Fat jabs gave me misshapen boobs & an apron belly – I looked 50 but mummy makeover gave me the body of a 20 year old
Victoria Vigors decided to have a tummy tuck, liposuction, breast lift, face lift and neck lift after using Mounjaro - a prescription injection used to treat type 2 diabetes and obesity - to slim down.
15
15
The 40-year-old initially felt 'misshapen' after losing so much weight.
But now she's never been happier - and says she looks better today than she did aged 20.
'I was very self-conscious about my fupa,' the mum, who is a content creator with 270,000 followers, revealed.
'My tummy overhung because I had a caesarean with my daughter, so it left a scar that my stomach would fall over.
'It was really obvious - I would wear tight-fitting clothing, and you could just see I had a really unnatural-looking belly. I hated it.
'My boobs felt misshapen, and one was much bigger than the other.
'And where I had lost weight on Mounjaro - the skin around my neck was like a turkey.
'It was all saggy, and I hated my jowls.
'I just felt old and unattractive.'
Victoria, from Kent, said people used to stare at her stomach and even make comments.
I spent £75k to turn myself into a 'yummy mummy' - not only am I now more confident in a bikini, but a better parent too
She said: 'I've been called 'flabby belly' online.
'People would say I looked more like 50.
'My side profile would show my sagging neck, and people would point it out.
'As much as my daughter would joke, she would also call me 'jelly belly' and poke my stomach.
'I'd been on Mounjaro for ages and eating really healthily, so I felt fantastic on the inside.
'But on the outside, my confidence was at an all-time low.'
15
15
After speaking to friends and getting recommendations, Victoria found Revitalize in Turkey.
She spoke to the clinic and was told about a £10,000 'mummy makeover'.
The mum booked in for surgery and flew out just 10 days later.
She said: 'Weirdly enough, I didn't feel anxious at all about going in.
'I was just so excited.
'I was already staying at the villa with loads of people who'd already had surgery and were recovering.
'They were all looking great already, so I wasn't nervous.
'I was a bit more stressed going into having my face done because obviously that's my face, and if that goes wrong, then I'm stuck with it.
'But I'd seen other people's results, which looked great.'
15
15
DAY OF THE SURGERY
Victoria's first surgery was for her tummy tuck, liposuction and breast lift.
She said: 'I woke up feeling very groggy, and the pain in my stomach was unreal.
'It'd hurt even more when I moved or coughed.
'I was in and out of sleep for a while, so I was a bit confused at times, but the next day they encouraged me to get up and see if I could start walking.
'I didn't feel any pain in my boobs whatsoever - it was all in my belly.
'I had drains in to collect any blood that was still coming out, and then they showed me a bit of my stomach that they cut away.
"It looked like a slab of fatty pork - I asked them to bin it!'
Five days later, she was taken in for the second surgery for her face and neck lift.
15
She said: 'Waking up, my face felt really painful and tight.
'I had massive quilting stitches all over my face and neck, which looked like bicycle tyre tracks.
'I was told they were to help direct the blood flow and drain any excess, but they were really uncomfortable and itchy.
'The first 24 hours were really painful, but then after that it eased off and just felt tight and numb.'
SURGERY RECOVERY
Victoria had a check-up two days later and was allowed to go home five days later.
She said: 'I was really nervous to see the results of my facelift as I had to keep the support on for four weeks, as well as the compression garments on my abdomen.
'I also had to keep my boobs strapped for six weeks.
'But once I could take them off, I was over the moon.
'My tummy had gone down and was so flat.
'My boobs looked great, and my face even better.
'I was like, wow, this is my body now!'
The mummy makeover would have cost £10,000 - but Tracy paid a discounted rate.
15
15
BOOSTED CONFIDENCE
She is overjoyed with her new look, and her friends and family have been 'super supportive'.
Victoria said: 'They just can't believe how great I look.
'I went to a baby shower a couple of weeks ago, where I hadn't seen some of the girls there for a long time.
'And one of them walked straight past me, didn't even realise it was me, and then she was like, 'Oh my god, look at you now - the glow-up is real.'
'Now I can wear little belly tops, cocktail dresses, tight clothing, and not feel self-conscious anymore.
'I'm super happy.
'There is a lot of pressure for you to be perfect.
'Of course, nobody can be, but this is my idea of perfect to me.'
In May, Victoria re-visited the clinic to have laser eye surgery and turkey teeth fitted.
15
15
15
She said: 'I had 20 porcelain crowns and my eyes done.
'My vision is incredible, and my teeth are perfect.
'My face looks lovely.'
TIMELINE OF SURGERY
10 March - First surgery on tummy tuck, liposuction and breast lift.
15 March - Second surgery on neck and face lift.
20 March - Flew home back to the UK.
7 May - Turkey teeth and laser eye surgery.
20 September - Labiaplasty and breast implants.
MORE SURGERY
Victoria plans on visiting for the final time in September to have breast implants and a labiaplasty.
She said: 'I was supposed to have breast implants when I was there in March, but they said doing that, as well as a lift, was a no-go.
'My blood count was too low when I went for blood tests, so the surgeon said he couldn't do my implants at the same time.
Now I can wear little belly tops, cocktail dresses, tight clothing, and not feel self-conscious anymore
Victoria Vigors
'Now I've given my boobs some time to rest - then I'll be going back.
'I'm super excited for my labiaplasty.
'After having two children, one of my labia appears bigger than the other one.
'I want it to be more levelled out and neat.
'Now, my face is done, my body looks great, it is just those final things.'
What are the risks of getting surgery abroad?
IT'S important to do your research if you're thinking about having cosmetic surgery abroad.
It can cost less than in the UK, but you need to weigh up potential savings against the potential risks.
Safety standards in different countries may not be as high.
No surgery is risk-free. Complications can happen after surgery in the UK or abroad.
If you have complications after an operation in the UK, the surgeon is responsible for providing follow-up treatment.
Overseas clinics may not provide follow-up treatment, or they may not provide it to the same standard as in the UK.
Also, they may not have a healthcare professional in the UK you can visit if you have any problems.
Source: NHS
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
3 minutes ago
- BBC News
Hospitals not treating enough patients to keep up with demand
The NHS waiting list in England has seen a small rise in the past month, with experts warning hospitals are not treating enough patients to keep up with the end of June, the list stood at 7.37 million, a rise of 10,000 on it is still down on last year's figure of 7.62 million, internal documents seen by the BBC, suggest one factor is patients being removed from the list without being treated. This can happen legitimately when patients pay for treatment privately or recover – but experts say it shows the NHS is struggling to keep government said it was trying to ensure all patients who need care get it as soon as possible. The NHS has been encouraged to weed out patients who do not need to be on the waiting list, described as "validation" by officials, for a number of years. Financial incentives are paid for the number of patients taken off and can also include patients who have can make services more efficient, as it means hospitals are not unnecessarily chasing up patients who no longer need treatment. Unreported removals Internal documents showed that, during March and April, the waiting list was brought down by 100,000 through weeding out patients. Without this the list would have Nuffield Trust think-tank said the true number being removed could be even analysis showed an average of more than 200,000 removals a month over the last two years. The think-tank claimed that, on top of validation, computing errors could mean some patients are being automatically removed in error, creating an additional waiting list that does not show up in the Becks Fisher, from the Nuffield Trust, said: "It would be easy to assume that recent reductions in the waiting list are down to the NHS treating a bigger number of patients each month but our analysis shows that presenting progress in this way is a mirage."The NHS is actually still treating fewer patients than are being referred."She said while this waiting list "validation" exercise was "absolutely" the right thing to do in many cases, there needed to be greater transparency and understanding about just what is happening behind the government said unreported removals were only a small factor in the progress being made on the waiting list, saying the NHS was still managing to treat an increasing number of the waiting list through the validation process was vital and ultimately improves productivity, they argue.A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: "Our drive to clear the huge waiting list backlog we inherited includes making sure all patients are getting the right treatment as quickly as possible."
Scottish Sun
3 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
‘King Kong' of fat jabs could DOUBLE in price – soaring to over £300 for the max doses
More than a million people are thought to be taking Mounjaro FAT JAB BLOW 'King Kong' of fat jabs could DOUBLE in price – soaring to over £300 for the max doses Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) MOUNJARO prices in the UK could double as the manufacturer will next month hike the rate it charges pharmacies for the fat jab. US-based Eli Lilly said it is increasing charges for the blockbuster weight loss injection in Britain to 'address inconsistencies' with what it commands from other rich countries. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 1 Mounjaro is by far the UK's most popular weight loss drug Credit: Alamy A middle-sized 5mg dose will nearly double from £92 to £180 from September 1. The maximum available dose, 15mg, will rise from £122 to £330. Lilly said it has struck a secret, cheaper deal with the NHS to ensure availability for the patients most in need. It also claimed to have negotiated with big private suppliers to ensure the whole increase is not passed on to patients. 'At launch, Lilly agreed to a UK list price that is significantly below the European average More than a million Brits are thought to be taking the weight loss injection privately and now face an increase in their monthly bill. Ministers are keen to use the drug to tackle the UK's bulging waistline and roll it out to millions more people over the next decade. A Lilly spokesperson said: 'Following a review, Lilly will increase the UK list price for Mounjaro (tirzepatide) from 1 September to address pricing inconsistencies compared to other developed countries, including in Europe. 'We have reached an agreement with the NHS to ensure continued supply and patient access. 'While Lilly does not determine the prices that private healthcare providers set, we are working with them to maintain patient access. 'The UK was one of the first countries where Lilly launched Mounjaro, and our priority was to bring it to patients as quickly as possible during a time of limited supply of GLP-1 RA treatments for type 2 diabetes. 'At launch, Lilly agreed to a UK list price that is significantly below the European average to prevent delays in NHS availability. 'With changes in the environment and new clinical evidence supporting the value of Mounjaro, we are now aligning the list price more consistently to ensure fair global contributions to the cost of innovation.'
Telegraph
4 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Five calorie counting myths we all fall for – and what works instead
'Calories in, calories out.' For over a century, this simple formula has underpinned popular weight-loss advice. Eat fewer calories than you burn, and the fat will melt away – or so we've been told. But, despite religiously logging our food intake and chasing 10,000 daily steps, millions of us still struggle to lose weight. In fact, evidence suggests calorie counting may only be serving to make us fatter. A study in American Psychologist, found that up to two thirds of people on calorie-restriction diets regain more weight than they lose. Now, as UK obesity rates continue to climb, nutrition experts say it's time to ditch this outdated approach. Latest science shows weight control is far more involved than 'energy in versus energy out'. We are complex machines, and a host of factors – including biology, hormones, food quality, and even how fast we eat – affects how we use the calories we consume. 'Calories only tell you how much of a food you're eating – nothing about the quality,' says Giles Yeo, the professor of molecular neuroendocrinology and programme leader at the MRC Metabolic Diseases Unit at the University of Cambridge. 'And that matters. Two hundred calories of doughnuts has a very different impact on the body than 200 calories of steak.' Here are five myths about calorie counting you might have fallen for – and what you can try instead to really help you drop the pounds Myth one: The most important thing to read on a food label is the number of calories Put simply, a calorie (kcal) is a unit of energy found in food or drink. One kilocalorie (kcal) is the amount of energy it takes to raise the temperature of one litre of water by one degree celsius. The body uses this energy to power its essential functions. On paper, calorie counting should work. 'From a physics perspective, clearly you have to burn more calories than you eat to lose weight,' says Yeo. The flaw in this diet approach lies in how we measure calories in the first place. 'We eat food, not calories,' says Yeo. 'The number of calories your body can extract from a food varies hugely, depending on its type – but that variation isn't reflected in the numbers you see on food labels.' Today's calorie values are still based on a 125-year-old system developed by biochemist Wilbur Atwater, who calculated that protein and carbohydrates contain four calories per gram, and fat nine. But what Atwater didn't account for is the energy (calories) our bodies expend metabolising these macronutrients. 'For every 100 calories of protein listed on a label, your body can only absorb around 70 – the rest are lost as heat,' explains Yeo. 'Fat is energy-dense, so we absorb almost 100 per cent. Carbohydrates fall somewhere between 90 to 100, depending on whether it's sugar or a complex carb.' In short, we're counting the wrong calories. 'They're useful for comparing portions of the same food – say, 100 versus 200 calories of chips,' says Yeo. 'But people get fixated on hitting, say 400 calories, without considering whether that's from sugar or steak.' What actually works 'Instead of counting calories, focus on improving the quality of your diet,' says Yeo. 'Aim to get 16 per cent of your energy from protein, 5 per cent or less from free sugars (like honey, maple syrup, fruit juice) and 30 grams of fibre a day (double the current average). Then, if you still need to lose weight, just eat less of that healthy diet.' Myth two: We all metabolise calories in the same way We all know someone who seems to eat whatever they like and never gain weight. While government guidelines recommend 2,000 calories a day for women and 2,500 for men, actual requirements vary hugely, depending on your age, size, muscle mass and activity level. But that's just where the differences start: 'There's a huge variability in how people process food, and how many calories they actually absorb from the same food,' says Sarah Berry, a professor of nutrition at King's College London and chief scientist at Zoe. A Zoe Predict study of over 1,000 people, including identical twins, found striking differences in blood fat and insulin responses to identical meals. This affects how calories are used, stored or turned into body fat. A separate study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found people eating the same 170-calorie portion of almonds absorbed anywhere between 56 to 168 calories. Clearly, it's not just what we eat, but how our bodies handle it. 'The variation could be due to all sorts of factors, from how thoroughly you chew your food, to how much is absorbed by your gut microbiome, or even whether you've had a bad night's sleep – which can alter your metabolic response,' says Berry. What actually works Don't rely on food labels. 'I would be cautious of back-of-pack labelling,' says Berry. 'The calories your body absorbs can be very different to what's listed. And remember: a diet that works for one person may not work for another.' Myth three: The calories are the same, regardless of how you prepare or eat your food Do you prefer your vegetables cooked or raw, your fish pie homemade or ready-made? The way food is processed and prepared can significantly impact how many calories your body absorbs, says Berry. 'Many foods, like nuts, grains and vegetables, have nutrients (including calories) encapsulated inside rigid cell walls,' she explains. 'That means some escape digestion and are lost in your poo.' For instance, whole almonds can provide 25 to 30 per cent fewer calories than the label suggests. Cooking or processing breaks down this 'food matrix', making nutrients more easily absorbed in the body. A raw stick of celery contains just six calories, but that jumps to 30 once it's cooked. 'Two plant-based products [like smooth versus crunchy peanut butter, or whole versus refined oats] may have identical ingredients and back-of-pack labelling,' says Berry. 'But the way your body processes them, and the calories you absorb, can be very different.' Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and ready meals are so broken down, they're effectively pre-digested. As a result, your body expends less energy metabolising them. A study in Food and Nutrition Research found people burned 50 per cent fewer calories digesting a UPF meal than a wholefood version containing the same calories. What actually works 'Focus on eating whole [unprocessed] foods,' says Berry. 'This slows down the speed you metabolise your food and, in some instances, reduces your energy intake. Rely less on soft, heavily processed foods – they're eaten faster, so you tend to consume more calories.' A study in Cell Metabolism found people on a UPF diet ate an extra 500 calories a day, compared to when they were on a minimally processed diet. Myth four: Calorie counting helps keep weight off 'Calorie counting can help with initial weight loss, but it's actually not as effective for keeping the weight off,' says Berry. 'Around 50 per cent of the weight is regained within two years, and 70 per cent within five.' Why? Because your brain is wired to defend the body's fat stores, in times of scarcity. 'Your body is really clever at protecting its set weight,' says Berry. 'It slows your metabolic rate so you burn fewer calories, increases your appetite to an even higher extent, and makes you less inclined to exercise – all to regain the weight you've lost. This 'perfect storm' can persist for years, making it easy to rebound.' What actually works 'Slow, steady weight loss is more sustainable than calorie counting,' says Berry. 'Switch to a more holistic approach to your diet and lifestyle.' That means eating foods that keep you feeling full such as oats, whole grains and eggs. 'It's why weight-loss drugs work – they suppress hunger,' says Yeo. 'High-protein, high-fibre foods take longer to move through the gut which raises GLP-1, a hormone that curbs your appetite, like a subtle Ozempic effect.' Myth five: Food labels are accurate and tell you exact calories of the food Still tempted to rely on back-of-pack calorie counts? Be warned: manufacturers are legally allowed a margin of error of up to 20 per cent. 'Ingredients, such as crisps, are never identical, so the calorie counts on packs are averages,' says Yeo. 'Even if you're meticulously tracking everything you eat, the numbers can still be off.' If you're eating out, the gap can be even greater. Research from the National Resources Institute shows your innocent-looking pub lunch or bowl of pasta could pack up to 50 per cent more calories than the menu states, due to variable portion sizes. No wonder we're getting it wrong – according to the Office for National Statistics, the average Briton consumes 32 per cent more calories a day than they estimate. What actually works 'Avoid obsessively checking individual calorie numbers, and focus on the quality of your overall diet across the week,' says Yeo. 'We also need better labelling. Traffic-light systems should highlight protein, fibre and free sugars, not just fat and calories. That way, people can make smarter choices without needing a degree in nutrition.'
