No Wonder I Was Always Hungry

My medical records are now online and just for the hell of it I was looking at past test results and I came across the pathology report from my first surgery.  I was given a sleeve in the first surgery and while I know that they made them bigger back then I couldn't believe when I read what was removed from my stomach.
The lateral stomach was 19 cm long, which is about 7 1/2 inches.   But the diameter was only 3 cm, a little over an inch?  Could that be right?  Taking an inch off of my stomach was hardly anything.  I mean, why bother?  My operative report said my stomach was reduced my 50%.  I doubt that my stomach was 2 inches in diameter.

This is what I found on the internet:

"The human stomach is a muscular, elastic, pear-shaped bag, lying crosswise in the abdominal cavity beneath the diaphragm. It changes size and shape according to is position of the body and the amount of food inside. The stomach is about 12 inches (30.5 cm) long and is 6 inches. (15.2 cm) wide at its widest point. The stomach's capacity is about 1 qt (0.94 liters) in an adult."

Could the pathology sample have been a portion of what was removed?
I know it doesn't matter now but I am curious about why I regained most of my weight.  Other then the fact that I ate terribly, of course.

That sounds like what would have been left not what was taken out. There are folks that had the same surgeon as I who can eat double or triple what I can eat at 4 months vice my 4 years. No idea how that happens. He uses a 60f bougie as a matter of routine, so it's not the diameter but likely the length and how stretchy your stomach was.

--g