Cleanse - why you are lucky they don't work
Replies
-
Fois gras? I can't seem to get it.
I'm sure they have liver pate sandwiches at several places in California!I'd like a liver pate sandwich unfortunately, I'm sitting in California at the moment. Rather than try to nitpick at little things, why not admit that this brings out something you either had not understood, need to look at, or are willing to consider.
I understand it, and I think that the right cleanse really is not going to cause the liver to release any more intermediate metabolites than normal. In fact I think the opposite. A cleanse will increase the liver function from inorganic arsenic to the end metabolites, thus reducing the intermediate metabolites. But it's just a theory.
What is the right cleanse - please feel free to reference it and I will look into it openly. Are you telling us that a cleanse up regulates multiple enzyme (and non enzyme) pathways? Do we have a candidate treatment for hepatic insufficiency that medical research has been ignoring?
Not sure that what you are stating even makes it to a hypothesis - given that Ar(III) is both a end state metabolite and intermediate metabolite are the ratios different. In the arsenic poisoning events the treatment of choice has not been cleanses. I wonder why.
Yes, they are that healthy. Or compared to what?
But are the patients' livers that healthy?As to the As (III), it is one of the most basic metabolites of arsenic found in urine. Since it is the first step of methylation, occuring in the liver. I'm guessing it is leaving the liver. But here is a reference:
http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol84/mono84-6.pdf
What bio marker would you like to state improves with a cleanse that you want us to measure?
It sometimes happens, I use French/Spanish/English/German with some interchangeability.
Yes, I would go with reverse osmosis filters but they are expensive.Also, you mentioned one should filter drinking water. Please be aware that many filters do absolutely nothing to remove arsenic. Choose wisely, if it is an issue (for example, certain well waters).Peplum also means, in French, a large production film, a type of multicolored vast production of people, from the American/Italian films that had people wearing peplum. I intended its use in that sense -I also hesitated to use "populo" it seemed less to touch on the productive/marketing sense of cleanses. But feel free to challenge my vocabulary, English isn't my first language; however, with respect to cleanses, I invite you to stop the argumentum ad hominem - address the subject, don't try to challenge my vocabulary or whether I'm making up things.
You've gotten dressed down, sans peplum, twice.
Peplum in English only means a part of clothing so it doesn't really fit . You have been making things up in most of your posts. I like to state when you are since most of them are assumptions Also you have disregarded some of mine where I was addressing the subject, not that it matters.
As to making things up, each time you've stated so I've given a reference. I've also stated where things are unknown and presented where uncertainty exists but making things up? No.
For peplum - here is the definition: see French (2) - http://dictionnaire.reverso.net/francais-definition/péplum
Here is the Wikipedia definition of the French word. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Péplum
Wouldn't you consider language a fluid thing and some words have multiple meanings and a certain play across languages/cultures?0 -
The entire value of this thread hangs on the definition of peplum.0
-
nos pontificatus habuerunt ignotae tamen indueris peplum.The entire value of this thread hangs on the definition of peplum.0 -
nos pontificatus habuerunt ignotae tamen indueris peplum.The entire value of this thread hangs on the definition of peplum.
We are pontificating over the use of peplum? or something like that. I think that is latin, but ever studied it.0 -
nos pontificatus habuerunt ignotae tamen indueris peplum.The entire value of this thread hangs on the definition of peplum.
We are pontificating over the use of peplum? or something like that. I think that is latin, but ever studied it.
We are pontificating over the unknown
While wearing a skirt
I studied it very little and very late. Still part of the French curriculum my oldest daughter saw.
0 -
Science > Hippie mutha fuka's0
-
A "law" is an irrefutable conclusion of scientific data and evidence, collaborated by the scientific community. For every test, the exact same results will occur and the exact same conclusions can be agree upon.
The theory of evolution has not been proven, therefore it cannot be 100% irrefutable. This is why we cannot dismiss the theory of creation. (altho MORE evidence exists to support this theory)
The theory of creation has not been proven, therefore it cannot be 100% irrefutable. This is why we cannot dismiss the theory of evolution.
NEITHER OF THE ABOVE ARE LAWS.
The law of gravity, however, has been proven, therefore it cannot be disputed.
No. A law is a simple fact that exists universally It can be demonstrated with repeated successful testing, but it is not a former theory that has accumulated enough evidence to become "proven". That is a misunderstanding of how the scientific method works. Theories can become generally accepted when they have enough evidence behind them, but they never (or are they expected to) become laws. Both are informative and useful in science.
This. RAT for the win.
Physics joke: Laws are broken to be meant.
^^^i almost spit out the red wine in my mouth and all over the hotel room sheets. I think I adore you.0 -
nos pontificatus habuerunt ignotae tamen indueris peplum.The entire value of this thread hangs on the definition of peplum.
We are pontificating over the use of peplum? or something like that. I think that is latin, but ever studied it.
We are pontificating over the unknown
While wearing a skirt
ROFLMAO!!! Almost spit coffee!0 -
This. RAT for the win.
Physics joke: Laws are broken to be meant.
^^^i almost spit out the red wine in my mouth and all over the hotel room sheets. I think I adore you.
He has been on a roll with the nerd wit!! :drinker:0 -
Fois gras was banned.
Fois gras? I can't seem to get it.I'm sure they have liver pate sandwiches at several places in California!
I understand it, and I think that the right cleanse really is not going to cause the liver to release any more intermediate metabolites than normal. In fact I think the opposite. A cleanse will increase the liver function from inorganic arsenic to the end metabolites, thus reducing the intermediate metabolites. But it's just a theory.
California's Foie Gras Ban Goes Into Effect 7/1/2012
http://abcnews.go.com/US/californias-foie-gras-ban-effect/story?id=16687059
Why would you want to eat diseased liver? I've never tried it but I'm guessing I would prefer braunschweiger and liverwurst.
The right cleanse would be one with all the vitamins and minerals especially sulfur and supplements to help the Cytochrome P450 enzymes and the conjugation pathway work at optimum levels. It's fairly complicated and I don't have it all written out. Maybe I'll write a book.What is the right cleanse - please feel free to reference it and I will look into it openly. Are you telling us that a cleanse up regulates multiple enzyme (and non enzyme) pathways? Do we have a candidate treatment for hepatic insufficiency that medical research has been ignoring?
This is a start:
Methylation:Methionine, Co-factors (Magnesium, Folic Acid, B-12, Methyl Donors), Lipotropic nutrients (choline, methionine, betaine, folic acid, vitamin B12)
I thought Ar(III) was just intermediate metabolite that the liver releases when it can't complete the phase II detoxification, not an end state metabolite?Not sure that what you are stating even makes it to a hypothesis - given that Ar(III) is both a end state metabolite and intermediate metabolite are the ratios different. In the arsenic poisoning events the treatment of choice has not been cleanses. I wonder why.
Prescribing a cleanse for arsenic poisoning would be like prescribing a heart health diet for a heart attack. It's a preventative diet, not a treatment.
How do you know if they are healthy?
Yes, they are that healthy. Or compared to what?
But are the patients' livers that healthy?As to the As (III), it is one of the most basic metabolites of arsenic found in urine. Since it is the first step of methylation, occuring in the liver. I'm guessing it is leaving the liver. But here is a reference:
http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol84/mono84-6.pdf
What bio marker would you like to state improves with a cleanse that you want us to measure?
The amount of glutathione-S-transferase would be important. So would levels of B-12 and Folic acid for methylation.
It sometimes happens, I use French/Spanish/English/German with some interchangeability.Peplum also means, in French, a large production film, a type of multicolored vast production of people, from the American/Italian films that had people wearing peplum. I intended its use in that sense -I also hesitated to use "populo" it seemed less to touch on the productive/marketing sense of cleanses. But feel free to challenge my vocabulary, English isn't my first language; however, with respect to cleanses, I invite you to stop the argumentum ad hominem - address the subject, don't try to challenge my vocabulary or whether I'm making up things.
You've gotten dressed down, sans peplum, twice.
Peplum in English only means a part of clothing so it doesn't really fit . You have been making things up in most of your posts. I like to state when you are since most of them are assumptions Also you have disregarded some of mine where I was addressing the subject, not that it matters.
As to making things up, each time you've stated so I've given a reference. I've also stated where things are unknown and presented where uncertainty exists but making things up? No.
For peplum - here is the definition: see French (2) - http://dictionnaire.reverso.net/francais-definition/péplum
Here is the Wikipedia definition of the French word. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Péplum
Wouldn't you consider language a fluid thing and some words have multiple meanings and a certain play across languages/cultures?
Some of the connections in your posts seem to be made up. Saying that a person is lucky a cleanse doesn't work is a guess and that arsenic would behave differently in a person on a cleanse is a guess.
The fluidity of languages would be much more pronounced in Europe, not so much in the U.S. Maybe in some areas with multilingual people.0 -
cleanse skirts only $29.95.The entire value of this thread hangs on the definition of peplum.
anti-cleanse skirts $39.95.0 -
where are the hippies?Science > Hippie mutha fuka's
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.0 -
where are the hippies?Science > Hippie mutha fuka's
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
it is in their interests... if they worked they'd patent them and make a lot of money
Go on, what's the science that proves that cleanses work
Also, how did all the Homo habilises survive when they didn't know how to cleanse? They ate scavenged meat (hunting came later in human evolution) so would have ingested a lot more toxins than modern people do.0 -
and I thought today was just another boring Monday...0
-
How are they going to patent fruits and vegetables? I guess they could genetically modify the seeds and sue people for trying to reuse their seeds when they get cross pollinated?
where are the hippies?Science > Hippie mutha fuka's
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
it is in their interests... if they worked they'd patent them and make a lot of money
I said that it can be proven not that it's been done yet. Obviously some sort of study. I'm not sure about the logistics of a food study. I'm not really interested in setting it up since I already believe in them. It's not my fault if the masses remain ignorant. I try to help as many as I can.Go on, what's the science that proves that cleanses work
Homo habilises are extinct. Well at least I haven't seen any but who can be sure about some people?Also, how did all the Homo habilises survive when they didn't know how to cleanse? They ate scavenged meat (hunting came later in human evolution) so would have ingested a lot more toxins than modern people do.
Our ancestors would have had little pollution besides their own feces. Sure plenty died of disease. Their diet would be a cleansing diet, not many processed foods and tons of sugar and fat with little nutritional value. And they would have gotten more exercise then the average person today.0 -
where are the hippies?Science > Hippie mutha fuka's
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
So, now you are into tin foil hat territory. The drug companies are always under pressure to bring new products to market. Older products pass into "generic" categories and the origninal patents no longer apply and profits are erroded. If science could prove cleanses worked, they would be systhesized into a product and sold. There would be a race to get approval based on the trails and a race to market. If could science could prove it, there would be substantial commercial incentive to do so. It would be in the best interests of the drug companies to do so.
Advocates for cleanses like you always make this kind of statement that neither makes logical sense nor can be proven.
edited for spelling.0 -
This thread is only 5 pages long and it was started over 24 hours ago? For shame. Methinks many are still sleeping off St. Paddy's overindulgences. :bigsmile:0
-
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
How can you possibly say that?
It's like me saying that science can prove that sticking my finger in my ear can cure indigestion, not that it's been done yet.0 -
where are the hippies?Science > Hippie mutha fuka's
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
So, now you are into tin foil hat territory. The drug companies are always under pressure to bring new products to market. Older products pass into "generic" categories and the original patents no longer apply and profits are eroded. If science could prove cleanses worked, they would be synthesized into a product and sold. There would be a race to get approval based on the trails and a race to market. If could science could prove it, there would be substantial commercial incentive to do so. It would be in the best interests of the drug companies to do so.
Advocates for cleanes like you always make this kind of statement that neither makes logical sense nor can be proven.
edited for spelling.
They already try to synthesize cleanses into a product but it doesn't really work. Most of the vitamins are lost in dehydration. Extracts are usually just one dimension of a whole food.0 -
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
How can you possibly say that?
It's like me saying that science can prove that sticking my finger in my ear can cure indigestion, not that it's been done yet.
For cleanses we can test vitamin and mineral levels and adjust the cleanse according to that. Get enough people involved with health issues and it can be proved. Sort of like Gerson therapy for tuberculosis. Now sticking your finger in your ear might be hard to measure anything. Maybe the level of pain?0 -
I'm glad because it's difficult keeping up with a thread that gets hot. Man, I drank way too many green smoothies!This thread is only 5 pages long and it was started over 24 hours ago? For shame. Methinks many are still sleeping off St. Paddy's overindulgences. :bigsmile:0 -
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
How can you possibly say that?
It's like me saying that science can prove that sticking my finger in my ear can cure indigestion, not that it's been done yet.
For cleanses we can test vitamin and mineral levels and adjust the cleanse according to that. Get enough people involved with health issues and it can be proved. Sort of like Gerson therapy for tuberculosis. Now sticking your finger in your ear might be hard to measure anything. Maybe the level of pain?
You missed my point. Or, is your point that they have not been tested due to some kind of conspiracy?0 -
Because it's yummy. And it isn't diseased, ducks normally achieve loaded livers in migration phases. And before we enter into a debate about gavage - I'm not for it, I get fois gras sans gavage (from Orleans or Spain) I brought my own, for my mother, but the stupid ban means I can't this type either. Meh, not the end of the world. Liverwurst is something totally different - it's like telling me to get a brownie when I can't find cheesecake in France.
Fois gras was banned.
Fois gras? I can't seem to get it.I'm sure they have liver pate sandwiches at several places in California!
I understand it, and I think that the right cleanse really is not going to cause the liver to release any more intermediate metabolites than normal. In fact I think the opposite. A cleanse will increase the liver function from inorganic arsenic to the end metabolites, thus reducing the intermediate metabolites. But it's just a theory.
California's Foie Gras Ban Goes Into Effect 7/1/2012
http://abcnews.go.com/US/californias-foie-gras-ban-effect/story?id=16687059
Why would you want to eat diseased liver? I've never tried it but I'm guessing I would prefer braunschweiger and liverwurst.
Excellent. Maybe you should write a book. That right there sounds like a steak with broccoli. Or fois gras. Certainly not the current set of recommended cleanses. Thanks for outlining those.
The right cleanse would be one with all the vitamins and minerals especially sulfur and supplements to help the Cytochrome P450 enzymes and the conjugation pathway work at optimum levels. It's fairly complicated and I don't have it all written out. Maybe I'll write a book.What is the right cleanse - please feel free to reference it and I will look into it openly. Are you telling us that a cleanse up regulates multiple enzyme (and non enzyme) pathways? Do we have a candidate treatment for hepatic insufficiency that medical research has been ignoring?
This is a start:
Methylation:Methionine, Co-factors (Magnesium, Folic Acid, B-12, Methyl Donors), Lipotropic nutrients (choline, methionine, betaine, folic acid, vitamin B12)
Apparently not, urothelial cells also metabolize As (III) and I'd suggest that instead of "release" you consider competition of clearance rates and enzymatic reaction rates.
I thought As(III) was just intermediate metabolite that the liver releases when it can't complete the phase II detoxification, not an end state metabolite?Not sure that what you are stating even makes it to a hypothesis - given that As (III) is both a end state metabolite and intermediate metabolite are the ratios different. In the arsenic poisoning events the treatment of choice has not been cleanses. I wonder why.
Prescribing a cleanse for arsenic poisoning would be like prescribing a heart health diet for a heart attack. It's a preventative diet, not a treatment.
Ok, agreed. Then as a preventative diet why not eat broccoli extract (or the other components of this cleanse) continuously? How does a three day or 10 day cleanse work better, as a preventative treatment, than a continuous diet. Taking your example, as preventative diet for a heart attack, no one would prescribe a diet of healthy eating for only 3-10 days.
I don't know that they are healthy, the point being, we don't know that they aren't either.
How do you know if they are healthy?
Yes, they are that healthy. Or compared to what?
But are the patients' livers that healthy?As to the As (III), it is one of the most basic metabolites of arsenic found in urine. Since it is the first step of methylation, occuring in the liver. I'm guessing it is leaving the liver. But here is a reference:
http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol84/mono84-6.pdf
What bio marker would you like to state improves with a cleanse that you want us to measure?
The amount of glutathione-S-transferase would be important. So would levels of B-12 and Folic acid for methylation.
Ligands? (Giving my age away - that what we called GST in my day)
Are you suggesting an increase in GST would be a sign of beneficial effects - Please consider this:
http://archsurg.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=390507
It sometimes happens, I use French/Spanish/English/German with some interchangeability.Peplum also means, in French, a large production film, a type of multicolored vast production of people, from the American/Italian films that had people wearing peplum. I intended its use in that sense -I also hesitated to use "populo" it seemed less to touch on the productive/marketing sense of cleanses. But feel free to challenge my vocabulary, English isn't my first language; however, with respect to cleanses, I invite you to stop the argumentum ad hominem - address the subject, don't try to challenge my vocabulary or whether I'm making up things.
You've gotten dressed down, sans peplum, twice.
Peplum in English only means a part of clothing so it doesn't really fit . You have been making things up in most of your posts. I like to state when you are since most of them are assumptions Also you have disregarded some of mine where I was addressing the subject, not that it matters.
As to making things up, each time you've stated so I've given a reference. I've also stated where things are unknown and presented where uncertainty exists but making things up? No.
For peplum - here is the definition: see French (2) - http://dictionnaire.reverso.net/francais-definition/péplum
Here is the Wikipedia definition of the French word. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Péplum
Wouldn't you consider language a fluid thing and some words have multiple meanings and a certain play across languages/cultures?
Some of the connections in your posts seem to be made up. Saying that a person is lucky a cleanse doesn't work is a guess and that arsenic would behave differently in a person on a cleanse is a guess.
The fluidity of languages would be much more pronounced in Europe, not so much in the U.S. Maybe in some areas with multilingual people.
Yes, it is a guess, I readily admit it. Everything pretty much is, but I can reference every one of those steps from medical research. Saying that a current cleanses (lemonade or whatever) as has been done here helps with heavy metal toxin processing is pie-in-the-sky, thumb-in-your-eye falsehood. There is no evidence of this. Will a specific cleanse provide a benefit in the future? Most likely - but will it be better than just including certain foods or supplements into your diet? Not convinced.
On the whole, I appreciate our interaction - you've brought the level of discussion up.
As to the fluidity of language it is going on around us constantly. The cross-lingual stuff is certainly very present, more so, in Europe, where I live mostly, but 80-90% of my family and childhood friends from the US and Mexico are trilingual or more. We are right in your back yard.0 -
where are the hippies?Science > Hippie mutha fuka's
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
So, now you are into tin foil hat territory. The drug companies are always under pressure to bring new products to market. Older products pass into "generic" categories and the original patents no longer apply and profits are eroded. If science could prove cleanses worked, they would be synthesized into a product and sold. There would be a race to get approval based on the trails and a race to market. If could science could prove it, there would be substantial commercial incentive to do so. It would be in the best interests of the drug companies to do so.
Advocates for cleanes like you always make this kind of statement that neither makes logical sense nor can be proven.
edited for spelling.
They already try to synthesize cleanses into a product but it doesn't really work. Most of the vitamins are lost in dehydration. Extracts are usually just one dimension of a whole food.
Ok, so which is it? It's not in their best interests? Or They already tried to and failed? And what proof source do you have for your choice?0 -
There are such things as science hippies.
Just sayin.0 -
I disagree with gravity. Also numbers. It's just a theory, I mean have you ever counted to a trillion?
Yeah how do we know numbers exists and who can even contemplate a trillion. I'm gonna stop using gravity and numbers until someone can prove to me they work. These are good questions, and thank you OP I will refrain from eating arsenic at this time.
Can I still eat cyanide, hydrogen sulfide, and rotten carcasses?
BTW I had a paristologist tell me once that no one in the world would ever be sick again if we would just quit eating Sh-t. I think thats good advice.0 -
well if you are talking about testing them like drugs its not going to work. You need the full spectrum of nutrients not just an isolated one.
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
How can you possibly say that?
It's like me saying that science can prove that sticking my finger in my ear can cure indigestion, not that it's been done yet.
For cleanses we can test vitamin and mineral levels and adjust the cleanse according to that. Get enough people involved with health issues and it can be proved. Sort of like Gerson therapy for tuberculosis. Now sticking your finger in your ear might be hard to measure anything. Maybe the level of pain?
You missed my point. Or, is your point that they have not been tested due to some kind of conspiracy?0 -
How are they going to patent fruits and vegetables? I guess they could genetically modify the seeds and sue people for trying to reuse their seeds when they get cross pollinated?
where are the hippies?Science > Hippie mutha fuka's
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
it is in their interests... if they worked they'd patent them and make a lot of money
If all you are saying is that eating fruit and veg is good for your liver and kidneys, then I wouldn't disagree with you, and neither does the British government or national health service, as they regularly encourage people to get their "five a day" fruit and veg servings. They even offer guidance as to what counts as a whole serving of fruit or veg. So that's clearly not information that's being "suppressed" because it's "not in their interests" for people to know it.
However if you're saying that there are specific ways/regimes of vegetable eating that will do more for your liver and kidneys than just eating whatever fruits and veg you happen to enjoy eating, that's where I would disagree. And I would point out that particular blends can be patented, and regimes can be copyrighted, and both can be sold (and in fact have been and are). So there's no vested interest in trying to pretend it doesn't work if it did work. People manage to patent and copyright them even though they don't work. If it did work, then big pharma would patent the particular blends and sell them, and the instructions for how to do them would be published in peer-reviewed medical journals.
I said that it can be proven not that it's been done yet. Obviously some sort of study. I'm not sure about the logistics of a food study. I'm not really interested in setting it up since I already believe in them. It's not my fault if the masses remain ignorant. I try to help as many as I can.Go on, what's the science that proves that cleanses work
Call me cynical, but "it can be proven but it's not been done yet" doesn't really cut it.
And the masses are ignorant of what? Something that hasn't been proven yet? And that has no basis in human physiology either (other than the fact that eating fresh fruit and veg is good for your internal organs generally)... what's there to be educated about? No-one's proven the existence of unicorns yet, does that mean the masses are remaining ignorant for not believing in them?
Homo habilises are extinct. Well at least I haven't seen any but who can be sure about some people?Also, how did all the Homo habilises survive when they didn't know how to cleanse? They ate scavenged meat (hunting came later in human evolution) so would have ingested a lot more toxins than modern people do.
Our ancestors would have had little pollution besides their own feces. Sure plenty died of disease. Their diet would be a cleansing diet, not many processed foods and tons of sugar and fat with little nutritional value. And they would have gotten more exercise then the average person today.
Homo habilis is pseudo-extinct, not extinct, because it evolved into Homo ergaster which evolved (ultimately) into us. in other words, they didn't die out, they survived and bred, and the taller ones with bigger brains and better adapted hands for toolmaking became Homo ergaster.
Are you familiar with the diet of Homo habilis? They smashed up the bones of lion kill after the lions had finished, and probably had to chase away vultures with sticks and stones to get at it. They were not able to use fire so ate it all raw.
Can I do a cleanse diet with the raw bone marrow of lion kill, that's got lion saliva and vulture poo on it then?
Fire kills bacteria, many kinds of bacteria release toxins. Those toxins would have been in the food that Homo habilis consumed. Yet they managed to survive and evolve into Homo ergaster without knowing how to cleanse their livers. yes, they would have eaten plant foods, and yes this would have given them micronutrients that benefitted their organs and their immune system... but how is this any different to following the advice by most doctors (and even the British government) to eat plenty of fruit and veg? What difference does a "cleanse" make if a cleanse is just fruit and veg anyway?0 -
well if you are talking about testing them like drugs its not going to work. You need the full spectrum of nutrients not just an isolated one.
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
How can you possibly say that?
It's like me saying that science can prove that sticking my finger in my ear can cure indigestion, not that it's been done yet.
For cleanses we can test vitamin and mineral levels and adjust the cleanse according to that. Get enough people involved with health issues and it can be proved. Sort of like Gerson therapy for tuberculosis. Now sticking your finger in your ear might be hard to measure anything. Maybe the level of pain?
You missed my point. Or, is your point that they have not been tested due to some kind of conspiracy?
But you said science can prove it...how would it prove it?0 -
well if you are talking about testing them like drugs its not going to work. You need the full spectrum of nutrients not just an isolated one.
Science can prove cleanses work but it's not in the best interest of the drug corporations so I don't know who is going to pay for it.
How can you possibly say that?
It's like me saying that science can prove that sticking my finger in my ear can cure indigestion, not that it's been done yet.
For cleanses we can test vitamin and mineral levels and adjust the cleanse according to that. Get enough people involved with health issues and it can be proved. Sort of like Gerson therapy for tuberculosis. Now sticking your finger in your ear might be hard to measure anything. Maybe the level of pain?
You missed my point. Or, is your point that they have not been tested due to some kind of conspiracy?
but how does that differ from a healthy balanced diet that gives you the full spectrum of nutrients?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 423 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions