Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 05:18:34 -0600
From: mark.ansara@...
To: Dianne Knight <raw_foods_natural_hygiene@...>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [rawfoodsnaturalhygiene] Fwd: The case against colonics

Dear Dianne:

I would reply to this simply by saying that this person has not presented any
new facts or demonstrated that any of the facts which I presented are invalid.
His argument is entirely personal and subjective. Therefore, I must conclude
that he has not done any research on the topic, as I have. Thus, his thesis
cannot be taken seriously.

Regarding the use of colonics during a fast, that is the worst possible time
to take one. The whole purpose of a fast is to give the body an internal rest;
especially, the organs involved in the digestion and absorption of food
elements are resting during the fast. (We call this a physiological rest.)
Taking a colonic during the fast defeats the purpose of fasting; it forces the
colon to work when it should be resting. In the constipated individual, use of
the colonic forces the bowels to overwork, at a time when they are most in
need of rest to recover. Enervated (tired)bowels NEED REST!

I might concede one circumstance under which a person contemplating a fast
might consider taking a colonic. (This was suggested at one time by
Dr. Herbert M. Shelton.) An extremely obese person, with very high blood
pressure, and suffering from chronic constipation, just before beginning a
fast, might use a colonic just to ensure that the individual will be more
comfortable during the fast. This is an unusual case. Otherwise, I must
emphasize, colonics are a form of interference with the body's normal
functions. They do not remove the cause of the problem and only force the body
to overwork.

As for coffee enemas, it is obvious that they appear to have a beneficial
influence: coffee is a powerful drug; it contains one of the most powerful
non-prescription stimulants known: caffeine. Stimulants "work" in this way:
they are so toxic that the body gives great priority to expelling them from
its system, and expends energy and effort to do so. Thus, as the body
mobilizes its resources to eliminate the threat to its integrity, you will
feel "stimulated" and this may appear at first glance to be beneficial, but
the longer-term consequence is that the body has spent some of its precious
vitality to do this, and is left in a more weakened state than before. I must
repeat, the drug or stimulant does not act in itself on the body: it is
bodily action which takes place, and thus the benefits of taking stimulants
are entirely false and delusional. (Need I remind you that the liver is an
organ of elimination and detoxification?)

The only way to achieve good health is by living healthfully. No drugs or
therapies or treatments are necessary. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Mark Ansara




Quoting Dianne Knight :

> Dear Mark,
>
> Would you like to reply?
>
> Thanks, Dianne
>
> Tim Campbell wrote:
> To: rawfoodsnaturalhygiene@yahoogroups.com
> From: Tim Campbell
> Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 08:49:54 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: Re: [rawfoodsnaturalhygiene] Fwd: The case against colonics
>
> Though I am in agreement with the author that regular, frequent colonics are
> perhaps not good for the colon, I have for 32 years benefitted from
> occasional colonics. I have found them to be particularly helpful during or
> toward the end of a fast. And I have also found coffee enemas to be a
> powerful help in maintaining good liver health.
>
> Be Well, All,
> Tim
>
> Dianne Knight wrote:
>
>
> mark.ansara@... wrote: Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 06:52:25 -0600
> From: mark.ansara@...
> To: Dianne Knight
> 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
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rawfoodsnaturalhygiene/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> rawfoodsnaturalhygiene-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3webLD gives you the lowest long distance rates out there...Canada calling
as low as 2 cents/min...U.S. as low as 4 cents/min...visit www.get3web.com for
details