#Weight Loss Surgery Complications | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

trenetralaya · 6 months

Text

Gastric Sleeve Revision in USA

Introduction: Considering gastric sleeve revision in the USA? Look no further than Beliteweight Hospital, a renowned medical facility committed to helping individuals achieve their weight loss goals through safe and effective procedures. In this comprehensive guide, we'll explore the benefits of gastric sleeve revision and why Beliteweight Hospital is the ideal choice for your journey towards a healthier and happier life.

Why Choose Gastric Sleeve Revision? Gastric sleeve revision surgery becomes necessary in certain cases where individuals experience complications or inadequate weight loss following their initial gastric sleeve procedure. Whether you're dealing with issues like weight regain, stretching of the stomach, or other concerns, revision surgery can provide a solution to help you get back on track.

Benefits of Gastric Sleeve Revision at Beliteweight Hospital:

Expertise and Experience: Beliteweight Hospital boasts a team of experienced surgeons specializing in weight loss procedures, ensuring that you receive top-notch care from professionals who understand the complexities of gastric sleeve revision.

State-of-the-Art Facilities: Our hospital is equipped with state-of-the-art facilities, providing a comfortable and safe environment for your revision surgery. We prioritize patient safety and well-being throughout the entire process.

Customized Treatment Plans: At Beliteweight Hospital, we understand that each patient is unique. Our expert medical team will work with you to create a personalized treatment plan tailored to your specific needs, ensuring the best possible outcomes.

Comprehensive Aftercare: Post-surgery, our dedicated medical staff will provide comprehensive aftercare support to ensure a smooth recovery. We are committed to guiding you through every step of the process, from surgery to rehabilitation.

Proven Success: Beliteweight Hospital has a track record of success in helping individuals achieve their weight loss goals through gastric sleeve revision. Our satisfied patients stand as a testament to the effectiveness of our procedures and the quality of care we provide.

Conclusion: If you're considering gastric sleeve revision in the USA, choose Beliteweight Hospital for a transformative experience. Our commitment to excellence, experienced medical team, and state-of-the-art facilities make us the ideal partner on your journey to lasting weight loss success. Take the first step towards a healthier you by scheduling a consultation with our expert team at Beliteweight Hospital today.

1 note · View note

hormonesclinics · 1 year

Text

Managing Obesity: Tips for a Healthier Lifestyle

Obesity is a major health problem affecting millions of people worldwide. This is a condition in which excess body fat builds up in the body, leading to a variety of health problems such as diabetes, heart disease, and certain types of cancer. It can be treated with medical intervention. This blog post will go into detail about different ways to treat obesity.

Diet

One of the most important factors in managing obesity is diet. A healthy and balanced diet is essential for maintaining a healthy weight. It is important to eat a variety of nutrient-dense foods such as fruits, vegetables, whole grains, lean proteins, and healthy fats. Avoid processed foods, sugary drinks, and foods high in saturated and trans fats.

Exercise

Physical activity is also important in managing obesity. Exercise helps burn calories, improve muscle mass, and boost metabolism. It is recommended to aim for at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity exercise per week. This can be achieved through activities such as brisk walking, cycling, swimming, or strength training.

Behavioral changes

Making behavioral changes can also help manage obesity. This includes setting realistic goals, monitoring progress, and staying motivated. It is important to identify triggers for overeating and develop strategies to overcome them. Seeking support from friends and family, joining a support group, or consulting with a healthcare professional can also be helpful.

Medications

In some cases, medications may be prescribed to manage obesity. These medications work by reducing appetite, blocking the absorption of fat, or increasing feelings of fullness. However, medications should always be used in combination with diet and exercise.

Surgery

For those with severe obesity, surgery may be an option. Bariatric surgery is a type of surgery that can help reduce weight and improve overall health. This surgery involves reducing the size of the stomach or bypassing a portion of the small intestine to limit the amount of food that can be consumed.

Summary

obesity is a serious health condition that can be managed with the right lifestyle changes and medical interventions. A healthy diet, regular exercise, behavioral changes, and medical treatments can all help manage obesity and improve overall health. It is important to seek support from healthcare professionals and loved ones to ensure long-term success in managing obesity.

For More information Visit: www.hormoneclinic.in

4 notes · View notes

lizardsfromspace · 1 year

Text

I do have to impress on anyone who wasn't around for it how batshit the reality boom of the 2000s could be. Especially on Fox.

Here are some 100% real 2000s reality shows:

Who's Your Daddy? A woman has to guess which of eight men is her biological father. One of them really is, and if she guesses right she wins $100,000. If one of the seven fake dads convinces her to guess them, he wins $100,000.

Black. White. A white family learns about racism by living a month in blackface, while a black family spends a month in whiteface. The black family was a real family, but the white family was just some actors hired to put on blackface to prove racism exists

Without Prejudice? Five strangers decide which of five strangers gets a cash prize based off clips and their answers to political questions. Cancelled when one of the choosers openly said he'd eliminate all black contestants

Welcome to the Neighborhood. Three conservative white families in a Austin subdivision decide which diverse family gets to move in. Unaired due to being literal housing discrimination

Seriously, Dude, I'm Gay. Two straight men try to pass themselves off as gay and whoever seems more gay gets $50,000. Unaired due to. Due to. Due to

Playing It Straight. A woman tries to find love among fourteen men, half of whom are straight and half of whom are gay, and she must eliminate two men she believes are gay each week. If she ended up picking a straight man in the end, they'd split a million dollars; if she picked a gay man, he'd win a million dollars

Boy Meets Boy. This was Playing It Straight but starring a gay man and he had to eliminate straight people

Who Wants to Marry a Multimillionaire? He wasn't a multimillionaire. He didn't even have a million dollars in liquid assets. He had a battery conviction Fox claims they didn't see. Because it was the 2000s, somehow this ended up with the woman he won being widely vilified and turned into a national punchline. How dare she complain about a massive corporation tricking her into marrying a lying abuser, good thing Matt Lauer's there to take her down a peg

The Swan. A "ugly" woman is given plastic surgery and wins a prize if she's the hottest at the end of the season. If she's not hot enough by the show's standards she's eliminated and called ugly on national TV

The Biggest Loser. Overweight people engage in competitive crash weight loss that often led to awful health complications. Studies showed basically everyone on the show regained any weight they lost once it was over and they didn't have abusive trainers demanding they take huge health risks to win a competitive weight loss competition. Like the others, this one was cancel-oh, it was a massive hit that ran for 18 seasons? Yikes!

Wife Swap and Trading Spouses. These were the same show and had a wife from one family go to another family that was different politically, racially, culturally, religiously etc. Most famous for the God Warrior

At the time people focused on the likes of Fear Factor but looking back it's wild how many of the worst shows toyed with politics. So many of these shows have a premise that's like "what if we exposed these conservatives to these people they hate?" or hyping themselves up as Important Experiments. Then they'd freak out when they got the kind of viral bigoted freakout they were trying to construct the whole time.

There were also a bunch of horrible reality shows, thankfully this time mostly unpopular, in the 2010s that based themselves around economic themes as a response to the market crash, but that's a story for another time

#television

27K notes · View notes

fatliberation · 1 year

Note

I saw a comment on your blog that says 'the way you eat does not cause diabetes'...are you able to expand on that or provide a source I could read? I've been told by doctors that my pre-diabetes was due to weight gain because I get more hungry on my anti psychotics and I'd like to fact check what they've told me! Thank you so much!

Pre-diabetes was rejected as a diagnosis by the World Health Organization (although it is used by the US and UK) - the correct term for the condition is impaired glucose tolerance. Approximately 2% of people with "pre-diabetes" go on to develop diabetes per year. You heard that right - TWO PERCENT. Most diabetics actually skip the pre-diabetic phase.

There are currently no treatments for pre-diabetes besides intentional weight loss. (Hmm, that's convenient, right?) There has yet to be evidence that losing weight prevents progression from pre-diabetes to T2DM beyond a year. Interestingly, drug companies are trying to persuade the medical world to start treating patients earlier and earlier. They are using the term “pre-diabetes” to sell their drugs (including Wegovy, a weight-loss drug). Surgeons are using it to sell weight loss surgery. Everyone’s a winner, right? Not patients. Especially fat patients.

Check out these articles:

Prediabetes: The epidemic that never was, and shouldn’t be

The war on ‘prediabetes' could be a boon for pharma—but is it good medicine?

Also - I love what Dr. Asher Larmie @fatdoctorUK has to say about T2DM and insulin resistance, so here's one of their threads I pulled from Twitter:

1️⃣ You can't prevent insulin resistance. It's coded in your DNA. It may be impacted by your environment. Studies have shown it has nothing to do with your BMI.

2️⃣ The term "pre-diabetes" is a PR stunt. The correct term is impaired glucose tolerance (or impaired fasting glucose) which is sometimes referred to as intermittent hyperglycemia. It does not predict T2DM. It is best ignored and tested for every 3-5yrs.

3️⃣ there is no evidence that losing weight prevents diabetes. That's because you can't reverse insulin resistance. You can possibly postpone it by 2yrs? Furthermore there is evidence that those who are fat at the time of diagnosis fair much better than those who are thin.

4️⃣ Weight loss does not reverse diabetes in the VAST majority of people. Those that do reverse it are usually thinner with recent onset T2DM and a low A1c. Only a tiny minority can sustain that over 2yrs. Weight loss does not improve A1c levels beyond 2 yrs either.

5️⃣ Weight loss in T2DM does not improve macrovascular or microvascular health outcomes beyond 2 years. In fact, weight loss in diabetics is associated with increased mortality and morbidity (although it is not clear why). Weight cycling is known to impacts A1c levels.

6️⃣ Weight GAIN does NOT increase the risk of cardiovascular OR all causes mortality in diabetics. In fact, one might even go so far as to say that it's better to be fat and diabetic than to be thin and diabetic.

Dr. Larmie cites 18 peer reviewed journal articles (most from the last decade) that are included in their webinar on the subject, linked below.

#diabetes #t2dm #type 2 diabetes #prediabetes #weight science #weight stigma #fat liberation #fat acceptance #inbox

29K notes · View notes

queertransetc · 11 months

Text

- ED trigger warning -

Being skinny ruined my life. If you’re thin and think to yourself, “why don’t fat people just lose weight?” Please read this

I was the “ideal fat” in the sense that I did everything skinny people wanted me to do. I tried every diet in the book. I exercised regularly. I worked with doctors and dietitians to figure out the best way to lose weight. But nothing worked. I did everything “right” to lose weight, and my weight stayed the same

But the thin people in my life kept telling me that I wouldn’t be happy, attractive, healthy, etc. until I lost weight. So, heartbroken, I came to the conclusion that anorexia was the only option left. It felt safer than bariatric surgery, and was obviously much more affordable

I became the perfect anorexic. 700 cal a day or less, except once a week I allowed myself 1400 cal. For reference, my body required at least 2800 to maintain weight, and at least 1800 to keep my organs and stuff fully functioning. Still, 700 a day, I persisted because everyone in my life told me weight loss was all that mattered. If dieting didn’t work, anorexia had to

And it did. My weight dropped all the way down to 110 pounds. I was skinny - underweight, even - in all sense of the word. The people in my life saw it as a miracle. The ultimate success story. My mother, my “friends,” my doctors, they all congratulated me on my accomplishment

When I confessed my eating disorder to my doctor, he told me, “that’s not the best way to go about it, but I’m glad you lost the weight.” My mother took pictures of me and sent them to relatives to brag

Okay, great. I was skinny. I did what I set out to do. But there were severe consequences

The most obvious was my joint pain doubled, maybe even tripled, to the point that I couldn’t leave the house without a wheelchair

I also developed several health complications, including fatty liver disease and extremely painful GERD. I had to see a handful of specialists and get an endoscopy because of severe stomach pain

My partner, who was the only person who saw my weight loss for what it was (a horrible thing that only happened because of an eating disorder), convinced me to enter a recovery program

For nearly a year, I relearned how to feed myself. I ate everything I was told to eat, nothing more and nothing less. My diet was 100% in the hands of somebody else

And I gained back every pound I has lost. All of the work to become thin went right out the window. It was proven to me that thinness and health were incompatible with my body. If I wanted to be thin, I had to forgo my physical and mental well-being. And vise-versa

Prior to the anorexia, I never once struggled with binge eating. I was naturally an intuitive eater, and I did a good job of having a well rounded diet. After the anorexia, after recovery, I developed a binge eating disorder. I had spent so long starving myself, that my brain and body got stuck in survival mode, desperate to consume any and all calories out of fear that I might starve again. To this day I struggle with binge eating

I did everything thin people wanted of me. I dieted. I exercised. And when all else failed, I starved myself. Now I have liver disease, stomach issues, and BED. Not to mention the loads of mental issues that accumulated as a result of my weight loss journey. During the throes of my anorexia, I had to be hospitalized for suicidal ideation

When you tell fat people to “just lose weight” you are suggesting they give themselves illnesses for which treatments are not always effective. You are asking fat people to destroy their stomachs and livers. When a fat person loses so much weight that they become skinny, they are likely giving up so much of their health in efforts to be treated like a human being

If you’re thin, do your part. Treat fat people like people before we tear our bodies apart

#Lincoln logs #fatphobia //#eating disorder //#fat liberation #body positivity

5K notes · View notes

goldyke · 1 year

Text

LAP Bands should be illegal

This post is going to deal with medical fatphobia, weight loss surgery, coercion, emetophobia, food issues, disordered eating, and just all around bad shit. But it’s important.

Shortly after I reached adulthood, I was coerced into weight loss surgery. I weighed about 250 pounds and was considered morbidly obese.

The Lap Band is a disgrace to the medical profession and is just another example of how the medical profession does not care about the lives of fat people.

To preface this: the surgery works. I lost 70 pounds and people treated me differently and I hated them all for it.

The Lap Band made my life miserable. When it was filled, I could not eat until noon without getting stuck. Even then, getting stuck was always a risk. There was a strict diet to follow and you were supposed to be safe from that if you followed it. On top of that, there were rules for how you ate. One standard I saw was not to eat in bites larger than your fingernail. Can you see yourself doing that for a week, let alone years and years?

Getting stuck is a horror you can't imagine. The food lodges in the top of your stomach, blocking off your system. You continue to produce saliva and swallow it down. Slowly, the mucous in your saliva builds up. It feels like you're drowning. Eventually, you have to essentially throw it all up. A disgusting experience (and a mortifying one if you're in public.) The saliva is thick and ropy. This experience is often called "sliming" on the forums.

I became frightened of eating in public. In a way, I became frightened of food altogether. I knew something had to give the day I reacted to someone biting a hamburger in a tv show the way a regular person would react to a killer jumping out in a horror movie. I developed the disgusting and unhealthy habit of chewing and spitting out food. I completely lost my enjoyment of many foods I had previously enjoyed because of how problematic they were (I can no longer enjoy a chicken thigh for example.) I stopped eating meals and began grazing. I developed eating habits worse than the ones that "made me fat"

After 3 years, I had the band emptied of fluid, which significantly decreased, but did not stop, these problems. I regained the weight, and found it didn't bother me. (Along the way I discovered that my discomfort with my body had never been weight related)

I had my band removed after 6.5 years earlier this year. I am in a support group on facebook for victims of this malpractice. There are 5.6 thousand members, each with their own horror stories. Some of them cannot get the band removed because insurance will not cover the procedure, though they happily covered the band's placement. Some have tried to go through with removal but have had surgeons try to coerce them into getting a different weight-loss surgery instead of just removing it. Many have long-term damage from the band eroding the walls of their stomach or esophagus, or from the band adhering to multiple organs. Many of them had the band for 12-14 years, before removal because none of our doctors told us it needs to be removed within 10.

Many practices no longer perform Lap Band surgery and now believe it is unethical. The surgeon who removed my band still performs this surgery regularly.

A study performed in 2011 with 151 lap band patients, found that 22% of patients experienced minor complications and 39% experienced major complications. The person who coerced me into surgery actually experienced major complications and needed an emergency removal.

I experienced no serious complications. Everything I described above is considered normal. And It still drastically lowered my quality of life.

I don't know why I'm sharing this or who I'm sharing it for, but here I am. If you know anyone considering the lap band surgery, don't let them go through with it without knowing the truth. And please be kinder to your body than the medical profession wants you to be.

#fatphobia #medical fatphobia #emetophobia #disordered eating #fat liberation #please reblog actually

3K notes · View notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 2 years

Text

The Geico STD story is the new McDonald's Hot Coffee story

Here’s a media literacy rule of thumb: any time you hear about how the courts have done something outrageous and absurd to some poor, long-suffering, gigantic, wildly profitable corporation…dig deeper. The canonical example is the “McDonald’s Hot Coffee Lawsuit” (aka Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants). You know, that time that an old lady got burned by her McDonald’s coffee and then sued for for $2.7 million?! Most people heard that story — and they heard it for a reason.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants

The Hot Coffee story was propaganda — specifically, it was propaganda for the idea that corporations should be shielded from legal liability when they maim or even kill the public through gross negligence. The real Hot Coffee story is a lot more complicated than the “lady gets millions because her coffee was too hot” tale that circulated widely.

One of the best explorations of the Hot Coffee story is Adam Conover’s excellent “Adam Ruins The Hot Coffee Story” video from 2016. In that episode, Conover explains what really happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9DXSCpcz9E

The coffee that burned Stella Liebeck in New Mexico in 1994 was served at 190°F. It caused third-degree burns that permanently disfigured Liebeck, required multiple skin grafts, and disabled her for two years. The surgery was so drastic that Liebeck lost 20% of her body-weight while she was recovering.

McDonald’s had a history of serving coffee that was dangerously hot. It had received 700 complaints about the matter, and had had to settle numerous claims from people who were horribly burned by its coffee. However, it declined to settle with Liebeck, who initially sought $20k to cover her medical expenses.

Denied a settlement, Liebeck sued. The jury did award $2.7m, but the judge clawed it back to $640k. Liebeck likely didn’t get that amount — she and McDonald’s reached a confidential settlement under threat of McDonald’s appealing.

So, the real story isn’t: “Old lady spills coffee and gets millions.”

It’s “McDonald’s ignores hundreds of dangerous incidents for years, then maims a customer for life and refuses to pay her medical bills or change its practices to avoid future incidents. A judge says she’s due a fraction of the jury award, but she doesn’t get it because McDonald’s uses its massive litigation war-chest to force her into a confidential settlement.”

So why did you hear so much about this story? And why was the moral of the story inevitably about how bloodsucking lawyers are victimizing poor l’il multinational corporations like Mickey Dees?

It was propaganda. The “bloodsucking lawyers preying on innocent corporations” story is a creation of the business lobby, which has, for decades, argued that it should be immune to legal consequences when it harms or kills the public. The cause of “tort reform” is, in actuality, a corporate charter of impunity.

It worked. Over the past four decades, corporations have steadily whittled away the public’s right to civil justice, no matter how egregiously a corporation behaves. The main mechanism for this was the expansion of binding arbitration, a 1920s-era law that initially allowed big companies to agree to have their contractual disputes worked out by a mediator, rather than going to court.

Since the 1980s, a series of Supreme Court decisions have steadily expanded binding arbitration, allowing corporations to add “arbitration waivers” to their terms of service, employment contracts and other non-negotiated boilerplates. Today, the mere act of removing some shrinkwrap or clicking a link can result in the permanent loss of your right to sue, no matter how badly a company treats you.

Instead, your grievances will be heard by a corporate arbitrator, a pretend judge who is paid by the company that wronged you. Your case must be heard in isolation, and not part of a class action. The proceedings are secret, and even if you win, you don’t set a precedent for others who are similarly wronged. It’s “a justice system just for corporations.”

http://www.onthecommons.org/magazine/we-now-have-a-justice-system-just-for-corporations

American corporations pushed the expansion of binding arbitration waivers as a get-out-of-court-free card, and for many years, it worked. Remember when Wells Fargo forged millions of its customers’ signatures to fraudulently open high-fee accounts in their names? The company argued that because the forged agreements included arbitration waivers, those customers couldn’t sue over the fraud:

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-ceo-of-wells-fargo-might-be-in-big-big-trouble/

Everybody got in on the act. If you’re a Pokemon Go player, you’re stuck in binding arbitration:

https://consumerist.com/2016/07/14/pokemon-go-strips-users-of-their-legal-rights-heres-how-to-opt-out/

Same with Airbnb customers:

https://www.airbnb.com/help/article/2908/terms-of-service

Unsurprisingly, Trump loved binding arbitration. One of his first acts as president was to strip nursing home residents of the right to sue, which was great news for the nursing homes that murdered patients by abandoning them to covid:

https://www.consumerreports.org/consumerist/trump-administration-will-allow-nursing-homes-to-strip-residents-of-legal-rights/

(Older voters love the GOP, but it sure as hell doesn’t love them back.)

Forced arbitration wasn’t just a matter of civil justice — it was also a matter of economics. As Lina Khan and Deepak Gupta showed in their 2016 American Constitution Society paper “Arbitration As Wealth Transfer,” “Forced arbitration clauses are a form of wealth transfer to the rich”:

https://www.acslaw.org/issue_brief/briefs-landing/arbitration-as-wealth-transfer/

But the business leaders who bankrolled the forced arbitration epidemic were — characteristically — overconfident. It turns out that arbitration has weaknesses. It’s possible to do mass arbitration — to automate filing arbitration claims by thousands of corporate victims, which triggers hundreds of millions of dollars in arbitration fees, which the company is on the hook for, win or lose.

Uber was one of the first companies to discover this, when thousands of drivers brought arbitration claims at once. Not only would Uber have to pay for arbitrators in each case, but because arbitration decisions do not constitute precedents, it would have to argue each case, over and over again, even if it won. The company surrendered and paid drivers $146m:

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/uber-sues-aaa-block-100-million-fees-politically-motivated-arbitration-2021-09-20/

This spooked Amazon, which amended its terms of service for Alexa to remove binding arbitration:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/06/02/arbitrary-arbitration/#petard

Law-tech firms like Fairshake created automation systems to enable mass arbitration filings at scale and on a budget:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/04/11/socialized-losses/#justice-restored

Something wonderful and wild started to happen. The companies that had argued for decades that binding arbitration was, well, binding, began to argue that arbitration waivers were unconstitutional, despite the precedents that they, themselves had bankrolled, at enormous expense.

The poster child of arbitration buyer’s remorse is Intuit, a company that has stolen hundreds of millions of dollars in tax-prep fees from the poorest Americans by tricking them into fake “Free File” products using dark patterns on its website.

Intuit is now facing arbitration at scale — more than 100,000 claims — and a court has ordered them to hire arbitrators to hear each and every one of them. After all it was Intuit — not its customers — who put the arbitration clauses in its terms of service, claiming that court cases were a bad way to resolve their disputes:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/04/11/socialized-losses/#justice-restored

Which brings me back to McDonald’s, hot coffee, and juicy stories about giant corporations being abused by the courts.

Have you heard about the Geico STD judgment? A woman caught an STD from her then-boyfriend when they had sex in his car. She won a judgment against him for $5.2m. Geico insures his car. A court has ordered Geico to pay that judgment.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jackson-county-woman-says-she-222907031.html

But it’s more complicated than that!

It’s not a court that ordered Geico to pay the judgment — it’s an arbitrator. Geico is one of the companies that forces its customers into arbitration. Why would an insurance company want arbitrators to hear cases about its refusal to pay claims, rather than judges?

I mean, duh. Insurance companies have a long, dishonorable tradition of taking your premiums every month, then stranding you when you actually experience an “insured event,” arguing that the obscure, obfuscating language in their contract doesn’t cover your losses.

The real Geico STD story is this: Geico demanded that the case be heard by its arbitrator, who ruled against Geico, because Geico’s insurance terms did cover this event. Now, Geico is claiming that the arbitration it insisted upon “violates the company’s due process rights” and that its own arbitration agreement is unenforceable.

The case that’s being reported on isn’t about the $5.2m award for the STD. That happened way back in 2021. The case that’s in the news this week is a court telling Geico that when it forces its customers into arbitration, it has to abide by the arbitrator’s decision, even in those rare instances in which the arbitrator finds against the company who pays their fees.

But you wouldn’t know it from the coverage. All this stuff about arbitration is buried way down in the story. The headline is: $5.2m judgment for a venereal disease!

This is McDonald’s Hot Coffee 2.0. Someone pitched this story, and the pitch emphasized the poor, downtrodden corporation (Geico is owned by Warren Buffet and has $32b in assets) — not the fact that Geico is reaping what it sowed. The real story here is: “Corporation seeks to replace civil justice system with a kangaroo court, and gets kicked by its own kangaroo.”

Incidentally, if you miss Adam Conover’s “Adam Ruins Everything” and you have a Netflix password, check out “The G-Word,” his incredible new show about regulatory competence and the deadly threats it holds at bay:

https://www.netflix.com/title/81037116

[Image ID: The Adam Ruins Everything title card for 'The Hot Coffee Case.' It is a split panel with Adam Conover on the left at a judge's bench, banging a gavel, and a confused Hamburgler on the right, in the witness box. They are separated by the center of the 'M' in the McDonald's 'Golden Arches' logo. Superimposed over this separator is the Geico lizard.]

#pluralistic

17K notes · View notes

ms-demeanor · 3 months

Note

Going off that post about nutrition and science, I'd love to hear what you think of the 5:2 diet/The Fast 800 and its creator, Dr. Michael Mosley. For context: in order to get an NHS-funded breast reduction (it's a gender thing, but also just a general quality-of-life thing), I need to be a certain BMI, so I've been referred to a weight management clinic. The lady I've been seeing initially just put me on a low-carb diet (130g or less of carbs per day, with an aside from her about how bullshit Keto and BMI limits for treatment are), but now she's said that, if I wanted to speed up the weight loss, I should include the 5:2 diet: 5 days in a week where I eat "normally", and 2 fast days in which I restrict myself to 800kcals. I did a little looking into it myself, and found that 5:2 - which I HAD heard about before - is now being sold as part of "The Fast 800", with Dr. Mosley being the creator of it. I was shocked by that, because I was already a fan of Dr. Mosley's work (he has a podcast called "Just One Thing" that I really liked, and thought contained reasonable-sounding advice), and yet having a diet plan that he's clearly making money off of does immediately make me feel suspicious. I've borrowed his "The Fast 800" book from the library, both to find out more about the diet I've been put on and to see if it's at all backed by evidence, and he does cite a bunch of scientific studies which seem to back up his ideas, but I don't know how valid they are, and I don't just want to accept them at face-value (especially since he's a "we got fat completely wrong in the 80s, therefore we should eat a Mediterranean diet!" types). Obviously I'll go with what my weight management lady suggests, since she's obviously more qualified to talk about it than I am, but I am curious to know what you think, and whether I'm right to be distrustful of all of this.

I am, generally speaking, against any diet for rapid weight loss. They're not sustainable so people gain the weight back (often with more weight getting added on).

There have also recently been findings that suggest that BMI cutoffs for top surgery are detrimental to patients as patients in higher BMI categories are more likely to have minor complications like UTIs or to be readmitted, but are not likely to have major complications or be at risk of significant harm from having top surgery. I don't know if anybody will listen if you bring up that study, and I know that GCS is fraught in many places for many reasons.

I'm also just.

I'm so mad. I'm so fucking mad! I'm so mad about this!

One of my best friends is a guy who was pressured into a pattern of disordered eating and unhealthy exercise in order to qualify for top surgery; since then he has not been able to eat in a healthy way and has struggled with alternating between exercising to the point of harm and other destructive behaviors that make him unhappy and unsafe. And he didn't need that. He didn't need any of that! He needed a very safe surgery that had perhaps a slightly higher risk of minor complications at his size and instead he got top surgery and an eating disorder! I hate it! I'm so fucking mad about it!

Also as near as I can tell Michael Mosley qualified as a psychiatrist in the 90s, spent very little time working as a psychiatrist, and then became a media personality. From what is visible on his website and every biography I've found for him he apparently doesn't have any background in nutrition beyond whatever is standard for someone in medical school (which is NOT MUCH).

Hey I just looked at his website and this is straight-up fucked up.

Anybody recommending an 800 calorie a day diet for 2-12 weeks in a context that is not heavily medically supervised can fucking choke. That is *ridiculously* dangerous and the website says that this can improve insulin resistance but there are a shitload of studies about people on crash diets like this *developing* insulin resistance (oh hey like my friend who became prediabetic after his rapid significant weight loss).

Also in regard to the studies he cites on the website, the "two years later patients are still going strong in their diabetes improvements" it's really important to put shit like that in context

at 5 years 13% of the original intervention group were in remission from their type two diabetes; the average weight loss experienced by the intervention group as a whole was 6.1kg compared to 4.6kg in the control group. That's 1.5kg lower for the people who went through a twelve week medically supervised very low calorie diet compared. That's an average difference of 3.3 pounds between "starvation diet" and "no diet" for the Americans in the audience.

Yours is the second comment I've seen that has been leery of the Mediterranean diet, btw, and the Mediterranean diet is fine. It's very achievable and not super gimmicky and is based on very reasonable reassessments of fat, not the hardcore "you are fine to eat 100g of fat a day" kind of attitude that you get from the keto crew. There isn't really one Mediterranean diet and it certainly isn't low carb (which the bits from Mosely's website seem to indicate it is).

So, no, honestly I don't think much of Mosely and I'm very sorry you're in this situation, that sucks and I hate that they're refusing you treatment until you undergo an exceptionally difficult and potentially harmful weight loss excursion.

I know you're probably stuck with that and it's bullshit and I think it fucking sucks and unfortunately the medical advice you're likely to get is "eat in a significantly disordered manner at least until it is time for surgery" and it blows. That just fucking sucks.

If you're looking for rapid weight loss that you don't plan to sustain (and you shouldn't plan to sustain it, it won't stay off) you may want to look into body building forums for how they discuss cuts. It's still disordered eating and it's still not healthy, but at least they're effective and can tell you what supplements will keep you from becoming malnourished while you prepare for surgery. This is a terrible idea. I don't actually want to give this advice to anyone but bodybuilders are the exact kind of people who know how far and how fast they can push weight loss while having an awareness that it isn't really good for them and it won't stay off.

I cannot overstate enough how much I hate the thought that people are being encouraged to rapidly starve themselves in order to prepare to recover from surgery. I am so sorry and I'm so mad and

#tw weight loss #tw diet talk #tw disordered eating #tw calorie restriction

321 notes · View notes

wheelie-sick · 3 months

Text

Explaining dysphagia

Dysphagia is simultaneously a symptom and a diagnosable condition. Most people think of it (if they think of it at all) as the choking on food disease but in reality it's much more complicated than that.

There are four categories of dysphagia: oropharyngeal, esophageal, esophagogastric, and paraesophageal

only two of those categories (oropharyngeal and esophageal) are commonly used and diagnosed so those are the main two I'll be talking about.

The diagnosis of dysphagia is a fairly complicated process involving a lot of radiological testing and things stuck up your nose and down your throat.

lost the source :(

source

the ICD 10 further divides dysphagia into unspecified, oral phase, oropharyngeal phase, pharyngeal phase, pharyngoesophageal phase, and other dysphagia which includes cervical dysphagia and neurogenic dysphagia

Oropharyngeal dysphagia

Oropharyngeal dysphagia occurs when someone has difficulty initiating a swallow. It's often accompanied by coughing, choking, feeling food stick in the throat, and nasal regurgitation. Other symptoms include frequent repetitive swallows, frequent throat clearing, a gargly voice after meals, hoarse voice, nasal speech and dysarthria, drooling, and recurrent pneumonia.

Oropharyngeal dysphagia is diagnosed with a modified barium swallow and/or a transnasal video endoscopy.

Some of the consequences of oropharyngeal dysphagia include aspiration pneumonia, upper respiratory infections, and weight loss. Common treatment includes rehabilitative swallowing exercises, botox, surgery, and/or a feeding tube.

Esophageal Dysphagia

Esophageal dysphagia is dysphagia where there is a problem with the passage of food or liquids through the esophagus between the upper and lower esophageal sphincter. Esophageal dysphagia is usually a result of abnormal motility in the esophagus or a physical obstruction to the esophagus. Symptoms of esophageal dysphagia vary depending on cause.

Motility: People with esophageal motility disorders will experience problems with swallowing both liquids and solids. Motility disorders consist of abnormal numbers of contractions in the esophagus, abnormal velocity of contractions, abnormal force of contractions, abnormal coordinated timing of contractions, or several of these simultaneously. People with esophageal motility disorders may also experience spasms or chest pain.

Obstruction: People with an esophageal obstruction will have more difficulty swallowing solids than liquids.

Some symptoms of both include pain when swallowing, the inability to swallow, sensation of food being stuck in your throat or chest, drooling, and regurgitation.

Esophageal dysphagia can be diagnosed with a barium swallow, upper endoscopy, esophageal manometry, and an endoFLIP.

Some common treatments for esophageal dysphagia include medication, esophageal dilation, surgery, stent placement, and/or a feeding tube.

Esophagogastric Dysphagia

Esophagogastric dysphagia occurs when there is a problem with material passing from the lower esophageal sphincter into the gastric fundus.

Paraesophageal Dysphagia

Paraesophageal dysphagia occurs when the esophagus is narrowed due to extrinsic compression.

The ICD 10 Classifications

Oral phase - difficulty moving food or liquid to the back of the throat

Oropharyngeal phase - difficulty initiating swallowing

Pharyngeal phase - difficulty swallowing when food or liquid is at the top of the throat

Pharyngoesophageal phase - unable to find information

Other dysphagia- cervical dysphagia (caused by problems with the cervical spine) or neurogenic dysphagia (caused by problems with the central or peripheral nervous system)

Sources

x x x

+ some others I definitely (/sarcasm) didn't lose the link to

#dysphagia #neurological disability #physical disability #physically disabled #undescribed

88 notes · View notes

fatphobiabusters · 4 months

Note

so i have a question, recently my doctor has recommended i lose weight for some health reasons, if i choose to go with that and lose weight willingly, does that make me fatphobic?

I can't tell you what to do with your body. Those decisions are yours. Life is complicated and nuanced, and so is oppression. If a trans person willingly loses weight because that's the only way the bigoted medical system will allow them to have top surgery, does that make them fatphobic?

Ultimately, what matters to me most is ending fat people's systemic oppression. What an individual person decides to do with their body, I don't really have the energy to care about. All of my mental energy is going towards more important matters that I do have a say in, like ending the wage gap that fat people endure and supporting fat positive legislation.

So whether or not the decision you make is fatphobic, you have bodily autonomy. Now if you're doing this because you believe weight equals health, well, "weight equals health" is fatphobic rhetoric. If you decide to lose weight because you want to feel superior to fat people, yeah, I'd say that's probably fatphobic. But my lack of mental energy to dictate what someone should do with their body, plus how nuanced and unique every situation is, makes me want to answer this ask with a shrug ¯\_( ￣o￣ )_/¯

You do what you want to do. If someone had a terminal illness and was told they'd magically survive by losing weight, I don't think I could blame them for trying when they're in such a desperate situation. I think the more important question to ask yourself is "Will this actually improve my health? Or will this harm me?"

Some other good questions to ask yourself are:

"How permanent would this weight loss actually be?"

"Is my doctor telling me to lose weight as their only means of treatment for me? Did they even examine me? What quality of healthcare am I receiving?"

"Is it specifically weight loss that helps this condition? Or is it certain behaviors that help and happen to sometimes include weight loss as a side effect?"

"Is weight gain what caused this condition? Is the answer to the previous question scientifically proven, or is it correlation? Is weight gain actually a symptom?"

"What scientific research is my doctor using to justify their recommendation that I focus on weight loss? How long was the study conducted for? Are there conflicts of interest? Does this study contain validity errors?"

I hope these questions will help you with the decision-making process. Good luck

-Mod Worthy

#bodily autonomy #healthism #diet culture #fatphobia #medical fatphobia #Mod Worthy #ask #justaskingquestionstbh

135 notes · View notes

growmydarling · 1 year

Text

bariatric surgery is a barbaric surgery. filling you with foreign objects to reduce stomach space, banding your esophagus or fundus such that your body interprets its internal pain signals as fullness. cutting your stomach to a tiny size or evn removing it altogether. it leads to vitamin deficiencies and has a high rate of complications including bile leakage, dumping syndrome, osteopenia, abscesses, pancreatitis, and more. the way people are taught to hate their size so much that they would undergo dangerous surgery, and that the medical industry happily tells people where to sign without telling them the full extent of bodily disfigurement, is tragic. while people may have a valid reason to pursue weight loss, we need to look critically at the way bariatric surgery is marketed and performed and explore more holistic options.

#ffa #bariatricsurgery #fat liberation #anti diet

206 notes · View notes

trenetralaya · 6 months

Text

#Best Gastric Sleeve Revision in USA #Gastric Sleeve Revision in USA #Gastric Sleeve Revision in California #Gastric Sleeve #Gastric Sleeve Revision #Weight Loss Surgery #Bariatric Surgery #Sleeve Gastrectomy #Revision Surgery #Gastric Sleeve Complications

0 notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 1 month

Text

Susan Rinkunas at Jezebel:

Today the Supreme Court held a brutal two hours of arguments in a case about whether women and pregnant people deserve life-saving medical care if that care happens to be abortion. (Yes, this is the second abortion case this term.) Several justices, and the lawyer for the plaintiff, trotted out wild hypotheticals and invoked the dangerous concept of fetal personhood in a disturbing preview of the future that awaits every state if Donald Trump wins the presidency. It could mean that people face horrible medical mistreatment simply because they’re pregnant and, at the most extreme end, could lead to a federal abortion ban.

The case, Moyle v. United States, is about whether state abortion bans like Idaho’s can override a longstanding federal law that requires emergency rooms to stabilize patients, including by offering abortion if necessary. That law, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) says hospitals that accept Medicare funding have to stabilize patients in medical crises and deliver babies when women are in labor. But given that some states passed abortion bans that only have exceptions to prevent death, not to treat threats to health, the Biden administration reiterated hospitals’ obligations after the Dobbs decision, and later sued the state of Idaho. Idaho strongly disagrees that its hospitals should have to provide abortions for threats to health—like when a woman’s water breaks in the second trimester, far too early for a baby to survive but, when left untreated, could result in a life-threatening infection called sepsis or extensive blood loss known as hemorrhaging. The state worked with the right-wing Christian legal firm Alliance Defending Freedom to craft its legal arguments and one such argument raised in briefs and in the courtroom is the claim that a fetus is a patient under federal law.

Justice Elena Kagan asked Josh Turner, the lawyer representing Idaho, how the state ban functions when doctors believe a woman’s pregnancy complication might cause her to lose her uterus, and thereby her ability to have children in the future, but not cause her to die. Turner’s response was chilling: “Congress under EMTALA recognizes that there are two patients to consider in those circumstances. And the two-patient scenario is tough when you have these competing interests.” This logic is terrifying, mostly because a fetus is only a patient under EMTALA when there aren’t health threats to the pregnant person. The woman is the patient first and foremost. Idaho is trying to claim that because the words “unborn child” are used in the law, it means that the interests of the woman and the fetus have equal weight, when they do not. This is fetal personhood and it’s scary not least because the people being denied ER treatment in Idaho and other states are often in their first and second trimester and there’s no way the embryo or fetus will survive. The fetus is a lost cause at that stage, yet states like Idaho say that women themselves need to be facing death before they can have an abortion. (People coming to ERs later in pregnancy with complications would typically have labor induced and then doctors would try to keep the fetus alive.)

[...] If by some miracle the court rules against Idaho, that doesn’t mean abortion access is safe by any means. Barrett and Gorsuch both asked if a future Congress could ban hospitals from performing any abortions or gender-affirming surgeries as a condition of accepting Medicare funds. Prelogar said yes, Congress does have the power to pass laws like that. And of course, there is the lurking threat of the 19th-century Comstock Act which a Republican president could enforce to ban abortion nationwide, even at clinics in states with abortion protections.

SCOTUS heard oral arguments on a pair of cases pertaining to EMTALA on Wednesday, and the radical right-wing black robed theocrat-majority are likely to rule in favor of Idaho's cruel anti-abortion law to weaken EMTALA.