Colonic Irrigation
25 October 2005, 07:00 PM
#62
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
It would be incorrect to assume that being a Doctor makes you correct and I'm certainly not arguing on that basis.
Whilst I'm not a gastroenterologist, I will point out that I've not seen plaques at endoscopy or on scans, and I've not seen any histology of any either. Searching the medical literature doesn't find the phrase used at all. Searching google finds lots of references from people who stand to gain from colonic irrigation products.
http://www.quackwatch.org/01Quackery...cs/gastro.html
http://www.snopes.com/toxins/fecal.htm
Whilst I'm not a gastroenterologist, I will point out that I've not seen plaques at endoscopy or on scans, and I've not seen any histology of any either. Searching the medical literature doesn't find the phrase used at all. Searching google finds lots of references from people who stand to gain from colonic irrigation products.
http://www.quackwatch.org/01Quackery...cs/gastro.html
http://www.snopes.com/toxins/fecal.htm
25 October 2005, 07:13 PM
#63
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rannoch
I remember a GP when I was a student - he was categoric in that nematodes were passed into the body by eating sugar.
Of course, being a doctor he was clearly correct
Or maybe post mortem analysis might have more to say on this subject - particularly the amount of colonic plaque removed from the very famous meat eating overweight Elvis
Of course, being a doctor he was clearly correct
Or maybe post mortem analysis might have more to say on this subject - particularly the amount of colonic plaque removed from the very famous meat eating overweight Elvis
Why would they remove 'plaque' during a post mortem? A PM is to find the cause of death or rule out foul play. Who ever told you this 'has left the building'
I agree with JB. I don't rule out alternative treatments but I see peoples guts cut open EVERY week and have NEVER seen a 'colonic plaque' let alone 5 lbs of 'crud' in 10 years. But I'm sure the person who sells you this therapy is far more likley to tell you the truth!
Its just a money making spin
But hey if you want a big rubber object shoved up your gary...
25 October 2005, 07:16 PM
#64
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Deep Singh
I see peoples guts cut open EVERY week and have NEVER seen a 'colonic plaque' let alone 5 lbs of 'crud' in 10 years.
Imagine that.
25 October 2005, 07:48 PM
#66
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bradford
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting claim. Wonder if the isotope swallowing studies would back this up
The build up of significant 'colonic plaque' is typically related to a low fibre, high meat content diet
Is my reading of this that your opinion on the matter (john btw) is that you see no evidence of any risk of harm but also see no evidence of any worthwhile gain from the procedure?
25 October 2005, 08:42 PM
#69
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bradford
Posts: 13,720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read both of them in full John and they certainly seem quite clear cut. They are also written in a far more critically objective style that the 'for' reading I have been doing on the internet. On this basis I have to agree there seems little evidence that any normal healthy person would particularly benefit from a colonic. As for my situation I would probably be best to switch for a week or so to a diet high in dietry fibre when I stop the high protien/fat program of eating I'm currently on in order to get things moving and resume normal service. You'll appreciate with little more than 5-10g of fibre a day I'm somewhat irregular just now
All this said, I got as far as this sentance before I ditched the colonic idea....Some propoponents have advocated that the tube be inserted as much as 30 inches
F**K THAT!!!
All this said, I got as far as this sentance before I ditched the colonic idea....Some propoponents have advocated that the tube be inserted as much as 30 inches
F**K THAT!!!
25 October 2005, 10:28 PM
#70
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: same time, different place
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
How about this one? "If the equipment is not adequately sterilized between treatments, disease germs from one person's large intestine can be transmitted to others. Several outbreaks of serious infections have been reported, including one in which contaminated equipment caused amebiasis in 36 people, 6 of whom died following bowel perforation."
Niiiiice...
Niiiiice...
26 October 2005, 12:58 AM
#71
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 15,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saxo Boy,
your suggestion of a high fibre diet and a lot of water is probably your best shot.
As for the articles being objective - I struggle with any objective observer who describes something as nonsense. Indeed something that is the subject of hot debate in the gastro-intestinal community. As for a 30in tube - that sounds outright bloody dangerous!
Oh well - it wasn't that long ago that highly qualified doctors were recommending cigarettes as an excellent expectorant to help clear the lungs. How times change
Good luck with the fruit and veg
Rannoch
your suggestion of a high fibre diet and a lot of water is probably your best shot.
As for the articles being objective - I struggle with any objective observer who describes something as nonsense. Indeed something that is the subject of hot debate in the gastro-intestinal community. As for a 30in tube - that sounds outright bloody dangerous!
Oh well - it wasn't that long ago that highly qualified doctors were recommending cigarettes as an excellent expectorant to help clear the lungs. How times change
Good luck with the fruit and veg
Rannoch
26 October 2005, 08:55 AM
#72
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The landmark smoking study was a 20 year follow up from 1934 to 1954. There was no doubt after that. [1]
The article contains the word nonsense once, and provides a further reference to back it up. [2]
Let's hear a reasoned rebuttal of it, since if I dislike the style of most alternative medicine papers I would stop reading on the first sentence as I find they are generally not peer reviewed and in a rather emotive style.
--
[1] http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...i?artid=437141
[2] http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/fitforlife.html
The article contains the word nonsense once, and provides a further reference to back it up. [2]
Let's hear a reasoned rebuttal of it, since if I dislike the style of most alternative medicine papers I would stop reading on the first sentence as I find they are generally not peer reviewed and in a rather emotive style.
--
[1] http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...i?artid=437141
[2] http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/fitforlife.html
26 October 2005, 09:43 AM
#73
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Don't see a problem with 30 inches of tube into the colon when done for strong indications with full consent under camera guidance by a trained professional licensed under the Medical Act 1983.
Between 70 and 90% of colonoscopies reach the caecum which is between two and three times the distance of concern.
Between 70 and 90% of colonoscopies reach the caecum which is between two and three times the distance of concern.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lee247
Non Scooby Related
7
04 June 2012 05:04 PM
