I posted this as a response in a different thread, but then felt it belonged in a thread of its own.
Condescension is an interesting concept.
Showing or implying superiority. (I looked it up)
I've seen people saying that, and for whatever reason, I thought I'd address that when it comes to Flintstones. (Or calcium, or drinking with eating, or B12, or eating plans, etc etc etc)
What I know about weight loss surgery is superior to what someone else knows, if I know more. It isn't superior to others who know more than me. (obviously). Is my knowlege about vitamins superior to anyone else on this message board? Probably. Is it superior to most people? Probably not.
Here's the crux.... some people are given a plan by their surgeons. People here imply that the plan is the ultimate source of information. And to begin with, it should be! Most of us who have been around a while generally start a lot of answers to questions asked by new-ops with "What does your surgeon's plan say?" It's super-common, because we respect that surgically, your surgeon is the ultimate authority on YOUR BODY. He's been looking around the inner bits and changing them up. He knows you INSIDE better than you do, probably. His plan is important. Likely he has reasons for the things he wants his patients to do. None of us can be superior to him when it comes to the surgical bits. Some of us might not quite understand his reasons for his postop eating plan if it's quicker or slower than our own. But he's the one you signed up for surgically.
But then there's the vitamin thing. And this is one of the few things where you'll hear people openly disagreeing with your surgeon. (The other open disagreements I've seen are when the surgeon says that NSAIDS are okay, or that drinking with meals are okay).
So WHY, in a group like this one, when the vets are almost religious in their questioning a new-op about what their surgeon says, do the vets start to question the validity of your surgeon's plan on vitamins?
The reason is down to science, medical studies, and often what the ASMBS recommends for ALL post-ops. No matter what your surgeon suggests for your vitamins -- whether it's flintstones once a day or some special $1.50/pill vitamin five times a day -- there is a set of guidelines for all postops that is supported by multiple studies, and is suggested on the website for the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgeons (I think that is what the ASMBS stands for). Among other things they recommend that we get 1500 to 2000 mg of calcium citrate, and 200% of the US RDA for vitamins for adults. There are studies that show that individuals who use calcium carbonate are not going to absorb enough calcium from Tums (Carbonate) to help their bones to avoid deteriorating into dust, and can at the same time they do nothing for your bones, they can create hideously painful kidney stones. There are studies that show that if you don't get vitamin B12 in a way other than through your STOMACH, you won't get any at all. You lack the necessary chemicals in your pouch to turn B12 from a pill into the useful stuff your body needs. There aer studies that show that permanent neural damage can occur if you don't get your vitamin Bs in properly. And I believe there are even studies that show that patients that are told to take Flintstones are far mroe likely to develop a whole plethora of debilitating deficiencies if they think they're getting enough but they aren't.
NOW is there condescencion when I or other suggest that your surgeon's plan is wrong and you should not follow it but should instead follow OUR superior plan? I don't know. Perhaps it comes off that way, because we have read the studies, seen teh evidence, perhaps even experienced the deficiencies and care enough to emphatically suggest that following a plan that can lead into misery, pain, and permanent damage is wrong and misguided. It might seem presumptuous to say your doctor is wrong. But the thing is, nutrition, particularly micronutrients (Vitamins) is not something that your surgeon has specialized in. He (or she) has specialized in slicing and dicing and rearranging in a way that will help to cure you of obesity in the most permanent fashion known to modern science. Some doctors have even admitted that they believe that their patients (implication: fat and lazy patients) won't use ANY supplements if they make the requirements hard. So to keep it simple, to make it easier to follow, they try to get their patients to do something easy. Flintstones and Tums are EASY. Are they the BEST choice? Nope. Tums is even a BAD choice that won't do anything good for you and possibly a lot of bad. But they still make the recommendation, perhaps because of their experiences, or perhaps because they just (some of them anyone) don't think that "fat people" have what it takes to do hard things, like follow a more complicated vitamin regimen than "Flintstones and Tums".
There is ample evidence, research, guidelines on the professional website for these types of surgeons to back up the emphatic insistence by some postops that Flintstones is a bad choice. BUT some of the people who see that see condescension, see people who are in a way badmouthing their surgeon who has done this awesome thing for you in your surgery, and frankly, they also see a vitamin regimen that is EASY for them, and they don't want to believe that their surgeon might be giving them a vitamin plan that isn't the BEST for their bodies. It's hard to deviate from the plan, and it's natural to want to defend your surgeon and his plan. It was, you know, a center of excellence (mine was, and they suggested flintstones and tums, and when I asked, they admitted it was "better than nothing but really not suggested seriously").
So yeah, you can hate on those people who insist that Flintstones are a bad choice. You can say that the person who says it's a bad choice are being condescending or superior, or even snotty *****es. But ultimately those snotty *****es on Obesity Health are NOT living inside YOUR body. Your surgeon isn't inside your body. The nurses and nutritionists and everyone else is NOt living inside your skin. It's YOUR body, and if you think communing with rattlesnakes and drinking antifreeze is the best thing for your body, go right ahead. It's your body.
For MY body, I look at the evidence, I look at the studies, I read the anecdotal stories too, and then I make a choice. Do I use calcium citrate or carbonate. If I use carbonate, and the carbonate fans are right, I save a few bucks. If the citrate fans are right, they won't get all superior while I'm having to avoid any sudden moves so as to keep my bones from snapping. They won't be condescending when I'm reduced to a wheelchair because my bones are all but dissolved. They WILL however, have healthier bones if they are right. So if Citrate (according to a lot of studies) is the best, why not spring for it, even if it is a bit more inconvenient and a bit more expensive? And the same thing is true of Flintstones. If I want a chewable I can get a centrum (lousy flavor, but better flavor than Flintstones). The number of Flintstones needed to come close to 200% of the US RDA of most or all micronutrients makes the "cost" of flintstones nearly equal, and possibly more expensive than the Adult vitamins. So if I save no money, and I'm taking a vitamin designed for an adult gut and adult needs, I'm doing a favor to my body. I have to live in this body, I'm not going to gamble on Flintstones being "good enough" and hope it's true, when there are better vitamins out there that I know are better, have more complete vitamins in adult amounts.
So.... while this is WAY more than you asked for, it's been stewing inside me for a long time. It's NOT condescension, it's because some doctors don't think their (fat and lazy) patients can handle the truth. If a doctor recommends something less than the ASMBS, and I've read the (not so) scintillating suggested vitamins on that website, then I do think that my knowlege of postop vitamins is superior to the doctors.