Re: Research?

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

I can't help out much with the research question. Although, we have

a number of well read/plagio expert members on this board who I'm

certain will respond to your post :-)

My son just started using a locally made helemt and his orthotist

said that he would need to wear the helmet at least 18 hours a day.

(although most people do wear the helmet for 23 hours). Since we

have just started, I can't tell you what our progess will

be..however, our orthotist said that we would see significant

improvement. (even with it on for 18 hours).

We'll probably try for the 23 hours. I don't want to ever think

that we could have gotten more improvement (if we only went with 18

hours). Ayway, good luck on your research and you have definately

come to the right place.

Dana (mom to )

helemt 04/17/02

ont.

> I'm just starting to investigate use of helmet/doc band for my son

> , 7 months, who has a noticeable flat spot on back side of

> head. Xrays have ruled out synostosis (thankfully), and 1 plastic

> surgeon I talked to recommended this treatment. Problem is I

can't

> find any other physicians who are recommending this (including

> 's pediatrician), as they say there is no scientific

research

> that supports this process. They all believe it'll take care of

> itself. Is anyone aware of any research that validates this

therapy,

> specifically some type of control group that did not have this

> treatment, where it was found after 2 years or so that their heads

> did not correct itself? Also wondering if anyone who has used the

> helmet has used it for less than the recommended 23 hours/day, and

if

> so, any sense of how that may have affected the outcome?

>

> Any input along these lines would be much appreciated. Thanks!

[Guest guest]

:

HI & welcome to the group! Most of the parents in our group, have or

are still using " helmet therapy " to treat their child's plagio.. My

daughter wore a DOCband from 11.5 mos - 15.5 mos of age, she had

severe plagio & we were able to achieve good correction in 4.5 mos

time. Abby " graduated " from her DOCband last June, since then I can

tell you we haven't noticed any addt'l improvement to her head

shape. She still is kind of flat, but I'm sure it's only noticeable

to those who know about it. There are some studies currently

underway to see if the good old " it'll round out on it's own in time "

theory. I for one don't believe it. Of course it depends on the

severity of the child's plagio, like I said my daughter's was quite

severe. SO many of our members have gotten the same opnions from

their peds. that the head will improve on it's own, there's no

evidence these bands work, hair will cover it & nobody's head is

perfect. I can tell you the DOCband DOES work! It was like magic to

see my daughter's head round just by wearing her band. I have been a

member of this group for 1.5 yrs now, and I really don't ever recall

hearing of an unsatisfied DOCband customer! Cranial Technologies

HIGHLY recommends keepnig the band on the child's head 23 hrs a day.

A child's head is growing & in order to get the maximum correction in

the fastest time, the band should be worn full time.

Welcome again, this is a very difficult & personal decision for you &

your family to come to, whether or not to band. Do whatever your gut

tells you to do. Best of luck & please keep us updated!

Debbie Abby's mom DOCgrad

MI

> I'm just starting to investigate use of helmet/doc band for my son

> , 7 months, who has a noticeable flat spot on back side of

> head. Xrays have ruled out synostosis (thankfully), and 1 plastic

> surgeon I talked to recommended this treatment. Problem is I can't

> find any other physicians who are recommending this (including

> 's pediatrician), as they say there is no scientific

research

> that supports this process. They all believe it'll take care of

> itself. Is anyone aware of any research that validates this

therapy,

> specifically some type of control group that did not have this

> treatment, where it was found after 2 years or so that their heads

> did not correct itself? Also wondering if anyone who has used the

> helmet has used it for less than the recommended 23 hours/day, and

if

> so, any sense of how that may have affected the outcome?

>

> Any input along these lines would be much appreciated. Thanks!

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

> to know if anyone else is upset over this last " research " put out

> about gastric bypass. Sorry if this has been discussed already and

Both the band and the bypass (which is really a collection of different

procedures, each with its own pluses and minuses) have plenty of published

material on them. Some of it is legitimate research, some of it isn't.

> I haven't seen it. The last straw for me was when our cardiologist

> told my husband, who has been considering banding, that the new

> reasearch indicates that bypass is much more effective and

> encouraged him (he is 50 years old, 300 lb, with severe CAD) to have

> the bypass instead of the band.

Well, sure....bypasses are what he does. Doctors are no different than the rest

of us. They generally use, and promote, what they're familiar with. If your

husband worked for Ford he wouldn't likely be driving around a Toyota or

recommending that someone buy a Camaro instead of a Mustang. The surgeon is

comfortable with bypasses, and not with the band.

> When he told me I quickly responded

> with the fact that the reasearch has left out what the results are

> in 5 years. My band surgeon, who does mostly bypass, is very clear

> on the research putting bypass vs band at the same loss at the end

> of the 5 years. Has anyone else heard this and can anyone tell me

> about " research " that they've seen on statistics/facts on the

> effectiveness of banding vs bypass.

In general they're the same loss after three years or so. With the band you're

not likely to have a " rebound " like you are with bypass. You can't adjust the

bypass, and when you stretch it out you're very likely to regain.

> One of the reasons I don't get much time to post is because I've

> been very busy trying my best to achieve success with my band. At

> the gym 3 days a wk. My band has taught me so many of the habits I

> was unable to establish on my own and I'm grateful for it. Down 81

> lbs in 16 mos. with a goal to be at 100 lbs loss or 140 if possible

> by my 2 yr bandiversary. Thank you all for your temendous support.

The bypass will also help you to change your habits, but the side effects can be

pretty traumatic....I have a friend who has a bypass, and you don't want to be

in the same room with him much of the time. They have air fresheners in every

room, and usually a scented candle burning.

To use an old phrase.... it could knock a buzzard off of a s...wagon.

dan

[Guest guest]

Hi, Carol! Wow, you're doing great!! Well, give him THIS study that

shoes BANDING SUPERIOR TO BYPASS: :

Five-Year Study Of The LAP-BAND® Show Significant Benefits over Lap

RNYGB

LAP-BAND® System is less invasive, less risky than laparoscopic

gastric bypass, according to a five-year study comparing the two most

common weight-loss surgery procedures for the seriously overweight

presented at this year's American Society for Bariatric Surgery

meeting by Emma , M.D., the senior investigator of the study

and Director of Oregon Weight Loss Surgery, LLC (Portland, OR).

" This was one of the first comparative studies of LAP-BAND and

laparoscopic gastric bypass patients conducted by a single

institution, " said Dr. . " It is significant to note that at

the five-year mark there is no difference in the weight-loss results

between the LAP-BAND and laparoscopic gastric bypass patients, yet

the gastric bypass has a much greater risk of operative

complications. " The study is an extension of a three-year study

conducted by Legacy Health System published two years ago.

The study concludes:

- LAP-BAND patients have shorter operative time, less blood loss and

shorter hospital stay compared with laparoscopic gastric bypass

patients

- LAP-BAND is less invasive with less perioperative risk to the

patient

- LAP-BAND patients have decreased complication rates

Additional results of the study indicate that patients undergoing

laparoscopic gastric bypass had statistically significant greater

weight loss up to 4 years, but at 5 years, there was no statistical

difference in percent excess weight loss between laparoscopic gastric

bypass and LAP-BAND.

The study also concluded that laparoscopic gastric bypass patients

had significantly more major complications than LAP-BAND patients

(10% vs. 5%, respectively). This observation was substantially

different from the finding in the 3-year report, where no significant

difference in major complications appeared between laparoscopic

gastric bypass and LAP-BAND patients.

As morbid obesity continues to be a global health problem, bariatric

surgery remains the only viable, consistent form of weight loss for

this patient population. " With the LAP-BAND System, there is now a

safer, less invasive and more acceptable surgical option for patients

suffering from the emotional and physical impact of being seriously

overweight, " added Dr. .

ABOUT OREGON WEIGHT LOSS SURGERY, LLC

Based in Portland, Oregon, Oregon Weight Loss Surgery, LLC is

nationally recognized as a Center of Excellence in Bariatric Surgery.

The practice is focused on laparoscopic weight-loss surgery and

provides a comprehensive weight-loss program. The center is a leader

in clinical research in bariatric surgery.

Also, do a serach on this sites for " Lap Band Statistics " " Lap Band

and Gastric Bypass results " or similar inquiries to find all the

current studies:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search & DB=PubMed

good luck Ther are lots of studies showing the bypass safer and mreo

effective longertm, so don't be swayed by that out of date cardiac

doc. - Sandy

>

> Hi All,

> Haven't posted in a really long time. Usually check in on you all

> just to see whats new. So glad for all the success. I just wanted

> to know if anyone else is upset over this last " research " put out

> about gastric bypass. Sorry if this has been discussed already and

> I haven't seen it. The last straw for me was when our cardiologist

> told my husband, who has been considering banding, that the new

> reasearch indicates that bypass is much more effective and

> encouraged him (he is 50 years old, 300 lb, with severe CAD) to

have

> the bypass instead of the band. When he told me I quickly

responded

> with the fact that the reasearch has left out what the results are

> in 5 years. My band surgeon, who does mostly bypass, is very clear

> on the research putting bypass vs band at the same loss at the end

> of the 5 years. Has anyone else heard this and can anyone tell me

> about " research " that they've seen on statistics/facts on the

> effectiveness of banding vs bypass.

> One of the reasons I don't get much time to post is because I've

> been very busy trying my best to achieve success with my band. At

> the gym 3 days a wk. My band has taught me so many of the habits I

> was unable to establish on my own and I'm grateful for it. Down 81

> lbs in 16 mos. with a goal to be at 100 lbs loss or 140 if possible

> by my 2 yr bandiversary. Thank you all for your temendous support.

> Carol

>

[Guest guest]

Sandy,

thanks so much for the encouragement. It is nice to see the scale

moving again. Also thanks for the great info on research. I wish

doctors would take the time to find out the facts before they advise

people to do something so drastic. Part of me wants to think that

the cardiologist is not that ignorant, but thinks that my husband

needs to lose fast because of his heart condition. Still, I would

think that a fast loss is also heard on the whole system, including

the heart. Thanks again, and I will be surfing this site.

> >

> > Hi All,

> > Haven't posted in a really long time. Usually check in on you

all

> > just to see whats new. So glad for all the success. I just

wanted

> > to know if anyone else is upset over this last " research " put

out

> > about gastric bypass. Sorry if this has been discussed already

and

> > I haven't seen it. The last straw for me was when our

cardiologist

> > told my husband, who has been considering banding, that the new

> > reasearch indicates that bypass is much more effective and

> > encouraged him (he is 50 years old, 300 lb, with severe CAD) to

> have

> > the bypass instead of the band. When he told me I quickly

> responded

> > with the fact that the reasearch has left out what the results

are

> > in 5 years. My band surgeon, who does mostly bypass, is very

clear

> > on the research putting bypass vs band at the same loss at the

end

> > of the 5 years. Has anyone else heard this and can anyone tell

me

> > about " research " that they've seen on statistics/facts on the

> > effectiveness of banding vs bypass.

> > One of the reasons I don't get much time to post is because I've

> > been very busy trying my best to achieve success with my band.

At

> > the gym 3 days a wk. My band has taught me so many of the

habits I

> > was unable to establish on my own and I'm grateful for it. Down

81

> > lbs in 16 mos. with a goal to be at 100 lbs loss or 140 if

possible

> > by my 2 yr bandiversary. Thank you all for your temendous

support.

> > Carol

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Thursday, August 31, 2006, 10:27:50 PM, you wrote:

> Part of me wants to think that

> the cardiologist is not that ignorant, but thinks that my husband

> needs to lose fast because of his heart condition. Still, I would

> think that a fast loss is also heard on the whole system, including

> the heart.

Yes, rapid loss is bad for the whole system. Also, with a bypass

you're continually deprived of proper nutrition, and will have to take

all sorts of supplements. Why not just eat good food with a band?

I'd bet that if he's a healthy enough candidate for a bypass surgery,

which is long, complex, and very hard on you, he's certainly ok to

lose a bit slower. I'll bet the doc is just using that scare tactic

because he likes bypasses. What does his heart specialist say about

losing weight, fast vs slow?

dan

--

Dan Lester, Boise, ID honu@... www.mylapband.tk

Dr. Ortiz, Tijuana, 4/28/03

323/209/199 Age 63 The road goes on forever.....

[Guest guest]

The cardiologist told my husband 2 years ago after stents had

already been placed by a different doc that he may need to have a

heart bypass, but his weight was too high and he needed at least 75

lbs off. Since then, after being treated with lots of med, Plavix,

Toprol, etc. and achieving good numbers the cardio says that he's

young enough and wants to keep treating with meds, but of course

still needs the weight off. I would think that a fast loss would be

an issue if he was intending to do the heart bypass ASAP. I

honestly think that these docs just experience more bypass losses in

numbers and automatically think its the way to go. Its not their

specialty, so they don't really care about it. Looking forward to

the future when bandsters are stronger in numbers and show the

medical community that we do succeed as well as count.

>

> > Part of me wants to think that

> > the cardiologist is not that ignorant, but thinks that my

husband

> > needs to lose fast because of his heart condition. Still, I

would

> > think that a fast loss is also heard on the whole system,

including

> > the heart.

>

> Yes, rapid loss is bad for the whole system. Also, with a bypass

> you're continually deprived of proper nutrition, and will have to

take

> all sorts of supplements. Why not just eat good food with a band?

>

> I'd bet that if he's a healthy enough candidate for a bypass

surgery,

> which is long, complex, and very hard on you, he's certainly ok to

> lose a bit slower. I'll bet the doc is just using that scare

tactic

> because he likes bypasses. What does his heart specialist say

about

> losing weight, fast vs slow?

>

> dan

>

> --

> Dan Lester, Boise, ID honu@... www.mylapband.tk

> Dr. Ortiz, Tijuana, 4/28/03

> 323/209/199 Age 63 The road goes on forever.....

>