Re: Weight Regain Question

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/9/2002 8:25:27 AM Pacific Standard Time,

gemstein@... writes:

> Is this what happens to us in time and explains the weight gain than many of

> us

> experience a few years out

From my own observations, the weight regain seems to be primarily a function

of a return to poor habits, with perhaps a secondary contribution from the

body's tendency to " renormalize " . I do believe the intestine will shift a

small amount to try and compensate, just as the stomach or pouch will stretch

a bit if we continuously stuff it to capacity. It seems unlikely that for

most people this is a significant factor.

I can definitely see and feel that my metabolism has shifted a bit at 2-1/2

years. But the primary reason for my regain /failure to reach goal is

unquestionably my desire to eat more and exercise less.

Kate

[Guest guest]

I do not think it is a matter of the intestine increasing in size. I

think it is more that the intestine becomes more efficient at digestion

and absorption. When this happens, it becomes a matter of using good

eating patterns and (ugh!) exercise to keep the weight off.

Ray Hooks

For WLS nutrition info, visit

http://www.bariatricsupplementsystem.com

SUE FINKELSTEIN wrote:

>

> Many years ago, I went to a fat farm, where I met a

> lady who had had the old now discredited WLS. She was

> at the fat farm because she said that that portion of

> her intestine that was still functioning had increased

> in size enormously. Is this what happens to us in

> time and explains the weight gain than many of us

> experience a few years out.

>

> Thanks

>

> Sue

>

> Homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Graduate-OSSG

>

> Unsubscribe: mailto:Graduate-OSSG-unsubscribe

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I do not think it is a matter of the intestine increasing in size. I

think it is more that the intestine becomes more efficient at digestion

and absorption. When this happens, it becomes a matter of using good

eating patterns and (ugh!) exercise to keep the weight off.

Ray Hooks

For WLS nutrition info, visit

http://www.bariatricsupplementsystem.com

SUE FINKELSTEIN wrote:

>

> Many years ago, I went to a fat farm, where I met a

> lady who had had the old now discredited WLS. She was

> at the fat farm because she said that that portion of

> her intestine that was still functioning had increased

> in size enormously. Is this what happens to us in

> time and explains the weight gain than many of us

> experience a few years out.

>

> Thanks

>

> Sue

>

> Homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Graduate-OSSG

>

> Unsubscribe: mailto:Graduate-OSSG-unsubscribe

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I do not think it is a matter of the intestine increasing in size. I

think it is more that the intestine becomes more efficient at digestion

and absorption. When this happens, it becomes a matter of using good

eating patterns and (ugh!) exercise to keep the weight off.

Ray Hooks

For WLS nutrition info, visit

http://www.bariatricsupplementsystem.com

SUE FINKELSTEIN wrote:

>

> Many years ago, I went to a fat farm, where I met a

> lady who had had the old now discredited WLS. She was

> at the fat farm because she said that that portion of

> her intestine that was still functioning had increased

> in size enormously. Is this what happens to us in

> time and explains the weight gain than many of us

> experience a few years out.

>

> Thanks

>

> Sue

>

> Homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Graduate-OSSG

>

> Unsubscribe: mailto:Graduate-OSSG-unsubscribe

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

At 6:25 PM -0600 11/9/02, Ray Hooks wrote:

>I do not think it is a matter of the intestine increasing in size. I

But, docs doing revisions have noted increases in length of the

alimentary limb and common channel in some patients.

>think it is more that the intestine becomes more efficient at digestion

>and absorption.

That, too. Docs have noted that the intestine becomes more " fluffy, "

probably because of greatly enhanced absorptive area. It surely

adapts.

--Steve

[Guest guest]

At 6:25 PM -0600 11/9/02, Ray Hooks wrote:

>I do not think it is a matter of the intestine increasing in size. I

But, docs doing revisions have noted increases in length of the

alimentary limb and common channel in some patients.

>think it is more that the intestine becomes more efficient at digestion

>and absorption.

That, too. Docs have noted that the intestine becomes more " fluffy, "

probably because of greatly enhanced absorptive area. It surely

adapts.

--Steve

[Guest guest]

Amazing, isn't it? I was set to observe the surgery of a guy who was being

changed down to a proximal. Long story, good reason. He wanted me to see,

his wife wanted me to see (cuz they wouldn't let her), and I wanted to see.

They wanted my amateur explanation. and I wanted to see one go backwards.

LOL! For a variety of reasons, I didn't get to observe that one, darn it.

Anyway, he originally had had a common channel under 40 " (his insistence).

At the time of this revision, it had become 73 " long. Yes, intestines are

wiggly and not exact, but you can't misjudge by 30 " ! The other two portions

had both elongated as well, hugely, giving him a total of more than 39 ft of

intestine. Wow.

This guy is a peer of B & Don & me. so, I think he was only 4-5 yrs

out at the time of his revision downward.

I found that ABSOLUTELY fascinating. Hypertrophy is more than a theory.

I'm not in that fellas shoes, so I'm in NOOOOOOO hurry to find myself with a

longer common channel. If I have to WORK at it with this little nub, what

the heck would I have to do with a regular size model?

I shudder to think

Signed,

owner of the most efficient body on earth.

Weight Regain Question

> Many years ago, I went to a fat farm, where I met a

> lady who had had the old now discredited WLS. She was

> at the fat farm because she said that that portion of

> her intestine that was still functioning had increased

> in size enormously. Is this what happens to us in

> time and explains the weight gain than many of us

> experience a few years out.

>

> Thanks

>

> Sue

>

> Homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Graduate-OSSG

>

> Unsubscribe: mailto:Graduate-OSSG-unsubscribe

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Amazing, isn't it? I was set to observe the surgery of a guy who was being

changed down to a proximal. Long story, good reason. He wanted me to see,

his wife wanted me to see (cuz they wouldn't let her), and I wanted to see.

They wanted my amateur explanation. and I wanted to see one go backwards.

LOL! For a variety of reasons, I didn't get to observe that one, darn it.

Anyway, he originally had had a common channel under 40 " (his insistence).

At the time of this revision, it had become 73 " long. Yes, intestines are

wiggly and not exact, but you can't misjudge by 30 " ! The other two portions

had both elongated as well, hugely, giving him a total of more than 39 ft of

intestine. Wow.

This guy is a peer of B & Don & me. so, I think he was only 4-5 yrs

out at the time of his revision downward.

I found that ABSOLUTELY fascinating. Hypertrophy is more than a theory.

I'm not in that fellas shoes, so I'm in NOOOOOOO hurry to find myself with a

longer common channel. If I have to WORK at it with this little nub, what

the heck would I have to do with a regular size model?

I shudder to think

Signed,

owner of the most efficient body on earth.

Weight Regain Question

> Many years ago, I went to a fat farm, where I met a

> lady who had had the old now discredited WLS. She was

> at the fat farm because she said that that portion of

> her intestine that was still functioning had increased

> in size enormously. Is this what happens to us in

> time and explains the weight gain than many of us

> experience a few years out.

>

> Thanks

>

> Sue

>

> Homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Graduate-OSSG

>

> Unsubscribe: mailto:Graduate-OSSG-unsubscribe

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Amazing, isn't it? I was set to observe the surgery of a guy who was being

changed down to a proximal. Long story, good reason. He wanted me to see,

his wife wanted me to see (cuz they wouldn't let her), and I wanted to see.

They wanted my amateur explanation. and I wanted to see one go backwards.

LOL! For a variety of reasons, I didn't get to observe that one, darn it.

Anyway, he originally had had a common channel under 40 " (his insistence).

At the time of this revision, it had become 73 " long. Yes, intestines are

wiggly and not exact, but you can't misjudge by 30 " ! The other two portions

had both elongated as well, hugely, giving him a total of more than 39 ft of

intestine. Wow.

This guy is a peer of B & Don & me. so, I think he was only 4-5 yrs

out at the time of his revision downward.

I found that ABSOLUTELY fascinating. Hypertrophy is more than a theory.

I'm not in that fellas shoes, so I'm in NOOOOOOO hurry to find myself with a

longer common channel. If I have to WORK at it with this little nub, what

the heck would I have to do with a regular size model?

I shudder to think

Signed,

owner of the most efficient body on earth.

Weight Regain Question

> Many years ago, I went to a fat farm, where I met a

> lady who had had the old now discredited WLS. She was

> at the fat farm because she said that that portion of

> her intestine that was still functioning had increased

> in size enormously. Is this what happens to us in

> time and explains the weight gain than many of us

> experience a few years out.

>

> Thanks

>

> Sue

>

> Homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Graduate-OSSG

>

> Unsubscribe: mailto:Graduate-OSSG-unsubscribe

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> I do not think it is a matter of the intestine increasing in size. I

think it is more that the intestine becomes more efficient at digestion and

absorption.<

Actually mine has done both... increased in size to make more of an

" accommodating second tummy beyond the pouch " and shows hypertrophy but I

don't know if it is or is not more efficient at digestion and absorption --

pictures can't tell that part but the immediate intestine can and does

enlarge (the section right beyond the stoma) -- see the photos in the photos

section and you can see for yourself.

Now, who knows the " why " it does that -- was it the surgery " type " I had or

would it do that no matter what? Did I not nourish my body enough? Is my

body just really " accommodating? " I don't know and I doubt anyone could do

anything but " guess " and have " theories " about it -- but, it does really

happen... got pictures... UGH!!!

Not a happy camper,

~denise

[Guest guest]

Ray Hooks wrote:

> >I do not think it is a matter of the intestine increasing in size. I

Steve added:

> But, docs doing revisions have noted increases in length of the

> alimentary limb and common channel in some patients.

~denise added...

I specifically asked the scope doc to get me a picture with the camera part

right in my stoma and then " click " to " see " the area of intestine right

beyond my stoma -- I wanted to " see " the difference in how that section of

my intestine looked in comparison to the intestine much further down -- BIG

DIFFERENCE --

In size... I have to wait till Monday to get the exact " measurements " but I

also specifically requested he measure the diameter of that section of

intestine with the intestine further down that hadn't stretched yet -- I

posted the pic's for everyone to look at and I'll post the measurement

difference soon as I get that....

My surgery is 2 yrs and 2 months old....

It's proximal (12 " by-pass) with a horizontal non-transected pouch -- my

pouch seems to be holding up fairly well... he guesstimated 3 oz's on that

(he gave me centimeters but I kinda had a lot of drugs in me so I honestly

don't remember.) Again, I'll post it all in measurements early next week

when I have those numbers.

hugz,

~denise

> >think it is more that the intestine becomes more efficient at digestion

> >and absorption.

>

>

> That, too. Docs have noted that the intestine becomes more " fluffy, "

> probably because of greatly enhanced absorptive area. It surely

> adapts.

>

> --Steve

>

>

>

> Homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Graduate-OSSG

>

> Unsubscribe: mailto:Graduate-OSSG-unsubscribe

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Vitalady wrote:

> The other two portions

> had both elongated as well, hugely, giving him a total of more than 39 ft of

> intestine. Wow.

Pardon me for being a skeptic, but I find this extremely hard to

believe. The typical intestinal tract is seldom more than 20 feet

long. I find it most unlikely that anyone's intestinal tract doubled in

size as a result of WLS. For one thing, it is doubtful that there is

enough room in the stomach cavity for that size of an increase. I would

file this account in the same place I filed the claim that drinking

carbonated beverages subtracted from liquid intake.

Ray Hooks

For WLS nutrition info, visit

http://www.bariatricsupplementsystem.com