FDA approves weight loss stomach pump device

2456710

Replies

  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    Lounmoun wrote: »
    I can't imagine resorting to something like that. It just seems cheaper, less painful, less effort to eat less calories in the first place.

    The article says the device is currently available in Europe. People all around the world buy and do dumb things instead of just watching their calorie intake.

    not sure this is any different than gastric bypass or band surgery????

    Less invasive maybe....

    I agree it's freakin' gross, disgusting and it's sad people are and are going to do it.

    Bariatric surgery has a higher risk of negative side effects than a g-tube. G-tubes have very low incidence of infection or other negative side effects.
  • knelson095
    knelson095 Posts: 254 Member
    Dangit. How did I miss this? I scrolled through and just made the same post. Whoops.
  • laur357
    laur357 Posts: 896 Member
    I think I'd feel better with the FDA-approved Obera or ReShape option. Fewer side effects, anyway, since there is no surgical incision and full anesthesia. But you're still walking around with a foreign object in your body.

    "The system is indicated as an adjunct to weight reduction for obese adults with body mass index of 30 to 40 kg/m2 who have been unable to lose weight through diet and exercise. It is to be used in conjunction with a long-term supervised diet and behavior-modification program, which are to be continued after device removal.

    Data on the use of the system in 125 individuals with BMI 30 to 40 kg/m2 were presented earlier this year at Digestive Disease Week 2015. The participants lost an average of 22 pounds (10%) of their body weight after the balloon had been in place for 6 months and maintained 19 pounds of that weight loss 3 months after it was removed." -http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/849200

    I'd rather just lose my weight for free with MFP and not a medical procedure, but everyone isn't me. Also sounds like there was some weight creep very soon after it was pulled, but at least it requires some long-term support.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    What I don't understand is how it's supposed to help in the long run. It's a temporary device that does nothing to re-train the user like conventional bariatric surgery. It will help with immediate weight loss, but it has to be removed at some point, and the user is left with a normal-sized stomach and appetite. The supervised diet and counseling can help long-term, but how does flushing undigested food down the toilet for a little while solve anything?

    I suppose it would solve as much as a reduced calorie diet would. In other words, it will help them lose weight. Given the percentage of people that regain weight after dieting by any method (including calorie counting) why not try something new?
  • snikkins
    snikkins Posts: 1,282 Member
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    I don't understand why people are worrying about eating disorders. Do they worry about eating disorders for bariatric surgery? This has the same general requirements - must be at a high BMI, must have tried to lose weight through other means, must be in a situation where weight loss is the most healthy thing they can do for themselves. It seems like completely unnecessary worry, people looking for reasons to be angry at this device because they think it's gross without actually being logical about it. In fact, this is just the feeding tube given to anorexic patients in reverse, and without inpatient. Seems like a great tool for someone with BED or other kinds of disordered binge eating.

    I think it's gross but I might think differently if I had a BMI of 45 and had been struggling for years to lose weight and knew that if I didn't lose weight I would be in mortal danger very soon. You know what's also gross? Colostomy bags. That doesn't mean they shouldn't exist; it just means that medical intervention is sometimes necessarily gross.

    Man, the people on this forum are so judgy and irrational sometimes.

    What would be "logical" is educating people and giving them what they need to learn how to eat properly for a lifetime rather than impanting a device which allows them to continue engaging in destructive eating habits yet purge their bodies of the food (which also carries a high likelihood that the device will be overused and the patient could suffer from malnutrition even while binging).

    That was one of my first thoughts, too. How is someone going to get proper nutrition while purging?
  • Mentali
    Mentali Posts: 352 Member
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    I don't understand why people are worrying about eating disorders. Do they worry about eating disorders for bariatric surgery? This has the same general requirements - must be at a high BMI, must have tried to lose weight through other means, must be in a situation where weight loss is the most healthy thing they can do for themselves. It seems like completely unnecessary worry, people looking for reasons to be angry at this device because they think it's gross without actually being logical about it. In fact, this is just the feeding tube given to anorexic patients in reverse, and without inpatient. Seems like a great tool for someone with BED or other kinds of disordered binge eating.

    I think it's gross but I might think differently if I had a BMI of 45 and had been struggling for years to lose weight and knew that if I didn't lose weight I would be in mortal danger very soon. You know what's also gross? Colostomy bags. That doesn't mean they shouldn't exist; it just means that medical intervention is sometimes necessarily gross.

    Man, the people on this forum are so judgy and irrational sometimes.

    What would be "logical" is educating people and giving them what they need to learn how to eat properly for a lifetime rather than impanting a device which allows them to continue engaging in destructive eating habits yet purge their bodies of the food (which also carries a high likelihood that the device will be overused and the patient could suffer from malnutrition even while binging).

    Yes, which is why this is designed to be used in conjunction with nutrition and exercise counseling - which was proven to work in their testing in the past to prevent the weight from coming right back.

    There is no likelihood that the person would overuse the device. You know why? Because the device literally has a failsafe in it that only allows it to be used 115 times before being replaced, which comes out to about 1.5 months. If you had bothered to research the thing you're trying to express your opinion on, you would know that....
  • singingflutelady
    singingflutelady Posts: 8,736 Member
    If you watch "thin" you will see that some anorexics and bulimics already use their G tubes to purge. This is nothing new
  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    edited June 2016
    Mentali wrote: »
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    I don't understand why people are worrying about eating disorders. Do they worry about eating disorders for bariatric surgery? This has the same general requirements - must be at a high BMI, must have tried to lose weight through other means, must be in a situation where weight loss is the most healthy thing they can do for themselves. It seems like completely unnecessary worry, people looking for reasons to be angry at this device because they think it's gross without actually being logical about it. In fact, this is just the feeding tube given to anorexic patients in reverse, and without inpatient. Seems like a great tool for someone with BED or other kinds of disordered binge eating.

    I think it's gross but I might think differently if I had a BMI of 45 and had been struggling for years to lose weight and knew that if I didn't lose weight I would be in mortal danger very soon. You know what's also gross? Colostomy bags. That doesn't mean they shouldn't exist; it just means that medical intervention is sometimes necessarily gross.

    Man, the people on this forum are so judgy and irrational sometimes.

    What would be "logical" is educating people and giving them what they need to learn how to eat properly for a lifetime rather than impanting a device which allows them to continue engaging in destructive eating habits yet purge their bodies of the food (which also carries a high likelihood that the device will be overused and the patient could suffer from malnutrition even while binging).

    Yes, which is why this is designed to be used in conjunction with nutrition and exercise counseling - which was proven to work in their testing in the past to prevent the weight from coming right back.

    There is no likelihood that the person would overuse the device. You know why? Because the device literally has a failsafe in it that only allows it to be used 115 times before being replaced, which comes out to about 1.5 months. If you had bothered to research the thing you're trying to express your opinion on, you would know that....

    But how do you know this, as well. It's a legitimate argument. What's so nutritious about having all food purged from your stomach and let alone having no energy to exercise. Geez

    ETA: I bet you someone would find a way to abuse this device
  • mespreeman
    mespreeman Posts: 70 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Depressing.

  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    I don't understand why people are worrying about eating disorders. Do they worry about eating disorders for bariatric surgery? This has the same general requirements - must be at a high BMI, must have tried to lose weight through other means, must be in a situation where weight loss is the most healthy thing they can do for themselves. It seems like completely unnecessary worry, people looking for reasons to be angry at this device because they think it's gross without actually being logical about it. In fact, this is just the feeding tube given to anorexic patients in reverse, and without inpatient. Seems like a great tool for someone with BED or other kinds of disordered binge eating.

    I think it's gross but I might think differently if I had a BMI of 45 and had been struggling for years to lose weight and knew that if I didn't lose weight I would be in mortal danger very soon. You know what's also gross? Colostomy bags. That doesn't mean they shouldn't exist; it just means that medical intervention is sometimes necessarily gross.

    Man, the people on this forum are so judgy and irrational sometimes.

    What would be "logical" is educating people and giving them what they need to learn how to eat properly for a lifetime rather than impanting a device which allows them to continue engaging in destructive eating habits yet purge their bodies of the food (which also carries a high likelihood that the device will be overused and the patient could suffer from malnutrition even while binging).

    That FDA statement indicates that the device will only be used after non surgical weight loss therapy has failed to achieve or maintain weight loss had failed and that eligible patients will be assisted with a lifestyle programme to help with healthier choices. It also states that patients will be the subject of regular checks.

    This, much like any invasive procedure won't be the first port of call.
  • megzchica23
    megzchica23 Posts: 419 Member
    To me this is bad because it isn't teaching people to learn to control their eating and be healthier. It is basically a way to eat what you want and still lose weight and that teaches no one anything. It is an easy out.
  • DoreenaV1975
    DoreenaV1975 Posts: 567 Member
    And the list of people I know who will use this just popped into my brain... these people I thought of don't give a fig about eating less to lose weight or proper nutrition. They are the people who complain about being "fat" while shoving large amounts of high calorie foods in their mouths all day every day... ::SMH::
    I think any candidate for this most be forced to be on a meal plan of some sort to try to shed at least a little bit of the weight first or else they will learn absolutely nothing!
  • DoreenaV1975
    DoreenaV1975 Posts: 567 Member
    edited June 2016
    snikkins wrote: »
    msf74 wrote: »
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    I don't understand why people are worrying about eating disorders. Do they worry about eating disorders for bariatric surgery? This has the same general requirements - must be at a high BMI, must have tried to lose weight through other means, must be in a situation where weight loss is the most healthy thing they can do for themselves. It seems like completely unnecessary worry, people looking for reasons to be angry at this device because they think it's gross without actually being logical about it. In fact, this is just the feeding tube given to anorexic patients in reverse, and without inpatient. Seems like a great tool for someone with BED or other kinds of disordered binge eating.

    I think it's gross but I might think differently if I had a BMI of 45 and had been struggling for years to lose weight and knew that if I didn't lose weight I would be in mortal danger very soon. You know what's also gross? Colostomy bags. That doesn't mean they shouldn't exist; it just means that medical intervention is sometimes necessarily gross.

    Man, the people on this forum are so judgy and irrational sometimes.

    What would be "logical" is educating people and giving them what they need to learn how to eat properly for a lifetime rather than impanting a device which allows them to continue engaging in destructive eating habits yet purge their bodies of the food (which also carries a high likelihood that the device will be overused and the patient could suffer from malnutrition even while binging).

    That FDA statement indicates that the device will only be used after non surgical weight loss therapy has failed to achieve or maintain weight loss had failed and that eligible patients will be assisted with a lifestyle programme to help with healthier choices. It also states that patients will be the subject of regular checks.

    This, much like any invasive procedure won't be the first port of call.

    Which, to me, makes a bad thing even worse.

    Other non-surgical forms of weight loss therapy failing means that the patient, for whatever reason, has never been able to take the "eat less calories than you're burning" part and make it a reality, which makes having a device to purge while supposedly teaching someone better eating habits seem tenuous.

    Why will they suddenly be successful long term now that they quite literally do not need to be accountable in any way for their food choices?

    Exactly!
    But I have to say I missed that part... where it's the last resort, so that at least makes it better!
  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    snikkins wrote: »
    msf74 wrote: »
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    I don't understand why people are worrying about eating disorders. Do they worry about eating disorders for bariatric surgery? This has the same general requirements - must be at a high BMI, must have tried to lose weight through other means, must be in a situation where weight loss is the most healthy thing they can do for themselves. It seems like completely unnecessary worry, people looking for reasons to be angry at this device because they think it's gross without actually being logical about it. In fact, this is just the feeding tube given to anorexic patients in reverse, and without inpatient. Seems like a great tool for someone with BED or other kinds of disordered binge eating.

    I think it's gross but I might think differently if I had a BMI of 45 and had been struggling for years to lose weight and knew that if I didn't lose weight I would be in mortal danger very soon. You know what's also gross? Colostomy bags. That doesn't mean they shouldn't exist; it just means that medical intervention is sometimes necessarily gross.

    Man, the people on this forum are so judgy and irrational sometimes.

    What would be "logical" is educating people and giving them what they need to learn how to eat properly for a lifetime rather than impanting a device which allows them to continue engaging in destructive eating habits yet purge their bodies of the food (which also carries a high likelihood that the device will be overused and the patient could suffer from malnutrition even while binging).

    That FDA statement indicates that the device will only be used after non surgical weight loss therapy has failed to achieve or maintain weight loss had failed and that eligible patients will be assisted with a lifestyle programme to help with healthier choices. It also states that patients will be the subject of regular checks.

    This, much like any invasive procedure won't be the first port of call.

    Which, to me, makes a bad thing even worse.

    Other non-surgical forms of weight loss therapy failing means that the patient, for whatever reason, has never been able to take the "eat less calories than you're burning" part and make it a reality, which makes having a device to purge while supposedly teaching someone better eating habits seem tenuous.

    Why will they suddenly be successful long term now that they quite literally do not need to be accountable in any way for their food choices?

    And the same could be argued about VLCDs or other forms of bariatric surgery. In fact many of the arguments put forward in this thread echo the same objections.

    Yet, they are both still viable because the benefit to the patient justifies the intervention. In some cases getting weight down, by whatever means necessary, is a better answer than the alternatives.
  • upoffthemat
    upoffthemat Posts: 679 Member
    What would this do to nutrition? I would think you wouldn't have any idea what you actually absorbed.
  • MissusMoon
    MissusMoon Posts: 1,900 Member
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    Lounmoun wrote: »
    I can't imagine resorting to something like that. It just seems cheaper, less painful, less effort to eat less calories in the first place.

    The article says the device is currently available in Europe. People all around the world buy and do dumb things instead of just watching their calorie intake.

    not sure this is any different than gastric bypass or band surgery????

    Less invasive maybe....

    I agree it's freakin' gross, disgusting and it's sad people are and are going to do it.

    I think it's different. People get full faster when they've had those procedures. In theory, they learn to eat better portions.

    This, this....it leaves me aghast. I don't have a problem with medical tools to help people generally speaking. But this...where is the learning to be healthy part? It's basically enabling a person to binge and purge. Given the new shuttle thing that's being tested, which is like gastric bypass but a temporary balloon, I don't see why the world needs something like this.

    Good gawd.
  • snikkins
    snikkins Posts: 1,282 Member
    msf74 wrote: »
    snikkins wrote: »
    msf74 wrote: »
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    Mentali wrote: »
    I don't understand why people are worrying about eating disorders. Do they worry about eating disorders for bariatric surgery? This has the same general requirements - must be at a high BMI, must have tried to lose weight through other means, must be in a situation where weight loss is the most healthy thing they can do for themselves. It seems like completely unnecessary worry, people looking for reasons to be angry at this device because they think it's gross without actually being logical about it. In fact, this is just the feeding tube given to anorexic patients in reverse, and without inpatient. Seems like a great tool for someone with BED or other kinds of disordered binge eating.

    I think it's gross but I might think differently if I had a BMI of 45 and had been struggling for years to lose weight and knew that if I didn't lose weight I would be in mortal danger very soon. You know what's also gross? Colostomy bags. That doesn't mean they shouldn't exist; it just means that medical intervention is sometimes necessarily gross.

    Man, the people on this forum are so judgy and irrational sometimes.

    What would be "logical" is educating people and giving them what they need to learn how to eat properly for a lifetime rather than impanting a device which allows them to continue engaging in destructive eating habits yet purge their bodies of the food (which also carries a high likelihood that the device will be overused and the patient could suffer from malnutrition even while binging).

    That FDA statement indicates that the device will only be used after non surgical weight loss therapy has failed to achieve or maintain weight loss had failed and that eligible patients will be assisted with a lifestyle programme to help with healthier choices. It also states that patients will be the subject of regular checks.

    This, much like any invasive procedure won't be the first port of call.

    Which, to me, makes a bad thing even worse.

    Other non-surgical forms of weight loss therapy failing means that the patient, for whatever reason, has never been able to take the "eat less calories than you're burning" part and make it a reality, which makes having a device to purge while supposedly teaching someone better eating habits seem tenuous.

    Why will they suddenly be successful long term now that they quite literally do not need to be accountable in any way for their food choices?

    And the same could be argued about VLCDs or other forms of bariatric surgery. In fact many of the arguments put forward in this thread echo the same objections.

    Yet, they are both still viable because the benefit to the patient justifies the intervention. In some cases getting weight down, by whatever means necessary, is a better answer than the alternatives.

    The difference, for me, is that with VLCDs and bariatric surgery, no one is encouraged to quite literally remove the contents of their stomachs in the same way that this pump does. This is making a different eating disorder behavior acceptable without the bodily damage that vomiting or laxatives causes.

    If you regain the weight after bariatric surgery, which many people do, you can find someone to do the surgery again or maybe try something different, which is what you'll likely be allowed to do with this device as well. What I'm worried about with this device is that the "something different" might end up being actual bulimia, since that's essentially what you were doing in the first place. I don't think it'll be a big leap for some.
  • sashayoung72
    sashayoung72 Posts: 441 Member
    I should be shocked that this is even a thing, but as several pointed out, people have done similar stuff for years. I'm so glad I finally found a way that works for me and there are ZERO tricks involved.
This discussion has been closed.