" you had to do anyway, right, and then the surgery becomes unnecessary.
I really don't get it.
At all.
If they were able to lose (not "loose") weight by controlling themselves before surgery, at
least enough so someone would do surgery on them, why not continue that? You know it
works, you know you can do it, why throw away your health by permanently changing your
body when it's not necessary? The surgery causes lifelong problems. Weight is temporary.
It does not require a permanent solution, other than eating a reasonable amount of calories
& moving more... which is what was done before surgery.
^^This!0 -
A lot of people are saying surgery is not a quick fix, it doesn't change hunger signals nor the degree of hunger, and that the same work goes into post-WLS as without it: diet and exercise. I think that is why some of us have the confusion as to why the surgery is necessary. I don't think people are trying to be narrow-minded or flippant. We may all be missing something here (that is possible) but if the WLS patient still has to do exactly the same things as s/he would have to do, why did s/he get the surgery...I think that's the question.
I would feel differently if people were saying that at least, the degree of hunger were changed. But without even that...what HAS changed for the patient except that s/he may throw up, etc. from larger portion sizes, especially considering the fact that WLS can and sometimes do "eat around" that factor (by smaller but more frequent meals, for example)?
I hear over and over again, "It is still just as much work." If it is AS MUCH work then why have the surgery that permanently alters your system...I think that's the question here. This is compounded by the fact that in some cases, the reasoning that the patient can't lose weight without WLS opposes the patient being required by his/her doctor to lose X amount of weight pre-surgery, and the patient accomplishing that.
So I don't think these questions are unreasonable, or even uneducated/due to ignorance. The questions make perfect sense.
With that said, I'm happy for anyone who wants to lose weight, and finds a way to do so.-1 -
I don't mean to offend anyone but I'm sure I will. That being said, it irritates the $ hit out of me when people that have had surgery to lose weight give advice like eat small meals, walk, whatever. It may all be valid but that's not how you did it so don't tell other people how to do it. Congrats on doing something to be healthier but don't confuse that with the hard work and sacrifice others are going thru.
I don't know much about WLS, and I don't know anyone who's had it, and I don't think it's that common in England, but I don't think it's like magic, you have the surgery and voilà, you're thin. I'm pretty sure people who have it have to lose a certain amount of weight first, then after the surgery they still need to exercise and eat sensibly. Plus the fact that surgery is so risky doesn't make it an easy option in my book.
I do think that people who resort to surgery probably have emotional issues related to eating and would probably benefit from some sort of counselling to address these issues, because surgery won't make those go away.0 -
herrspoons wrote: »Anyone who doesn't understand bariatric surgery simply hasn't bothered to read about it. The evidence is overwhelmingly in support of the procedure(s) without any controversy in the medical literature. A good starting point for self-reading:
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/ccf/media/files/Bariatric_Surgery/schauerbest.pdf
Two selected stats from that paper:
95% of patients post-op report an improved quality of life - you won't find that among MFP users.
Schauer et al, Annals of Surgery, 2000
Risk of death within 5 years of observation is reduced by 89% in the surgery versus no-surgery cohort of patients.
Christou et al, Annals of Surgery, 2004
What about total long term loss in total excess weight and recidivism rates?
From the limited reading I've done, whilst there is no doubt that it is effective in taking people out of the weight range that is deemed unhealthy, it doesn't generally bring them to a normal BMI long term.
For example, the paper you quote shows an excess weight loss of 61% on average, meaning that about 40% of excess weight isn't lost.
So, if a person whose ideal body weight is 150 pounds, and who is 250 pounds at time of surgery, they are likely to be 40 pounds overweight long term at 190 pounds.
Yes?
Perhaps you were just pulling numbers out of the air, but no responsible doctor would perform WLS on a250 pound, 5 foot 8 inch person, which is what your example equates to. A better example would be a400 lb person who "only" gets down to 250. And in that hypothetical, it may well be that the health benefits are worth it. Further, the 40%is an average, including the complete failures who eat around the surgery by sipping Mc Donald's milk shakes all day. And those people do exist. The typical weight loss against goal net of the failures is obviously higher.0 -
A lot of people are saying surgery is not a quick fix, it doesn't change hunger signals nor the degree of hunger, and that the same work goes into post-WLS as without it: diet and exercise. I think that is why some of us have the confusion as to why the surgery is necessary. I don't think people are trying to be narrow-minded or flippant. We may all be missing something here (that is possible) but if the WLS patient still has to do exactly the same things as s/he would have to do, why did s/he get the surgery...I think that's the question.
I would feel differently if people were saying that at least, the degree of hunger were changed. But without even that...what HAS changed for the patient except that s/he may throw up, etc. from larger portion sizes, especially considering the fact that WLS can and sometimes do "eat around" that factor (by smaller but more frequent meals, for example)?
I hear over and over again, "It is still just as much work." If it is AS MUCH work then why have the surgery that permanently alters your system...I think that's the question here. This is compounded by the fact that in some cases, the reasoning that the patient can't lose weight without WLS opposes the patient being required by his/her doctor to lose X amount of weight pre-surgery, and the patient accomplishing that.
So I don't think these questions are unreasonable, or even uneducated/due to ignorance. The questions make perfect sense.
With that said, I'm happy for anyone who wants to lose weight, and finds a way to do so.
Most of the people who have wls would have to work for years to get the weight off. Problem is, they don't *have* years to accomplish this.
Pair that with the hormone imbalance, disease and sedentary lifestyle that comes from too much weight and you can figure out why the surgery is needed.
The reason why they don't just continue loosing weight is because they have a high chance if dying before it's done.
Wls does decrease hormonal production so that patients feel less hunger, BUT as anyone overweight knows, hunger is rarely the reason why people overeat. No one gets to 500lbs because they are peckish. So yes, the surgery allows people to eat what is basically a starvation diet without the body rebelling in a serious way (which it does both mentally and physically, it's gruesome) nobody (sans eating disorder) on a slow diet would do that to themselves.
My resource:
https://asmbs.org/patients/benefits-of-bariatric-surgery
All that said I think the reason ppl are upset is the insinuation that ppl with wls haven't suffered enough. Humanity has agreed that wrongdoing MUST be punished, and by suggesting that those with wls haven't suffered enough you(relative you) are in turn suggesting that being fat is a crime. That is why you have someone like me, who is not eligible for this surgery, speaking out. Being fat is NOT a crime, it does not deserve punishment. But Anything other than full out penance is seen as cheating, why? Can't we just accept that ppl take different paths to the same place? If we are meeting at the park and I walk the mile from my house and you drive the 10mi from yours can I judge you for using a car?0 -
herrspoons wrote: »SergeantSausage wrote: »I don't mean to offend anyone but I'm sure I will. That being said, it irritates the $ hit out of me when people that have had surgery to lose weight give advice like eat small meals, walk, whatever. It may all be valid but that's not how you did it so don't tell other people how to do it. Congrats on doing something to be healthier but don't confuse that with the hard work and sacrifice others are going thru.
Well then, ignore all my posts. I had to follow sensible eating and exercise before surgery, and to maintain I must keep it up afterwards.
I gotta ask (no offense) but then: why the surgery?
Just keep up the "sensible eating and exercise" you had to do anyway, right, and then the surgery becomes unnecessary.
I really don't get it.
At all.
Me neither. Sorry, I just don't.
No reputable surgeon will perform the surgery on anyone with less than 2 co-morbidities. Usually that's diabetes, heart disease, severe joint damage, sleep apnea, or gall bladder disease. There are other odd things that may count in specific circumstances. They don't just hand it out like Oprah passing out cars.
That said, there are some very shady quacks who will put anyone with insurance under the knife for the paycheck, even if they're not even that overweight.0 -
By the way, I get the same hunger signals as I ever had, but I get full a lot faster. It takes planning to make sure I get enough protein in to avoid nasty side-effects. It's a lot less planning than when I was monitoring my blood sugars though. I'm off all medications (yay!) but must continue with vitamins for life (boo!). To avoid selfsame side-effects of surgery.
I am training for my first 5K. I am accepting professional help for this too (physiotherapist), but perhaps you see that as a "cheat" as well. Is my anti-pronating running shoe a "cheat"? My daughter mentioned that she was expecting me to continue to gain weight and lose mobility through retirement, and that she is so terribly proud of me. This weight loss means I've added ten years to my lifespan and all the vitality that goes with it. All in all for the health and mobility gains, it's been worth it!
But of course, 123, you are free to ignore my posts if they are too irritating for you.
Being a sleever, I agree with you jgnatca. Prior to surgery, we had to eat less, hungry or not. In fact, I lost about 20 lbs on the pre-surgery diet. I messed up my shin and back and was only lightly physically active which slowed down my progress. I used the sleeve as a tool, just like any other person who has had the surgery. Its not an "I Dream of Jeanie" fix like a lot of people think it is. If nothing else 1234usmc, your venting actually gave the gastric surgery community the opportunity to let people know that having the surgery is nothing instant like a diet miracle, it still takes making sensible choices and adding physical activity to your lifestyle.
I lost 100 lbs within 6 months. As a result, I no longer am diabetic (My Dr. moved me to pre-diabetic at my last appointment), I no longer need hypertension meds (I was taking 2) and I was able to drop one of my cholesterol meds ( I still have the hereditary cholesterol). I am also off the daily prilosec. I am able to walk over an hour without having to huff and puff and climb stairs with little issue. Something I was unable to do 100 lbs. ago. When I don't keep my eyes on the prize, I can gain as much as 10lbs over a 2 day period. Takes me 4 days of hyper clean eating to get back down so I still know that I have to sacrifice and workout to keep losing or maintain where I want to be.
Thank you, 1234usmc, for your comments and keep posting.
0 -
1234mc...thank you for your service! You may vent all you want! As far as I am concerned you earned the right. Loads of people state their opinion on here and end up being torn apart for it. Don't let them bother you. I don't fully understand gastric by-pass, but I have seen some people lose a lot of weight on their own and then still get the surgery which is confusing to me.....I feel like, look you did it on your own! Why alter your body for the rest of your life? There's is a lot I don't understand about it either. Don't fret!0
-
My sister had the sleeve. After many years of yo-yo diets and depression, it gave her the confidence that she COULD lose weight. She had totally lost faith in the process (eat less, move more), and this gave it back to her. She's lost a lot of weight and is a completely different person now. I am FOR surgery, when a person is ready for it.0
-
I dunno - not trying to be hateful - is it just people who've had surgery or is it anyone trying to give you advice that bugs you?
I haven't had surgery yet, but am still considering it, and I go to the support group meetings because whether or not any of us have had surgery, the goal is still the same: to lose weight.
Further, whether or not you're interested in having surgery, you're going to have to eat less (or be smarter about what you eat) if you want to lose weight. That's why I haven't gotten the surgery as yet. If I'm going to lose weight or have surgery, I'm going to have to change my eating habits. If I can do that without surgery, all the better. If I can't, then the surgery is a tool to assist in that endeavor.
It's all about putting yourself in an environment that will promote success by being around those who are trying to accomplish the same thing as you. I may be 48, but I'm smart enough to know I don't know everything, and maybe I can learn something from others whether they've had some sort of weight loss surgery or not. Yes there will always be things that won't work for me, but there has to be something that will help me along the way.
***really trying to avoid singing kumbaya*** LOL0 -
The problem with gastric bypass or any other surgical procedure is that it treats a symptom and not the root cause. Additionally the enzymatic regimen one must abide by for the rest of their life surgery is certainly not an easy option in the long term, although the short term gains are certainly appealing. It is a short term strategy and should only be used as a last resort.-1
-
Interesting thread. I've never thought people that chose surgery had it easy. Surgery scares the bejeepers out of me.
A woman that has a podcast that I follow had surgery 8 or 9 years ago and achieved successful weight loss. In January of this year she had complications directly related to the surgery many years before. They have now removed around 90% of her small intestines and she may be on a liquid diet for life.
There is nothing easy about choosing surgery but I can understand the tendency to think that person is unqualified to give advice on weight loss dieting. I don't know if they are or not.0 -
See now, right here...crazyjerseygirl wrote: »But Anything other than full out penance is seen as cheating, why? Can't we just accept that ppl take different paths to the same place? If we are meeting at the park and I walk the mile from my house and you drive the 10mi from yours can I judge you for using a car?
...you are the one who is judging.
It's that presumption that "It's so much harder for us (WLS patients or people considering WLS)." When I started out losing weight, I had nearly 100 pounds to lose. I still have close to 70 to go. I don't presume that it's "so much easier" for someone who only has 50 lbs., or 20 lbs., to lose. You are making the judgments, not I. And I see that a lot, frankly.
I never said WLS was "cheating." I asked legitimate questions. You answered them - thank you. But I asked - I didn't point a finger nor bring out an unlikely analogy, as you did.
When you make that comparison that presumes it's a piece of cake for us 100-lb.-to-lose (or less) people compared to WLS people (which is weird because at 100 lbs. overweight I would have been a candidate for WLS), it is you who are making judgments, wagging a finger, and minimizing another's struggles.
I appreciate your taking the time to give legitimate answers, as I asked legitimate questions, but the judging and minimizing add-ons weren't necessary and, as I said, seem pretty common in these WLS threads. How about not minimizing the next person's struggle and waving away that person's hard work so that you can support WLS? In the end WLS is a choice, as is not having WLS and dieting/exercising without it. Thanks in advance for being more considerate and thoughtful in the future.
"Can't we just accept that ppl take different paths to the same place?" I can, which is why I asked questions, pointed out why the questions were being asked, and didn't pre-judge you nor minimize and toss aside your struggles as basically no possible comparison to mine, using inflated analogies designed to make your weight loss journey look like a snap of the fingers and mine like the Trail of Tears.
0 -
Yeah I think part of it is the desire to see people punished for their perceived failures, part of it is jealousy over the perception of someone having an easier time with the same goal, and some of it is just out of a need to fight insecurity by putting others down.
I would say *almost* none is actual open-minded curiosity. You can't really say, "I just don't understand why you're taking the easy way out/mutilating your body/risking your life" and expect that to come off as not judgmental. Because it isn't.0 -
Further to the above (sorry, didn't want to edit as it will be too long and someone may answer the post in the meantime) - this:
"Most of the people who have wls would have to work for years to get the weight off. Problem is, they don't *have* years to accomplish this.
Pair that with the hormone imbalance, disease and sedentary lifestyle that comes from too much weight and you can figure out why the surgery is needed.
The reason why they don't just continue loosing weight is because they have a high chance if dying before it's done."
On what basis do you make this diagnosis...that they "have a high chance of dying before it's done"? Many WLS patients have been the weight they're at for years; many have also had comorbid conditions for years. Some have been obese the majority of their lives. Some have been at their current weight for five years. Some for 20 years. Some are in their 40s and have been morbidly obese since their teens. I can see a doctor making the judgment, on an individual, case-by-case basis, that they "don't have years," but how are you doing so...for "most" WLS patients?
You don't have to be a My 600-Lb. Life candidate to be a candidate for WLS. From what I understand, WLS basically relies on a BMI of 40 or more - with or without comorbidity. As I understand it, lower BMI if there are comorbidities. For a 5'6" person, that's only 250 lbs. For me, at 5'1", that would only be 210 lbs. (10 lbs. lower than my highest weight). Would you say that I was likely to die before losing weight when I was 210 lbs.? I didn't - and I was there for three years. And only about 10 lbs. under WLS candidacy for 11 years (but still considered morbidly obese). Would you have made the judgment that I was likely to die without the WLS at some point during that time?
I wish you had just stuck with legitimate explanations, but you had to "go there" in a number of ways that just aren't accurate and that you can't possibly decide from afar...IMO. And all based on your presumption that everyone who doesn't fully understand WLS v. dieting and exercising without it is making some judgment. Ironically, you're actually the one making the judgments and sweeping presumptions. IMO, that detracts from the message and really doesn't "educate" people any better. You're saying others are ignorant, meanwhile making fatality diagnoses from afar about a huge category of people and stating as categorical fact that the struggle of a non-WLS patient can't possibly compare to that of a WLS patient - we're only walking a mile, they're trying to walk 10. Really, if you want to be spreading "correct" information then you should be doing just that. But as long as you're deciding not to do that, you might want to beg off accusing others of same.0 -
The problem with gastric bypass or any other surgical procedure is that it treats a symptom and not the root cause. Additionally the enzymatic regimen one must abide by for the rest of their life surgery is certainly not an easy option in the long term, although the short term gains are certainly appealing. It is a short term strategy and should only be used as a last resort.
Bariatric surgery is a catch-call phrase which includes the actual surgery, plus the medical treatments surrounding surgery. Part of those medical treatments at a reputable clinic in Canada or the USA - not from medical tourism clinics elsewhere - is ALWAYS nutrition counseling, exercise regimens, and proof of concept. At my hospital in Canada, you will be disallowed from having bariatric surgery if you've been non-compliant in your pre-surgery weight loss goals. You have to prove for several months that you're committed to a lifestyle change before anyone will operate on you, thus negating your point.beemerphile1 wrote: »Interesting thread. I've never thought people that chose surgery had it easy. Surgery scares the bejeepers out of me.
A woman that has a podcast that I follow had surgery 8 or 9 years ago and achieved successful weight loss. In January of this year she had complications directly related to the surgery many years before. They have now removed around 90% of her small intestines and she may be on a liquid diet for life.
There is nothing easy about choosing surgery but I can understand the tendency to think that person is unqualified to give advice on weight loss dieting. I don't know if they are or not.
I think you are either mis-remembering or the podcaster is exaggerating reality. It is not possible to live on an oral diet with 90% of your small bowel removed. People have about 300 cm of small bowel. Short gut syndrome - in which the bowel is too short (from repeated surgeries) to absorb enough food to sustain you - results when you have less than 125 cm of small bowel and no right colon, or less than 75 cm of small bowel with an intact right colon. To remove 90% of the bowel and have a remaining 30 cm of small bowel would require lifetime intravenous nutrition, not a liquid diet.herrspoons wrote: »Anyone who doesn't understand bariatric surgery simply hasn't bothered to read about it. The evidence is overwhelmingly in support of the procedure(s) without any controversy in the medical literature. A good starting point for self-reading:
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/ccf/media/files/Bariatric_Surgery/schauerbest.pdf
Two selected stats from that paper:
95% of patients post-op report an improved quality of life - you won't find that among MFP users.
Schauer et al, Annals of Surgery, 2000
Risk of death within 5 years of observation is reduced by 89% in the surgery versus no-surgery cohort of patients.
Christou et al, Annals of Surgery, 2004
What about total long term loss in total excess weight and recidivism rates?
From the limited reading I've done, whilst there is no doubt that it is effective in taking people out of the weight range that is deemed unhealthy, it doesn't generally bring them to a normal BMI long term.
For example, the paper you quote shows an excess weight loss of 61% on average, meaning that about 40% of excess weight isn't lost.
So, if a person whose ideal body weight is 150 pounds, and who is 250 pounds at time of surgery, they are likely to be 40 pounds overweight long term at 190 pounds.
Yes?
Yes, what you've posted is correct. Bariatric surgery is not a foolproof guarantee that you will have a beach body or even reach a healthy BMI. I fail to see how that is a failing of the treatment. You yourself are an advocate for diet and exercise as a primary treatment plan and so you should find it encouraging that every bariatric surgery patient also requires lifetime changes with regards to diet and exercise to reach their goals. As I pointed out above, in Canada you are barred from having surgery if you haven't demonstrated a commitment to these lifestyle changes.
What the surgery does achieve however is results that are not possible without surgery. For example, a majority of patients achieve an instant cure from type 2 diabetes with surgery. I don't mean that they go for surgery, lose weight, and eventually taper off the meds; I mean, in fact, instant. Patients go in for surgery as a diabetic, and leave the operating room never needing diabetes medications again, without having lost a single pound. This is not a result achievable by any other method, and is just one example of why bariatric surgery works.
Bariatric surgery isn't a weight loss plan. It is a complex, multi-modal treatment of every element of obesity, including the weight, but also including all of the medical, nutritional, and psychological complications. You might be able to lose weight without bariatric surgery (lots of inspiring example on this very website!) but you cannot achieve all of the other outcomes.0 -
See now, right here...crazyjerseygirl wrote: »But Anything other than full out penance is seen as cheating, why? Can't we just accept that ppl take different paths to the same place? If we are meeting at the park and I walk the mile from my house and you drive the 10mi from yours can I judge you for using a car?
...you are the one who is judging. It's that presumption that "It's so much harder for us (WLS patients or people considering WLS)." When I started out losing weight, I had nearly 100 pounds to lose. I still have close to 70 to go. I don't presume that it's "so much easier" for someone who only has 50 lbs., or 20 lbs., to lose. You are making the judgments, not I. And I see that a lot, frankly.
I never said WLS was "cheating." I asked legitimate questions. You answered them - thank you. But I asked - I didn't point a finger nor bring out an unlikely analogy, as you did.
When you make that comparison that presumes it's a piece of cake for us 100-lb.-to-lose (or less) people compared to WLS people (which is weird because at 100 lbs. overweight I would have been a candidate for WLS), it is you who are making judgments, wagging a finger, and minimizing another's struggles.
I appreciate your taking the time to give legitimate answers, as I asked legitimate questions, but the judging and minimizing add-ons weren't necessary and, as I said, seem pretty common in these WLS threads. How about not minimizing the next person's struggle and waving away that person's hard work so that you can support WLS? In the end WLS is a choice, as is not having WLS and dieting/exercising without it. Thanks in advance for being more considerate and thoughtful in the future.
"Can't we just accept that ppl take different paths to the same place?" I can, which is why I asked questions, pointed out why the questions were being asked, and didn't pre-judge you nor minimize and toss aside your struggles as basically no possible comparison to mine, using inflated analogies designed to make your weight loss journey look like a snap of the fingers and mine like the Trail of Tears.
It was an analogy, and if you read before that I suggested a relative "you" so that comment was not actually directed towards you or anyone in particular.0 -
Further to the above (sorry, didn't want to edit as it will be too long and someone may answer the post in the meantime) - this:
"Most of the people who have wls would have to work for years to get the weight off. Problem is, they don't *have* years to accomplish this.
Pair that with the hormone imbalance, disease and sedentary lifestyle that comes from too much weight and you can figure out why the surgery is needed.
The reason why they don't just continue loosing weight is because they have a high chance if dying before it's done."
On what basis do you make this diagnosis...that they "have a high chance of dying before it's done"? Many WLS patients have been the weight they're at for years; many have also had comorbid conditions for years. Some have been obese the majority of their lives. Some have been at their current weight for five years. Some for 20 years. Some are in their 40s and have been morbidly obese since their teens. I can see a doctor making the judgment, on an individual, case-by-case basis, that they "don't have years," but how are you doing so...for "most" WLS patients?
You don't have to be a My 600-Lb. Life candidate to be a candidate for WLS. From what I understand, WLS basically relies on a BMI of 40 or more - with or without comorbidity. As I understand it, lower BMI if there are comorbidities. For a 5'6" person, that's only 250 lbs. For me, at 5'1", that would only be 210 lbs. (10 lbs. lower than my highest weight). Would you say that I was likely to die before losing weight when I was 210 lbs.? I didn't - and I was there for three years. And only about 10 lbs. under WLS candidacy for 11 years (but still considered morbidly obese). Would you have made the judgment that I was likely to die without the WLS at some point during that time?
I wish you had just stuck with legitimate explanations, but you had to "go there" in a number of ways that just aren't accurate and that you can't possibly decide from afar...IMO. And all based on your presumption that everyone who doesn't fully understand WLS v. dieting and exercising without it is making some judgment. Ironically, you're actually the one making the judgments and sweeping presumptions. IMO, that detracts from the message and really doesn't "educate" people any better. You're saying others are ignorant, meanwhile making fatality diagnoses from afar about a huge category of people and stating as categorical fact that the struggle of a non-WLS patient can't possibly compare to that of a WLS patient - we're only walking a mile, they're trying to walk 10. Really, if you want to be spreading "correct" information then you should be doing just that. But as long as you're deciding not to do that, you might want to beg off accusing others of same.
I got that information from the paper I linked to, plus another one linked by someone else up thread.0 -
crazyjerseygirl wrote: »Further to the above (sorry, didn't want to edit as it will be too long and someone may answer the post in the meantime) - this:
"Most of the people who have wls would have to work for years to get the weight off. Problem is, they don't *have* years to accomplish this.
Pair that with the hormone imbalance, disease and sedentary lifestyle that comes from too much weight and you can figure out why the surgery is needed.
The reason why they don't just continue loosing weight is because they have a high chance if dying before it's done."
On what basis do you make this diagnosis...that they "have a high chance of dying before it's done"? Many WLS patients have been the weight they're at for years; many have also had comorbid conditions for years. Some have been obese the majority of their lives. Some have been at their current weight for five years. Some for 20 years. Some are in their 40s and have been morbidly obese since their teens. I can see a doctor making the judgment, on an individual, case-by-case basis, that they "don't have years," but how are you doing so...for "most" WLS patients?
You don't have to be a My 600-Lb. Life candidate to be a candidate for WLS. From what I understand, WLS basically relies on a BMI of 40 or more - with or without comorbidity. As I understand it, lower BMI if there are comorbidities. For a 5'6" person, that's only 250 lbs. For me, at 5'1", that would only be 210 lbs. (10 lbs. lower than my highest weight). Would you say that I was likely to die before losing weight when I was 210 lbs.? I didn't - and I was there for three years. And only about 10 lbs. under WLS candidacy for 11 years (but still considered morbidly obese). Would you have made the judgment that I was likely to die without the WLS at some point during that time?
I wish you had just stuck with legitimate explanations, but you had to "go there" in a number of ways that just aren't accurate and that you can't possibly decide from afar...IMO. And all based on your presumption that everyone who doesn't fully understand WLS v. dieting and exercising without it is making some judgment. Ironically, you're actually the one making the judgments and sweeping presumptions. IMO, that detracts from the message and really doesn't "educate" people any better. You're saying others are ignorant, meanwhile making fatality diagnoses from afar about a huge category of people and stating as categorical fact that the struggle of a non-WLS patient can't possibly compare to that of a WLS patient - we're only walking a mile, they're trying to walk 10. Really, if you want to be spreading "correct" information then you should be doing just that. But as long as you're deciding not to do that, you might want to beg off accusing others of same.
I got that information from the paper I linked to, plus another one linked by someone else up thread.
That wasn't "a paper," it was an article produced by an organization promoting bariatric surgery, that made sweeping statements without links to the "studies" they kept referring to.
Not saying the studies don't exist, but what were they? And what did they actually show/state? What were the conditions of the study? Anyone can summarize someone else's paper - and be accurate about it or not, and leave in or take out important parts of the study at will.
I will look upthread to see what the other person you referenced posted to see what it says. Hopefully it's a study.
0 -
Double posted.0
-
.0
-
.
Actually, I didn't dismiss the link before reading it. In fact, I stated that I was going to go read it.
You're not adding much to the conversation by not correctly reading what a person has written, then using your mis-reading to judge the person you're quoting.
Yes, I used "studies" with quotations - referencing the link another poster put up, not your link. Please see that link. Again, you might want to understand what you're reading of another's post (in this case, mine) before using the cutesy "see those silly little numbers"? comments which don't actually apply, in this case. They apply to your link (which I already agreed to read, BEFORE making any judgments) - not to the post you're quoting (mine) which was about an entirely different link. In the link I was actually talking about, see that lack of silly little numbers after sentences? Yup.
RIF, and all that.
0 -
@LAWoman72 my response thought you were replying to my link, which it was not (I think), so I deleted it.
My link from the Cleveland Clinic has 87 studies referenced in proper format. Feel free to look up any and all of them at your leisure - no "sweeping" generalizations in there.0 -
@LAWoman72 my response thought you were replying to my link, which it was not (I think), so I deleted it.
My link from the Cleveland Clinic has 87 studies referenced in proper format. Feel free to look up any and all of them at your leisure - no "sweeping" generalizations in there.
Thank you for the link, which I read back to locate. Am reading it now.
Yes, I see that you deleted, as I was trying to quote - including your snark about how I apparently didn't see the "silly little numbers"; lesson learned, perhaps, to read before you snark?
Oh well, probably not.
Anyway, reading now.
ETA: Specifically, I'll be looking for support for the other poster's assertions that WLS patients overwhelmingly "don't have years"; exactly how many years they don't have and why, for instance, taking two years to lose the weight via non-WLS methods would more likely result in death than not; and that another person's journey must only be approximately one-tenth as hard (i.e. the walking to the park analogy) - as those are what I objected to.
All the rest was a simple request for information and support for why non-WLS patients ask these questions.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions