Question:
Does anyone know why people say that WLS is dangerous?
Is it just because it's surgery or is it more dangerous than say...a hyterectomy or removal of a malignant tumor? When I had my hyterectomy NO ONE said oh, its so dangerous...but was encouraged to have it...isn't WLS life saving as well??????? — Barbara S. (posted on March 7, 2003)
March 7, 2003
Good question!! I was wondering the same thing. I think alot of people
focus on the death part more with this surgery because it is still
controversal. I did not think twice about having a hysterectomy- the
thought of death with that surgery never crossed my mind- that is why I am
not focusing too much on it now- I figure if I have done well with the
previous surgeries I will do well with this one too! Good Luck!!
— Jan S.
March 7, 2003
I am pre-op, and in my experience people fall into two camps... one camp
says "great! go for it, I am happy for you", and the other
cautions about the risks. I think the ones in the second group are often
the ones who feel morbidly obese people can lose weight if the "just
try harder"; to them this surgery is unnecessary risk (oddly enough,
they usually don't have a weight problem themselves ;) ). The surgery is
not experimental or as controversial as it once was. The NIH approved it
in 1991 as a treatment for morbid obesity.
— Tim W.
March 7, 2003
I don't think it is any riskier than a hysterectomy or any other surgery.
Any time you have surgery, you run the risk of blood clots (which is one of
the biggest risks for WLS). I know when I had my C-Sections (which I never
thought twice about), I had to wear those pretty white, tight, hose to
prevent blood clots. But, like you said, the risk associated with
"standard" surgeries is never really discussed and I believe it's
only an issue with WLS because many people still view it as being
unnecessary. Like a previous poster said, most people think that because
we're obese, we just sit around and eat junk and if we would just get off
our butts and live on rabbit food, we'd be just fine. Funny thing is, I
live on chicken and salads because I like it and I'm still obese and I know
a lady (in her 40's) who lives on vending machine junk like corn chips and
cheeto's and eats fast food at least once a day. She probably weighs 125
pounds. It's in the genes. Why can't some people understand that?
— Carolyn M.
March 7, 2003
Part of the reason is that WLS is still considered elective surgery,
whereas removal of tumors and hysterectomys are not. We who have it know
that it is a life saving surgery for us and without it we would live 1/2
lives or not much of a life, but to most, it is still a new and
controversial surgery that obese people ("who are lazy, and if they
only ate less and exercised more") have. Also, statistics show that 1
out of every 200 or 300 (I have heard both stats) die from WLS. I'd say
that is dangerous. Then again, all surgeries are dangerous and all run the
risk of problems. I think in time as more and more people have this
surgery-and the numbers are growing, and the results are known, it will
become more acceptable to the public.
— Cindy R.
March 7, 2003
I didn't think twice about having half of my thyroid gland removed for what
turned out to NOT be cancer. I am betting the risks of serious
complications is much greater for that surgery - given all the nerves and
blood vessels in the neck and upper chest - than the lap RNY I had! Mostly
I think people think the surgery is dangerous due to misinformation. I
think the mortality rates for WLS are extremely good - considering obesity
itself is a huge risk factor in any surgery, and there are obviously no
"normal sized" people having WLS to change the statistics for the
better.
— koogy
March 7, 2003
Well, first there is US, being morbid. *WE* are higher risk for anything
surgical--we don't knit well, and most are not healthy going in. Then, back
with the general population, some of the risks are common among most
surgeries you mentioned. Blood clot, pneumonia, infection. Then back it
being US, then we have special risks associated with WLS, post-op leak,
malnutrition, etc. And this one is relatively new, in the scheme of
things. But I think in the minds of "them", it's more dangerous
because THEY don't understand the surgery OR the need for it. After all, we
can just push away from the table, right? Just like they do, right? And it
always worked for us before, right? And the NIH lists it as the most
effective weight loss tool out there, right?
— vitalady
March 7, 2003
Obviously, anytime you are cut open it is dangerous...but read about my mom
in my profile and see what happens when you DON'T have WLS.
— fropunka
March 7, 2003
Probably because of the old wls that are not being done anymore. People
died from malnutrition, kidney failure, liver failure auto-immune disease
and etc. I had the old intestinal bypass in 1981 and had all kinds of
problems. Finally in 2002, I had to have an emergency takedown of that
surgery to save my life and my surgeon couldn't believe that I was even
still alive. Nearly everyone who had that surgery has died or had a
reversal. They all say that I am one of the lucky ones that I lived to
tell about it. As far as other things go, this surgery is the same as
others for blood clots. The risk of infections from leaks and leaks are
another thing that make this surgery so risky and if you think it isn't,
you are living in the ozone. I know being obese is a risk also. You just
have to weigh the pros and cons and see if you want to take the chance,
knowing that you could die. I am three weeks out from rny now and thankful
that so far, I have had no complications although I know from reading here
that I am not out of danger yet. People have died from blood clots and
leaks several months out.
— Delores S.
Click Here to Return