say don't get the lap-band!

the nurse at my regular dr's office had gastric bypass and she practically begged me to do that instead. Same thing with an online friend of mine.

What made you decide to get the band instead of bypass? I was so floored I couldn't even think of the reason why I chose the band over bypass lol.

First if the doctors nurse was that passionate about you having the bypass, I would discuss her lack of professionalism with the doctor (assuming she isnt a personal friend).

I think most people pick the lab band for the following reasons:

1. Its less evasive with a shorter recovery time frame.

2. Its reversible

3. Its adjustable.

4. None of the dumping issues that come with By pass.

That said it is still a surgery with risks. But I am with you, I couldnt think of a reason to have bypass

I chose to have the band instead of bypass for a few reasons.

1. It is less invasive than bypass. Healing time is much faster because they don't cut your stomach up.

2. You will not get nauesatied with the band as much so as the bypass

3. It is adjustable so if God forbid you get sick or get pregnant you can eat larger amounts of food.

4. less risk involved if your like me and plan on having a baby.

5. Less costly

6. My mom's friend had gastric bypass for about 10 years now and she throws up every day and has to take so many vitamins and she can't reverse it. However, the doctor did recommend having the band to help with the systems.

I didnt chose, my surgeon did & i trust him dearly & im so happy with the results so far :crying:

& also he said i wasnt in the bypass criteria

Remember that people will speak highly of the surgery they had if it's been successful for them. If someone had bypass and had no complications, of course it was a good choice. But overall, bypass has a 10% occurrence rate of complications -- including death, malnutrition (the bypass past of the surgery decreases the amount of intestine available for absorption of nutrients and it's really easy to screw up and skip vitamins and maybe not eat as good as you should and suddenly, your hair starts to fall out or something similar), etc. Lap band is not as hard on you at the time of surgery and the .01% chance of complications is limited to non-life threatening stuff. And, above all, IT'S YOUR CHOICE.

This was my list vs. RNY.

My reasons for the LB:

- Safer surgery (no cutting other than the Laproscopic incisions, and fat tissue around where the band will go)

- Unfill at any point needed and Reversible if needed for other health reasons

- Less complications (dumping, hair loss, etc.)

- Slower weight loss (easy to explain when you're not 'telling' everyone. I’m a lower BMI without severe comorbidities, so I don’t need to get healthy FAST).

- Easy to get proper nutrition- I don't EVER have to drink a protein shake.

- Continued interaction/accountability to the surgeon (ie. I had to sign that I would continue seeing my surgeon for 5 yrs. post-op, he covers 6 fills as part of the package so it's not for more $, he really wants you to be successful long-term)

- Continued adjustments to stoma for life (RNY/some others- can stretch the stoma, some need revision surgery to retighten this.)

- I'm more interested in a slow significant weight loss and keeping it off than a huge weight loss...in other words, if I don't lose all 100 pounds as long as I get to healthy and stay there that's OK with me. It's the keeping it off I'm most interested in.

- I need portion control, not reactions to bad foods. I already know I can diet pretty successfully (I'm a professional dieter, just can't keep it off and I feel like I'm starving) so I'm not worried about counting calories etc. (I don't think I need the malabsorption).

How about "After thoroughly researching my WLS options, I made an informative decision that this is the best one for me."

I wouldn't have had WLS if I had to have bypass. The thought of having my organs cut up and sewn back together just freaks me out. It's permanent and you can't go back. My Aunt had bypass and is malnourished and has no body fat left which is horribly dangerous. I think I would have to be extremely desperate to have the bypass. I am very happy with the band and have no regrets.

Less invasive surgery and not permanent. Those were the two key differences to me.

Hrtgoeson, While nobody has begged me to get the bypass, I have gotten a weird vibe from some of the staff at the bariatric center. Like somehow the lapband is the poor stepsister to bypass, and if I was really serious about losing weight I'd go with the "winner" (bypass). The center does do more bypasses, and they have a longer history of doing bypass as compared to lapband, so that might account for the vibe I'm getting. But it doesn't matter; I'm still getting the lapband there (they are a center of excellence and the only place my insurance will pay for). If lapband weren't an option, I would rather stay fat than have bypass surgery.

When I went to see my surgeon the first time he asked me which procedure I wanted... I told him that I didn't know; that one of the reasons I was seeing him was to discuss my options with him.

I did mention that I wasn't necessarily interested in a fast weight loss. I said that "slow and steady is fine with me". I then mentioned that was I was concerned about was not where I would be in 6 months or a year but where I would be in 5 years --- 10 years.

As soon as I mentioned that (the long-term consideration) he immediately said that I would want the lap-band.

And that was the "path" I began upon.

As a part of my pre-surgery consults my surgeon wanted me to see my endocrinologist (I have some thyroid issues) for a surgical clearance. My endocrinologist asked me which procedure I was considering having and I told him the lap-band. He said "Good, because I would not approve you for gastric bypass." When I asked him why he said that because they bypass so much of the first part of the gut, in addition to the stomach, that I would have calcium problems. I already have a problem with calcium metabolism; I certainly do not need to place myself in a deficit with calcium absorption.

Remember that people will speak highly of the surgery they had if it's been successful for them. If someone had bypass and had no complications, of course it was a good choice. But overall, bypass has a 10% occurrence rate of complications -- including death, malnutrition (the bypass past of the surgery decreases the amount of intestine available for absorption of nutrients and it's really easy to screw up and skip Vitamins and maybe not eat as good as you should and suddenly, your hair starts to fall out or something similar), etc. Lap band is not as hard on you at the time of surgery and the .01% chance of complications is limited to non-life threatening stuff. And, above all, IT'S YOUR CHOICE.

Parrothead... this is not accurate. The lap band does not offer 0.01% complications.

Erosion: 1.3%

Slips: Over 7%

Infections: <1% at the time of surgery, but the risk remains with each fill.

Then there is band intolerance, pouch dilation, esophageal dilation, stoma spasms, and many other possible issues.

There IS a chance for death with Lap Band surgery, there is a chance of death for ANY surgical procedure. It's low with band/sleeve but it's still a possibility.

Hair loss happens all the time with all WLS types. Have you seen the many posts here on hair loss?

I think it's really important to provide good, solid information so that people can make the choice that is right for them. The doctors and band makers do not support your 0.01% stat in the least.

Edited March 27, 200917 yr by WASaBubbleButt

Just a note on hair Loss:

Lap Band patients typically get the kind of hair loss that any major surgery will cause and it shows up about three months post-op (I had it after childbirth and other surgery, but it grows back). In my travels here on LBT it's just as predicted, in new LB'ers. I also frequent other sites that include more RNY'ers and they have more hair loss long term because of malnutrition (which is possible to counteract if you're proactive). Sure LB'ers can have malnutrition if they don't watch it, but with the malabsorbtion of RNY you have to be way more proactive on getting all the necessary nutrients.

Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia:

Loss of hair after sedation or general anesthesia is probably much more common than is realized. The medical term for this is telogen effluvium. Briefly, due to a specific event, hair follicles prematurely terminate the anagen phase and enter the resting or telogen phase. The hair follicle is not damaged or diseased, but has simply had its biological clock reset. Resting hairs remain on the scalp for about 100 days, so hair loss occurs about 3 months after the event that caused the biological clock to be reset. Hair loss is diffuse and up to 50% of the body's hair can be affected. There are many types of events that can cause this to occur. They include acute blood loss, childbirth, high fever (commonly seen in children), and physical and/or psychological stress. Hair dressers, when they see patients who have had surgery, commonly blame this problem on the anesthesia. They are wrong-it's the surgery, because of the associated physical and/or psychological stress. Anesthesia itself does not cause this to occur.

I wanted to be as healthy as possible which, for me, meant no malabsorption. I fear looking sick for the sake of being skinny. Heck, I feared being sick for the sake of being skinny, dumping aint pretty.

I am a control freak and the band allows for the maximum in control. I can control my weight loss and have used the band to build a healthy lifestyle.

At the time, I was keen on the fully reversible aspect.

I am glad I chose the band but if ever I needed to removed it, I would reconsider the more permanent procedures.

These were my reasons and I can relate to everyone's reasons for choosing their respective surgeries. I hope for you that, like me, your wls experience has not disappointed.