Question:
Does anyone know why people say that WLS is dangerous?

Is it just because it's surgery or is it more dangerous than say...a hyterectomy or removal of a malignant tumor? When I had my hyterectomy NO ONE said oh, its so dangerous...but was encouraged to have it...isn't WLS life saving as well???????    — Barbara S. (posted on March 7, 2003)

March 7, 2003
Good question!! I was wondering the same thing. I think alot of people focus on the death part more with this surgery because it is still controversal. I did not think twice about having a hysterectomy- the thought of death with that surgery never crossed my mind- that is why I am not focusing too much on it now- I figure if I have done well with the previous surgeries I will do well with this one too! Good Luck!!
   — Jan S.

March 7, 2003
I am pre-op, and in my experience people fall into two camps... one camp says "great! go for it, I am happy for you", and the other cautions about the risks. I think the ones in the second group are often the ones who feel morbidly obese people can lose weight if the "just try harder"; to them this surgery is unnecessary risk (oddly enough, they usually don't have a weight problem themselves ;) ). The surgery is not experimental or as controversial as it once was. The NIH approved it in 1991 as a treatment for morbid obesity.
   — Tim W.

March 7, 2003
I don't think it is any riskier than a hysterectomy or any other surgery. Any time you have surgery, you run the risk of blood clots (which is one of the biggest risks for WLS). I know when I had my C-Sections (which I never thought twice about), I had to wear those pretty white, tight, hose to prevent blood clots. But, like you said, the risk associated with "standard" surgeries is never really discussed and I believe it's only an issue with WLS because many people still view it as being unnecessary. Like a previous poster said, most people think that because we're obese, we just sit around and eat junk and if we would just get off our butts and live on rabbit food, we'd be just fine. Funny thing is, I live on chicken and salads because I like it and I'm still obese and I know a lady (in her 40's) who lives on vending machine junk like corn chips and cheeto's and eats fast food at least once a day. She probably weighs 125 pounds. It's in the genes. Why can't some people understand that?
   — Carolyn M.

March 7, 2003
Part of the reason is that WLS is still considered elective surgery, whereas removal of tumors and hysterectomys are not. We who have it know that it is a life saving surgery for us and without it we would live 1/2 lives or not much of a life, but to most, it is still a new and controversial surgery that obese people ("who are lazy, and if they only ate less and exercised more") have. Also, statistics show that 1 out of every 200 or 300 (I have heard both stats) die from WLS. I'd say that is dangerous. Then again, all surgeries are dangerous and all run the risk of problems. I think in time as more and more people have this surgery-and the numbers are growing, and the results are known, it will become more acceptable to the public.
   — Cindy R.

March 7, 2003
I didn't think twice about having half of my thyroid gland removed for what turned out to NOT be cancer. I am betting the risks of serious complications is much greater for that surgery - given all the nerves and blood vessels in the neck and upper chest - than the lap RNY I had! Mostly I think people think the surgery is dangerous due to misinformation. I think the mortality rates for WLS are extremely good - considering obesity itself is a huge risk factor in any surgery, and there are obviously no "normal sized" people having WLS to change the statistics for the better.
   — koogy

March 7, 2003
Well, first there is US, being morbid. *WE* are higher risk for anything surgical--we don't knit well, and most are not healthy going in. Then, back with the general population, some of the risks are common among most surgeries you mentioned. Blood clot, pneumonia, infection. Then back it being US, then we have special risks associated with WLS, post-op leak, malnutrition, etc. And this one is relatively new, in the scheme of things. But I think in the minds of "them", it's more dangerous because THEY don't understand the surgery OR the need for it. After all, we can just push away from the table, right? Just like they do, right? And it always worked for us before, right? And the NIH lists it as the most effective weight loss tool out there, right?
   — vitalady

March 7, 2003
Obviously, anytime you are cut open it is dangerous...but read about my mom in my profile and see what happens when you DON'T have WLS.
   — fropunka

March 7, 2003
Probably because of the old wls that are not being done anymore. People died from malnutrition, kidney failure, liver failure auto-immune disease and etc. I had the old intestinal bypass in 1981 and had all kinds of problems. Finally in 2002, I had to have an emergency takedown of that surgery to save my life and my surgeon couldn't believe that I was even still alive. Nearly everyone who had that surgery has died or had a reversal. They all say that I am one of the lucky ones that I lived to tell about it. As far as other things go, this surgery is the same as others for blood clots. The risk of infections from leaks and leaks are another thing that make this surgery so risky and if you think it isn't, you are living in the ozone. I know being obese is a risk also. You just have to weigh the pros and cons and see if you want to take the chance, knowing that you could die. I am three weeks out from rny now and thankful that so far, I have had no complications although I know from reading here that I am not out of danger yet. People have died from blood clots and leaks several months out.
   — Delores S.