Talk:Adjustable gastric band

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"What is the "standard" Bander diet?" is not an appropriate term for a section. The same goes for many others. This is an encyclopedia article, not a FAQ. JFW | T@lk 17:49, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

The standard "bander Diet" as explained later in the article is liquids and mushy/blended stuff up to 2 oz....theoritically, I say this because everyone is different...this article makes it sounds really great...It isn't all that it's cracked up to be and without proper counseling is usually a complete failure, as for the "it can just be removed" part well good luck, unless you just want to have another laparascopic surgery for $20,000 US it isn't gonna happen. My health insurance will not even pay for a follow up visit to check. The PB doesn't just happen from eating too quickly, or too much...I can eat one bite and throw up for hours, sometimes even when that consists solely of water. As for malnutrition not ocurring with lap-band, hah...If you throw up daily, can't eat anything crunchy or fibrous, and haven't been given a personalized diet...guess what you will be malnourished, and it's the last thing they look at when you go to the hospital because who expects a large person to be malnourished?

can a price range be insterted, please?

The surgery for me was around 20,000, but the insurance I had at the time covered all but 2,000. However, if your company changes insurance or you change jobs or have a problem post-op beware it's out of your pocket any associated costs. If you want it and can pay out of pocket I think the cost is fown to about 8,000 USD in Mexico now.

(Esce 06:42, 4 June 2006 (UTC))

Contents

[edit] Intro in serious need of cleanup

The opening 'intro' paragraph is far too long and messy. It seems practically an article in itself, rather than just a quick to-the-point summary, and the writing itself seems awkward, especially with all the <x>/<y> elements. I've added this article to the {{intro length}} cleanup category, though as I said, I think it needs additional cleaning beyond the length. I might take a crack at doing it myself, but am really not familiar with this topic, and am unsure if I'm qualified to handle the matter. - Pacula 14:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Section on Discussion Groups?

Should a section for the listing of popular discussion groups be added? These types of resources are a good source of information for those researching the procedure. I'm working for a firm peripherally involved in the industry so I don't want to do it myself, I'd rather have someone researching or who has had the surgery actually create the list. Brad Einarsen 14:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Semiprotected - spam

The article seems to be a target for spamming by IP editors, so it has been semiprotected for a few weeks. Requests for unprotection should be made at WP:RFPP. Neil ム 17:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blogs about the Lap Band

There are several blogs about the band that show the 'real life stories' of people who have or are getting the surgery. I noticed there used to be a few but they are now gone, and I don't think that's right. I'm thinking about the band and these blogs helped me get a different perspective and they were really informative. There's one or two that I really follow that I'm gonna put back on if there's no objection in a day or so. It's better to have it up there other than 'boroing clinical information' being a link on this page! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.61.161.224 (talk) 23:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Infection of fluid in the band

I've added this to the possible side effects even though it's not documented on the FDA website on the grounds that a case is currently being investigated of a severe infection within the band. It's likely that the patient will require a band removal or replacement. This is currently undocumented either in the medical press or elsewhere on the Internet (I am the patient). --Marcusbm (talk) 04:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removed forum link

I have removed the link for lapbandtalk because it's a forum that doesn't meet WP:EL. I could find no evidence that the website is an authoritative source or has been quoted in any mainstream news sources. If this link should be included, the reasons should be discussed here rather than continue the cycle of being added and removed. Flowanda | Talk 00:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blog Reference

I added a blog to the reference list that the Randy Alvarez Wellness Hour referenced the other day.

Smokingmaenad (talk)

[edit] Removed forum link

IMHO Lapbandtalk forum does meet WP:EL criteria. Specifically "4) Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews." The web site is an authoritative source, See Google. The site has close to 750,000 meaningful posts by individuals providing reviews and other relevant Lapband information.

Abrecher (talk) 07:08, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

When I use the URL as a search term, I get less than 150 hits and no mentions in any mainstream or industry press as an authoritative site. I just think that without indication of professsional, known moderation/responsible admin oversite, a free-for-all, anonymous, user-generated discussion forum, no matter how popular or populated, just doesn't belong in an article on such a serious medical subject. Flowanda | Talk 21:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
When I use the URL as a search term, I receive over 584,000 hits and it comes up as a Google Authoritative web site. You can test this yourself by clicking here. Please tell me I'm making a mistake ? There are 20 moderators on LapBandTalk who have gone through this procedure themselves. LapBandTalk works together with Allergan and Inamed, the company that manufacturers the Lap-band. There isn't another web site like it where people interested in this procedure can read true real life stories, both positive and negative. Bottom line, this site is the largest community of individuals that have the Lap-band and it would be a disservice to wikipedia users if they weren't aware of this resource. Abrecher (talk) 05:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I think there are some legitimate aspects to this forum in providing additional useful information, but there are commercial and user-generated (i.e. forum, anonymous, paid-to-post, PR, etc) obstacles that need to be addressed. Google hits aren't going to help; it's Google's second page that drops the results from your number to my number. Are there any authoritative, objective, verifiable, non-related organizations independently recommending or quoting this site?
I would recommend filing a request for editor assistance in reviewing your site, especially since there is an ongoing pattern of anonymous IPs removals with no detailed edit summary or discussion on this talk page. I listed my reasons above for removing the link (especially when it's being added three at a time), but I also think your arguments above warrant a closer look and consideration in including this link. Forums are a tough sell, but they are sometimes included when warranted.
And if you are somehow related to the site, I'd take a look at WP:COI and WP:SPAM, identify yourself and continue to work within Wikipedia guidelines to advance your case here on the talk pages. Flowanda | Talk 01:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why was the Love My Lap Band site link removed?

It's a good site that links to major studies, as well as provides first person accounts with no advertising and no selling involved. I learned about from watching the Randy Alvarez Wellness Hour. I think it's a perfectly reasonable link which actually provides a lot of academically generated material.

Smokingmaenad (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

It is still a blog, which is undesirale as an EL. You could put the links to the studies in this article though. Greetings TINYMARK 02:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Forums, blogs and Links normally to be avoided

Please don't add these, Wikipedia is NOT a "repository of links" or a "vehicle for advertising".

Forums, blogs and Links normally to be avoided. Here are the rules which govern this issue:
Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in Wikipedia articles. --Hu12 (talk) 13:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)