Stanford LEtter: Consumer Fraud??

[Guest guest]

Dee,

That letter from Stanford is partly lifted from 10-yr old NIH stuff, too,

and is the biggest disservice and disinformation I have read yet. I wrote

to NIH about it.

I have spent the last year intensely researching stuff. I'm amazed they

can actually get away with this. I can't believe it is sincere -- if it

is, it shows how little even the doctors know about this procedure.

It is outlandish:

1) to tout the RNY as NOT malabsportive, because whether RNY distal or

proximal, there is SOME malabsorption!! (and many are doing distals, which

granted are different malabsorptions, but still malabsorption!!)

2) to not mention that gastric restriction is also performed in other

methods, such as gastrectomy. (Hey does anyone know why they don't do this

anyway??) As we know, restricting " naturally " is quite an improvement over

the RNY, with some strange little stapled off section with plumbing resewn

and no drain valve to boot!! (The ds'er gets to keep the pyloric valve).

3) most importantly, to not give consumers up to date information!!!!!

We really should rally on this sort of thing. Because Stanford is

respected, and they are obviously using old material to opportunitistically

sell their wares, it almost seems like consumer fraud to me.

===============================

Hawkins

netmaker2@...

===============================

" Those who can't laugh at themselves leave others to do the job! "