-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Welcome to a Moment in Just Because They Can Doesn't Mean They Should: Researchers Develop A Magnetic Lock Jaw Device for Weight Loss
- Thread starter excelsiorlef
- Start date
OP
OP
They could also opt to be tied to a chair and have their food intake controlled by a third party, doesn't make that a good idea either.
If you have a better solution, I'm sure there is a market.
In cases where immediate weight loss may drastically increase morbidity outcomes, I have no issue at all with this as an opt-in option.
OP
OP
Thanks for the faithful engagement in your own topic.
I'm shocked.
I only see this.
This is the rotary phone, these researchers invented the iPhone
OP
OP
Literally creating devices so vulnerable people can be coerced into magnetically locking their jaws shut with no ability to open it themselves is torture
If I ever get the stomach sleeve surgery (many formerly over weight friends have had success with it). I may ask about this as a pre-surgery option to help lose the weight you need to lose prior to the surgery.
honestly, maybe it's just recognizing the problem, but it seems like this solution could be reasonable for people who truly can not help themselves (of which I likely am one of)
honestly, maybe it's just recognizing the problem, but it seems like this solution could be reasonable for people who truly can not help themselves (of which I likely am one of)
You are right these should not be something that a person does against their will. And I am sure some people will coerce others into using it for their sick gratification (not unlike pressuring other cosmetic surgeries).
but on a personal level, I understand the desire,
Absolutely anything to keep food companies from being responsible.
Hyper synthesized demand in products and then also sell products of synthesized control. Unchecked capitalism weeee
Hyper synthesized demand in products and then also sell products of synthesized control. Unchecked capitalism weeee
OP
OP
I'm not sure how that framing applies to anything I posted. I'll attempt to be more specific:
I am specifically talking about patients who require (nearly) immediate surgical intervention such as a bypass, whose odds would increase drastically by losing weight fast. Of that very specific group, if the device has been thoroughly tested, I don't see the issue with allowing patients to opt-in if they believe it's the best option for their particular circumstance.
The makers of this device think this is appropriate for "millions" of people which is completely fucking insane
OP
OP
Once it's out there you can't control the limitation so such a degree, even if I agreed with you on such a narrow framing, which I really don't.
OP
OP
I like making thread titles, I consider it an exercise in creative writing
Isn't there a surgical solution to extreme weight issues that involves tying up your stomach so the amount of food your body can physically contain is reduced, which then causes you to throw up your next meal because your brain doesn't automatically know how it's hit the limit? Would this be used in sort of cases where we're in that sort of territory?
I'm sure the device creators want as many use cases as possible.
Controlling the approved circumstances is up to the various regulatory apparatuses. It's entirely doable. Do I believe they would limit it strictly to the use cases I mentioned? Probably not, but that's a different discussion.
As for the rest, fair enough to disagree. I would certainly give weight to the potential for unintended consequences.
It has a use case - if you're seeking bariatric surgery and you're so obese that the surgery itself has a high risk of you dying on the operating table, having something that can force caloric reduction to the levels needed to shed weight before surgery could lead to the difference between life and death.
For any other purpose, it's just stupid.
For any other purpose, it's just stupid.
Yeah, and that's completely fucking insane. Acknowledge that's the sticking point here.
What the creators want isn't the sticking point here. That's entirely ordinary. Every medical device inventor thinks their device can "help millions." Regulatory bodies for the most part reign in the lunacy. The creators fantasies do not negate the validity of the specific use case discussed.
1. They should never be trusted.
2. The device has already been created unless I misread.
3. Regulatory bodies must approve the scope of medical devices.
Last edited:
OP
OP
So then we can agree these people should not be trusted and this device not created
Yes there is, but usually these kinds of surgeries also require you to lose weight to minimize the risk of dying during surgery.
A person who'd "need" this kind of "restraining bolt" isn't one that can safely be operated on...
That's like the entire arc of every episode of "My 600lb Life". Obese person wants life altering surgery, visits Dr. No. Dr. No tells them they need to lose weight to qualify for said surgery. Many of them lack the discipline to do so. Dr. No gives them one last chance to lose more weight. They lose it. They get the surgery.
That sounds absolutely terrifying and generally incredibly unhealthy. Weight loss is more than just not eating food. Weight loss is about life style change as much as it is altering your caloric intake. Restricting solid food is just incredibly dangerous.
What if you vomited or started choking? Or got into an accident and started coughing up blood. Or got an upper respiratory infection? Or had an injury to the face or jaw? Or the million other scenarios where being able to freely open your mouth wide is very important?
And if your eating is severe enough that you would need such a device, wouldn't the person be likely to force food through the small gap anyway, which would then be a choking hazard? And if someone did choke or need medical attention, this device would become an impairment to receiving quick medical assistance?
And isn't speed dieting through fasting not recommended, especially prior to major surgeries? How is forcing a liquid diet a healthy choice when not necessary?
There just seems like so many ways this could go horribly wrong.
And if your eating is severe enough that you would need such a device, wouldn't the person be likely to force food through the small gap anyway, which would then be a choking hazard? And if someone did choke or need medical attention, this device would become an impairment to receiving quick medical assistance?
And isn't speed dieting through fasting not recommended, especially prior to major surgeries? How is forcing a liquid diet a healthy choice when not necessary?
There just seems like so many ways this could go horribly wrong.
Why wouldn't the intentions of the medical device developer matter? "Don't worry, these psychos won't actually get what they want."
"The speciifc use case discussed" is what you choose to focus on because the broad application of this device as intended by the designers is indefensible. You're engaging in a Motte & Bailey.
This device is not going to be limited to emergency weight loss.
Motte and Bailey would be if I were defending blanket approval while continuing to argue the valid use case. I'm not.