Surgery to treat severe obesity is expanding at a very fast rate, and quite rightly. Although gastrointestinal surgery is a last resort, it is proven that is the only technique to lose too much weight and stay so. Worldwide obesity is becoming already an epidemic, a health problem that affects all areas of the life of those who suffer from it. It is a condition that is expanding too quickly, due to various factors. Inheritance can be a cause, but the sedentary lifestyle, little or no exercise, and excessive calorie intake, in addition to the pace of life as you have, they seem to be the main causes of overweight and obesity. Although there are several alternatives for weight loss, bariatric surgery is the only one who has tried to help the patient to lose too much weight and kept so. This can be a good thing for the super obese patients, but for medicine and science, is a failure to try to find alternatives or less drastic solutions to combat the growing health problem that is obesity. There are two main types of surgery to treat obesity.
One of them is the lap band, where the placement of an adjustable band creates a small pouch in the stomach, thereby limiting the amount of food that you can eat every time. The other technique combines stomach restriction and cut part of the small intestine to reduce the area that absorbs calories and nutrients. Both procedures manage the patient to lose weight, but this combined approach is much more effective than the other. The combination of the restrictive and poorly absorbent has proven to be more effective at producing long-term weight loss. If patients eat much or too fast, feel discomfort immediately. Patients have been performed the gastric bypass operation, usually lose a lot of weight the first two years, then rise a bit and stabilize later.
Today, with a diesel engine searches for water in the subsoil, (aquifer), surface waters, like groundwater, are not sufficient, at least at the time and in the desired location. Increasing the exploitation of aquifers and, thus, introduces a new component in environmental injustice pervasive in the world (and in each country). The criticism of the idea of development, as environmentalists had formulated it in the 60s-70s, turned to eco-development and, later, to sustainable development, and through those tortuous paths the very idea of development was revived; the Stockholm Conference and the Conference of Rio de Janeiro, not only have intensified the rhythms of exploitation and transformation of resources, have also arisen new strategies of intervention of nature, as well as new manifestations of ecological risks and their impacts. Leaves no of scared when we heard that water or biodiversity should be treated as a world heritage site and then identify the interests of the rich countries in the Amazon region there. Ricardo Petrella (2001) Italian warned that exactly as heritage of humanity, the water, the air or knowledge are resources that can not be privatized, either by national or transnational corporations. So we conclude that you part of the well-being of the human population directly or indirectly depends on biological diversity; is through the use of numerous species or the enjoyment of intangible services that systemic echo results from processes. The emergence of the indigenous and peasant struggles in favour of natural resources constitutes the struggle for the conservation of biodiversity, the struggle for life. The indigenous and peasant communities in Latin America and the world are carriers of a millenarian knowledge about biodiversity, plants, animals, water and climate.
Scientific research has shown that three quarters of all the prescription drugs of vegetable origin, found in the world market is about 43,000 million dollars – according to Rural Advancement Foundation International, (year 95) were discovered because of its previous use in indigenous medicine. They are societies that have based their material and energetic civilizing process biomass and biodiversity, with a specific way of conceiving the interplay between nature and society in a vital way. Authors like Bawa and Gadgil (1997) recognize indigenous peoples as people of the ecosystem that form for millennia culturales-naturales landscapes. The capital then lies in a great dilemma on the one hand needs to steal the indigenous knowledge and on the other to deal with the process of exclusion and extermination of the cultures and indigenous communities of the ORB, phenomenon that is already proving to be contradictory.