Re: Colon Cleanse Product

Orac said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
Toby Joe <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But it doesn't help much
with bringing any evidence to light and discussing it further, so that
we may all have the chance to learn a little from the discussion.

It's hard to bring evidence to light when you won't even produce any to
support your assertions.

Indeed.

Toby asserts that colonics are an important part of an overall plan to
have a healthy colon and reduce the incidence of disease.

However when repeatedly asked for evidence of this assertion she does
a "song and dance".

Toby realizes that she does not have any evidence to support her
assertion so she attempts to create a diversion to derail the
discussion. And then she manipulatively tries to shift the blame onto
the skeptic for causing problems in discussion.

This is typical behavior of many altie posters here.

Aloha,

Rich

-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------

The best defense to logic is ignorance

Orac said:

In any case, how do you know, given that you haven't even TRIED to
present any evidence to support your assertions?

I've presented this twice now.
Here it is again:

J Chin Med Assoc. 2003 May;66(5):282-7.
A potential alternative treatment of uncomplicated painful diverticular
disease by trans-colonoscopic irrigation technique: a preliminary report.

Chen WS, Lin JK.
Division of Colorectal Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, National
Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.

BACKGROUND:
Colonic diverticular disease is a common disorder in elder
patients. Medical treatment was usually recommended as the first line
management for this disease. However, the recurrence rate of such disorder
is still high. In patients with severe complications such as abscess or
fulminant inflammation, non-invasive diagnostic examination, abdominal CT
scan for example, is recommended. Its most common symptom is repeated
abdominal pain with disturbance of bowel habit. Many patients are found to
be with diverticular disease only after colonoscopic examination. The aim
of this study is to introduce a new irrigation-draining method and to
evaluate its efficacy in treatment of uncomplicated painful colonic
diverticular disease.

METHODS:
To reduce the risk of recurrence of acute diverticulitis
and other severe complications, we introduce a transcolonoscopic irrigation
technique for patients of uncomplicated diverticular disease by flushing
out the obstructed fecalith from the diverticular sac in order to improve
the drainage from the obstructed diverticular sac.

RESULTS:
Thirty-two patients
of uncomplicated painful diverticular disease with obstructed fecalith
impacted were treated by this technique. Clinical symptom improved in all
of them and no complications developed during the mean follow-up period of
46 months.

CONCLUSION:
The results of this preliminary study suggest that this
technique accomplished in the colonoscopic examination without additional
therapeutic procedures. It provides another potential alternative to the
conventional medical treatment for patients with uncomplicated diverticular
disease.
http://tinyurl.com/2s9py
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=A
bstract&list_uids=12908570

--
http://costofwar.com/
www.unicef.org/sowc02/g31.htm

On 01 Apr 2004 01:29:46 GMT, Toby Joe <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Orac said:

In any case, how do you know, given that you haven't even TRIED to
present any evidence to support your assertions?

I've presented this twice now.

And I responded to this. But Toby ignored it. I predict that Toby is
going to claim that she either put me in her kill file or is ignoring
my posts. Just watch.

Here it is again:

Comment: There was no control group to compare results. It also does
not talk about how they determined clinical symptom improvement. There
also obviously was no blinding of the study.

To make this a decent study one would have one group that had a real
transcolonic irrigation and another (placebo) group that had a sham
transcolonic irrigation so that the patients would not know which they
were receiving. And then you have the people who rate improvement
blind to who was in treatment group and who was in control group.

Having said that it appears common sense that if a person is
experiencing pain secondary to irritation by something lodged in
diverticula then dislodging it will lead to improvement. But this is a
very specialized situation and certainly not a reason to routinely do
colonics if you are chronically constipated or for some other reason.

Aloha,

Rich

Quoted message said:

Here it is again:

J Chin Med Assoc. 2003 May;66(5):282-7.
A potential alternative treatment of uncomplicated painful diverticular
disease by trans-colonoscopic irrigation technique: a preliminary report.

Chen WS, Lin JK.
Division of Colorectal Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, National
Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.

BACKGROUND:
Colonic diverticular disease is a common disorder in elder
patients. Medical treatment was usually recommended as the first line
management for this disease. However, the recurrence rate of such disorder
is still high. In patients with severe complications such as abscess or
fulminant inflammation, non-invasive diagnostic examination, abdominal CT
scan for example, is recommended. Its most common symptom is repeated
abdominal pain with disturbance of bowel habit. Many patients are found to
be with diverticular disease only after colonoscopic examination. The aim
of this study is to introduce a new irrigation-draining method and to
evaluate its efficacy in treatment of uncomplicated painful colonic
diverticular disease.

METHODS:
To reduce the risk of recurrence of acute diverticulitis
and other severe complications, we introduce a transcolonoscopic irrigation
technique for patients of uncomplicated diverticular disease by flushing
out the obstructed fecalith from the diverticular sac in order to improve
the drainage from the obstructed diverticular sac.

RESULTS:
Thirty-two patients
of uncomplicated painful diverticular disease with obstructed fecalith
impacted were treated by this technique. Clinical symptom improved in all
of them and no complications developed during the mean follow-up period of
46 months.

CONCLUSION:
The results of this preliminary study suggest that this
technique accomplished in the colonoscopic examination without additional
therapeutic procedures. It provides another potential alternative to the
conventional medical treatment for patients with uncomplicated diverticular
disease.
http://tinyurl.com/2s9py
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=A
bstract&list_uids=12908570

-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------

The best defense to logic is ignorance

In article <[email hidden]>,

Toby Joe said:

Orac said:

In any case, how do you know, given that you haven't even TRIED to
present any evidence to support your assertions?

I've presented this twice now.
Here it is again:

J Chin Med Assoc. 2003 May;66(5):282-7.
A potential alternative treatment of uncomplicated painful diverticular
disease by trans-colonoscopic irrigation technique: a preliminary report.

Chen WS, Lin JK.
Division of Colorectal Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, National
Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.

BACKGROUND:
Colonic diverticular disease is a common disorder in elder
patients. Medical treatment was usually recommended as the first line
management for this disease. However, the recurrence rate of such disorder
is still high. In patients with severe complications such as abscess or
fulminant inflammation, non-invasive diagnostic examination, abdominal CT
scan for example, is recommended. Its most common symptom is repeated
abdominal pain with disturbance of bowel habit. Many patients are found to
be with diverticular disease only after colonoscopic examination. The aim
of this study is to introduce a new irrigation-draining method and to
evaluate its efficacy in treatment of uncomplicated painful colonic
diverticular disease.

METHODS:
To reduce the risk of recurrence of acute diverticulitis
and other severe complications, we introduce a transcolonoscopic irrigation
technique for patients of uncomplicated diverticular disease by flushing
out the obstructed fecalith from the diverticular sac in order to improve
the drainage from the obstructed diverticular sac.

RESULTS:
Thirty-two patients
of uncomplicated painful diverticular disease with obstructed fecalith
impacted were treated by this technique. Clinical symptom improved in all
of them and no complications developed during the mean follow-up period of
46 months.

CONCLUSION:
The results of this preliminary study suggest that this
technique accomplished in the colonoscopic examination without additional
therapeutic procedures. It provides another potential alternative to the
conventional medical treatment for patients with uncomplicated diverticular
disease.
http://tinyurl.com/2s9py
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=A
bstract&list_uids=12908570

Apples and oranges. This study does not describe purging, enemas, or
flushing, as advocated by you and other alties. They did COLONOSCOPIES
on all of these patients, an INVASIVE medical procedure, fer crissakes!
During the colonoscopy, they used the irrigation port of the colonoscope
to dislodge fecaliths under direct colonoscopic vision. The technique
described is NOT the same thing as purges, flushes, or enemas! It is
quite different and involves irrigating only the diverticulum with the
fecalith in it with a relatively small amount of irrigation. (If you've
ever done colonoscopy--as I have during my training--or seen one done,
or even read a little bit about how colonoscopies are done, you'd know
that.) It is about as un-altie as it gets.

In any case, it's not even a very good study. For one thing, there was
no control group. There is no description of what criteria were used to
determine which patients underwent this procedure. (The way it should
have been done is to randomize patients with known diverticular disease
having colonoscopy to undergo the fecalith removal/irrigation versus
doing only a diagnostic colonoscopy. Besides, using the irrigation port
of the colonoscope to dislodge feces in the colon is not a new technique.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article said:

On 01 Apr 2004 01:29:46 GMT, Toby Joe <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Orac said:

In any case, how do you know, given that you haven't even TRIED to
present any evidence to support your assertions?

I've presented this twice now.

And I responded to this. But Toby ignored it. I predict that Toby is
going to claim that she either put me in her kill file or is ignoring
my posts. Just watch.

Here it is again:

Comment: There was no control group to compare results. It also does
not talk about how they determined clinical symptom improvement. There
also obviously was no blinding of the study.

That last one may not be possible in a study of this type. What makes
doing clinical research about procedures or surgical operations somewhat
more difficult than doing such research on drugs is that it is much more
difficult (and sometimes impossible) to blind the researchers and the
patients to which group they are in.

Quoted message said:

To make this a decent study one would have one group that had a real
transcolonic irrigation and another (placebo) group that had a sham
transcolonic irrigation so that the patients would not know which they
were receiving.

Even that wouldn't be necessary. They did colonoscopy on everyone, and
the irrigation to remove the fecaliths was done through the colonoscope.
The control group would simply have to undergo colonoscopy without the
irrigation (the patients would be blinded, but the doctors could not be,
unfortunately), and the experimental group would undergo the irrigation
at the time of colonoscopy. As long as the patients were adequately
sedated and not allowed to look at the monitor during the colonoscopy,
the patients would be blinded to which group they were in.

Quoted message said:

And then you have the people who rate improvement
blind to who was in treatment group and who was in control group.

That is one way of getting around the fact that you can't blind the
doctors to which group each patient is in, as they will know what they
did during the colonoscopy.

Quoted message said:

Having said that it appears common sense that if a person is
experiencing pain secondary to irritation by something lodged in
diverticula then dislodging it will lead to improvement. But this is a
very specialized situation and certainly not a reason to routinely do
colonics if you are chronically constipated or for some other reason.

Indeed. This study does not address the question of whether purges,
colonics, or enemas "promote colon health." It addresses a very
specialized and relatively uncommon situation (usually you don't see the
fecalith in patients with diverticular disease when you do the
colonoscopy).

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

Orac said:

Toby Joe said:

J Chin Med Assoc. 2003 May;66(5):282-7.
A potential alternative treatment of uncomplicated painful diverticular
disease by trans-colonoscopic irrigation technique: a preliminary
report.

Chen WS, Lin JK.
Division of Colorectal Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital,
National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.

BACKGROUND:
Colonic diverticular disease is a common disorder in elder
patients. Medical treatment was usually recommended as the first line
management for this disease. However, the recurrence rate of such
disorder is still high. In patients with severe complications such as
abscess or fulminant inflammation, non-invasive diagnostic examination,
abdominal CT scan for example, is recommended. Its most common symptom
is repeated abdominal pain with disturbance of bowel habit. Many
patients are found to be with diverticular disease only after
colonoscopic examination. The aim of this study is to introduce a new
irrigation-draining method and to evaluate its efficacy in treatment of
uncomplicated painful colonic diverticular disease.

METHODS:
To reduce the risk of recurrence of acute diverticulitis
and other severe complications, we introduce a transcolonoscopic
irrigation technique for patients of uncomplicated diverticular disease
by flushing out the obstructed fecalith from the diverticular sac in
order to improve the drainage from the obstructed diverticular sac.

RESULTS:
Thirty-two patients of uncomplicated painful diverticular disease with
obstructed fecalith impacted were treated by this technique. Clinical
symptom improved in all of them and no complications developed during
the mean follow-up period of 46 months.

CONCLUSION:
The results of this preliminary study suggest that this
technique accomplished in the colonoscopic examination without
additional therapeutic procedures. It provides another potential
alternative to the conventional medical treatment for patients with
uncomplicated diverticular disease.
http://tinyurl.com/2s9py
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&do
pt=A bstract&list_uids=12908570

Apples and oranges. This study does not describe purging, enemas, or
flushing, as advocated by you and other alties.

You asked for evidence of the person's assertions. Any assertions I have
made have been irt colon irrigation, and have been to effect that they may
be a helpful adjunct, particularly as a preventative measure.

As well, in that study they are in fact "flushing out" the obstructing
matter (their own terminology).

Quoted message said:

They did COLONOSCOPIES
on all of these patients, an INVASIVE medical procedure, fer crissakes!
During the colonoscopy, they used the irrigation port of the colonoscope
to dislodge fecaliths under direct colonoscopic vision. The technique
described is NOT the same thing as purges, flushes, or enemas!

Colonic irrigation has the same result.

Quoted message said:

It is
quite different and involves irrigating only the diverticulum with the
fecalith in it with a relatively small amount of irrigation. (If you've
ever done colonoscopy--as I have during my training--or seen one done,
or even read a little bit about how colonoscopies are done, you'd know
that.) It is about as un-altie as it gets.

No, it is very similar to colonic irrigation, in that they are both washing
out the unwanted matter, fecalith or other.

Quoted message said:

In any case, it's not even a very good study. For one thing, there was
no control group. There is no description of what criteria were used to
determine which patients underwent this procedure. (The way it should
have been done is to randomize patients with known diverticular disease
having colonoscopy to undergo the fecalith removal/irrigation versus
doing only a diagnostic colonoscopy. Besides, using the irrigation port
of the colonoscope to dislodge feces in the colon is not a new technique.

None of which counters the fact that the process of washing out unwanted
matter from the colon was found, by a colorectal surgery team, to be
helpful for diverticular disease.

--
http://costofwar.com/
www.unicef.org/sowc02/g31.htm

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Colon Cleanse Product
From: Toby Joe [email hidden]
Date: 3/31/2004 7:29 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

Orac said:

In any case, how do you know, given that you haven't even TRIED to
present any evidence to support your assertions?

This is the same ole. same ole put forth by organized medicine, since they deny
it helps, it is not written in the JAMA. Well big deal, there are many REAL
diseases they deny. Saying prove it is just a game. It helps many and they get
RESULTS.

With the rate of colon cancer and colon problems, it is ridiculous to say the
colon is all shiny pink. I can assure you most any person over age 60 has
constipation problems. Sure it is caused by lack of exercise, sure it is the
diet, sure it is other problems, so, saying it isn't real is as stupid as
saying mercury in the mouth is safe ONLY *in* the mouth.

It is all a game to the *gang*. They have a need to be *right*. That far
outweighs getting REAL.

They will find something wrong with anything posted.

It's not double blinded, it's not peer reviewed, it's not in a controlled
setting, yada yada yada.

Squawk squawk squawk.

Jan

Quoted message said:

I've presented this twice now.
Here it is again:

J Chin Med Assoc. 2003 May;66(5):282-7.
A potential alternative treatment of uncomplicated painful diverticular
disease by trans-colonoscopic irrigation technique: a preliminary report.

Chen WS, Lin JK.
Division of Colorectal Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, National
Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.

BACKGROUND:
Colonic diverticular disease is a common disorder in elder
patients. Medical treatment was usually recommended as the first line
management for this disease. However, the recurrence rate of such disorder
is still high. In patients with severe complications such as abscess or
fulminant inflammation, non-invasive diagnostic examination, abdominal CT
scan for example, is recommended. Its most common symptom is repeated
abdominal pain with disturbance of bowel habit. Many patients are found to
be with diverticular disease only after colonoscopic examination. The aim
of this study is to introduce a new irrigation-draining method and to
evaluate its efficacy in treatment of uncomplicated painful colonic
diverticular disease.

METHODS:
To reduce the risk of recurrence of acute diverticulitis
and other severe complications, we introduce a transcolonoscopic irrigation
technique for patients of uncomplicated diverticular disease by flushing
out the obstructed fecalith from the diverticular sac in order to improve
the drainage from the obstructed diverticular sac.

RESULTS:
Thirty-two patients
of uncomplicated painful diverticular disease with obstructed fecalith
impacted were treated by this technique. Clinical symptom improved in all
of them and no complications developed during the mean follow-up period of
46 months.

CONCLUSION:
The results of this preliminary study suggest that this
technique accomplished in the colonoscopic examination without additional
therapeutic procedures. It provides another potential alternative to the
conventional medical treatment for patients with uncomplicated diverticular
disease.
http://tinyurl.com/2s9py
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=A
bstract&list_uids=12908570

--
http://costofwar.com/
www.unicef.org/sowc02/g31.htm

Orac said:

In article said:

On 01 Apr 2004 01:29:46 GMT, Toby Joe <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Orac <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> In any case, how do you know, given that you haven't even TRIED to
> present any evidence to support your assertions?

I've presented this twice now.

And I responded to this. But Toby ignored it. I predict that Toby is
going to claim that she either put me in her kill file or is ignoring
my posts. Just watch.

Here it is again:

Comment: There was no control group to compare results. It also does
not talk about how they determined clinical symptom improvement. There
also obviously was no blinding of the study.

That last one may not be possible in a study of this type. What makes
doing clinical research about procedures or surgical operations somewhat
more difficult than doing such research on drugs is that it is much more
difficult (and sometimes impossible) to blind the researchers and the
patients to which group they are in.

This is true but there have been studies in which there has been real
surgery and sham surgery (just incision). In one case involving knee
surgery it was determined that surgery did no better than sham even
though it was thought that the surgical procedure was efficacious.

It could easily be done on patients in which one get colonscopy alone
and the other colonoscopy with irrigation. Or one could involve
irrigation but not of the fecalith.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

To make this a decent study one would have one group that had a real
transcolonic irrigation and another (placebo) group that had a sham
transcolonic irrigation so that the patients would not know which they
were receiving.

Even that wouldn't be necessary. They did colonoscopy on everyone, and
the irrigation to remove the fecaliths was done through the colonoscope.
The control group would simply have to undergo colonoscopy without the
irrigation (the patients would be blinded, but the doctors could not be,
unfortunately), and the experimental group would undergo the irrigation
at the time of colonoscopy.

Exactly. But the raters could be blinded.

Aloha,

Rich
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------

The best defense to logic is ignorance

On 01 Apr 2004 03:32:13 GMT, Toby Joe <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Orac said:

Toby Joe said:

J Chin Med Assoc. 2003 May;66(5):282-7.
A potential alternative treatment of uncomplicated painful diverticular
disease by trans-colonoscopic irrigation technique: a preliminary
report.

Chen WS, Lin JK.
Division of Colorectal Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital,
National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.

BACKGROUND:
Colonic diverticular disease is a common disorder in elder
patients. Medical treatment was usually recommended as the first line
management for this disease. However, the recurrence rate of such
disorder is still high. In patients with severe complications such as
abscess or fulminant inflammation, non-invasive diagnostic examination,
abdominal CT scan for example, is recommended. Its most common symptom
is repeated abdominal pain with disturbance of bowel habit. Many
patients are found to be with diverticular disease only after
colonoscopic examination. The aim of this study is to introduce a new
irrigation-draining method and to evaluate its efficacy in treatment of
uncomplicated painful colonic diverticular disease.

METHODS:
To reduce the risk of recurrence of acute diverticulitis
and other severe complications, we introduce a transcolonoscopic
irrigation technique for patients of uncomplicated diverticular disease
by flushing out the obstructed fecalith from the diverticular sac in
order to improve the drainage from the obstructed diverticular sac.

RESULTS:
Thirty-two patients of uncomplicated painful diverticular disease with
obstructed fecalith impacted were treated by this technique. Clinical
symptom improved in all of them and no complications developed during
the mean follow-up period of 46 months.

CONCLUSION:
The results of this preliminary study suggest that this
technique accomplished in the colonoscopic examination without
additional therapeutic procedures. It provides another potential
alternative to the conventional medical treatment for patients with
uncomplicated diverticular disease.
http://tinyurl.com/2s9py
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&do
pt=A bstract&list_uids=12908570

Apples and oranges. This study does not describe purging, enemas, or
flushing, as advocated by you and other alties.

You asked for evidence of the person's assertions. Any assertions I have
made have been irt colon irrigation, and have been to effect that they may
be a helpful adjunct, particularly as a preventative measure.

As well, in that study they are in fact "flushing out" the obstructing
matter (their own terminology).

Yes. But "Flushing out" using transcolonic irrigation in which there
is direct visualization of the diverticuli and localized irrigation is
quite different from the flushing out by colonics that are given by
alties. This study involved an invasive procedure of introducing a
long flexible instrument into the colon and under direct vision
removing some fecalith.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

They did COLONOSCOPIES
on all of these patients, an INVASIVE medical procedure, fer crissakes!
During the colonoscopy, they used the irrigation port of the colonoscope
to dislodge fecaliths under direct colonoscopic vision. The technique
described is NOT the same thing as purges, flushes, or enemas!

Colonic irrigation has the same result.

Colonic irrigation by alties has the same result as those done by
colonoscopy????? References please.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It is
quite different and involves irrigating only the diverticulum with the
fecalith in it with a relatively small amount of irrigation. (If you've
ever done colonoscopy--as I have during my training--or seen one done,
or even read a little bit about how colonoscopies are done, you'd know
that.) It is about as un-altie as it gets.

No, it is very similar to colonic irrigation, in that they are both washing
out the unwanted matter, fecalith or other.

Do you have any frigging idea what you are talking about?? Please
provide evidence that colon cleanses wash out fecaliths. The problem
with fecaliths is that they are difficult to remove and require that
one provide direct irrigation of the diverticula until the fecalith is
dislodged. There is no evidence that colon cleanses can achieve the
same thing despite your assertion.

Your thinking is rather bizarre. Both refer to "flushing out" and you
assume that they both work the same way. They don't.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In any case, it's not even a very good study. For one thing, there was
no control group. There is no description of what criteria were used to
determine which patients underwent this procedure. (The way it should
have been done is to randomize patients with known diverticular disease
having colonoscopy to undergo the fecalith removal/irrigation versus
doing only a diagnostic colonoscopy. Besides, using the irrigation port
of the colonoscope to dislodge feces in the colon is not a new technique.

None of which counters the fact that the process of washing out unwanted
matter from the colon was found, by a colorectal surgery team, to be
helpful for diverticular disease.

Yes, but until you can demonstrate that colon cleanses done by alties
can remove fecaliths you are simply talking out of your ass.

Aloha,

Rich

-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------

The best defense to logic is ignorance

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Colon Cleanse Product
From: [email hidden] (Jan)
Date: 3/31/2004 7:36 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Colon Cleanse

Quoted message said:

With the rate of colon cancer and colon problems, it is ridiculous to say the
colon is all shiny pink.

the colon is all shiny pink

EXCEPT if there is pathology ie a tumor...then ONLY the area where the tumor
is...will look pathologic...'

the REST of the colon will be shiny and pink..

surely there ARE conditions..ie ulcerative colitis..where the walls are
inflamed...but this is not a common ailment

Quoted message said:

I can assure you most any person over age 60 has
constipation problems

[censored]!! and speak for yourself...again..the hypervigalent such as yourself
MIGHT have problems...MOST do NOT

you are assuming that MOST over 60 are couch potatoes like you...I know few of
those...

and most actually [censored] normally despite themselves

"most over 60"...yikes ..that's a keeper

hawki.....

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Colon Cleanse Product
From: Orac [email hidden]
Date: 3/31/2004 6:33 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Apples and oranges. This study does not describe purging, enemas, or
flushing, as advocated by you and other alties. They did COLONOSCOPIES
on all of these patients, an INVASIVE medical procedure, f

not to mention....that the prep for a colonoscopy is very vigorous..a liquid
prep that truly cleans one out

so IF fecaliths remain in the divertics after such a prep...they would likely
also remain after a colonic...

Quoted message said:

During the colonoscopy, they used the irrigation port of the colonoscope
to dislodge fecaliths under direct colonoscopic vision. The techniqu

this is absolutely true....tho only a very small %% of tics have fecaliths in
them (assuming from the prep)....I was taught to irrigate them GENTLY...not
forcefully,,,for fear of perforation..

remember these are weak walled sacs..and a colon perforation is a surgical
emergency...

the presence of a piece of [censored] in a tic is not a danger in itself...
hawki.....

"Jan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Colon Cleanse Product
From: Toby Joe [email hidden]
Date: 3/31/2004 7:29 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

Orac said:

In any case, how do you know, given that you haven't even TRIED to
present any evidence to support your assertions?

This is the same ole. same ole put forth by organized medicine, since they

deny

Quoted message said:

it helps, it is not written in the JAMA. Well big deal, there are many

REAL

Quoted message said:

diseases they deny. Saying prove it is just a game. It helps many and they

get

Quoted message said:

RESULTS.

And then they flush the results. Why the cover-up?

Quoted message said:

With the rate of colon cancer and colon problems, it is ridiculous to say

the

Quoted message said:

colon is all shiny pink. I can assure you most any person over age 60 has
constipation problems.

Just because you are full of it, does not mean that everyone is.

Sure it is caused by lack of exercise, sure it is the

Quoted message said:

diet, sure it is other problems, so, saying it isn't real is as stupid as
saying mercury in the mouth is safe ONLY *in* the mouth.

So, more exercise, better diet, etc. is the solution, NOT a cleanse, which
is unnatural.

Quoted message said:

It is all a game to the *gang*. They have a need to be *right*. That far
outweighs getting REAL.

What is important is good diet, good exercise, etc.

When I got up this morning, I heard that it is National Walk to Work Day. I
was not impressed, as I have been walking to work for years.

Quoted message said:

They will find something wrong with anything posted.

No, just the bull you and your ilk post.

Quoted message said:

It's not double blinded, it's not peer reviewed, it's not in a controlled
setting, yada yada yada.

Wrong. See above for details.

Quoted message said:

Squawk squawk squawk.

Yes, Jan you do squawk a lot.

"Hawki63" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Colon Cleanse Product
From: [email hidden] (Jan)
Date: 3/31/2004 7:36 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Colon Cleanse

Quoted message said:

With the rate of colon cancer and colon problems, it is ridiculous to say

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

colon is all shiny pink.

the colon is all shiny pink

See: http://www.murrasaca.com/colonoscopy.htm

Quoted message said:

EXCEPT if there is pathology ie a tumor...then ONLY the area where the

tumor

Quoted message said:

is...will look pathologic...'

the REST of the colon will be shiny and pink..

surely there ARE conditions..ie ulcerative colitis..where the walls are
inflamed...but this is not a common ailment

Quoted message said:

I can assure you most any person over age 60 has
constipation problems

[censored]!! and speak for yourself...again..the hypervigalent such as

yourself

Quoted message said:

MIGHT have problems...MOST do NOT

you are assuming that MOST over 60 are couch potatoes like you...I know

few of

Quoted message said:

those...

and most actually [censored] normally despite themselves

"most over 60"...yikes ..that's a keeper

My Dad died when he was 80. He walked the boardwalk in Coney Island at least
three times a week until a week before he died. That is >15 miles of walking
a week. He was never constipated.

Last I looked, I'm not dead yet, but I will be 67 in three months & I've
never had any "constipation" problems. Never had any colon irrigations
either. How weird.

Now my husband, at age almost 76, has been taking a "100% Natural
Psyllium Husk Fiber" product for the past couple of years, though I'm
not exactly sure why (though I think his "health-nut" sister influenced
him there). He already eats oodles of raw fruits & vegetables daily &
takes our three dogs for a mile walk every morning AND evening.

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Colon Cleanse Product
From: "M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-April 2, 2004" M.a.r.kP.r.o.b.e.r.t
[email hidden]
Date: 4/2/2004 7:18 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the colon is all shiny pink

Quoted message said:

See: http://www.murrasaca.com/colonoscopy.htm

great pics Mark....

hmmm..was I the ONLY one who saw all that SHINY pink colon??

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

EXCEPT if there is pathology ie a tumor...then ONLY the area where the

tumor

and was I the only one to notice that the pics showing a polyp the REST of the
mucosa was SHINY pink??

great pic of the transverse colon...the triangular shaped lumen...it was always
fun to get that far with the sigmoidoscope..which actually should be too short
to reach beyond the sigmoid...but a GOOD endoscopic can "pleat" the colon on
the scope..thus reaching farther...

thanks Mark..

cue Jan to say it was all made up...\

sad that

hawki.....

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Last I looked, I'm not dead yet, but I will be 67 in three months & I've
never had any "constipation" problems. Never had any colon irrigations
either. How weird.

Now my husband, at age almost 76, has been taking a "100% Natural
Psyllium Husk Fiber" product for the past couple of years, though I'm
not exactly sure why (though I think his "health-nut" sister influenced
him there). He already eats oodles of raw fruits & vegetables daily &
takes our three dogs for a mile walk every morning AND evening.

Sounds right. My 88 year old uncle is quite active. Just came back from a
cruise with his girlfriend, who was all smiles.

My 93 year old uncle is also quite active. I would call him and ask about
his health regimen, but he is away at a tennis torunament.

BTW, neither smoked or drank. Both had physcial jobs and were active outside
of their job.

My grandfather (93 year old's father) lived to 100 and was a cigar smoker
but non-drinker. He, too, had a physical job (same as his son) and was a
founder of the Coney Island Volunteer Lifeguard Corps in 1910. He swam and
ran the beach every day of his life (born, grew up and lived within a 1/4
mile of the ocean). Died in a MVA.

"Hawki63" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Colon Cleanse Product
From: "M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t-April 2, 2004" M.a.r.kP.r.o.b.e.r.t
[email hidden]
Date: 4/2/2004 7:18 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the colon is all shiny pink

Quoted message said:

See: http://www.murrasaca.com/colonoscopy.htm

great pics Mark....

hmmm..was I the ONLY one who saw all that SHINY pink colon??

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

EXCEPT if there is pathology ie a tumor...then ONLY the area where the

tumor

and was I the only one to notice that the pics showing a polyp the REST of

the

Quoted message said:

mucosa was SHINY pink??

great pic of the transverse colon...the triangular shaped lumen...it was

always

Quoted message said:

fun to get that far with the sigmoidoscope..which actually should be too

short

Quoted message said:

to reach beyond the sigmoid...but a GOOD endoscopic can "pleat" the colon

on

Quoted message said:

the scope..thus reaching farther...

thanks Mark..

cue Jan to say it was all made up...\

sad that

Glad you liked them. Now, the Alties will have to find a way to get around
that good evidence.

M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t said:

"Hawki63" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Colon Cleanse Product
> the colon is all shiny pink

Quoted message said:

See: http://www.murrasaca.com/colonoscopy.htm

great pics Mark....

hmmm..was I the ONLY one who saw all that SHINY pink colon??

Yes, they are great shots, but not all colons appear to be "shiny pink"
(ref links below), and the large picture of a colon that is shown is of an
ideal super-healthy one. It doesn't show stricturing, prolapses,
blockaging, swelling (enlargement), diverticulae, polyps, ulcers,
inflammation, or other.

www.endowsec.com/pated/ecdgs02.htm
(has little diagrams, incl "severe diverticulosis"😉

www.canceruk.net/cchtonline/chapters/ch08_1.htm
(not all shiny and pink...)

Nor are these (warning: yukky pics!)
www.gicare.com/pated/eicnddbd.htm
www.gicare.com/pated/eicnppip.htm
www.gicare.com/pated/eicncluc.htm
www.gicare.com/pated/eicnppap.htm
www.endoatlas.com/co_di_02.html

--
http://costofwar.com/
www.unicef.org/sowc02/g31.htm

"Toby Joe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

M.a.r.k P.r.o.b.e.r.t said:

"Hawki63" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

>Subject: Re: Colon Cleanse Product
>> the colon is all shiny pink

>See: http://www.murrasaca.com/colonoscopy.htm

great pics Mark....

hmmm..was I the ONLY one who saw all that SHINY pink colon??

Yes, they are great shots, but not all colons appear to be "shiny pink"
(ref links below), and the large picture of a colon that is shown is of an
ideal super-healthy one. It doesn't show stricturing, prolapses,
blockaging, swelling (enlargement), diverticulae, polyps, ulcers,
inflammation, or other.

www.endowsec.com/pated/ecdgs02.htm
(has little diagrams, incl "severe diverticulosis"😉

www.canceruk.net/cchtonline/chapters/ch08_1.htm
(not all shiny and pink...)

Nor are these (warning: yukky pics!)
www.gicare.com/pated/eicnddbd.htm
www.gicare.com/pated/eicnppip.htm
www.gicare.com/pated/eicncluc.htm
www.gicare.com/pated/eicnppap.htm
www.endoatlas.com/co_di_02.html

Of course. You selected images of colons which are diseased. Not everyone is
diseased. However, the proponents of clonics, flushes, cleanses, recommend
these procedures for everyone.

That is dishonest.