mark.ansara@... wrote:

Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 06:52:25 -0600
From: mark.ansara@...
To: Dianne Knight <raw_foods_natural_hygiene@...>
Subject: The case against colonics


Dear Dianne:

As I promised, here is my article reviewing the case against the use of
colonics and enemas. This is largely based upon Dr. Shelton's teachings on
this subject, although some of it is my own reasoning and the result of
brainstorming with you. I think that it pretty well summarizes the arguments
and position of Natural Hygiene on this subject.

To begin with, colonic irrigation poses a risk of damaging the colon: there is
a possibility of the pressure puncturing the wall of the colon. This would
result in infection occurring and it may well prove fatal to the victim. I
admit that in the hands of an experienced therapist, such risks are small, but
I have always felt that it is wise to avoid unnecessary risks.

Secondly, as we have discussed, enemas and colonics may force waste back up
into the small intestine, where the toxic wastes may be absorbed into the
body. Let us remember that by the time feces reach this stage, the waste is
already in a much more advanced state of decay than earlier in its passage
through the bowels. Therefore, it is much more toxic and dangerous than
previously. This fact should indicate that colonics are a potentially
dangerous procedure, despite the benefits claimed by their proponents.

Thirdly, some colon therapists use various substances (other than plain water)
for the colonic. An example that comes to mind is the coffee enema. These
therapists claim additional benefits from the use of these substances. As a
hygienist, I would point out that such substances are in themselves toxic, and
if there is any apparent benefit to using them, that is a sure indication of
toxic effects in the body. This is on the principle that only the living body
can act, and the inert, lifeless substances that we use as stimulants are
incapable of performing any actions; thus, the stimulation is the result of
bodily action, not drug or stimulant action, which is a myth. Introducing
more toxic substances into the body cannot have any benefits, only toxic side-
effects.

Next, let me mention that a former friend of mine, who believed in colonics
and had undergone at least one such treatment, reported feeling much cleaner
and having much more energy following the treatment. As stated, this is an
indication of stimulation. The principle is the same as taking drugs as
stimulants: one takes a drug or a treatment in the belief that it will make
one feel better, and this is the immediate and short-term result. However, we
must remember the Law of Dual Effect: that any stimulation has a two-fold and
opposite effect: the short-term effect of stimulation, followed by the
long-term and more profound effect of depression or enervation. Again, to
understand this effect, we must remember that the stimulant does not act upon
the body - it is the body which acts. When a toxic substance enters its
domain, the body will act to expel it. This requires that the already
enervated body expend precious energy, thus ultimately leaving it more
enervated than before. Incidentally, a check of medical textbooks reveals that
the repeated and long-term use of enemas has one major side-effect:
constipation. This is logical in view of what I just said about profound
enervation; the colon is left in a greatly enervated state and is less able to
function normally than before.

I might add here that any treatment of this kind is basically irrational:
treating of symptoms and ignoring causes. This is the approach of medicine,
and represents the exact opposite of the rational approach to disease. The
hygienic way, which is tested and proven, is to ignore symptoms and remove
causes. That way, the symptoms (effects) will disappear of their own accord;
no specific treatment is necessary. (And as a bonus there are no side-effects.)

Dr. Shelton mentions a couple of other problems with this sort of treatment.
He states that colonics tend to weaken the walls of the colon. He also
indicates another side-effect of this treatment: visceroptosis, or the descent
of the viscera, i.e., the internal organs and structures of the body. It is
easy to see that this may cause other problems due to pressure on the organs
that are no longer in their normal positions. (This refers to many different
organs, not just the bowels.) Incidentally, Shelton denies the validity of
X-ray photos of the colon showing it heavily impacted with uneliminated fecal
matter, such as were used by advocates of colonic irrigation like Dr. Norman
Walker. He says that this is merely a fantasy, and he had a medical doctor who
backed him up on this point, saying that they do not see indications of such a
phenomenon during autopsies.

In summary, I think that we must conclude that the use of enemas and colonics
is not justified by a consideration of all of the facts. I also wish to point
out that an enervated organ needs rest, not stimulation or treatment. It is
best to leave it alone and let nature take its course. This is the position of
Natural Hygiene, and it has proven to the wisest course through the long
history of the movement.

Sincerely,

Mark Ansara

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com