Coffee Enemas!!

[Undisclosed]

A good place to read and learn about coffee enemas.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/bottomsupgroup/

Unfortunately, such closed groups on Yahoo are usually rampant with misinformation based on the pseudoscience/made up stuff promoted by the likes of Gerson and others. The name of this one brings up a big red flag -- 'Bottoms Up Creative Approaches for Regaining Health and Vitality -- there is absolutely no evidence that coffee enema's or colonics have any magical qualities that would help one regain their health. Well maybe a bit of vitality -- re: side effects of caffeine that are short-lived. And hydrotherapy promoting longevity is nothing short of ridiculous. Having worked in a hospital, I have seen patients on painkillers get so bunged up, that an enema is a blessed relief -- so they do have a purpose.

Their description:

Bottoms Up is a collaboration of individuals exploring the medicinal, cleansing benefits of Colon Hydrotherapy (ie. enemas, colonics). We also discuss other complementary tools to promote longevity & wellness. Must be 18 or older.

Many years ago it was believed that illness was related to the bowels -- clean them out and you could cure any illness. This idea around this was called autointoxication. By the 1900s, this idea was discarded as a better understanding of anatomy, physiology and the true causes of many diseases was gained. Even though scads of science exists that does not support 'autointoxication', there is still so much misinformation out there that is promoted by such Facebook groups that is promulgated by quacks who seem to ignore basic science and years of research.

Some more interesting links:

http://www.livescience.com/947-colon-cleansing-money-toilet.html
http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/colon-detoxification-myth-vs-science/
http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/colon-detoxification-myth-vs-science/

 

[barbc56]

I think it's your use of the word 'quack', a loaded word. And quotes from the science-based medicine website and their love of dissing the 'woo'. They're they other end of extremism.

How many times has the term Big Pharma been equated with science in this thread? These are also loaded words.

Maybe it's a matter of perspective?

 

[Undisclosed]

I think it's your use of the word 'quack', a loaded word. And quotes from the science-based medicine website and their love of dissing the 'woo'. They're they other end of extremism.

Max Gerson was very much a quack in my eyes. I don't believe in being disingenuous. Take from that what you will. It's not about that though -- it's about the pseudoscience and non-science being used to promote coffee enemas which in some cases can be dangerous. I don't much care for the nasty attitudes of these people but fortunately amid their attitudes they are able to present the facts related to the science related to what Gerson and others claim and show how very wrong it all is. Getting annoyed at the use of the word 'quack' really takes away from the point and is a unnecessary digression.

Must be 100% useless that it was in the merck manual at one stage... because that book is for quacks

Why I am taken to task for using the word 'quack'? I think referring to all doctors as quacks is much worse and really quite pointless.

 

[douglasmich]

Max Gerson was a saint.

Lets see any of you pharma nut huggers cure anyone from terminal cancer.

Medical science is a joke 99% is funded by pharmaceutical companies. If capitalism didn't exist neither would drug medicine.

Clinical experience is all we need, and it works.

Have fun waiting till the day you die for "science " to help you get better.

Honestly if you think a coffee enema is dangerous you have no hope at getting better from anything. You sound like the type of person that would take any surgical procedure or medication completely obliviously just because your beloved MD said it was ok. You bow down to MD directed medicine; which is essentially a scam.

 

[Undisclosed]

Max Gerson was a saint.

I didn't realize this -- Is there a saint of coffee enema's -- interesting!

Lets see any of you pharma nut huggers cure anyone from terminal cancer.

Terminal cancer doesn't have a cure - being terminal and all that. Since this thread is neither about terminal cancer, Pharma nut huggers, it doesn't seem relevant.

Medical science is a joke 99% is funded by pharmaceutical companies. If capitalism didn't exist neither would drug medicine

Actually that's not true. Much of medical science exists apart of pharmaceuticals. That being said much of the supplement industry is also owned by Big Pharma. Again, relevance to coffee enema's?

Clinical experience is all we need, and it works

I have had much experience in the clinical sense -- have seen liver, kidney transplants save people, seen cancer cured, seen heart transplants, heart valve tranplants, seen premature babies saved purely from medical intervention. Antibiotics, anitviral, antimalarials, vaccinations have saved millions. All from scientific research. Both alternative therapies and medical science have a place in the world, no need for insults. I have used some alternative therapies with success.

Honestly if you think a coffee enema is dangerous you have no hope at getting better from anything. You sound like the type of person that would take any surgical procedure or medication completely obliviously just because your beloved MD said it was ok. You bow down to MD directed medicine; which is essentially a scam.

Thinking realistically about the dangers of procedures has no bearing on whether one is going to be cured or not. I truly hope that a cure is found one day for ME but I doubt what I think about procedures re: safety makes one iota of difference. I am not the type of person who blindly follows what an MD says, in fact I usually don't after weighing pros and cons. I am not sure why you have to resort to negative personal comments rather than actually refuting any science produced on the thread re; coffee enema's.

 

[TiredSam]

You sound like the type of person that would take any surgical procedure or medication completely obliviously just because your beloved MD said it was ok.

Max Gerson was a saint.

Anyone spot the irony?

 

[barbc56]

Anyone spot the irony?

Yes!

It's also ironic that your avatar shows Superman after a medical bowel procedure. Without benefit of drugs.

Just sayin'

 

[Chrisb]

One wonders whether payment for these products can be made per anum, or whether the usual method of payment, through the nose, will suffice.

The old jokes are the best.

 

[TiredSam]

One wonders whether payment for these products can be made per anum

I did enjoy that, it was new to me.

 

[u&iraok]

How many times has the term Big Pharma been equated with science in this thread? These are also loaded words.

Maybe it's a matter of perspective?

Sure. I'm not using the word, 'Big Pharma' here, I'm not saying anything against science or the medical profession. I'm talking about being extreme and I'm saying that the quackbusters and science-based medicine folks are extremists.

Max Gerson was very much a quack in my eyes. I don't believe in being disingenuous. Take from that what you will. It's not about that though -- it's about the pseudoscience and non-science being used to promote coffee enemas which in some cases can be dangerous. I don't much care for the nasty attitudes of these people but fortunately amid their attitudes they are able to present the facts related to the science related to what Gerson and others claim and show how very wrong it all is. Getting annoyed at the use of the word 'quack' really takes away from the point and is a unnecessary digression.



Why I am taken to task for using the word 'quack'? I think referring to all doctors as quacks is much worse and really quite pointless.

It's not the word 'quack' in itself. I don't know anything about Max Gerson or whether or not he's a quack and I have no opinion on coffee enemas. I'd be afraid to try an enema and wouldn't want to take the risk. I was just making the point that the word 'quack' is a loaded word because of the Quackbusters. I'm just pointing out that your use of the word 'quack' along with your quoting of the science-based medicine website puts others in a defensive mode and I believe that is a good part of the reason why this thread erupted.

As to the science-based medicine site, I think of an analogy with news programs. Say you have watched a certain news program for years and trust that journalism is an honest, fact-presenting profession and so any program that calls itself a news program can be trusted. But then one day you watch a segment on something you KNOW about and you see that the news is presented in a snide, name-calling, exaggerated, drama invoking manner. It makes you look with suspicion on any other pieces they report on.

Well this is the case with this site. Here is a quote from an article on their cite written in 2010 about CFS and Retroviruses (incidentally, I don't see 'ME' used anywhere on the site and they have very few articles on CFS. They also like to pooh-pooh Chronic Lyme--they say antibiotics take care of Lyme and that's final!):

CFS is still a controversial diagnosis. Some observers have implicated psychological factors and somatization. Sufferers are on the defensive, wanting to validate CFS as a real physical entity. The finding of a virus was just what they were hoping for. They want to believe in it, and their emotions have clouded their judgment.

 

[Undisclosed]

Sure. I'm not using the word, 'Big Pharma' here, I'm not saying anything against science or the medical profession. I'm talking about being extreme and I'm saying that the quackbusters and science-based medicine folks are extremists.



It's not the word 'quack' in itself. I don't know anything about Max Gerson or whether or not he's a quack and I have no opinion on coffee enemas. I'd be afraid to try an enema and wouldn't want to take the risk. I was just making the point that the word 'quack' is a loaded word because of the Quackbusters. I'm just pointing out that your use of the word 'quack' along with your quoting of the science-based medicine website puts others in a defensive mode and I believe that is a good part of the reason why this thread erupted.

As to the science-based medicine site, I think of an analogy with news programs. Say you have watched a certain news program for years and trust that journalism is an honest, fact-presenting profession and so any program that calls itself a news program can be trusted. But then one day you watch a segment on something you KNOW about and you see that the news is presented in a snide, name-calling, exaggerated, drama invoking manner. It makes you look with suspicion on any other pieces they report on.

Well this is the case with this site. Here is a quote from an article on their cite written in 2010 about CFS and Retroviruses (incidentally, I don't see 'ME' used anywhere on the site and they have very few articles on CFS. They also like to pooh-pooh Chronic Lyme--they say antibiotics take care of Lyme and that's final!):

I think if you would like to discuss the usage of the word 'quack', you should probably start a new thread because this thread is about coffee enemas. I stand by my use of the word quack in relationship to Max Gerson. How about a member here totally degrading all physicians, research, etc. with certain word usages. Considering there are many medical professionals, researchers, members here who appreciate science and research, members who utilize big pharma medications, I am wondering how many members felt defensive about that. This is the internet -- somebody always feels defensive about something. I was simply trying to present the science re: coffee enemas and some of the dangers which is in line with the topic of the thread. To digress re: the correct and proper usage of words and references takes the thread off-topic. Again this should be in another thread. I am just commenting on it now as it was brought up on this thread.

I suppose I was feeling a tad 'defensive' myself after being accused on this thread of causing members to commit suicide (removed by another moderator) by commenting on the state of research, how science does not support the misinformation produced by the likes of Gerson, and some possible dangers. This was not only appalling but devastating because we have recently lost some beloved members via suicide. Is it not possible to have a reasonable scientific discussion related to therapies used by patients without being chastized for using certain words; is their a rule that one has to get their information from certain sites (rhetorical questions). I did add an article written by somebody who is deeply into alternative therapies that agreed with the science from the other articles/blogs but without the rhetoric. Science is science which is what I was pointing to. I couldn't find any better examples of the science and I already said I don't much like the way it is presented in such a sarcastic and rude manner.

Can we keep the thread on topic please.

 

[u&iraok]

I suppose I was feeling a tad 'defensive' myself after being accused on this thread of causing members to commit suicide (removed by another moderator) by commenting on the state of research, how science does not support the misinformation produced by the likes of Gerson, and some possible dangers.

Wow, that's quite a strong accusation.

 

[Violeta]

Wow, that's quite a strong accusation.

I didn't see that comment. I am going to go look through my emails, I get all messages emailed to my email account.

 

[Undisclosed]

Wow, that's quite a strong accusation.

I didn't see that comment. I am going to go look through my emails, I get all messages emailed to my email account.

Redacted who wrote it but here is the relevant part:

I hope you enjoyed derailing a thread in the ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES section with your elitist pharmaceutical bullshit, and masking a potential beneficial therapy that could have helped many here. In fact i wonder how many suicides you have caused here by fear mongering over natural therapies. Maybe some people killed themselves and could have treated their depression successfully with various non pharmaceutical methods.

Can we please get this thread back on topic.

 

[ebethc]

Lol not sure if that's a joke or not.

No i use a medium to light roast organic coffee. Dump 3 TBSP into a pan with 1 Quart of distilled or filtered water. I then bring it to a boil and keep it there for 3-5 minutes then i bring it back down to a low simmer covered for 15-20 minutes

Then i top the water back up to 1 Quart and let it cool to body temperature, fill up the enema bucket and do the enema. I then retain it for 15 minutes then expell. Follow it up with some organic juice, sea salt and/or coconut water

where do you get the enema materials? thx

 

[douglasmich]

C c

where do you get the enema materials? thx

Hi. You just need an enema bag/bucket kit and some organic coffee.

Should be able to find both online easily.

For the last 6 months ive experimented with gargling 6x a day for vagus nerve activation. I would feel incredibly relaxed after it like my parasympathetic system came back into balance

Interestingly i have noticed the same with coffee enemas. I held off coffee enemas for years due to my severe stimulant intolerances, but after my first one i was so surprised at how relaxing it was. I definitely think it helps vagus nerve tone, in fact if i recall correctly a doctor recommended them for vagus nerve training. His last name started with a K

 

[douglasmich]

Oh and this afternoon i had a meal with my neighbor. She was the one who originally introduced me to the Gerson therapy. She was given 6 months to live in 2013 due to terminal melanoma. She had nothing to loose so she did 2 weeks at the gerson clinic in mexico then continued the regime at home here in australia.

Shes alive and well and cancer free. If she took doctors advice she would be dead. Oh but im sure "she never had cancer" or "it would have gone away anyway "

If anyone interested i can get her scans with terminal diagnosis and scans after fully recovering on gerson therapy after being on deaths door.

But i guess it doesn't matter anyway, wasn't a double blind placebo controlled study funded by merck, bayer & pfizer.

 

[futuritycarpaccio]

I think the point was to gather some experiences with coffee enema or ask questions about this persons experience, but it was derailled from the very beginning! You might as well delete the whole thread now.

we are all putting our faith in science and pharmaceuticals, but we fail to understand how biased some studies have been! Authors changing conclusions, images, results, on purpose, pharma companies ommitting relevant side effects data, all in the name of power and money. You cant argueue with that, just look at all the lawsuits. Every year there are studies published where u cant reproduce the results and they have to be withdrawn. This is the biggest threat to science right now.

Even scientists.make honest mistakes too. Not everything that science says is written in stone, wether it is claimed to be proven or to be disproven. Sometimes theres 2 studies saying it doesnt work, and 2 studies saying it works. So what to do?

Who is guaranteeing me that coffee enemas dont work for me? I will have to try them to know..

I was actually interested in this thread.....

 

[TiredSam]

I think the point was to gather some experiences with coffee enema or ask questions about this persons experience, but it was derailled from the very beginning! You might as well delete the whole thread now.

This thread was never derailed. It started as an invitation to discuss coffee enemas, and that's all anyone was doing. The OP presented Gerson's "science" in Gerson's scientific language, but tried to ban anyone else from presenting alternative (no pun intended) scientific viewpoints. The thread also contains anecdotes and personal experiences.

Since when does anyone get to say that we must limit our contributions to "anecdotes" or "science" or "personal experience" on any matter? It's all helpful information to people reading from various perspectives, I don't see why the OP gets to filter it and decide what we are allowed to read. I'm perfectly able to filter out anything that doesn't conform to my preconceived notions and prejudices myself before reaching a conclusion, without his help.

 

[Violeta]

Coffee enemas have been very helpful for me. It's amazing how many different types of pain they alleviate.