FDA approves weight loss stomach pump device

Options
2456715

Replies

  • blondie_mfp
    blondie_mfp Posts: 62 Member
    Options
    I'm having a hard time thinking of any possible medical reason why this would be necessary. surely there is one... right? this device wouldn't only be for overweight people to lose weight while continuing to eat too much... right?
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    elphie754 wrote: »
    So basically it is a PEG tube but in reverse?

    I can see this becoming a huge issue, especially for those with a history of bulimia. HBO did a special years ago called "Thin" about residential eating disorder treatment. One of the women had a PEG tube and used it to stay under 90lbs!

    What on earth was the FDA thinking?

    By the description I believe it is just a PEG tube (those work in either direction). Don't know if you read the article but you must stay under a doctor's care to use it. They may have been thinking desperate measures for desperate times. Obesity is a huge drain on national resources.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    Options
    and here in Canada they have developed a Deep brain stimulation operation to help combat eating disorders..smh...

    Sorry but US is screwed up...
  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    Options
    They may have been thinking desperate measures for desperate times. Obesity is a huge drain on national resources

    That's what I took from this.

    Also, it seems it (quite rightly) won't be made available to everyone but rather:
    The AspireAssist device should not be used on patients with eating disorders, and it is not intended to be used for short durations in those who are moderately overweight. It is intended to assist in weight loss in patients aged 22 and older who are obese, with a body mass index of 35 to 55, and who have failed to achieve and maintain weight loss through non-surgical weight-loss therapy.

    Do the benefits of this intervention outweigh (pardon the pun) the costs? The FDA seems to think so after assessing the evidence.

    It may seem gross, unpleasant and so on but the question to me is "will it be successful in what it is setting out to achieve?" If the answer is yes then it seems to be a useful asset to consider in treating obesity.
  • kommodevaran
    kommodevaran Posts: 17,890 Member
    Options
    Absolutely nasty, disgusting in every way, but most of all, very sad.

    My second thought - will this device come with vouchers so you can buy more food?
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    Options
    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.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    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
    Options
    Dangit. How did I miss this? I scrolled through and just made the same post. Whoops.
  • laur357
    laur357 Posts: 896 Member
    Options
    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: 13,576 Member
    Options
    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?