On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 04:42:27 GMT, Orac <[email hidden]> posted:
Quoted message said:In article <[email hidden]>,
Toby Joe said:Orac <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Do you have any evidence that flushes, enemas, or colonics prevent
colon cancer? Or are you just assuming?I am not assuming anything. I would still like to know the present rates
for colon and similar cancers, and for related illnesses, particularly
chronic ones. Obviously I can go and search for it if I "really really"
would like to learn more about it, but as others were making knowledgeable
comments, I thought they might have ready access to some of the info and/or
could refer us to somewhere online that had it.I'll take that as a "No, I don't have any evidence that flushes, enemas,
or colonics prevent colon cancer."Quoted message said:
A quick scan of medline suggests that few _if any_ studies have been done
on the topic. (I couldn't see any.)And I don't understand why they (c.i.s) have been so totally ignored by the
med community. They are used for "intra op" procedures, but not as an
early stage intervention to lessen likelihood of need for surgery.Is there any evidence that they do not or could not be helpful as a
preventative intervention for those who could be considered at higher risk
of developing colon or bowel cancer, or for chronic diseases of the colon?Logical fallacy: argumentum ad ignorantium. See:
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html#ignorantiam
Argumentum ad ignorantiam means "argument from ignorance." The fallacy
occurs when it's argued that something must be true, simply because it
hasn't been proved false. Or, equivalently, when it is argued that
something must be false because it hasn't been proved true.
Very interesting. I see what it is getting at, but principles (laws)
of physics are only "true" until someone comes along with one example
to the contrary.