Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2013 8:46:53 GMT -5
Great post.
To those that are short, older, a LW, been on a perpetual diet all your life, it is possible to reach a normal BMI, not easy but possible.
I have a smallish stomach with a 175 cc common channel. But my starting BMI just barely put me in the running for WLS at all...my surgeon actually wanted me to have a 200 cc, I got him to agree to the 175. And it is working for me.
|
|
|
Post by Joanne on Mar 11, 2013 12:50:34 GMT -5
Thanks for bumping this great post by Diana.
I'm not a big believer in goal weights, because I think it sets us up automatically to consider ourselves a success or a failure. So much goes into the equation. No two people are obese for the same reasons, have the same metabolism, eat exactly the same, have exactly the same activity level, etc. There is no such thing as saying a <fill in the blank> CM common channel = this much weight loss. There are way too many variables. That's like saying two 5'6" women with the same normal length intestines should weigh the same thing.
Now, back to the goal weights. Once your body was MO, it changes. Your bones get heavier, your vascular system grows. You have excess skin. The way YOU look at 175 lbs might be very different than if you weighed 175 lbs having never been MO. So setting an arbitrary goal is meaningless, anyway. Even if you were to make it, you might not look as expected. Most formerly MO people look better a little higher on the BMI scale than they thought.
The 75-80% excess weight loss is an average. That means for everyone who achieves near 100% EWL, someone is less than average. It could be you on either side of that. It may be due to things you can control (carbs, activity), or it may be due to things beyond your control (metabolism, disability, age). I believe people should set lifestyle goals, and not set themselves up out of the gate to be a failure. Examples of lifestyle goals are: being off diabetes medication, gaining mobility, running a marathon...it's all relative to where you started.
And yes, weight loss is based on a percentage of excess weight. I saw someone post last week that they were over 400 pounds and had a goal of 150 lbs. Possible? Maybe. But not likely. My surgeon likes to frame it like this, for people with higher BMI, there is something in play that allows their body to get to that BMI to begin with. Maybe it's a really bad gene card for metabolism, maybe it's something else. But the DS can correct some / most of that, but there are still factors working against you. Also at super high BMI's you will also likely have 20-30+ pounds of excess skin. I started around 290 pounds and still had 12 pounds of excess skin removed.
Stuff to keep in mind. This is a great topic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2013 21:43:10 GMT -5
Joanne, EXALT and THANK YOU for your post immediately above. It came at the perfect time for me. I have struggled with this process for almost a year now and have returned to and read this great thread on personal responsibility several times. Tonight's read helped me in a whole different, expanded way because of your wise additions. As I approach my 1 year revisiversary I've been feeling like a wls failure (again) and determined not to let myself off the hook by NOT posting about it (later this month). Anyway, you've given me some really good and important things to think about and I appreciate all you've added to this thread more than you'll likely ever know. Thanks thanks thanks.
|
|
MrsGMO
Full Member
Praying for a DS with Dr. Ayoolah
Posts: 137
Surgery Type: Lap Band
Surgery Date: 2005
|
Post by MrsGMO on Mar 12, 2013 1:12:08 GMT -5
5) Some surgeons do not do adequate operations. That's just fact. Drs. X, Y and Z (I'm not going to name names here, but I will give my opinions privately) seem to have more patients with worse results on average than others. And I'm wary of the surgeons who are giving people REALLY small stomachs and longer common channels -- some surprisingly long (150-200 cm). I have my doubts about them. My opinion, of course, and not a fact, and all based on anecdotal evidence. Personally, I would never accept a common channel longer than 125 cm, but that is my OPINION, not fact. The smaller stomach (3 oz vs. 5 or more, but no smaller) I think is a good idea, depending on the person. I tried to msg. the OP about this point several months ago but received no response. (I'm sure she's off living life and such.) Could anyone shed some light on this/these surgeon(s)? Of course, I want to know if my prospective surgeon is on her list and am deeply curious as to who might be on the list. Is this common knowledge amongst the DS crowd? I haven't seen it discussed on any forum. Please feel free to msg. me if you prefer.
|
|
MrsGMO
Full Member
Praying for a DS with Dr. Ayoolah
Posts: 137
Surgery Type: Lap Band
Surgery Date: 2005
|
Post by MrsGMO on Mar 12, 2013 17:56:06 GMT -5
I'm sorry about that, Diana. I hate it when I miss the obvious!
The surgeon in question is Dr. Daryl Stewart in Denton, Texas. Over the past two years, I've read just about every scrap of info on him I could find online. None of the feedback I could find indicated anything negative about him or his choice of channel and/or stomach size, but I wanted to see if he was on anyone's Hit List after reading this post.
|
|
Kat
Junior Member
Finally in Onederland!
Posts: 76
Surgery Type: DS
Surgery Date: June 18,2014 (265 lbs.)
Surgeon: Dr. J.R. Salameh
|
Post by Kat on Mar 15, 2014 16:37:57 GMT -5
While I find your post informative, I find that your offer to give your opinion of surgeons who were not your own akin to gossip and possible professional bashing. I'm glad you had the keen seen to say you'd do the naming privately.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
|
|
|
Post by newyorkbitch on Mar 15, 2014 18:20:31 GMT -5
This thread is from over a year ago. Please don't necropost.
|
|
|
Post by goodkel on Mar 15, 2014 18:31:21 GMT -5
This thread is from over a year ago. Please don't necropost. This post has been stickied to the top. It was not necroposted. Stickied posts are there specifically for the reason so new people can find them and contribute or ask questions on it. Otherwise it would have been locked. Someone was going to rewrite it, but that has been delayed. The new version will be stickied as well.
|
|
|
Post by newyorkbitch on Mar 15, 2014 19:59:38 GMT -5
Ah, gotcha.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2014 20:48:31 GMT -5
My heart leapt a bit when I saw the vets on this post. Then I noticed the dates...
|
|
|
Post by goodkel on Mar 16, 2014 19:07:02 GMT -5
We'll get a new one up soon and send this one to the archives.
|
|
|
Post by kennyk on Mar 17, 2014 4:19:57 GMT -5
The names in the history of thie post make this no less relevant. Rewriting and archiving it for new names reminds me of the odd cousin kept away in the Alabama closet, away from people. This is a relevant thought provoking post that I was glad to read and think upon and then I see it is going the way of soylent green and being reprocessed. Feh on that and the concept of necropostng! Kenny
|
|
|
Post by goodkel on Mar 17, 2014 9:20:56 GMT -5
This info won't go away. But, a better version is in the works.
No need to keep old drama on the first page. Those "odd cousins" are in the closet for good reason. To make you happy, Kenny, I'll just remove the sticky and let it die a natural death.
And it is always better to start a new thread than to reply to a necropost. Information changes, members change. If a thread has fallen off a couple of pages, it is because the topic wore itself out or the participants lost interest. Better to start fresh. You can always copy and paste particular info you want to discuss or refer to it by link.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 22:46:38 GMT -5
It leapt with joy Kenny. I want them here drama and all.
|
|
|
Post by Girlrocker on Mar 17, 2014 23:03:04 GMT -5
It leapt with joy Kenny. I want them here drama and all. What does this have to do with the context of what's on this post? All kinds of members have posted on this, some still post, others move on, others drop in once awhile, some only use support boards during their pre-op and immediately post op time. There's plenty of members making a contribution and value here? And what qualifies as a 'vet'? I believe there are several members of this particular community who are 7-14 year post op, they don't qualify as 'vets, their contribution is not as valulable?. What exactly about what you're saying here is constructive in any way, and why is 'drama' a positive? We are now in a digital age with a variety of sources to access information and weight loss surgery has become more part of its mainstream. Topics such as this are timeless, and that's why they are stickied, because they provide an 'encyclopedia' effect of information, and over time, continue to be updated so they remain current and relevant.
|
|
|
Post by kennyk on Mar 18, 2014 2:54:23 GMT -5
I get it. From both sides. I miss a lot of the folks that moved on but their loss. But as much as reworks are a part of life(I just saw and enjoyed robocop, but I would never give up my copy of the original!) Just sayin' K
|
|
|
Post by Girlrocker on Mar 18, 2014 9:46:44 GMT -5
I get it. From both sides. I miss a lot of the folks that moved on but their loss. But as much as reworks are a part of life(I just saw and enjoyed robocop, but I would never give up my copy of the original!) Just sayin' K And I will say the same thing here, there are no 'sides' - we are a bariatric community and our responsibility is to provide support and the most information we can to as many as we can. We are all on the same side. I am newer to the DS but I'm not new to the bariatric world, and when I started reading about it in 2000, there were very few resources out there for us, you really had to dig and search. We live in a changed world, we are a digital culture now and, bariatric surgery is not the taboo, marginalized topic it once was. It is hardly mainstream, but there is more information to access now, places to look - that's the nature of the culture we live in. No one source has the claim as the be all/end all of information, and, yes, it's actually possible in an online community for people to share wisdom and experience without drawing counter productive attention. Constant references like you both continue to make only detract from the focus of information and support being shared, many have no idea what you're talking about and why should they? They/we are here for bariatric support, some comic relief, learn a little more about their fellow community members via off topic threads. So if we could now please return this to the original post topic at hand, it would be appreciated.
|
|