I'd just like to distinguish something, without dissing anyone's right to quote facts, numbers, statistics and whilst agreeing that yes, people considering the band need to consider these things.

But hard facts are not the same thing as statistics, which are afterall skewed by extremes. I dont believe there are any hard facts about the band at all, there are only statistical averages to consider.

Ok, so its likely that a lot of people will lose between 50 and 70% of their excess weight with the band. Its likely that some people will not lose at all and its likely that some people will have other problems - its also likely that many people will lose all the weight they desire with no problems whatsoever.

Statistics! Not hard facts.

Maybe?

The data that is fed into the program consists of "facts."

The resultant stats are subject to manipulation.

The decisions we make based on stats are subject to all sorts of influences.

I think they all have a place in the "figuring".

Well yes, I agree with that. I just mean really that people dont have to assume they are going to be a statistic. They're derived from facts sure but they're really only a series of likelihoods.

In the past several years I have personally met at least 100 bandsters and know another 500 or so from on-line support groups. Out of 600 banded people I personally know, only a small handful have reached some type of goal weight, while many have lost roughly half their excess weight. Meanwhile, many have gained back some, most or all of their lost weight. Disecting terminology doesn't change the numbers in my collection of raw data. Finding scientific studies that say differently won't change anything either because I know what I see, regardless of what's in print. If I see it firsthand, that's factual enough for me.

That's always very interesting and I'm very glad you brought this up Jachut. Facts v/s Statistics and heresay too.

When I reference my dismay about people sharing "fact" or "statistics", it's usually regarding what people say they have read or have seen or was told to be fact, when in all actuality, there is no proof of it or maybe there is but..where the heck is the proof? An internet link? A newspaper clipping?

I always say if you don't know the history of the author then you don't know what you are reading.

I know that the factors in the actual success of a band are relative to doctor/surgeon, geographical location, current health of the patient and some kind of patient category. I personally don't know 600 people that are banded but im sure if an actual study was done by a credible research company we would have some kind of a solid answer as to what is fact.

Yet that's country specific. Statistics are nowhere near so depressing in Australia. I personally have met and known many bandsters online who have reached their goal weights and more than a few who have had their bands 10 years plus! That 50 to 70% of excess weight isnt quoted as regularly over here, probably due to population averages, general lower starting weights (Australia hasnt quite caught up to America in the obesity stakes yet), I dont know. There's also fewer people in this country and therefore fewer banded, so that alters the statistics, see what I mean? What percentage of total bandsters is your 600 - in a country as big as America, its miniscule, who says they're representative of bandsters as a whole? You cant know that, and that's why dissecting the terminology does change the picture. I'm not disputing the fact that people need to be realistic about the outcome they'll achieve with this thing, but you cant interpret statistics as if they're fact and it simply isnt healthy to go into something like this either blinkered OR with a defeatist attitude that means you're beaten before you start.

And I've just started this whole argument going again probably, which I shouldnt have done, but this distinction does bug me. Its a real one.

Ok, well I guess its just another agree/disagree thing, I've said what I think so I wont continue to restate it.

Actually wouldn't it be kinda cool to do our own little poll? It will have alot of variables, but at least we can get an idea of what's going on here in the community. We could do something like a poll with questions about goal weight met, complications, no complications, geographical location and years into the band?

There already is a poll here Telly - it's called 'Our own statistics' I think. Do a search on it.

Actually I think one thing people do need to be realistic about, is that banding is relatively new. Its only been done in Australia for a little over 10 years and much much less elsewhere in the world. The US doesnt even have medium term statistics let along long term ones yet. Its been around for well under a decade over there.

None of us knows the consequences of having these bands in for 10, 20, 30 years or if they will even stand up to that length of time. We are all taking a blind leap of faith there.

Jacqui, I don't think this is an argumentative thread at all, and you pointed out some valid information. Without turning to journals or case studies it's easy to say that America's obesity crisis outweighs most other countries, right? I can't even count the number of 24-hour drive through fast food restaurants within a quarter mile of my house, let alone the 24 hour convenience stores packed with aisle upon aisle of pre-packaged junk foods. I haven't done much traveling outside the United States, but I can't imagine other countries have as much access to the crap us morbidly obese tend to crave. Within five blocks of my house are McDonalds, Churches Fried chicken, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Jack in the Box, Long John Silver, Del Taco, Taco Bell, Subway, Pollo Loco, Burger King, Wendy's and Sonic, and those are just the drive through places! I'm not even talking about all the pizza joints, sub shops, fast Chinese takeouts or ice cream stores.

When I say I know 600 people, most of them are from the United States. Many of the 600 live in farm areas or out of the city. Not all of us have convenient accesss to junk food, but one thing I know for sure is that I've personally never lived anywhere that I had to drive more than 5 minutes to get to fast food or junk food. Our TV, radio and billboard commercials convince us to SUPER SIZE, while the small chain restaurants promote "all you can eat" like we need a reminder!

I guess all the facts/statistics really don't matter to me considering I'm not planning on leaving my fat country soon, and I don't understand why advertising alcohol and cigarettes has been banned while we're dying of obesity-related diseases while Carl's Junior still makes commericals with skinny blonde chicks scarfing down drippy triple cheeseburgers.

Well I think Australia is fast catching up but on the whole we do eat a fresher, healthier diet. There's an abundance of fast food and convenience food but the culture is still fresh and homecooked. I think that would have a huge outcome on long term outcomes with the band, as well all know its still quite easy to eat a high calorie diet whilst only consuming a small quantity of food.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, you're right, so thanks for acknowledging that. I think I'm really trying to say that statistics are a huge conglomeration of "facts" gathered from a lot of places and for each and every individual, not all of the lifestyle, psychological or other factors that influence those facts come into play. Therefore no one statistic constitutes a hard fact for any particular person, simply a likely outcome based upon others experiences.

Three years ago I took a vacation to Ireland. I was VERY surprised that Ireland was running public interest advertisements on the increasing rates of obesity in that country and stressed the importance of NOT becoming an obese country like America. They didn't slam America... just pointed out what the future could be and the future was America.

Ireland....Have you ever seen an Ulster Fry? It is a heart attack waiting to happen! Similiar to Denny's Grand Slam breakfast except it also comes with Blood Sausage, Baked Beans, and Stewed Tomatoes. I can see why they need to run those ads!

In my view statistics are more than a little ephemeral.

For example, in my "Erosion" thread, I base the statistics on "Facts". Unfortunately the "Facts" are driven by massive variables.

X number of people have experienced erosion.

Great.

Now... how many of them had the 9.75cm band, the 10cm... the 11cm... the vanguard... Swedish...

How many were "compliant" with the bandster rules...

How many had variations in their post operative diet... was it six weeks, three weeks...did they do a pre-op diet...

I love statistics, and I love facts. I also acknowledge that facts based on variables are not true facts, The statistics show a very broad spectrum of data, based on very broad variables.

While they can be a guideline, they certainly can't speak on what will occur to an individual.

Charge on madly!

Actually wouldn't it be kinda cool to do our own little poll? It will have alot of variables, but at least we can get an idea of what's going on here in the community. We could do something like a poll with questions about goal weight met, complications, no complications, geographical location and years into the band?

Full moon, maybe? Great minds? Whatever. Someone at another site a couple of us here visit posted the same kind of poll just today. (Of course, variables--as discussed elsewhere--were not covered, so we don't know who did the surgeries, when they were done, which band was used, etc.)

Here's what they've gathered so far...

HTH

Yuck GeezerSue, I don't like those stats. Esp. the purple color'd one. Out of 30 people 10 of them had another surgery and 9 thought maybe reoperation was necessary. But good thing, overall 11 people thought we'd make it to the end. Short but interesting poll.