I am going to see my health provider later this week and we are going to discuss doing a body cleanse....to clear out a lot of the crap and toxins from smoking, eating bad, drinking etc and to kind of give my body a jump start.

Has anyone here done a cleanse? What exactly did you do? How did it affect you and was it possitive? Would your recomend it to others?

Thanks!

The Master Cleanser (http://forums.johnstonefitness.com/showthread.php?t=7228)

Anyone try detox? (http://forums.johnstonefitness.com/showthread.php?t=6614)
This has some interesting information from Jeremy about his juice fast...

How to Modify a Thirty Day Juice Fast. . . (http://forums.johnstonefitness.com/showthread.php?t=11621)

There's a lot of negative replies in these threads, so try to wade through them for the information you're looking for.

And here's the book that you'll want to buy if you're doing the Master Cleanse. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0963926209/qid=1127758839/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-3220481-2902404?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)

along similar lines, what are some indications that a cleanse should be done?

I'm wondering because I ate like CRAP 100% of my life until i hit 22 yrs old.
My daily nutrition came from MoutainDew, Poptarts, and pizza.
But - i recently had a doctor checkup with blood tests, and all my tests came back far better than normal - almost superman-like results.

So is it possible that i would still need said cleansing?
And if so, how often should a person take part in such cleansings?
Every 5-10 years?

I hate the idea of a cleaning, but if it's going to add 10 years onto my life, bring it on!

edit: i did not read the links in slushpuppy's post before posting this.
i still havnt, because im lazy, and i'm willing to admit it.

along similar lines, what are some indications that a cleanse should be done?

I'm wondering because I ate like CRAP 100% of my life until i hit 22 yrs old.
My daily nutrition came from MoutainDew, Poptarts, and pizza.
But - i recently had a doctor checkup with blood tests, and all my tests came back far better than normal - almost superman-like results.

So is it possible that i would still need said cleansing?
And if so, how often should a person take part in such cleansings?
Every 5-10 years?

I hate the idea of a cleaning, but if it's going to add 10 years onto my life, bring it on!
\

Are we talking like high colonic? Ouch!!!!! :eek: :d_eek:

along similar lines, what are some indications that a cleanse should be done?
Some people do a cleanse because of the refreshed feeling it can bring. I' ve never done one, but a lot of people say that it's extremely invigorating and that your body releases all sort of toxins (in very strange ways, too... see the Amazon book link and read what happens to people's tongues!).

Some people do it as a spiritual kickoff to a more lifelong process, sort of like a cannonball into the water. They become more in touch with their bodies and get a feeling of accomplishment and achievement from it.

Some people do it for fat loss reasons, but a cleanse isn't really meant for that. Most who fast for fat loss reasons wind up really disappointed.

Are we talking like high colonic? Ouch!!!!!
Not a colonic cleanse... I assumed that Carrie35 was talking about a dietary cleanse, like the Master Cleanser. You basically live off of this lemonade/molasses concoction for 10-20 days and your body "cleanses" itself. Read the reviews of the book in the link I posted, there's some very, very interesting stuff in there!

The Master Cleanser (http://forums.johnstonefitness.com/showthread.php?t=7228)

Anyone try detox? (http://forums.johnstonefitness.com/showthread.php?t=6614)
This has some interesting information from Jeremy about his juice fast...

How to Modify a Thirty Day Juice Fast. . . (http://forums.johnstonefitness.com/showthread.php?t=11621)

There's a lot of negative replies in these threads, so try to wade through them for the information you're looking for.

And here's the book that you'll want to buy if you're doing the Master Cleanse. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0963926209/qid=1127758839/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-3220481-2902404?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)

Thanks for the links! I have checked them all out.

I am probably very much like the clients Jeremy has recomended detox or fasts for. I have been very physically active for the past year, have lost about 25 pounds, but have not been able to get a handle on my eating habits and therefore have had a plateau for the past 6 months...plus giving up smoking, the idea of a detox is appealing to me. I don't expect to lose any weight, but I do expect to get an appreciation for what my body needs and how it functions. Like giving up smoking, it is a way to break a food/ carb addiction at start new.

I probably won't be doing the Master Cleanse...I will know better after I see my doctor, but I will more than likely be eating fresh, organic vegetables and fruit...no salt, oils, fats or dressings.
I'll post more when I know more!

Not a colonic cleanse... I assumed that Carrie35 was talking about a dietary cleanse, like the Master Cleanser. You basically live off of this lemonade/molasses concoction for 10-20 days and your body "cleanses" itself. Read the reviews of the book in the link I posted, there's some very, very interesting stuff in there!


NO! :eek: I actually read up on enemas and colonics, but I just can't do it! I am hoping that all of the fibrous veggies and fruit will just clean the colon out au natural!! No enema bags for me!!!! (I know, TMI!...but you should read about some of this stuff...Ick!)

I will know better after I see my doctor, but I will more than likely be eating fresh, organic vegetables and fruit...no salt, oils, fats or dressings.
I'll post more when I know more!
The only fats/oils you should be giving up are the ones that say "Hydrogenated" or "Partially Hydrogenated" in the ingredients lists.

Otherwise - fats are good and very nessessary for good health.
Oh yeah - don't forget about protein too!!

ok, since science can't prove these things are needed, forget it.
Cleansings are probably bad for someone who's bulking anyway... :)

I did the 10 day Master Cleanse. I ate nothing for 10+ days, and only drank a homemade leomande drink. It sounds really crazy but I was not really hungry at all during the 10 days. Sure there where hard days when I just wanted to eat something, but it wasnt really like hunger.

Would I reccomend it...not really sure.

There were some good things that came out of it, and some bad things. I really didnt need to lose any weight, and I knew I would lose some, but I lost over 10 pounds in 10 days. At the end I looked very malnurished and sickly. I went from like 135 to about 122. I didnt want to work out or do much cardio while I was on it. Obviously I lost weight, but a lot of it was muscle! I feel like it has taken me a while to get that muscle back, as well as my endurance.

I did feel clean. And I got some nasty shit coming out of me...pun intended! I can believe how much waste just sits in your colon. Even on about the 3rd day I was still passing solids....that's 3 days of not eating anything solid. Which leads me to believe it was just hanging out up in my colon or body somewhere. I did have the white tongue after a while, etc.

Another interesting side effect was my hightened sences...I'm not talking like Spiderman or anything. But twards the end, my sence of smell was amazing. For example I opened our work refrigerator and immediatly smelled something rotten. I asked other people and they couldnt tell. Or when I was walking through the grocery store, I could have walked blindfolded through the fruit section and tell you what type of fruit was in the stands next to me.

ok, since science can't prove these things are needed, forget it.
Cleansings are probably bad for someone who's bulking anyway... :)


Yeah in my opinion that would be one of the worst things for ya. I'm on a bulk now too. And I probably would never do a cleanse like that again.

Sounds like utter bollocks. The body is not an engine cylinder; you can't go in on one that's been fed junk fuel and scrap it out and then be right-as-rain. One cannot atone for years of abuses with a few days of hardship.

If somebody has real medical literature on the benefits of these I'll be the first to do one but until then I'd put it next to the fatkins diet and the hollywood diet and whatever else sounds silly and novel.

I just read some of what jeremy wrote and find it interesting. He didn't support this from the toxic/cleaning approach but rather from the psychological one--kind of like the same reason somebody might run 100 miles...it's not for health. They're just testing themselves and seeing what they're made of. I, like he was, am a chronic binger. I am slim but I seem to have a difficult time eating "normally". One day I'll be on my diet properly and then the next day, which i set aside as a cheat day, turns into a total feeding frenzy day. :o

ok, since science can't prove these things are needed, forget it.



Science can prove anything it wants to prove. It just doesn't want to prove this- there's no money in it.

Try to tell Merck, Pfizer, or any of the other big spenders in research to prove the usefullness of a cheap cleanse. I think they'd rather pay hordes of scientists to "prove" that their $200 miracle pills cure all ailments. That's why I love when people cite this or that "scientific" study to prove why we should take expensive drugs or eat all carbs or use only vegetable oil not butter. Hmmmm... Who paid for that study and did you actually read *and understand* that study. :eek:

My sister did the master cleanse a few months back. She also said she wasn't hungry and had some nasty stuff leave her body. She also said after a few days she was full of energy and would just jump out of the bed in the morning when her eyes opened. I know she lost some weight so I would have to assume it was lean mass because she was drinking that lemonade water stuff....

I'd like to try it but I don't want to lose mass. But I really don't think there's any way to avoid it.

k

How would someone train and do one of those cleanses at the same time? Sounds like you might be lacking a lot of nutrients.

I have done a intestinal cleanse 3 times before and it has been good for a lot of reasons. I am considering a liver and kidney cleanse as well, but am having a hard time figuring how I will make the time to do it right as it takes a lot of prep time and alot of work through out a 5 day period of time.

If anyone knows of a simple liver cleanse let me know.

So far the cleanse stuff we have used has been from a guy named Dr. Schultz.

If somebody has real medical literature on the benefits of these I'll be the first to do one but until then I'd put it next to the fatkins diet and the hollywood diet and whatever else sounds silly and novel.
But it's not a diet to lose weight, and doesn't really claim to be. It's just a 10-20 day body "cleanse" to get rid of toxins, not fat. There's no big industry built around it, no Master Cleanser prepackaged frozen meals, no Master Cleanser franchises... just a book for $6. And on Amazon.com alone, there's 116 reviews with 4.5 stars rating. That has to say that it's worth something.

But it's not a diet to lose weight, and doesn't really claim to be. It's just a 10-20 day body "cleanse" to get rid of toxins, not fat. There's no big industry built around it, no Master Cleanser prepackaged frozen meals, no Master Cleanser franchises... just a book for $6. And on Amazon.com alone, there's 116 reviews with 4.5 stars rating. That has to say that it's worth something.There may not be a big industry yet, but there's definitely money in it. Book sales, supplement sales...Is there any actual PROOF besides some anecdotal evidence on message boards or by monetarily-motivated authors that these cleanses actually do anything that they claim?

I'm surprised nobody yet has mentioned the 30 lbs of impacted stool they found in Elvis when he died (which of course is false, but I've seen it as evidence elsewhere that we need to do this stuff).

Why would somebody presume that limiting the body's access to nutrients (good and bad) would somehow clean out only the good stuff? You can't use toxins (whatever they are) to fuel your body, so if your body does somehow cleanse itself it's just as likely to be using proper nutrient reserves in this attempt so while you may cleanse out filth you're probably cleaning out goodness as well.

It just sounds like an awful lot of quackery!

It just sounds like an awful lot of quackery!

It sounds like 100% junk. How does drinking your nutrition cause a body to lyse toxins? A better route is a clean diet and a good exercise regimen so that you lose the body fat that can store the toxins. Doesn't that make more sense than 10~20 days of drinking some supposedly nutritional drink?

The lengths that people will go to in the name of health sometimes boggles my mind... but this has got to be one of the craziest I've seen.

-R

The only thing that I've heard any possitive feedback on is NSP's AB-TRIM (http://shop.acsfitness.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=11&zenid=49f9d28d10b2dba7a5263ac67a33d218). Basically you're still feeding your body the necessary amino acids to reduce any muscle loss. That's the only site I know of that I can show you what's included. You could contact Ron Kosloff at NSP for any other information.

I have done two cleanse,one a year but not for a year now as i have been weight training.

I know one sigth and the guy does regular cleanses and bodybuilds thouhg he gives no photos and I suspect he is just happy with his definition really.i lost alot of weight on both cleaqnses;I tended to loose muscle and not fat.Not that i had much anyway but it still left what i have under my jaw gggrrrrrr.

In my opinion doing a cleanse without colonic is pointless.And having a colonic is pointless near enough without about 3-4 days on fruit only first.

Do that and you detox wil be easier.But my advice is by a home colonic kit;they are very cheap and use it once a day in you fast or any time you get a detox dip and feel you cant go on.

I find fasting emotionally very difficult and wouldnt try it at work,both times i took time off for it.


The result.My incidence of migrane has absolutly plummeted.


i think a detox is worthwhile if done properly but dont kid yourself that you will retain th ebenifits of wieght training while fasting,its not going to happen.

water fasting,ie drinking only water is also emotionally very hard,buy your self a juicer and get fresh fruit and vegetable juices down your neck.Dont mix the two.Take th efruit in th emorning and veg at night.

My fasts were for ten days,3 days on fruit before and theree after to break it gently.I never felt particularly good on either of them but think they are good for you.

Wanted to update and tell y'all what my doctor and I decided to do.

I am doing a cleanse or "Purification" but there is no fasting involved...basically I am taking supplements and eating a very limited diet which consists solely of :

Specific Vegetables including (but not limited to) spinach, greens , celery, bell pepper, artichoke, asparagus, cucumber, carrots etc.

Fruit (not avocado)

2 cups of brown rice daily

up to 2 eggs daily

2 servings of lean fish, poultry or beef daily

Eat twice as many veggies as fruit, veggies can be steamed for 4 minutes, meat either baked, broiled or steamed, no seasonings, butter, salad dressings etc.

So, for lunch today I had a huge bowl of salad with spinach, leaf lettuce, celery, onion, bell pepper, apple, grapes, brown rice and a hard boiled egg....it wasn't that bad :)

I am in the middle of day 3 and so far so good...I have had monster cravings for strange things like Little Debbie Snack Cakes and Subway sandwiches...stuff I never eat or think about eating.
I am realizing how much time and energy I spend thinking about, going to get, planning to have and looking forward to food. I am feeling bored a lot of the time...I want to go "out" and realize "out" means eating. The first day I literally wandered around the house aimlessly...I couldn't smoke and I couldn't eat (anything I wanted anyway) and I didn't know what to do with myself! Today is a bit better...

Anyway...this is what I am doing...we'll see how it works out :)

If anyone is really interested in cleansing your body I highly recommend the book The Body Ecology Diet by Donna Gates. This is an exceptionally well researched and sound diet. It is very hard to do and will require lots of changes but if you really need to get cleaned up this is the real deal. It removes the yeast from your intestines and makes food digestion a whole lot better. It cured my bad case of IBS a couple years back.

http://www.bodyecologydiet.com/

If anyone is really interested in cleansing your body I highly recommend the book The Body Ecology Diet by Donna Gates. This is an exceptionally well researched and sound diet. It is very hard to do and will require lots of changes but if you really need to get cleaned up this is the real deal. It removes the yeast from your intestines and makes food digestion a whole lot better. It cured my bad case of IBS a couple years back.

http://www.bodyecologydiet.com/
What exactly is being cleansed ?

What you eat either becomes part of your body, is utilized for energy or excreted.

What exactly is being cleansed ?

What you eat either becomes part of your body, is utilized for energy or excreted.

Or a myriad of other things...

Or a myriad of other things...

I'm coming out of an eternity of lurking to say that these "cleansings" are ridiculous. There is no evidence that people keep undigested matter in their intestines or colon for years; indeed, millions of colonoscopies and autopsies have been done, yet the only time you'll read about impacted fecal material is when the impaction is potentially dangerous or actually killed someone, and it's not caused by unhealthy foods, but rather foreign material or preexisting health conditions.

If the people on this board don't believe in miracle pills to lose fat, why believe in miracle drinks of lemon juice and molasses to "cleanse" the body of unnamed toxins?

If you want to fast and lose lean muscle for no reason at all, that's your perogative, but don't encourage others to jump on your sinking ship.

I'm coming out of an eternity of lurking to say that these "cleansings" are ridiculous. There is no evidence that people keep undigested matter in their intestines or colon for years; indeed, millions of colonoscopies and autopsies have been done, yet the only time you'll read about impacted fecal material is when the impaction is potentially dangerous or actually killed someone, and it's not caused by unhealthy foods, but rather foreign material or preexisting health conditions.

If the people on this board don't believe in miracle pills to lose fat, why believe in miracle drinks of lemon juice and molasses to "cleanse" the body of unnamed toxins?

If you want to fast and lose lean muscle for no reason at all, that's your perogative, but don't encourage others to jump on your sinking ship.

First of all, when a coroner performs an autopsy they don't prepare a press release about intestinal contents. Secondly, cleanses are not specifically for impacted fecal material. They cleanse at a cellular level. Thirdly, yes, there are lots of bogus methods out there, lemon juice and molasses sounding like one of them. But, cleanses are very effective if done properly for specific results. And believe me they are not easy or anything like a miracle pill, but yes they can have miraculous results. Just be sure to research the cleanse you are planning on undertaking and consult a naturopathic doctor.

First of all, when a coroner performs an autopsy they don't prepare a press release about intestinal contents. Secondly, cleanses are not specifically for impacted fecal material.

Medical examiners are doctors; any abnormal or unusual results would be properly publicized. But you then say:

They cleanse at a cellular level.

What compounds do they release from the cells? By what process are these compounds extracted? Why have cellular biologists not stumbled across this process?

This forum is a valuable resource only so long as it remains honest. There is no physical benefit to be gained by starving oneself.

Medical examiners are doctors; any abnormal or unusual results would be properly publicized.

If a guy gets shot in the head and gets autopsied, the medical report says "death by gunshot wound to the head," the doctor doesn't know or care if the victim had a severe Candidiasis overgrowth in the intestine.

Following are a few classic symptoms of candida overgrowth most of which won't kill you and require an autopsy but which really suck:

Gastrointestinal: indigestion, gas, bloating, inflammatory bowel diseases, diarrhea, constipation, heartburn, bad breath and thrush (coating on tongue).

Physical: numbness, burning or tingling; painful, swollen, stiff joints; muscle aches and tension, nasal congestion, chronic headaches, blurred vision, shortness of breath, chest pains, dizziness, sinusitis, and chemical sensitivity.

Mental/Emotional: depression, mental confusion, irritability, insomnia, nervousness, anxiety, disorientation, impaired decision making, low energy, fatigue, hyperactivity, chronic ear infections and poor memory.

Skin: white fungal skin patches like dandruff, acne, athlete's foot, anal itch, diaper rash, psoriasis, dermatitis, finger and toenail infections, unpleasant body or hair odour, genital touching in infants and young children, skin rashes and behavioural problems.

Sexual: vaginitis, discharge, itch, bladder infection, menstrual irregularities, pain, cramps, lowered libido, infertility, impotency, prostate problems.

Urinary: frequent urination, burning, fluid retention and edema.



What compounds do they release from the cells? By what process are these compounds extracted? Why have cellular biologists not stumbled across this process?

The type of cleanse I am refering to releases Candidiasis yeast and its toxic byproducts. You can do your own research regarding the actual processes involved, if you really care. It sounds more like you are just flaming to me though. :mad: I have no idea about what the cellular biologists are doing.

This forum is a valuable resource only so long as it remains honest. There is no physical benefit to be gained by starving oneself.

You have no idea what you are talking about. A cleanse and a fast are not the same thing. Both a cleanse and a fast can be very beneficial. Your statement "There is no physical benefit to starving oneself," has nothing to do with either a fast or a cleanse when done properly. No one is going to starve. No one is recommending anyone just up and stop eating because they read this thread. If someone has a situation like the sympotoms listed above they may want to consider visiting a ND and see what type of cleanse or treatment could help them. MD's and other establishment medical types usually deal in drugs and surgeries which will probably exacerbate this type of condition, or at best mask the symptoms. Cleanisng the body of impurities can be done safely and naturally without drugs and yes, can and may involve a period of fasting.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

It sounds to me like you're the one who's flaming here, not me. I have thus far not attacked you at all, only the message.

I'm well aware of the possible ill effects of C. albicans overgrowth. There is preliminary evidence that the secretions of albicans can cause modified immune response through a variety of methods. The question at hand is "how can a 'cleanse' remedy this problem and what methods have been sufficiently studied to ensure their safety and efficacy?"

Naturopathic 'doctors' do not have the clinical or educational background to accurately test for, identify, or treat Candida overgrowth. In addition, many employ homeopathic methods, which have been repeatedly proved to be of no benefit for a variety of ailments.

I am stunned that you have questioned the effectiveness of whey protein based solely on the fact that it is a processed food, yet recommend untested and unverified methods to regulate intestinal flora with only the stipulation to see a naturopath beforehand. This is irresponsible and dangerous.

If someone hasn't actually done a fast or a cleanse I think their opinion is limited.

And for anyone to sit here and said they know for a fact the entire process of digestion, food, the impact of eating/not eating, eating certain foods, drinking just water etc.. and it's effects on the human body at the cellular level with certainty is just plain ignorant. THere is more that science doesn't know about our bodies than they do know... and it's probably on a scale of 1 to 10 million....

You may feel it's all just quackery.... but many people (before it got as popular as it is today) thought eating 6 meals a day was no better than eating 3 meals a day.... the world used to be flat, eating 1.5 times your bodyweight in protein will damage your kidneys, jerking off causes warts and blindness... now we look back and see some of the 'true' stuff was just quackery and some of the 'quackery' was right on target.

I once did a water and apple fast for 4 days. I had shit excreting from my body that I never saw before. Sores on my tongue, etc... I got lightheaded and then I got very acute in my senses.... I ended up getting more energy and actually felt different.... Now you may sit there and tell me the whole thing was just bullshit, but I was the one doing it and experiencing the changes.

You want an opinion, do it, then you'll have an opinion.

k

What exactly is being cleansed ?

What you eat either becomes part of your body, is utilized for energy or excreted.

Ok but you missed an important one.... It poisons/damages the body. For example - You can intake mercury but you don't utilize it for energy and you eventually excrete it, but it does a whole bunch of things to the body while it's in there. Ok now put in chemical additives, environmental pollutions, hormones injected into cows to make them grow etc... I think the premise is that it is very hard to have a diet where you are not taking in these things so some people have deduced that by not eating any of this stuff gives the body a chance to function 'cleaner' and do it's job without having to deal with the extra 'toxins' that we ingest. Your body naturally 'detoxes' and has a detoxification process, who is to say you can't help it out??

k

I once did a water and apple fast for 4 days. I had shit excreting from my body that I never saw before. Sores on my tongue, etc...

Wow sores on my tongue that sounds really great I will get on this bandwagon right away then

This forum is a valuable resource only so long as it remains honest. There is no physical benefit to be gained by starving oneself.
I don't really know if a full "cleanse" does anyhitng significant or not, other than what I've heard others say. No one has suggested starving, just changing the calorie source (juice, fruit or that lemon drink).

I respect your opinion, but what hard evidence do you have that a cleanse doesn't do anything? It sounds like your posts are based on opinion, while others have posted from experience...

I respect your opinion, but what hard evidence do you have that a cleanse doesn't do anything? It sounds like your posts are based on opinion, while others have posted from experience...

My posts are not based on opinion; rather, they are based on the collective consensus of tens of thousands of doctors and researchers over decades of research, all of whom have hard data, published, critiqued, and peer-reviewed, to back up our knowledge of internal anatomy and physiology.

The idea that drinking a certain concoction will cleanse the body of unnamed "toxins" is an extraordinary claim; extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Thus far all the evidence presented in this thread is a mishmash of quackery buzzwords, and of course kfendt's unpleasant mouth sores problem.

Imagine that I had a pill for sale that I claimed would increase your metabolism by another 50%, and made your skin glow like an angel's. My website has all sorts of endorsements from people like "Linda S." and "Barry R," and I say "there's your proof."

Can you prove my pill doesn't work? Is the method of simply believing the testimonials the best way to determine the proof? There could be ten people in this thread claiming that a cleansing ritual improved their health, but that doesn't make their claims unbiased or true. There are plenty of forums on the internet where people claim quite sincerely that an underground cabal of reptilian aliens control the world's governments; that alone doesn't make it true.

In order to determine whether a treatment - and natural or not, that's what these fasts and cleanses are, a medical treatment - works or not, you need a double-blind, controlled testing protocol.

On my side I have gastroenterologists, internists, and biologists both molecular and cellular, all of whom have advanced degrees and training. Even better, I can look up their published research. On the side of the cleansers you have people trying to sell books, tapes, and pricey supplements. And their research is nowhere to be found. That alone doesn't make their claims false, but it does remind us to be skeptical of untested cures.

Speaking of gastroenterological concerns, the role of Helicobacter pylori in ulcer causation was not mapped out by a natural healer with his cleansers and cursory examinations, it was done by serious and honest men and women using the principles of the scientific method. If someone wants to claim that gastroenterological illness or general poor health is caused by "toxins" that can be cleared out in days through fasting or cleansing, I encourage them to first identify what toxins they are talking about and secondly identify how the techniques espoused in this thread work.

I am still waiting to hear what "toxins" are being cleaned from the body, incidentally.

If someone hasn't actually done a fast or a cleanse I think their opinion is limited.



Huh?

Frankly, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Having done a cleanse would provide one with ancecdotal evidence which means... nothing.

I cannot personally see why the idea of a cleanse is so extraordinary.

I know that if I want to look after my boots properly, I should polish them reguarly. But if they were caked in mud, I'd scrap it off first. My experience has shown that getting off the bulk of the mud before polishing is highly beneficial. However, I'm still waiting for a double-blind scientific study that proves my experience one way or another.

Unless I'm convinced otherwise I shall be experimenting with a colon and liver detox when I have reached my other goals. If you can provide any links to good studies that prove that this will be bad for me, I shall reconsider.

I cannot personally see why the idea of a cleanse is so extraordinary.

I know that if I want to look after my boots properly, I should polish them reguarly. But if they were caked in mud, I'd scrap it off first. My experience has shown that getting off the bulk of the mud before polishing is highly beneficial.

Unless you can see inside your intestines - or according to some claims, the very cells that line your intestine- your comparison doesn't hold.

Besides, your gastrointestinal tract is self-cleaning. And certainly nothing you eat other than fiber will keep things moving any more smoothly.

Unless I'm convinced otherwise I shall be experimenting with a colon and liver detox

A liver detox? Have you even had a blood test to find out what is wrong with your liver, if anything? You know what? Fine, go nuts. I'm pretty tired of trying to warn people about potentially dangerous, unscientific voodoo. I've done this for years and no one ever listens until, say, their skin turns gray because they took 8g of collodial silver. Maybe I should just join the dark side and sell thirty-dollar bottles of sugar pills. Ugh.

I could really give a crap about this whole cleanse issue but I really despise doctors with that attitude, thecup, and I've run across lots.

My posts are not based on opinion; rather, they are based on the collective consensus of tens of thousands of doctors and researchers over decades of research, all of whom have hard data, published, critiqued, and peer-reviewed, to back up our knowledge of internal anatomy and physiology.You mean the same people that prescribed Vioxx to millions of patients?

http://www.vioxx.com/rofecoxib/vioxx/consumer/index.jsp

Merck is driven by science and our commitment to acting in the best interest of patients. Merck acted responsibly – from researching VIOXX prior to approval in studies with almost 10,000 patients – to monitoring the medicine while it was on the market – to voluntarily withdrawing the medicine when we did.I guess they forgot the double-blind heart attack and stroke tests...

Science and medicine isn't everything and doctors would prescribe medicine on top of medicine to fix people's problems that could be handled with diet and exercie. Doctors are pushing a lot more unnecessary, overpriced shit on the patient... I'm sorry, customer... than any infomercial or advertisement in Flex magazine.

Let's face it ... the whole discussion is left-brained versus right-brained.

It would be too boring and monotonous to take this to it's logical conclusion. In other words, you can tap into the consensus that there must be some scientific evidence to support toxins leaving the cell. But "scientific evidence" really refers to a body of research based on clinical trials. The people conducting the experiments are human, the conductors are human, and the standard that is accepted and taken for granted is a by product of an entire industry. It is typical to just assume this industry is a gold standard because it has the word "research" associated with it, but the fact remains there is an established body formed by a popular opinion that follows a certain set of standards.

Statements like "there is no benefit from starving" go against the grain of everything else you argue. You ask for scientific proof but then go against that very grain. For example ... no benefit from starving?

What about this (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12724520&query_hl=6) ("intermittent fasting resulted in beneficial effects that met or exceeded those of caloric restriction") or this this (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12710893&query_hl=6) ("a more definitive therapy may consist of a therapeutic fast, followed up by the protective diet as a maintenance regimen") etc. Yes, there is evidence.

However, it is very naive to assume that unless there is a body of scientific evidence that it's not true. That only makes since in the context of having a debate on the platform of assumption ... in other words, MOST studies and trials are funded by organizations and industries that benefit from this. That doesn't make it good or bad, but it doesn't invalidate ideas that are not scientifically studied. You'll find thousands of pages of research on cholesterol because it is a billion dollar pharmaceutical industry. While homeocysteine has an impact on cardiovascular risk factors, there is very little out there about it because there is magic homeocysteine drug.

If you don't like cleanses, fine. However, you are trying to sound like the "logical passive voice" when you first attacked with the sarcastic "sinking ship" comment that was just your opinion shining through.

Anecdotal is not reliable in a general sense, especially in the scientific community. However, when anecdotal means that everyone who I know anecdotally receives a benefit, I could be like so many others and give up my power by just falling in line and following the trend, or I can say, maybe there IS something to people experiencing positive effects. As a coach, it's not my job to follow the current trends. If that were true, I'd just have everyone eat low-carb diets and train on Swiss workout balls and use words like core and functional training and maybe even kettlebell all of the time. The fact is my business is about results, so I don't waste my time trying to scour through fifteen volumes of published experiments for results. If I get a positive result, that's a success. Anecdotal? Get upset all you want, it doesn't bother the people who are benefitting from the processes that are only "anecdotally" validated.

It's like the classical argument between who is right, the medical doctor or the naturopath. Personally, after having a medical doctor tell me to start exercising and "watch what I eat" when I showed up weighing 195 pounds at 8% body fat (yes, I could see my abs) I realized that it is naive and ignorant to place our trust in what is published or part of the medical community.

It's fine to have a different opinion ... you don't believe in cleanses, fine. Personally, I don't worry about what is popular or statistically correct. I don't care what works for 80% of the people because that 80% is overweight or obese and broke. I'm more interested in what the healthy, successful 5% do ... and that is why I'm a big fan of fasts and cleanses.

Nope, I can't give you reams of scientific data and you are right, perhaps it is just anecdotal. I also agree, I don't want anyone to get on a sinking ship. I'd rather they come along with the people who are taking charge and transforming their lives, and because that is so rare for people to have what it takes to do that permanently, I've found the habits and practices are also rare to find.

At any rate, I definitely respect the opinion that cleanses are worthless and if you tried one I respect you even more. Personally, I decided long ago to stop giving up my power to the masses and making decisions just because it was published in a book or "everyone says so" or "this is what science says."

Science said the world was flat. Then it said the world was the center of the universe. 98% of what we know about the brain was only discovered in the past 6 years and people still think it makes sense to go on a low-fat diet and classify carbohydrates as simple and complex. Personally, I've seen the so-called science break down enough to have an open mind and if I'm not sure about something, instead of wasting my time debating and hypothesizing I just do it. If it works, great, I'll suggest it to someone else and they can do it. Maybe it will work, maybe it won't, but we're more the merrier for trying.

Have a phenomenal day.

Jeremy

PS I just had to share with this ...

My posts are not based on opinion;

Everything is an opinion. What we consider fact is really based on assumptions we've made and agreed to ... our contracts to make reality convenient. For example, that a table is solid is a fact only until you reach the sub-atomic level ... but then again, has anyone really experienced the sub-atomic level or do we just trust what comes out of the machines developed by the same humans who are prone to making mistakes?

rather, they are based on the collective consensus of tens of thousands of doctors and researchers over decades of research,

Communism and Racism, even Genocide, is based on the collective consensus of thousands of individuals. Does that make it valid and right?


all of whom have hard data

What is hard data? The Heisenberg uncertainty principle says that there is always something we don't know ... focus on one variable and the other blurs. Is there hard data that light is a particle? Is there hard data that it is a wave?

published

I've been published, does that mean I'm always right?

critiqued, and peer-reviewed

My book was critiqued AND peer-reviewed ... again, does it make everything in it true and right? Or could it still just be my opinion?

to back up our knowledge of internal anatomy and physiology.

Bottom line. Everything is opinion. It may help you feel better about your argument to try to make it into something that is a pure truth, but it's not, so let's just cut to the chase and admit there are differing opinions and stop trying to sell ice cubes to Eskimos. You have your opinion, we have ours, and unless we have something useful to share, debating whether my perception of blue is the exact same as yours really doesn't serve a purpose.

Again, I do appreciate both sides of the debate because anyone reading this will get to exercise their freedom to choose what they might try to see what works for them. Taking airs or trying to claim something as an absolute truth goes a little beyond the scope of comparing opinions about cleansing. There is no absolute that it works.

Take a look at this page:

http://www.sanoviv.com/medical_treatments.html

Oh my gosh. They mention ... botanical therapy. Orthomolecular nutrition (Linus Pauling received the nobel prize for this, yet the same people who respect his findings argue against taking a quality multivitamin ... another case of just taking what we believe and throwing out the facts that don't align) ... did they mention DETOXIFICATION?

Yes, they did. They even said, "ridding the body of toxins." Surely these are naturopath quacks, right?

But wait ... according to this page:

http://www.sanoviv.com/FAQs/what_are_the_staffs_qualifications.html

All of the doctors have attended "accredited medical schools and universities."

There are tons of case studies on the site too ... but again, this boils down to opinion. Those who believe in this type of treatment will say, "It's fact, look at the documented case studies." Those who don't will say, "Look, they got paid actors and made up the case studies."

Again, my only point on jumping in is to get this back to a dialogue instead of something where someone tries to stop the argument with the old and tired "this is an absolute fact because thousands of doctors across the world agree with me." That has nothing to do with the discussion and I seriously doubt you've taken the time to visit all of those doctors and read all of their papers and ask their opinions about cleanses.

Jeremy

Naturopathic 'doctors' do not have the clinical or educational background to accurately test for, identify, or treat Candida overgrowth. In addition, many employ homeopathic methods, which have been repeatedly proved to be of no benefit for a variety of ailments.

I am stunned that you have questioned the effectiveness of whey protein based solely on the fact that it is a processed food, yet recommend untested and unverified methods to regulate intestinal flora with only the stipulation to see a naturopath beforehand. This is irresponsible and dangerous.

How can you possibly discredit all ND's? And homeopathic methods? It doesn't seem to me you've spent any time actually researching natural healing modalities yet you dismiss it out of hand. Chiropractic, accupuncture, herbs, massage, meditation, prayer, homepathy, chinese medicine in general- all quackery I presume?

My questioning of processed foods and whey in particular doesn't seem dangerous to me, it seems cautious actually. And I don't think anyone would be in danger by visiting a Naturopathic Physician. Actually I would think more danger would come from visiting a MD who may prescribe very powerful pharmaceuticals based on a short consult (all based on sound scientific principals and decades of research of course.)

Jeremy- You are a very thoughtful guy. I couldn't have said it better. I'm very impressed! Maybe you've got a new customer, I'll check out your site when I get a chance.

Unless you can see inside your intestines - or according to some claims, the very cells that line your intestine- your comparison doesn't hold.

Besides, your gastrointestinal tract is self-cleaning. And certainly nothing you eat other than fiber will keep things moving any more smoothly.


I may be extraordinary and have squeaky clean intestines; but I doubt it. If I was to go for a colonic, there would be plenty they could pump out of me. I'm willing to accept that this may not be a problem, but I'm also open to the possibility that it is. I like the idea of a good spring clean - it makes sense to me.

But I'm willing to be open minded and be convinced otherwise...


A liver detox? Have you even had a blood test to find out what is wrong with your liver, if anything? You know what? Fine, go nuts. I'm pretty tired of trying to warn people about potentially dangerous, unscientific voodoo. I've done this for years and no one ever listens until, say, their skin turns gray because they took 8g of collodial silver. Maybe I should just join the dark side and sell thirty-dollar bottles of sugar pills. Ugh.

I don't really care if it is 'potentially dangerous' - most things are. I want to know if it IS dangerous. And if it is, tell me why. If it's simply not proven, I will do what Jeremy did, and try it out for myself. If I feel better I'll be happy. If I feel worse I'll be upset. But I'll know.

But, yes, if you think this is going to cause me permanent damage, I'm interested in knowing why.

Just wanted to say thanks Jeremy. Your writing skills are excellent.

I remember in the not so distant past when meditation was labeled as quackery until the medical establishment started to study it and find positive connections between meditation and the physical effects it has on the body. So thousands of years of 'anectodal' evidence was discounted for all that time until the med community decided it had value? I'm sorry, but I'm not waiting for someone else to determine what has value and what doesn't.... I think I'll do that myself.

Who would have thought years ago that there was a link between oral health and heart disease? I'm sure the first few people who suggested this were laughed at by their so called 'colleagues'.

It's called a medical practice because it's just that.... practice. lol. It's not called medical absolute truth.

k

You mean the same people that prescribed Vioxx to millions of patients?

If you're looking for a Merck defender, you're not going to find one in me. Falsifying or alterting data to ensure a product is approved is antiscientific and morally reprehensible. The employees responsible should be charged with negligent homicide and the US branch of Merck should be bankrupted.


But "scientific evidence" really refers to a body of research based on clinical trials. The people conducting the experiments are human, the conductors are human, and the standard that is accepted and taken for granted is a by product of an entire industry. It is typical to just assume this industry is a gold standard because it has the word "research" associated with it, but the fact remains there is an established body formed by a popular opinion that follows a certain set of standards.

Jeremy, I think what you've done is great, and you're an inspiration to all of us, but I strongly disagree with many of your claims. I've never said science is infallible; on the contrary, the falsifiability of scientific research is the background of mordern epistomology. The difference is that those who publish results can be shown to be wrong, but purveyors or miracle pills and email forwards with the latest fasting regimen have no such corrective model.

Statements like "there is no benefit from starving" go against the grain of everything else you argue. You ask for scientific proof but then go against that very grain. For example ... no benefit from starving?

What about this ("intermittent fasting resulted in beneficial effects that met or exceeded those of caloric restriction") or this this ("a more definitive therapy may consist of a therapeutic fast, followed up by the protective diet as a maintenance regimen") etc. Yes, there is evidence.

I appreciate your research. But in the first study, fasting days were alternated with days of regular food intake. Perhaps this program would be beneficial and requires a close look. But you know as well as I do that most fasting programs occur over a week or more.

The second link is merely a hypothesis based on another researcher's findings; as such, it is of no value until it is properly tested.

It's like the classical argument between who is right, the medical doctor or the naturopath. Personally, after having a medical doctor tell me to start exercising and "watch what I eat" when I showed up weighing 195 pounds at 8% body fat (yes, I could see my abs) I realized that it is naive and ignorant to place our trust in what is published or part of the medical community.

I hope you found a different doctor; that guy is nuts. There are plenty of bad doctors. I merely posit that the proportion of incompentent MDs is far less than the proportion of incompetent naturopaths.

Science said the world was flat. Then it said the world was the center of the universe.

You're thinking of the Catholic church. Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth 200 years B.C.E., and Aristarchus of Samos first proposed a heliocentric solar system around the same times. Both of these ideas were decried by political and religious leaders, not scientists.

98% of what we know about the brain was only discovered in the past 6 years

That is quite a claim.

For example, that a table is solid is a fact only until you reach the sub-atomic level ... but then again, has anyone really experienced the sub-atomic level or do we just trust what comes out of the machines developed by the same humans who are prone to making mistakes?

We've used those machines to make pretty significant progress in our understanding of the physical model; if you think it's a coincidence that the things we make work - for instance, PET scanners and nuclear weapons - I don't know what to tell you.

Communism and Racism, even Genocide, is based on the collective consensus of thousands of individuals. Does that make it valid and right?

The "social sciences" aren't studied or implemented the way that physics, chemistry, and mathematics are. Your analogy is deeply flawed.

What is hard data? The Heisenberg uncertainty principle says that there is always something we don't know ... focus on one variable and the other blurs. Is there hard data that light is a particle? Is there hard data that it is a wave?

There's hard data that it's both.

My book was critiqued AND peer-reviewed ... again, does it make everything in it true and right? Or could it still just be my opinion?

Pardon my French, but goddamnit, no one is claiming that science is always unquestionably 100% right. The idea is that there is a method of determing the truth or falsehood of a claim, and scientific research is predicated on that method, whereas 99% of the utter crap that is sold under the banner of "wellness" is all anecdotal.

It may help you feel better about your argument to try to make it into something that is a pure truth

Please don't attack an opinion I don't hold.

http://www.sanoviv.com/medical_treatments.html

Oh my gosh. They mention ... botanical therapy. Orthomolecular nutrition (Linus Pauling received the nobel prize for this, yet the same people who respect his findings argue against taking a quality multivitamin ... another case of just taking what we believe and throwing out the facts that don't align) ... did they mention DETOXIFICATION? Yes, they did. They even said, "ridding the body of toxins." Surely these are naturopath quacks, right?

I would not go to Sanoviv if my life depended on it. There's a reason it's located in Mexico, where medical safety standards are quite a bit more "relaxed" than they are in U.S.

But let's talk about your claims on Linus Pauling. He received the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 1954, not for orthomolecular nutrition, but for "his research into the nature of the chemical bond and its application to the elucidation of the structure of complex substances."

Pauling did not epsouse massive doses of vitamin C and other nutrients until 1968. Please don't misrepresent his work or the Nobel academy.

How can you possibly discredit all ND's? And homeopathic methods?

Because NDs are not doctors. Studies showing homeopathy works have never been successfully replicated, and no one can tell the difference between homeopathically treated water and distilled water. If you can perform the latter, I strongly suggest you win a million dollars from the James Randi Educational Foundation for doing just that.

It doesn't seem to me you've spent any time actually researching natural healing modalities yet you dismiss it out of hand.

I have studied untenable claims in medicine for over eight years.
Chiropractic, accupuncture, herbs, massage, meditation, prayer, homepathy, chinese medicine in general- all quackery I presume?

Chriopractic medicine is 90% garbage. Acupuncture is useful only as a placebo effect for pain relief. Massages are nice. Meditation is fine although I make no claims as to its effects positive or negative. Prayer as a healing tool may be useful as a placebo effect, though double-blind studies have shown that when the patient does not know he or she is being prayed for, there is no difference between them and the control group. Chinese medicine in general is too broad a field to answer your question.

My questioning of processed foods and whey in particular doesn't seem dangerous to me, it seems cautious actually.

And questioning a weeklong regimen of lemon juice and molasses is what, then?

I think I'm done posting in this thread. The enmity towards and ignorance of the scientific method is staggering, and there has been a lot of misinformation. The stuff about Linus Pauling is particularly egregious, and I'm disappointed. Some studies are flawed, and some scientists and doctors are incompetent, but the method science uses is the best, most reliable way of finding out the truth. Scientific knowledge changes over time; that's the whole point of it. Our understanding of the universe will never be perfect, but it gets better every day.

You expect scientific research to be without flaw or it's useless, yet no one has told me what toxins they are so anxious to rid themselves of or how their detox plan works.

After reading all this, I think I should go on a hunger strike until someone admits they are wrong.

If you are interested in a good 'cleansing', might I suggested 2 bowls of Kashi's Wonderfully Tasty "Good Friends". You can thank me later. :tu:

The funny thing about this thread is that both sides are "right" as far as I'm concerned. Do homeopathic methods work? Maybe. Can the "scientific method" prove it doesn't? No. I think common sense should be used before using any of these "detoxifying" methods. If the program advises you to avoid drinking water for a week while running 10 miles a day, then it is not a good idea. On the other hand, fasting for 2 days may not help you, but it certainly won't kill you. Lemonade and molasses? Not something I'd choose to eat, but then again, I also don't take a multi-vitamin, eat protein powder, or supplement with creatine. Maybe I'd be bigger if I did, maybe not. The point is, most things in life cannot be pigeon-holed as good or bad. Usually they are both and neither.

Reeze - try the cleanse, just be careful to choose one that uses natural foods, allows for plenty of liquids, and if it involves fasting, refrain from training during the fast.

Well I guess we can all agree on a few things:

1. That we take in toxins on a daily basis through our food, the air we breath and even through our skin.

2. That our body has a natural process to rid itself of these toxins.

The thing that is being debated:

1. Whether or not a 'cleanse' or a 'fast' can help the body get rid of these toxins.

I think if you want to try the cleanse go ahead and try it. If they tell you that you have to take some supplements make sure you research what's going into your mouth. A simple fast is easy cause there's no crazy stuff to have to ingest..... I can agree that there are some snake-oil salesman and I personally won't go on any cleanse that tells me to take something that I don't feel safe ingesting. And when I say safe, I mean something that I've researched and have determined to be safe.

I'm with cashman in saying don't workout. You'll just be eating up lean mass if you're not taking in calories.

k

This should erase some of the questions about colon cleansing:

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=88