Cleo's Mom

First the criticism was that the public option or medicare buy-in would put the poor private health insurance companies out of business and create a government take over, so now that those are stripped, it's the cost - despite the fact that the CBO has said it will REDUCE the deficit by $130 billion over 10 years. You see, when a non-partisan organization like the CBO comes out in our favor, it is ignored. It's only when it supports their opposition is it cited. Their same repeated, lame arguements against health reform just ring hollow.

One of my two mantras that I offer on here all the time is: If it weren't for hypocrisy the republicans wouldn't have anything. The examples are seemingly endless. I will add another but first I want to preface it by saying: Since he lost the presidential election McCain has been a pain in the butt. He has been a sore loser and more than ungracious. Pres. Obama has reached out to him, invited him to a White House dinner in his honor but McCain never lets an opportunity pass to criticize Pres. Obama. It makes it so much more obvious that the better man won. Now to my mantra: When Sen. Franken didn't allow Lieberman more time than he was alloted to speak on the Senate floor, McCain was outraged - saying never in 20 years has he seen such a display, etc.. ad infinitum, ad phoney outrage. He has a short memory because HE DID THE SAME THING TO A DEMOCRATIC SENATOR and here it is: Flashback: McCain Objected To Granting Dem Senator More Time (VIDEO) Eric Kleefeld | December 18, 2009, 6:39PM Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook! 14Share On Hardball this evening, Chris Matthews dug up the video to prove that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) wasn't being totally truthful when he complained that he'd never seen anything like when Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) denied Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) more time to speak -- in fact, McCain himself has done it. Yesterday, McCain vehemently protested when his friend was denied an extra moment to finish his speech, claiming that it had never happened before and damaged the comity of the Senate. (Franken said he had been instructed by the leadership to hold people to their time limits, as the presiding officer.) "I've been around here 20-some years. First time I've ever seen a member denied an extra minute or two to finish his remarks," McCain said indignantly. "And I must say that I don't know what's happening here in this body. But I think it's wrong." But as Think Progress pointed out, McCain certainly had seen it happen before -- and in fact had perpetrated it in 2002, when he lodged an objection and thus denied extra time to then-Sen. Mark Dayton (D-MN) during debate on the Iraq War. Matthews tonight provided the video. "And now John McCain says this has never happened before, he's never seen anything like it," Matthews observed wryly, "when in fact he did it."

I talked to the PA in my doctor's office today about the shoulder pain and she said the UGI that I had last week when I was hospitalized due to the stuck incident showed that the tubing was close to the diaphram and that may be causing the pain. I am scheduled for another upper GI next month and if the pain becomes chronic they might have to go in and shorten the tubing. This doctor places the port on the left side and uses less tubing. My former doctor placed my port on the right side and the tubing goes across my stomach and up to the band in a backward C. She said to use advil for inflammation and see if that helps. Time will tell. MERRY CHRISTMAS

In order to meet the Christmas Eve deadline and because the OBSTRUCTIONIST REPUBLICANS have used every procedural delay tactic (reading of entire bill, etc), the vote had to be scheduled at 1 AM. So you see, it isn't sneaky but rather a timeline scheduling problem created by the delay tactics of the republicans. And since everyone knows about it, how can it be sneaky? And I don't see what difference it makes what time they vote on it. It's not like it would make a difference if it were held during the day. And as for 2010 what miracle do you think is going to happen then? Yes, democrats will lose seats. The incumbent party always loses seats in midterm elections. So what? The republicans that win will just join the rest of the party of no and continue to be obstructionists. They had their day in the sun under bush and we had 8 years of failed policies. Other than a tax cut for the rich and an unnecessary war in Iraq, both raising the deficit, nothing was done. No problems were tackled. Not the economy, global warming, job creation, clean, renewable energy, or healthcare. Why would we ever want to go back to THAT?

No MRI, just an x-ray. Everything was okay. Maybe an MRI is the next step.

I am 15 months out from my banding and the left shoulder pain that I had right after surgery resolved after a couple of weeks but I still get left shoulder pain from time to time. It has been very painful the last couple of days. I saw my PCP about it awhile ago and had an x-ray. It didn't show anything. I am convinced it is band related. Did any of you who had your band removed have left shoulder pain that went away after the band was removed?

Anyone who doesn't think that repubicans make behind closed door deals to seal the deal are very naive. That's how politics works. It's an ugly business. And always will be as long as it takes increasing amounts of money to win an election or re-election. They always say you shouldn't see how two things are made: sausage and laws.

I got the left shoulder pain right after surgery, which was 15 months ago. That resolved itself after a few weeks. However, I still get the shoulder pain from time to time but it is not related to fills. It just happens. I think it is band related and the band presses on the diaphram and that pain is referred to the left shoulder.

They did do an upper GI the next day and it showed that everything was going through but the radiologist said I had esophageal motility disorder (things move slowly) and I talked to the PA in my doctor's office and she said she didn't think the band caused that but my stuck espisode might have. Truthfully, I don't think doctors know a lot about how the band works and what it does to our bodies and they guess a lot. But it didn't show that the band slipped. I hope you are able to finance a revision. Being a glass half empty type of person, when I went on the sleeve site I went right to complications. But I know those who have gotten a band to sleeve revision are all happy. It's a new procedure too, but for me, who has major hunger issues, it seems like it would have been the right surgery for me. I don't think at this point that I will ever get a fill. Because when I had 2cc's in my 4cc band it never took away my hunger or provided me with satiety and when it was overfilled to 3 cc's (by my idiot former doctor) I had reflux, heartburn and pain. And again, no satiety and still hungry. But what the band has done is cause me to get stuck - very painfully - several times, one requiring hospitalization. So, I have been operating on pretty much willpower, so why not continue to do that unfilled? Do you not have insurance at all or just a policy that won't pay for WLS? Almost no policies pay for the sleeve at this point, but that might change. Good luck to you with your struggles.

I think I've seen other posts here about those who have had left shoulder pain long after their surgery. I do think it's band related because I never had it before surgery. I just think this foreign object right in the middle of your diaphram can cause problems because it isn't supposed to be there. I mean why do we hiccup when we get overfull or stuck? Same concept, I think. The band pressing on something. As for me, now that I am totally unfilled, I plan on staying this way unless I start putting on a lot of weight. That stuck episode and resulting ER trip and hospitalization scared the hell out of me. One week later and I'm just starting to feel confident to eat solids again. I am very afraid of the band and getting stuck again.

Yes, this happened to me. It is the result of both the anesthesia and pain meds. When they took the cath out of me, I could not urinate on my own. So, they had to straight cath me whenever I felt full. I had to stay an extra day but the next day was able to go on my own. They didn't even consider sending me home without being able to go on my own.

Thanks, BJean. So are you - on here and R&R. Your doctor sounds smart, too, in that he recognizes the shoulder pain. My former, idiot doctor said he never heard of it except in the right shoulder after gallbladder surgery. But what could I expect from a general surgeon who had only done 22 lapbands before mine? Actually when I had an upper GI after surgery and told the radiologist about the shoulder pain - he actually offered an intelligent explanation. That the band presses on the diaphram and it is referred pain from that.

I switched doctors 7 months after my lapband surgery and went with Dr. Urbandt. Best decision I made. I like him and his staff. He is very supportive.

Despite WLS being around for awhile, we can see from the posts on these boards that the surgeons and nutritionists vary greatly in what they advocate for both pre-and post operative plans. Some doctors don't require a two week pre & post operative liquid diet. Some require one day before and a couple of days after. So which plan is right? Some say no caffeine, others in moderation. Some say no carbonation, others once in awhile. Some tell you to eat a varied healthy diet, others say low carb. My point is I don't think they know what the path to success with the band is and we should trust ourselves and our bodies. If something isn't working then it's time to change and if your doctor is resistant then that says more about him/her. I am going to be very reluctant to get any fill after my being hospitalized after being stuck. I am fine with where I am at this point and just want to get over my fear of eating after that last episode. If I start gaining a lot of weight I will re-evaluate my situation. But for now, I am glad I am fill-free.

In addition to having an upper GI, you should have complete blood work. Make sure it includes a complete thyroid profile. Your symptoms could be any number of things and they should be taken seriously.

I didn't delete, I rebutted. And I offer this: If a conservative is a believer, he wants to enact laws to make everyone abide by his beliefs. If a conservative doesn't like certain types of music or literature, he forms a group to censor it. If a conservative doesn't like drugs, he passes laws prohibiting what you can and cannot put in your body. If a conservative is a homosexual, he must hide his identity lest he shunned by his peers. If a conservative thinks he knows what is best for a womans reproduction, he will fight for laws to control it. If a conservative wants to bring pork home to his state, he does, just to a slightly lesser degree than his democrat counterparts.

BJean - you're absolutely right. It should all be about health and not about weight. That is why I will never use a ticker. I am not a number on the scale. I have been eating healthy for 4 years since I started on my own diet of healthy foods, no junk, low fat, smaller portions, etc. By the time I got the band put in I had lost 50 pounds then another 10 with the post op liquids and only 15 more from the actual band. The band has NEVER controlled my hunger the way it was promoted. My doctor is satisfied with my weight loss but I put pressure on myself to lose to get to that goal weight even though I doubt I'll ever reach it since I haven't lost any weight since last spring. But then I see that I am eating healthy and exercising every day and doing things that I never did when I was younger and much heavier. So, I think we all need to cut ourselves a break and realize that, like you said, some of us are not meant to be thin or even a "normal" weight. I come from a long line of obese people on both sides of the family. I am the 4th person to have WLS. I was a thin person. I weighed 122 when I got married in 1973. And I ate A LOT. I ate when hungry and I ate until full. So, if I was thin and eating a lot, why didn't I stay that way if I was meant to be thin? It's like a switch was flipped and bam! The genetics kicked in with a vengeance. I'm not blaming everything on genetics but obesity is a very complicated condition and each person gets there for very individual reasons. I agree that we need to quit chasing elusive goals and just try to be healthy by eating healthy and exercising.

Here's my opinion. I WANT the government to take over healthcare. They spend 92 cents of every dollar on healthcare whereas the greedy private insurance companies only spend 73 cents of every dollar on healthcare. The government does a better job of delivering healthcare or the vast majority of medicare receipients wouldn't be happy with it. It's a bargain and they know it. With the government involved in healthcare, I have direct representation if I am unhappy. Vote them out. Right now, with private insurance that I can't change (employer provided) I have no say in what they cover or what procedures they will approve. And I can't change my company. We need to take the profit motive out of healthcare, it doesn't belong in something that is a fundamental right like healthcare. And I don't care if all the private healthcare insurance companies go out of business. They are seldom just in one area of insurance anyway. And if not, well they can branch out into life, disability, car, etc.. insurance and come up with new ways to cheat people there. So all the arguments about the government expanding too much into healthcare - well I think that's a good thing, so that argument sure doesn't work for me.

Because they were completely different issues - under bush it was the Iraqi war and the lies that led to it, Gitmo, torture, secret prisons, Katrina, Valerie Plame. Those people were not bush supporters and would not have voted for McCain. They voted for Obama. Those protesting Obama didn't and wouldn't vote for him and were supportive of bush and didn't find any problem with HIS deficit increases, spending or any of the above issues or the issues they are protesting under Obama. If they had had a problem with those issues under bush we would have seen them protesting them and we didn't.

It's a mentality that is exhibited far too often. In my small town newspaper they run an online question each week. Last week's question was about a proposed community rec center and whether people would be willing to pay more taxes for it. Some said yes, they would like a rec center and would pay more taxes for it. Some said no, we don't need a rec center. But most said yes, we need a rec center but they wouldn't be willing to pay more taxes for it. That's typical. People want good schools, roads, healthcare, etc.. but they don't want to pay for it. Who do they think is going to pay for these things? Wal Mart? McDonald's?

It's not about cost. None of those who oppose Obama's agenda really care about cost. Did any of them question the cost of bush's medicare part D program (a trillion over 10 years) - they just pushed it through - no debate, no townhall meetings, no media scrutiny. Ditto for tax cuts for the rich and Iraqi war. The cost is just a smokescreen for their real agenda - to have Obama fail so they can increase their numbers in 2010 and 2012 elections.

I might add that when you don't address the difficult problems - like bush didn't - then you can't be criticized. Like the failing economy, rising unemployment, healthcare, clean, renewable energy, etc.. You just promote the status quo and kick the can down the road to the next president. Tackling this difficult problems is going to be a painful process. There are no easy answers but President Obama has the intelligence, ability and guts to do so and has said that if he is only a one term president because of it, then so be it. Bush was only concerned about being re-elected and didn't care what lies he told or problems he ignored to be so.

I agree and let me give my opinion of who makes up the republican party that has grown increasingly conservative. Of course there are exceptions (most on these boards will take exception, of course, but here it is): The 4 R's of Republicanism: 1) Rich 2) Racist 3) Redneck 4) Religious Right The first group are the CEO's, the wealthy, the have's - those that have jobs, healthcare, an investment portfolio, etc.. and they want policies in place that make sure they get all the breaks and continue to be the haves while not wanting the have nots to get a piece of their pie. They think they deserve everything they have - no one else does. The second group are those who hate minorities, blacks and latinos and who are very anti-immigration. They blame everything on them. This group is largely the white men who are republicans. They were once in control of jobs, etc.. and now blame the minorities for taking what they believe was rightfully theirs. The third group are largely under or un-educated people who have no understanding of how the government works. They just are anti government. It is evil to them. And they say this as they collect their government unemployment, collect Social Security and medicare, drive on government paid for roads, etc.. And they say all this as they hug their guns and profess to be God-fearing people. The last group - well they just want their particular religious views to be injected into the government and promote policy and agenda. But they don't want government in their religion, of course. They also want the government to fund their religious initiatives. Many can fall into more than one category but again, this is my opinion and based on seeing and listening to those who are conservative republicans.