Gallbladder surgery

Quoted message said:

I have been told that I need to have my gallbladder removed but am
keen to explore alternatives. I have seen methods for "flushing" the
stones. Has anyone any experience of this procedure and what were the
results?

Gallbladder cleanses are [censored]. The so-called stones are not stones at all
and do not come out of the gallbladder. The gallbladder holds ~50ml or 1/20 of
a liter. The bile duct is about 2-3mm. Proponents of the cleanses report
liters of stones and some 5-8cm across.

As for alternatives, you need to tell us a bit more as to WHY it was suggested
that you have your gallbladder removed. What are your symptoms and what Dx's
have been made?

In article <[email hidden]>,

(kevinf) said:

I have been told that I need to have my gallbladder removed but am
keen to explore alternatives. I have seen methods for "flushing" the
stones. Has anyone any experience of this procedure and what were the
results?

They don't work. Conventional medicine gave up on various approaches to
try to "dissolve" or "flush" gallstones many years ago, because they
just don't work. In fact, "flushing" the stones out of the gallbladder
would likely not be a good thing in the absence of a means of removing
them from the biliary tree or somehow dissolving them completely.
Serious sequelae of gallstones finding their way out of the gallbladder
and into the common bile duct include cholangitis, jaundice, or even
gallstone pancreatitis. (In fact, these are some of the potential
complications of gallstone disease that prevented by cholecystectomy.)
Indeed, it's probably good that "alt meds" can't "flush" the gallstones
out, as it would certainly result in some serious complications and even
some deaths.

Regarding alternatives to surgery, it rather depends on the symptoms. In
general, if a patient has no symptoms and just gallstones (and isn't a
diabetic), then simply observing is a viable option and intervening if
the gallstones become symptomatic. (A significant percentage of them
will never become symptomatic.) On the other hand, if a patient has
symptomatic cholelithiasis and is in decent health, cholecystectomy is
probably indicated. If a patient has ever had a bout of cholecystitis,
the gallbladder should almost certainly come out, unless that patient is
a very poor surgical candidate.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

(kevinf) said:

I have been told that I need to have my gallbladder removed but am
keen to explore alternatives. I have seen methods for "flushing" the
stones. Has anyone any experience of this procedure and what were the
results?

The "flush" is a hoax ... what is claimed as "stones" is really
just the result of the oil and lemon and other ingredients mixing
as they pass thorugh the digestive system.

For starters, REAL gallstones do not float in a toilet bowl.

And, the so-called "stones" from the flush are much larger than
the exit duct from the gall bladder ... it is anatomically
impossible to excrete stones larger than the exit without ripping
it wide open.

Go for the surgery. Don't waste your tiime on a useless quack
treatment.

Tsu Dho Nimh

--
When businesses invoke the "protection of consumers," it's a lot like
politicians invoking morality and children - grab your wallet and/or
your kid and run for your life.

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Gallbladder surgery
From: Tsu Dho Nimh [email hidden]
Date: 2/12/2004 5:31 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

(kevinf) said:

I have been told that I need to have my gallbladder removed but am
keen to explore alternatives. I have seen methods for "flushing" the
stones. Has anyone any experience of this procedure and what were the
results?

The "flush" is a hoax ... what is claimed as "stones" is really
just the result of the oil and lemon and other ingredients mixing
as they pass thorugh the digestive system.

For starters, REAL gallstones do not float in a toilet bowl.

And, the so-called "stones" from the flush are much larger than
the exit duct from the gall bladder ... it is anatomically
impossible to excrete stones larger than the exit without ripping
it wide open.

Go for the surgery. Don't waste your tiime on a useless quack
treatment.

Tsu Dho Nimh

Another sock puppet for organized medicine.

Best to talk with some who have had actual experience.

http://tinyurl.com/2v443

Jan

"Jan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Gallbladder surgery
From: Tsu Dho Nimh [email hidden]
Date: 2/12/2004 5:31 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

(kevinf) said:

I have been told that I need to have my gallbladder removed but am
keen to explore alternatives. I have seen methods for "flushing" the
stones. Has anyone any experience of this procedure and what were the
results?

The "flush" is a hoax ... what is claimed as "stones" is really
just the result of the oil and lemon and other ingredients mixing
as they pass thorugh the digestive system.

For starters, REAL gallstones do not float in a toilet bowl.

And, the so-called "stones" from the flush are much larger than
the exit duct from the gall bladder ... it is anatomically
impossible to excrete stones larger than the exit without ripping
it wide open.

Go for the surgery. Don't waste your tiime on a useless quack
treatment.

Tsu Dho Nimh

Another sock puppet for organized medicine.

Best to talk with some who have had actual experience.

Of what? Gallstones, or the material that the flushes produce? From the
"actual experience" frequently described by those who have done the flushes,
that material is obviously not gallstones, for the many reasons that those
with "actual experience" of real gallstones have mentioned herein.

I don't now about the others here, but I have extracted stones from hundreds
of gallbladders and (mostly) given them to the patient. Hospitals are
less happy about doing this these days, so that fewer lay people may have
the opportunity to see what real gallstones are like.

Peter Moran

BO' qw@nonamewhatsover said:

I suggest very strongly
that you check out alternatives before you let them cut out your gall
bladder , like my doctor told me before putting me on to the liver cleanse ,

I very strongly suggest that you have a cholecystectomy
before serious, and possibly fatal, sequela develops due
to lack of appropriate aaaand timely treatment.

Quoted message said:

" You don't throw away the fuel injection system on your car and then
pronounce to the world that you have cured the problem " .

We ain't talking about petroleum fueled engines.

I suspect that you have no clue about the anatomy of
the bile ducts, not to mention abnormal and pathologic
changes in the system.

Do tell us, "oh great one", what is the physiologic function
of the mamallian gall bladder ?

WB

--

"I can dance on the head of a pin as well"
-Yoshimo

My wife was diagnosed with gallstones and needed a gallbladder removal. We
did the flushes as prescribed by the Clark site and with great perceived
success got many hundreds of stones out!

Let me tell you this as I was told by many doctors. Those are not stones
from your gallbladder! They are balls of fat possibly from your liver and
from the congealed oils that you drink during the flush.

Almost a year later (last December...yup two months ago) my wife started
having gallbladder attacks. She had only had one a year before. To the
hospital and the only thing that stopped the pain was Demerol injections. It
happened again a few nights later and again a few nights after that. Now if
you want to here about pain. She passed out from the pain a collapsed on the
bed where I accessed and began AR because she was not breathing. We booked
the operation.

The surgeon did the operation laproscopically but was five seconds from
splitting her wide open because her gallbladder was so hard and packed with
stones he couldn't get it out via the largest hole he cut. Thinking it was
cancerous he sent it off to pathology. It turned out to just be severe scar
tissue and we breathed a sigh of relief.

The surgeon offered us $500 if we could flush even one gallstone out. He
told us it cannot be done and I now believe him for most cases. I didn't
while we did the flushes. We aggravated the situation to the point of making
6 hospital emergency visits in December. Now it is over as my wife is back
in her Pilates Classes and other exercises and almost up to full endurance
again at 50 YOA.

My advise to you is that if you can get a doctor to co-operate, and do the
Ultrasound pictures at various stages then try the flushes. If they are
working....fantastic! If they are not get the operation done
laproscopically as soon as possible before complications can set in and
while it still can be done with a few one inch cuts(no muscle cuts) If a
stone gets caught in the bile duct tube, your liver, gall bladder (just
pain) and your pancreas are in trouble and so are you. You will be split
from side to side through all your abdominals and be unable to use them for
half a year.

Best of luck! My heart goes out to you.

"kevinf" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I have been told that I need to have my gallbladder removed but am
keen to explore alternatives. I have seen methods for "flushing" the
stones. Has anyone any experience of this procedure and what were the
results?

(Jan) said:

Another sock puppet for organized medicine.

Best to talk with some who have had actual experience.

Janniie-poo ...
I do have actual experience with gallstones, having handled a
lot of them in the lab after surgrey. They were far too large
and hard to be "flushed" out of the gallbladder. The exit duct
was smaller than the stones.

Tsu Dho Nimh

--
When businesses invoke the "protection of consumers," it's a lot like
politicians invoking morality and children - grab your wallet and/or
your kid and run for your life.

This is an almost exact description of my own wives' purgatory
regarding cholecystectomy.

Clipped some of GBs' story as it rings true,
to highlight the important points
The 'flushes' do nothing; except perhaps
postponing the inevitable needed surgery .

Gymmy Bob said:

My wife was diagnosed with gallstones and needed a gallbladder removal. We
did the flushes as prescribed by the Clark site and with great perceived
success got many hundreds of stones out!

Let me tell you this as I was told by many doctors. Those are not stones
from your gallbladder! They are balls of fat possibly from your liver and
from the congealed oils that you drink during the flush.

Right

Quoted message said:

Almost a year later (last December...yup two months ago) my wife started
having gallbladder attacks. She had only had one a year before. To the
hospital and the only thing that stopped the pain was Demerol injections. It
happened again a few nights later and again a few nights after that. Now if
you want to here about pain. She passed out from the pain a collapsed on the
bed where I accessed and began AR because she was not breathing. We booked
the operation.

The surgeon did the operation laproscopically but was five seconds from
splitting her wide open because her gallbladder was so hard and packed with
stones he couldn't get it out via the largest hole he cut. Thinking it was
cancerous he sent it off to pathology. It turned out to just be severe scar
tissue and we breathed a sigh of relief.

Good.

Quoted message said:

The surgeon offered us $500 if we could flush even one gallstone out. He
told us it cannot be done and I now believe him for most cases.

Right. Read the following statements closely.

Quoted message said:

I didn't while we did the flushes. We aggravated the situation to the point of making
6 hospital emergency visits in December. Now it is over as my wife is back
in her Pilates Classes and other exercises and almost up to full endurance
again at 50 YOA.

Expensive delay. Not just monetary, healthwise.

Quoted message said:

My advise to you is that if you can get a doctor to co-operate, and do the
Ultrasound pictures at various stages then try the flushes. If they are
working....fantastic! If they are not get the operation done
laproscopically as soon as possible before complications can set in and
while it still can be done with a few one inch cuts(no muscle cuts)

Now here is the most important statement:
Reiterate, this is the most important statement:

Quoted message said:

If a stone gets caught in the bile duct tube, your liver, gall bladder (just
pain) and your pancreas are in trouble and so are you.

Sequela follows,

Quoted message said:

You will be split
from side to side through all your abdominals and be unable to use them for
half a year.

moral of the story: wait and you will suffer more.

Quoted message said:

Best of luck! My heart goes out to you.

"kevinf" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I have been told that I need to have my gallbladder removed but am
keen to explore alternatives. I have seen methods for "flushing" the
stones. Has anyone any experience of this procedure and what were the
results?

Just for the record, this is the only time that I have ever agreed
with GymmyB

WB

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Gallbladder surgery
From: Tsu Dho Nimh [email hidden]
Date: 2/13/2004 6:01 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

(Jan) said:

Another sock puppet for organized medicine.

Best to talk with some who have had actual experience.

Janniie-poo ..

PLONK!

(Jan) said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Best to talk with some who have had actual experience.

Janniie-poo ..

PLONK!

The sound of jds typographical excrement impacting the 'net ?

We report, you decide.

WB

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Gallbladder surgery
From: WB [email hidden]
Date: 2/13/2004 8:36 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

(Jan) said:

Quoted message said:

>Best to talk with some who have had actual experience.

Janniie-poo ..

PLONK!

The sound of jds typographical excrement impacting the 'net ?

We report, you decide.

WB

Trollish, chicken

"Jan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Gallbladder surgery
From: Tsu Dho Nimh [email hidden]
Date: 2/13/2004 6:01 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

(Jan) said:

Another sock puppet for organized medicine.

Best to talk with some who have had actual experience.

Janniie-poo ..

--------------------------------------------
< restored >
Janniie-poo ...
I do have actual experience with gallstones, having handled a
lot of them in the lab after surgrey. They were far too large
and hard to be "flushed" out of the gallbladder. The exit duct
was smaller than the stones.

Tsu Dho Nimh
-----------------------------------------------

Quoted message said:

PLONK!

Jan, the self-appointed MHA judge and jury for LIES, responds to the TRUTH
by sticking her fingers in her ears and singing "La, La, La, La."

Sad, that.

--Rich

In article <[email hidden]>,

Tsu Dho Nimh said:

(Jan) said:

Another sock puppet for organized medicine.

Best to talk with some who have had actual experience.

Janniie-poo ...
I do have actual experience with gallstones, having handled a
lot of them in the lab after surgrey. They were far too large
and hard to be "flushed" out of the gallbladder. The exit duct
was smaller than the stones.

And, on the occasions when they occasionally do somehow manage to find
their way out of the gallbladder and into the common bile duct, they
have a propensity to cause serious complications, such as biliary
obstruction resulting in cholangitis or gallstone pancreatitis.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article <[email hidden]>,

WB said:

This is an almost exact description of my own wives' purgatory
regarding cholecystectomy.

Clipped some of GBs' story as it rings true,
to highlight the important points
The 'flushes' do nothing; except perhaps
postponing the inevitable needed surgery .

There's no evidence that flushes even manage to delay the need for
surgery. Rather, it is the patient's misplaced faith in the flushes that
results in delay of surgery to a point when the disease process has
progressed and the surgery is more difficult. (Usually they don't
acknowledge that the flushings aren't working until they continue to get
repeated bouts of severe biliary cholic or even acute cholecystitis
while doing the flushes. By that time, they may have delayed needed
surgery for months or even years.) Hopefully, it doesn't result in a
delay in surgery to the point where the potentially life-threatening
complications of gallstones set in, such as acute cholecystitis,
ascending cholangitis, or gallstone pancreatitis. Oh, and as a side
note, if you get gallstone pancreatitis, your pancreas can end up being
screwed up for life, making you prone to repeated bouts of pancreatitis,
even after the gallbladder is out. If you've ever seen a patient with a
nasty case of chronic pancreatitis, you know how miserable that patient
is and how often he or she has to be hospitalized for acute flareups,
etc.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

WB said:

This is an almost exact description of my own wives' purgatory
regarding cholecystectomy.

Clipped some of GBs' story as it rings true,
to highlight the important points
The 'flushes' do nothing; except perhaps
postponing the inevitable needed surgery .

There's no evidence that flushes even manage to delay the need for
surgery. Rather, it is the patient's misplaced faith in the flushes that
results in delay of surgery to a point when the disease process has
progressed and the surgery is more difficult. (Usually they don't
acknowledge that the flushings aren't working until they continue to get
repeated bouts of severe biliary cholic or even acute cholecystitis
while doing the flushes. By that time, they may have delayed needed
surgery for months or even years.) Hopefully, it doesn't result in a
delay in surgery to the point where the potentially life-threatening
complications of gallstones set in, such as acute cholecystitis,
ascending cholangitis, or gallstone pancreatitis. Oh, and as a side
note, if you get gallstone pancreatitis, your pancreas can end up being
screwed up for life, making you prone to repeated bouts of pancreatitis,
even after the gallbladder is out. If you've ever seen a patient with a
nasty case of chronic pancreatitis, you know how miserable that patient
is and how often he or she has to be hospitalized for acute flareups,
etc.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."

I am sure Orac will agree that the problem with gallstones is that their
behaviour is quite unpredictable, so that quack treatments can sometimes
look good. . A person can have one or two attacks of pain, and then go for
years without another one. Some who don't have their gallbladder out will
end up carrying their gallstones to the grave without further trouble.

Others will be less lucky. A patient of mine died of severe gallstone
pancreatitis despite our best efforts, and was found to have been in another
hospital just a few months before with gallbladder colic. She had not
undergone surgery because she was very obese, and was trying to lose weight
before the operation.

Peter Moran

Quoted message said:

|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article
<[email hidden]
..au>,

Peter Moran said:

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

WB said:

This is an almost exact description of my own wives' purgatory
regarding cholecystectomy.

Clipped some of GBs' story as it rings true,
to highlight the important points
The 'flushes' do nothing; except perhaps
postponing the inevitable needed surgery .

There's no evidence that flushes even manage to delay the need for
surgery. Rather, it is the patient's misplaced faith in the flushes that
results in delay of surgery to a point when the disease process has
progressed and the surgery is more difficult. (Usually they don't
acknowledge that the flushings aren't working until they continue to get
repeated bouts of severe biliary cholic or even acute cholecystitis
while doing the flushes. By that time, they may have delayed needed
surgery for months or even years.) Hopefully, it doesn't result in a
delay in surgery to the point where the potentially life-threatening
complications of gallstones set in, such as acute cholecystitis,
ascending cholangitis, or gallstone pancreatitis. Oh, and as a side
note, if you get gallstone pancreatitis, your pancreas can end up being
screwed up for life, making you prone to repeated bouts of pancreatitis,
even after the gallbladder is out. If you've ever seen a patient with a
nasty case of chronic pancreatitis, you know how miserable that patient
is and how often he or she has to be hospitalized for acute flareups,
etc.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."

I am sure Orac will agree that the problem with gallstones is that their
behaviour is quite unpredictable, so that quack treatments can sometimes
look good.

True enough. It's also true for many diseases. Clinical variability in
disease course is one reason why anecdotal evidence is of so little
value. Alties never seem to understand this very basic fact, no matter
how many times we try to explain it.

Quoted message said:

A person can have one or two attacks of pain, and then go for
years without another one. Some who don't have their gallbladder out will
end up carrying their gallstones to the grave without further trouble.

I would want to add to this that it is usually not the symptomatic
patients who will go to the grave without further trouble from their
gallstones (although certainly there are a few who will). If a person
has an attack of biliary colic, it is at least 2/3 likely that that
person will have another serious attack within 2 years. On the other
hand, it is true that there are many people with asymptomatic gallstones
out there. Less than 1/3 of patients with gallstones ever develop
serious symptoms. That's why cholecystectomy is usually reserved for
symptomatic patients, although exceptions are sometimes made for
patients with sickle cell anemia (for whom progression is more rapid)
or for people at a higher risk for gallbladder cancer, such as patients
with gallbladder polyps, "porcelain gallbladder," or very large
gallstones.

Quoted message said:

Others will be less lucky. A patient of mine died of severe gallstone
pancreatitis despite our best efforts, and was found to have been in another
hospital just a few months before with gallbladder colic. She had not
undergone surgery because she was very obese, and was trying to lose weight
before the operation.

A tough call, whether to have her try to lose weight first or just to do
the surgery.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

Orac <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

(kevinf) said:

I have been told that I need to have my gallbladder removed but am
keen to explore alternatives. I have seen methods for "flushing" the
stones. Has anyone any experience of this procedure and what were the
results?

They don't work. Conventional medicine gave up on various approaches to
try to "dissolve" or "flush" gallstones many years ago, because they
just don't work. In fact, "flushing" the stones out of the gallbladder
would likely not be a good thing in the absence of a means of removing
them from the biliary tree or somehow dissolving them completely.
Serious sequelae of gallstones finding their way out of the gallbladder
and into the common bile duct include cholangitis, jaundice, or even
gallstone pancreatitis. (In fact, these are some of the potential
complications of gallstone disease that prevented by cholecystectomy.)
Indeed, it's probably good that "alt meds" can't "flush" the gallstones
out, as it would certainly result in some serious complications and even
some deaths.

It all sounds reasonable, but you need to be familiar
with altmed claims before refuting them...

E.g., one altmed claim is that "Gold Coin Grass" can
"crush" the stones, prior to flushing them out.
So an objection based on size is not valid
without more of an explanation.

Also, is there a clinical trial you can point to
that proves that this "Gold Coin Grass" or other
altmed remedies are ineffective? Or at least
harmful? [Beyond keeping the patient from
the "right" treatment -- presumably the pain
and the right to treat it, ultimately belongs
to the patient!]

WB <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

This is an almost exact description of my own wives' purgatory
regarding cholecystectomy.

Clipped some of GBs' story as it rings true,
to highlight the important points
The 'flushes' do nothing; except perhaps
postponing the inevitable needed surgery .

Gymmy Bob said:

My wife was diagnosed with gallstones and needed a gallbladder removal. We
did the flushes as prescribed by the Clark site and with great perceived
success got many hundreds of stones out!

Let me tell you this as I was told by many doctors. Those are not stones
from your gallbladder! They are balls of fat possibly from your liver and
from the congealed oils that you drink during the flush.

Right

Quoted message said:

Almost a year later (last December...yup two months ago) my wife started
having gallbladder attacks. She had only had one a year before. To the
hospital and the only thing that stopped the pain was Demerol injections. It
happened again a few nights later and again a few nights after that. Now if
you want to here about pain. She passed out from the pain a collapsed on the
bed where I accessed and began AR because she was not breathing. We booked
the operation.

The surgeon did the operation laproscopically but was five seconds from
splitting her wide open because her gallbladder was so hard and packed with
stones he couldn't get it out via the largest hole he cut. Thinking it was
cancerous he sent it off to pathology. It turned out to just be severe scar
tissue and we breathed a sigh of relief.

Good.

Quoted message said:

The surgeon offered us $500 if we could flush even one gallstone out. He
told us it cannot be done and I now believe him for most cases.

Right. Read the following statements closely.

Quoted message said:

I didn't while we did the flushes. We aggravated the situation to the point of making
6 hospital emergency visits in December. Now it is over as my wife is back
in her Pilates Classes and other exercises and almost up to full endurance
again at 50 YOA.

Expensive delay. Not just monetary, healthwise.

Quoted message said:

My advise to you is that if you can get a doctor to co-operate, and do the
Ultrasound pictures at various stages then try the flushes. If they are
working....fantastic! If they are not get the operation done
laproscopically as soon as possible before complications can set in and
while it still can be done with a few one inch cuts(no muscle cuts)

Now here is the most important statement:
Reiterate, this is the most important statement:

Quoted message said:

If a stone gets caught in the bile duct tube, your liver, gall bladder (just
pain) and your pancreas are in trouble and so are you.

Sequela follows,

Quoted message said:

You will be split
from side to side through all your abdominals and be unable to use them for
half a year.

moral of the story: wait and you will suffer more.

Quoted message said:

Best of luck! My heart goes out to you.

"kevinf" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I have been told that I need to have my gallbladder removed but am
keen to explore alternatives. I have seen methods for "flushing" the
stones. Has anyone any experience of this procedure and what were the
results?

Just for the record, this is the only time that I have ever agreed
with GymmyB

WB

So basically, you believe in anecdote tellers only as long
as the anecdote is supporting what you are
saying, otherwise you choose to distrust them?