Gross bullcrap and a great example of how the sick care industry cons you into the malpractice that is bariatric surgery.
The one thing that this article does NOT prove is that Gastric Bypass Reduces Disease Related Deaths Among Severely Obese.
What it can prove is that Weight Loss Reduces Disease Related Deaths Among Severely Obese.
Here is the con:
1. The result of this unnecessary surgical mutilation was weight loss.
2. The weight loss caused the reduction in disease related deaths.
3. The surgery was just the means to the weight loss.
4. Had the subjects lost their weight without surgery, then they still would have had a reduction in disease related deaths.
Here is an analogy:
If I took the cars away from 1000 people, then those car owners would have fewer car accidents than people who still had their cars (since they could not drive).
If, on the other hand, 1000 cars were vandalized and could not be driven, then those car owners would have fewer car accidents than people who still had their cars (since they could not drive).
In reporting this, I have a choice.
I can headline the article, "If You Cannot Drive, You Cannot Get Into A Car Accident." Not very sexy.
Or I can headline the article, "Vandalism Reduces Car Accident Deaths Among Automobile Drivers." Sexier.
If I am a slithering promoter of vandalism, then I choose the second headline.
This is what the belly-crawling proponents of the malpractice known as bariatric surgery have done in this instance.
The subjects in this exercise in mutilation would have improved with simple weight loss and without any of the related harms and huge costs associated with this terrible surgical malpractice.
For your own well-being, don't be a slave to the headlines, the diet gurus or the sick care system.
This stuff can and does kill.
Another example of your doc being your executioner.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Dear Dr. Michael,
Just how easy is it for an obese person to lose the ... hmmm, let's say, 100 pounds from the more pedestrian challenge of 15-20? and is not the difficulty factor raised in proportion to the weight loss medically required?
Now, I'm not a proponent of bariatric surgery, given that I am a lay person, but are there no kind words for this procedure in those cases of dire obesity when biking,crunches and rope skipping simply will not do?
ultimately the real isue is one of maintenance! can the post-op bariatric surgery patient keep the pounds off? what are the facts about that?
looking forward to your response,
I am,
Very Sincerely yours,
Alan D. Busch
www.thebookofben.blogspot.com
Dear Mr. Busch,
Thank you for your comment.
There are assumptions you make to which I cannot agree.
I will address just one: "cases of dire obesity when biking,crunches and rope skipping simply will not do?"
It is a physical impossibility for one to fail at weight loss when one consumes fewer Calories than one burns. "Biking,crunches and rope skipping" MUST do so long as Calories in are fewer than Calories out. There is no choice.
Any other outcome would contravene the Laws of Thermodynamics.
This is impossible.
The indications for bariatric surgery specifically require the candidate to have failed at weight loss attempts. You can confirm this at: http://www.lapsurgery.com/BARIATRIC%20SURGERY/SAGES.htm
Since diet recommendations are impossible for most people to follow, they can almost never succeed at weight loss making this requirement illusory and condemning the dieter to failure and, therefore, a surgery without indication.
Further, since diets are made impossible by the design of the experts, their diet advice teaches dieters humiliation, disappointment, suffering, frustration, pain and how to starve – not the skills needed to control weight by nutrition.
This addresses to some degree your last issue of maintenance. It is better to maintain weight loss through a less invasive technique than medically-sanctioned extreme body piercing, IMHO.
Again, thank you for your comment.
Post a Comment