How exactly is "excess weight" figured?

[somethingelse 0]

I've been reading that with the band you could likely lose 50-60% of your "excess weight". I'm wondering how they are coming up with the amount that is your excess weight. For instance for my height of five foot one most charts will say I should way something like 105 pounds when in fact I would be like a skeleton at that weight. The lowest I've ever been was 119 and that was while on phen-fen with very little eating and tons of exercise. And even at that weight I was pretty small.

So do the doctors go off of some chart and figure your excess weight from that? Or is it more like a realistic goal weight you and your doctor can come up with together?

I guess I'm just wondering so I could get at least a ballpark figure of what 50% of my excess weight would be.

[Alexandra 55]

In my opinion, statistics and charts are absolutely worthless as predictors of one's own level of success. If YOU feel an appropriate weight for you is 125, say, then 50% of your excess weight would be half of whatever lies between you and 125. If you want to lose more than that, you can and you will.

[lianna 3]

I think that the charts are only a guideline to go by in determining an ideal weight. I chose a weight that I remember feeling healthy at and looking good at....according to the "charts" it is the very highest weight that will put me at a normal BMI. I also notice some people reassess their goal weight higher or lower as they get closer.

[WASaBubbleButt 41]

I've been reading that with the band you could likely lose 50-60% of your "excess weight". I'm wondering how they are coming up with the amount that is your excess weight. For instance for my height of five foot one most charts will say I should way something like 105 pounds when in fact I would be like a skeleton at that weight. The lowest I've ever been was 119 and that was while on phen-fen with very little eating and tons of exercise. And even at that weight I was pretty small.

So do the doctors go off of some chart and figure your excess weight from that? Or is it more like a realistic goal weight you and your doctor can come up with together?

I guess I'm just wondering so I could get at least a ballpark figure of what 50% of my excess weight would be.

I just looked up your BMI and normal weights. According to the chart I was looking at you should be between 99lbs (low end) to 130 (high end). Anywhere in the middle is normal weight for your height.

[somethingelse 0]

Wow, 99 pounds? I would literally be a skeleton at that weight, I can't even fathom.

So there is no real scientific formula for them to decide how much excess weight you are carrying? Well I felt pretty good at 223 which is only 42 pounds from where I'm at now. Is 223 where I'd feel my best? Of course not but I certainly wouldn't be miserable at that weight.

Honestly I can't imagine myself being less than 180. That's the smallest I've been in nearly 10 years. So then that's 85 pounds less than I am now. So I may lose roughly 50% of that? That's only 40 pounds. I can tell you positively this would not be worth it to me to only lose 40 pounds. Maybe if I knew, really knew that it would truly help me keep it off...but even still 40 pounds isn't that much with all you'd be going through.

I guess I was thinking at least 60 or more. Am I crazy in thinking that? Maybe I was just dreaming?

[Jachut 487]

You've got it a bit confused - statistics arent really saying that you tend to lose 50% of the amount of weight YOU choose to lose, you tend to lose 50% of your excess body weight, so even though you think you'd be a skeleton at that low a weight, your excess weight is still the difference between that weight and your current weight. Just because you only choose to lose 50lb instead of 100 (for example) doesnt mean you can say you only have 50lb of excess weight! You have 100lb of excess weight, you just choose not to lose it all. But that statistic also takes into account people who have erosion, slippage, lose their bands, have their bands removed, are non compliant etc. If you choose to do this right, follow the rules, eat well, exercise well you can probably be quite confident that you will lose more than 50% - that is entirely in your control.

The real right weight for you is the weight at which your body fat percentage and muscle ratio is healthy, no matter what it says on the scales. If you are a very muscular person you will always weigh more.

You also have the right to look the way you want to. If you dont like the thin look that being at the bottom of the healthy weight range tends to give, then dont aim there, its up to you. But you wont be "unhealthy" or a "skeleton" if you're within your healthy range, or not likely anyway. Its more a matter of most people who have been obese for a long time cannot see themselves as normal

I've lost 100% of my excess weight - I'm now at the top end of my healthy weight range, I'm very happy but would like to lose more. I like skinny, lol. Not that I ever have been. I'm not skinny now, I'm "normal" looking and I have bits I still would like to see a lot less flesh on. </p> <p> </p> <p>But if I can state a personal opinion, I cannot see why in the world people would have weight loss surgery to still finish up overweight by their own choosing. Yes you've improved your health to a large degree but the bottom line is if you're still overweight then you're STILL at increased risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, various cancers etc. Less risk than before but still a greater risk that what you would have at a normal weight. </p> <p> </p> <p>But that's just my opinion. There's also a lot to be said for picking an achievable goal and stopping at a weight you can maintain without obsessive effort.</p>

[somethingelse 0]

Jachut- What you said at the end of your post about why would someone go for the surgery and still be in the "overweight" category...that is exactly my point. I DON'T want to do that. That's why I'm trying to understand exactly how they are figuring excess weight.

My point was that I would never go through all this to still be 220 something pounds, no way. Yeah it would be okay but not to have to go through all of this. Would I want to even be 180, no but it would be a heck of a lot healthier than my once 280.

That said trust me that I haven't been obese all my life. I bounced around between normal and chubby for my high school days for the most part. And when I got down to 119 pounds I was thin. Was I Nicole Richie thin, no. But there was no doubt about it I was thin and in great shape. I was usually in a size 6 then, sometimes smaller. I don't know if I'm wrong here but that's not big in my book. Now trust me when I tell you at 90 something pounds I would be sickly, not healthy. In high school my sort of "natural" weight were I could eat most anything I wanted and not worry too much was 160. That's where I got a bit chubby. Think like Kate Winslet in titanic or maybe Liv Tyler. Not fat at all, just not trim and in shape like I was at 119.

I just wanted to make sure I made it clear that I understand that 220 something isn't healthy, in fact that's my point.

I'm wondering and hoping that when I read "excess weight" they are referring to the difference between me at 265 and my suggested healthy weight range of 90-100 and something. Does that make sense?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't want to even think about it if I don't have a good chance at getting back to a "normal" weight. I would love to be a size 5 or 6 again. But at this point in my life my priority is to be able to feel good and live life again. I could easily do that at 160, even though the charts would still consider me obese at that weight. I've been there and done that and I know that it was a healthy weight for me.

So if I'm supposed to weigh say 130 pounds at the high end...then that's 135 pound difference of excess weight correct? Then I could expect to lose roughly half of that? Which would be about 67 pounds, is that right?

I hope I'm not coming off as snappy because I don't mean to be at all. Actually you are saying exactly what I'm trying to say (does that make sense). Again, I would be much happier and healthier losing 67 pounds. I guess I was just hoping I could expect to lose more. Is that possible, more importantly is it realistic?

BTW-Towards the end here did I get the excess weight thing right? Sorry to be so confusing here guys. Thanks so much for hanging in here with me, your help really means so much!!

[Jachut 487]

Yes, that's right, your excess weight is the difference between now and 130lb - and I think its entirely realistic to expect to get there. Its just down to how you want to approach it.

people dont get there for all sorts of reasons, but often those are reasons within your personal control. There's not a reason in the world why you have to settle for only 50% of the weight off.

Although when I used to hit 79kg when I was younger, it was trigger point for me to diet. I'd lose weight easily, get back down to 75kg or so. Now it wont move for love nor money, lol. It does get harder to get as low when you've been very overweight I think.

[Alexandra 55]

I'm sorry if I confused the issue for you, Somethingelse. My point was only that you shouldn't put too much weight (so to speak) on what the statistics say. My "goal" weight is somewhere between 150 and 180, according to the charts, so when I started I had about 160-190 lbs to lose. 50% of that is 80-95 lbs. I've lost about 120-130, so by all accounts I'm a success.

But MY goal going in was only that I would get somewhere below 250, 230 if all my dreams came true. (That was my lowest adult weight, reached for 10 minutes back in 1990 after starving for four months.) I wanted to get healthy, be able to chase after my kids, be able to not worry and obsess about every bite and hate myself for not being able to exert control. If all of that happened and I was unable to get below 260 or a size 20, well, at least I'd no longer be GAINING. And once I discovered how to live with the band, getting to a really normal size turned out to be possible, much to my surprise, and I'm absolutely thrilled with a weight between 210 and 220. Why? Because it's staying there. Someday, maybe, Jachut's exercise high will hit me and I will turn into a fitness fanatic, but for now I'm content.

My point is don't throw away the idea just because the statistics are less than miraculous. Look at your relationship with food and see if an internal brake that helps you stop eating is something that will help you. Because that's what the band is, nothing more, nothing less. It flipped things so that instead of constantly trying NOT to eat and beating myself up about every bite, I was able to plan meals and eat small amounts without being hungry. Sure, it's possible to eat around the band and get in more calories than we should, but the band gives us a huge hand in the battle--if we want to take it.

I miss my band and hope to get a new one in July. Until then, I'm re-living the dieting life.

[somethingelse 0]

Okay I think I got ya now. So it's not a complete fantasy to think I could lose say 90 or 100 pounds? Of course this is all depending on me I know. But you know although if I could be a "normal" weight again that would obvioiusly be ideal. Like you said though even if I had to still be heavier than ideal, if I wasn't gaining that would be a huge accomplishment alone.

I think I've just sort of got to realize that there's no real "rule" when it comes to how much you can expect to lose. That scares me. It all comes down to failure pretty much. What if I go through all of this and lose 10 pounds or worse than that gain 30 or worse than that die of a complication. As you can see I'm a pessimist.

Like everyone has said though, things are already bad. I know I'm going to end up diabetic and that just kills me, mentally and literally. Plus my quality of life is so low. Not to mention what my kids are missing out on because of my limitations.

I just keep hoping I'll have this sort of "lightbulb" moment where I'll know 100% that this is absolutely the right thing to do, I don't think that could happen for me though. You know my daughter just went through losing my mom her beloved Grandma who lived with us through my daughter's entire life. They were best friends. My little girl is going through some pretty serious emotional issues right now stemming from that loss. I'm so afraid that because I'd have to go this route that I might die from it. Now of course I know if I don't do something I'll die sooner or later anyhow. But the thought of leaving my kids because I couldn't lose the weight on my own. Oh my god it breaks my heart.

I know that there isn't a huge mortality rate, but still like I said I'm a pessimist. I just need to somehow get past this but I'm having a hard time. I'm telling you I can't make a decision about anything without having major worries about it. What was it for you all that really got you over the hump of "what if's" and moving on?

[Chickie 15]

So it's not a complete fantasy to think I could lose say 90 or 100 pounds? Of course this is all depending on me I know. But you know although if I could be a "normal" weight again that would obvioiusly be ideal. Like you said though even if I had to still be heavier than ideal, if I wasn't gaining that would be a huge accomplishment alone.

(bold mine)

Hell no, it's not a fantasy! I had 154lbs to lose to get to the high end of normal. I ended up losing 183lbs.

Anything is possible. Anything is achievable. You just have to believe in yourself to make it happen.

[Alexandra 55]

I just keep hoping I'll have this sort of "lightbulb" moment where I'll know 100% that this is absolutely the right thing to do, I don't think that could happen for me though. You know my daughter just went through losing my mom her beloved Grandma who lived with us through my daughter's entire life. They were best friends. My little girl is going through some pretty serious emotional issues right now stemming from that loss. I'm so afraid that because I'd have to go this route that I might die from it. Now of course I know if I don't do something I'll die sooner or later anyhow. But the thought of leaving my kids because I couldn't lose the weight on my own. Oh my god it breaks my heart.

I know that there isn't a huge mortality rate, but still like I said I'm a pessimist. I just need to somehow get past this but I'm having a hard time. I'm telling you I can't make a decision about anything without having major worries about it. What was it for you all that really got you over the hump of "what if's" and moving on?

The lightbulb moment for me was having my husband run twice as far as I would have had to go to grab our toddler from the traffic towards which she was blithely galloping. That is, he covered twice the distance in less than the time it would have taken me to get halfway towards her, and it would have been too late if he hadn't been there and thinking fast. My little one was an infant at the time, and I could see many future episodes when one or both would be headed for trouble and my husband wouldn't be there to save them. I was, to put it bluntly, an unfit parent. I couldn't save my children if they needed me to.

Against that reality, taking the really minor risk of outpatient surgery was a no-brainer. Talk with your doctor (once you find one) and with other people who have had same-day surgery. The risk of dying on the table is really minuscule, and once you are off the table you are back in control. It's not that there's a minimal mortality rate--there's really NO mortality rate. This is not an operation that kills people. We all have heard the same three or four scare stories, sure, but those are the exceptions that prove the rule and usually involve someone not getting the care they should have gotten.

Find your surgeon and talk with him. And keep asking questions. You'll know it's right when you know it. :hug:

[Jachut 487]

Wow Alexandra, that really must have been a frightening moment. I think the same could easily have happened to any of us.

On a lighter note, not so serious, I do recall thinking I have to do something about this when I chased Ewan down the street with the wooden spoon for something he did. I couldnt catch the little monster!

[khenry83 0]

WOW CHICKIE! What a transformation. I hope to have a change like that one day. Thanks for the motivation!! :eek:

[WASaBubbleButt 41]

The risk of dying on the table is really minuscule, and once you are off the table you are back in control. It's not that there's a minimal mortality rate--there's really NO mortality rate. This is not an operation that kills people. We all have heard the same three or four scare stories, sure, but those are the exceptions that prove the rule and usually involve someone not getting the care they should have gotten.

I know of one person that died because of lap band surgery. She was a verrry complicated case. She had previously had a seriously botched gastric bypass. Due to the surgery she had extreme scarring and adhesions. She originally lost all her excess weight and promptly regained it back. She HAD to have the adhesions and scarring removed, it wasn't a choice. Had their been a choice I doubt the surgeon would have done the procedure.

She had serious heart problems, a long history with various cardiologists (weight related), she saw just about every specialist that there is due to so many comorbidities. Since they had to operate anyway to fix the botched bypass all the docs (cardiologist) agreed that a band was in order. So the surgeon tried to fix everything that was wrong and added a band. Her heart just couldn't take it and she died a few days later. This was just a few weeks ago.

Thing is, even without the band she would have died. So is this death technically considered a lap band death? Maybe on paper it is but I don't think it was band related. I think she had a botched bypass, regained 200lbs, had severe weight related comorbidities, and nothing could have taken care of it. My heart goes out to the lady. I didn't know her but she's from the same town I am.

It's not fair, you know? She was doing all the right things, trying to get weight issues under control but sadly, it was out of everyone's control.

My point is that even for the handful of deaths we do hear about there is usually a great deal more to the story.