pattygreen

I never knew they made a band that only held 4cc's. I hope you don't mind me saying this, but if you only needed to lose 20 pounds, why did you have surgery to do it? Just curious.

For me it was just that I wasn't GAINING any more weight. I was grateful to put those gains to a halt. Also, immediately after the surgery, I was taken off my diabetes medication, and I am no longer diabetic. There is a big difference between 281 and 228 and how you feel! I was hopeful because I felt that even if I never lost another pound, I was off the meds and feeling better than before the surgery. I knew that if I had the right fill, I would start to lose again. I had a 4 month period with very little weight loss. Then after my last fill, I started to feel the restriction. I lost 3 lbs. this week!

I believe that also, but just so long as it is Jesus that's in your heart. Because having him in your heart counts for everything!

Congratulations on your soon to be marriage! It has been 8 1/2 months since my surgery and I have lost 52 lbs. I started at 281 and now I am 229. I'm 47 and already had alot of hanging skin to begin with, cause I had 7 babies. When I lose the rest of my excess weight, I plan to have a tummy tuck. You wont be able to do that until you lose most all of the weight you need to. But then again, you are young and may not need to do that at all. I hope so, for you. Everyone is different and lose at their own pace. It's hard to tell anyone what they will lose by a certain time. All else matters, like fills and how far apart you have them.

Kari, My first fill was 4cc, my next was 2cc, and at 6cc, I thought I would have good restriction, but NO! for 4 months I lost barely nothing! Then, I had 1 more cc put in and Hooray! At 7cc, that did the trick. I just had that fill last Thursday, and I lost 3 lbs. this week. I can eat only 3 or 4 bites out of a burger and I'm done! Everyone is different. I heard of a person who lost all her weight and never even got one fill. Just the band. So, you may need 1 more cc. Who knows? Before my last fill, I could eat 1-2 cups of food no problem, too. (just like you). So, don't get discouraged. You're just beginning. Patty

Only 2 months and you've lost 60 lbs. already? Hooray! I was banded on 9/9/08 and have only lost 53 lbs. so far. You are doing great! I am just now, after my 3rd fill, getting good restriction. I can only eat 3 bites of a burger and I'm done. I took off 3 lbs. this week because I just got my 3rd fill last thursday. That last fill , I believe, will start me losing again now. Everyone is different. I hope all goes well for you! You LB friend, Patty

If you say you are an agnostic, then this doesn't make sense to me, because doesn't agnostic mean simply "I don't know"? Meaning... an agnostic won't say they don't believe, like an atheist will, and they won't say that they do believe, like a christian will. They just say "I don't know." Yet, you say in the above post that you do believe. Also, I looked up armenian apostolic, and see that that church believes in Jesus, and is therefore a christian church, which would make it the same belief as me. There may be some church traditions and beliefs I may not agree with as biblical, but the most important doctrine, which is that Jesus is the Savior, is really what matters in choosing a church to attend and associate with. I've always said that it's not the 'name' of the church you attend that counts, it's what's in your heart.

Do you mind my asking what your belief is? Just curious. You don't have to answer me if it is personal.

Yes, God answers all prayers for salvation. Other than that, If they don't believe in God, then who are they praying to? If they don't ask in the name of Jesus, then who are they asking?

I know what Romans teaches, and I have NEVER claimed to be sinless. Where do you get that about me? Obviously you don't know me. On this thread, I've only given the answers that the bible teaches concerning the questions asked. I'm not debating them with anyone. On some other threads in the rants and rave area, I seem to be judgmental simply because the topics that I have been debating on are controversial issues that are SINS, such as 'abortion', 'homosexuality', or 'should prostitution be legal'. How can I debate without giving my reasons for why they shouldn't be accepted? I believe they are wrong and because God said so. You may believe any way you want to, of course. Did you want everyone to agree with you on each issue? If so, who would you debate with? If I were talking on the 'post op fills' or the 'biggest loser' thread, I wouldn't be offending anyone, cause those topics aren't about sinful actions. I say, "If you want to debate issues that are sinful, expect opposition in the debate!"

How would you like it if I said that I'm so sick of athiests trying to interject that there is no God into everything these days? Those Atheists are very irritating to those of us who can understand that if their is a painting, there MUST be an artist, therefore, there is a creator. Since in the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth, and then mankind, we were here first! lol

There is NO scientific proof that contradicts God's word in the bible.

I would like to clarify something. God doesn't embed anyone with their circumstances. Life happens. He intervenes if believers ask him to. Prayers of unbelievers who don't trust God fall on deaf ears. What would make someone who won't acknowledge that he exists ask him for anything anyway? If a child of God asks him for anything, he will have it, unless God sees that it wouldn't benefit them or it may harm them. Just like a parent/child relationship. If you believe that God hasn't shown you any compassion, it may be because you have not chosen to make him your Father.

Which part or parts of this is the dumbest thing you ever heard?

When a baby dies as a natural part of life, you have no way of avoiding it. Cars drive on roads, children have been known to walk in the road at times, and sometimes one may even get killed by one of those cars. It happened. No one likes it, but it happened. If the child felt pain, there wasn't anything anyone could do about that. BUT, if the driver of the car 'deliberately' ran over the child and killed him, and the child felt pain because of it. Now people are angry. God 'allows' life to 'happen' without intervening unless someone else prays for them, and even then, he may not answer someones prayers the way they want, because He knows what's best for all.

Christianity is not a religion. Religions are organized groups of people with their own set of rules and regulations that usually man has made up, like a doctrine of faith or a catechism or creed of some kind. Some christian churches take on a religious form, and is like that, but I believe that 'real' christianity is an awakening by God's Holy Spirit to the truth of the word of God as the one and only guidebook for mankind to follow, and a relationship with God. When someone becomes what we call 'born again', then they are truly in a relationship with God. Until then, they are just 'playing' church. My definition of Religion is mankind 'working' at trying to be good enough to get to God. And Christianity is man doing nothing and God reaching down to find him. EVERY 'Religion' out there expects their congregants to do something to make it to heaven (like give to charity, be good, live morally, share their faith, go door to door, praying continuously, behave, etc.) Christianity doesn't. It's the only faith out there where nothing is required of you except faith in Jesus to get you there. Many christians, after becoming born again know that their salvation is a gift from God and not through any works they have done, but when they understand the great sacrifice that Jesus made for them, they choose to do what's right in life and in so doing, honor God. But they are not sinless and know it. This is the difference between Religion and Christianity.

I have heard of storys where doctors and nurses have actually 'heard' babies scream during an abortion.

Read the conclusion at the end of your links article. It states that they are uncertain if a baby can feel pain in the first trimester, but it is probable that they do in the second or later trimester. If they aren't sure about the first timester why would anyone even take a chance? Like I said before about being uncertain about life beginning at conception, if they don't know, why take the risk? If in the 2nd and later trimesters the baby can feel pain, who in their right mind could condone such torture to an innocent baby? Even if it were uncertain about the pain aspect of abortion, just knowing that I MAY be causing a baby pain is enough for me to carry it through the 9 months and deliver it. (even if I didn't want it, there are many couples who would) Also, Rodriguezequal, I'm not trying to force you to believe in my religion or anything I say. Maybe you don't know this about me, but I hate religions.

So, there are opposing scientific stands on either side. So, what you're saying is NOONE knows for sure. Well then, if the prolifers are correct and life begins at conception, no harm done. OTOH, if prochoicers are correct and life doesn't begin until it enters through the canal, then.....WOW! think of all the harm done! We prolifers have nothing to lose if we're wrong with our stand, You pro choicers are either allowing or murdering millions of human beings if you're wrong on your stand.

Awesome link! It said it perfectly. The issue IS "what is the unborn?" If prochoicers knew that the unborn was 'human', then they would HAVE to be against abortion. ALL abortions. Since they choose not to believe the biblical view on killing the unborn, then they need a scientific view to convince them. There are many scientists and doctors who say that life begins at conception. I saw many articles when I googled "life begins at conception". Although, IMO, I tend to believe that those who are prochoice really don't care if it could be proven scientifically or not. They want to be able to do what they want to do if they so choose with their own bodies and don't care if another life seperate from theirs ends because of their decision.

If I were posting on the 'loose is not lose' . or the 'biggest loser' or the 'elective C-section ' forums, I wouldn't be discussing sin at all. But these posts on 'abortion', homosxuality', and 'prostitution', are ABOUT sin. And why we believe they should or shouldn't be legalized. Do you just want me to agree with you and end the debate? I don't agree prostitution (or any other thing that God deems sinful) should be legalized. If you feel that I am being judgmental towards others because in order to tell my reason for why I don't want them legalized is to point out that it is sinful, then so be it. I would ONLY point out someones sin, or make them aware of it in a forum like this that is debating it. I certainly don't go around in my life telling others that they are sinners, or being judgmental towards others. You see me as intollerant, judgemental and hard hearted, because you ONLY have seen me on controversial boards that discuss sinful situations like the ones I've mentioned.

And prostitution? That's an addiction? Cause that's what we were originally talking about here. Prostitution doesn't have to be.

He had breakfast, he had his recess snack and he was able to eat when he got home. Then he had dinner and a snack before bed. Don't try to make this into an 'abuse' case by making a mountain out of a molehill. He didn't STARVE. He was taught a great lesson. And all it took was 2 days of going without lunch. He always saved his lunch money for lunch after that. We learn when we're not enabled. We do what's right. And guess what? Her doing that didn't mean she didn't LOVE her son! She did it because she DID love her son.

FYI: I never turned her away from getting food. When I shared the story about her going to the food bank, I said "IF" I were running the food bank. I DON"T run the food bank. But "IF" I donated ALL the food myself and ran it myself, it would be for people who REALLY need the food, not someone who buys herself diamonds instead of feeding her children or for someone who blows her money on smokes instead of feeding herself. Those kind of people don't need my help. So, you're wrong. I DIDN'T have a perfect opportunity to be a loving force in her life. I also didn't look down on her for being a smoker. That's only what you think I did. I understand her sin. I was there. Like I said, I used to smoke. So, you don't know me at all. I stopped smoking because the cost of the habit was taking away from my other bills, and it was ruining my health. I HAD to make a choice. Do what's right or don't pay all my bills. I chose to do what's right. Once I did, my bill paying problem went away because that freed up $80. a month for me. Moral of the story again: Do what's right and usually no problems.