alli vs WLS

this is not meant to be controversial, its just something i've been thinking about.... i am a little confused as to why people are so anti-alli yet pro-WLS. as i see it, they work in same way - follow a good diet or else suffer the consequences. its negative reinforcement. with WLS this is foamies, bloating, dumping, feeling gross etc. with orlistat, it the oily nastiness. actaully if you have the DS instead of GB, you will also get similar side effects since there's a big malabsorption aspect. they are both designed to keep you honest and accountable. just WLS is permanent while you have to take the alli before your meals. you can still cheat around both (alli - don't take the pill or eat high sugar/low fat, WLS - graze throughout the day, or many people don't even get the dumping etc). its similar to antabuse and alcohol. if you take the antabuse and drink, you get violently ill. i dunno. it just seems like everyone has decided that alli is so crazy and horrible, yet rerouting intestines is okay? isn't alli just another "tool" like WLS?

Andy- I guess in my case I don't have such a casual attitude towards WLS either. I would never consider it for myself. Maybe it's that the weight loss benefits of Alli, on average, don't seem to be nearly as dramatic as those from WLS. That's a lot of money and poo squirts to waste on not a lot of poundage. I am dreading the continued onslaught of marketing for this product, and having to see ladies who are maybe 10-20 pounds overweight gobble it up at the drugstore.

I personally am against RNY - I think rerouting your intestines is too drastic.  That being said, there is no anal leakage involved with the band and therefore, the band would be better than Alli, for me. 

I have nothing against Alli. I just wouldn't take it just because of the thought of being mortified in the public eye. Especially at work.   Also I am not sure of how much fat you have to intake to get the oily side effect, however I do believe medications should not be inconvenient to the point where the quality of life is impacted like that if you are taking them. I think anyone who takes this though may find that it will force them to reduce their fat intake due to side effect, when they could probably do it without the pill. I have nothing against WLS either.. just as long as the entire process is done with diligence by both the patient and the doctor.  Whatever werks fer you! Hey does anyone know if Lay's still makes those chips that were fried in Olestra? I recall they had the same oily side effect.

Lays (or someone) perfected the olestra oil and frying process. The chips no longer produce the cramps or diarrea. No doubt I'm sure there's still some side affects but from what I understand it's no where near the amount as before.  Pretty neat stuff and they taste good.  Frito-Lay changed the name from WOW to Light to get away from the side-affects hype.  They initially had to list the side affects, not anymore though. Plug: http://www.fritolay.com/fl/flstore/cgi-bin/products_light.ht m

Tks Chris.. Now all they need to do is engineer a less starchy potato and I'll start eating chips again!

I think Sonora hit the nail on the head.  My only addition is that the side affects from Alli are probably a little more embarassing than that of WLS.  I imagine most people really don't know which foods have fats and which ones don't.  Like I'm pretty sure they know that a big juicy steak has plenty of fat but what about  peanut butter and cheese crackers or even the toastchee.  You wouldn't think they have a lot of fat but in reality they have around 11g per serving! Thats a lot of damn fat for such a little snack!  Take a baked or roasted chicken breast.  1.3g of fat. Doesn't seem like a whole lot but would that bring havoc to your rectum?? I imagine if you had a week to sit and home and learn what makes you "leak" then it would be too bad of a deal.  With WLS I imagine it's a little more precise. But again, the weight loss from WLS is far greater than the fat blockers.  Perhaps I'll try some Alli just to see what it does.  Afterall I have one of those netting style office chairs. It's not like it can soak in right?   Yeah, no thanks! lol

well that's the point though. for long term permanent weight loss, you will have to learn whats in what you are eating (hence monitoring, which i know you resist!). 1.3 g isn't going to do anything. you'll only have the bad side effects if you go above and beyond what you should be doing. a tablespoon of reduced fat JIF has 6 g of fat. so you're fine if you have 1 tablespoon like you're supposed to. have a 1/4 c at 24 g, then you are a little more screwed... i think its just another tool that forces you to be more aware of what you are eating,  awareness + action leads to change. and change is what we want.

I think people inherently know that and they don't want to have to watch what they eat and they definitely don't want the side affects.  I think the people you'll find using these are people who have not decided to change their lives.  I think the pills are still a good idea because it may show a few more people that they need to watch what they eat and be aware of the their intake, as you mentioned. I agree with you, it's another tool, albeit a stinky one! lol

Hmm.. this may be redundant.. but is that realistic though? 1 Tbsp of peanut butter? Is that shaved off the top.. or a "heaping?"  *****ally eats that.. Do you know what is actually recommended for fat intake daily if you are on the pill? Also with a combinations of foods, you really have to count those fat grams when making your meals.. It just sounds simplier to do it w/o the pill, and you can have a little more fat! Once again it sounds like a "reinforcer". I shut up now!