Coffee Enemas!!

douglasmich

Senior Member
Messages
311
Likes
126
So after reading Max Gerson MD"s book i decided to start Coffee Enemas, despite how weird they sounded. I can say for certain that they have done a number on my brainfog and depression and make me feel overall alot better

"The purpose of the enemas is
to remove toxins accumulated in the liver and to remove free radicals from the bloodstream. In the 1920s, two
German professors tested the effects of infused caffeine on rats. They found that the caffeine travels via the
hemorrhoidal vein and the portal system to the liver, opens up the bile ducts and allows the liver to release bile, which contains toxins.

The theobromine, theophylline, and the caffeine in coffee dilate blood vessels and bile ducts, relax smooth muscles, and increase the bile flow.

Doctors at the University of Minnesota showed that coffee administered rectally also stimulates an enzyme system in the liver called glutathione S-transferase by 600%-700% above normal activity levels. This enzyme reacts with free radicals (which cause cell damage) in the bloodstream and makes them inert. These neutralized substances become dissolved in the bile, are released through the bile flow from the liver and gallbladder, and are
excreted through the intestinal tract.

A Gerson patient holds the coffee enema in the colon for 12-15 minutes. During this time, the body’s entire blood supply passes through the liver 4-5 times, carrying poisons picked up
from the tissues. So the enema acts as a form of dialysis of the blood across the gut wall.

The purpose of the coffee enema is not to clear out the intestines, but the quart of water in the enema stimulates peristalsis in the gut. A portion of the water also dilutes the bile and increases the bile flow, thereby flushing toxic
bile (loaded with toxins by the glutathione S-transferase enzyme system) out of the intestines.

A patient coping with a chronic degenerative disease or an acute illness can achieve the following benefits from the lowering of blood serum toxin levels achieved by regular administration of coffee enemas:

1) increased cell energy production
2) enhanced tissue health
3) improved blood circulation
4) better immunity and tissue repair and
5) cellular regeneration

Additionally, coffee enemas can help to relieve pain, nausea, general nervous tension and depression.

References: A Cancer Therapy: Results of Fifty Cases by Dr. Gerson, Healing the Gerson Way by Charlotte Gerson ,
and Liver Detoxification with Coffee Enemas by Morton Walker, DPM excerpted from July 2001 edition of
Townsend Newsletter."

I dont know how much of this is true, but i feel like CEs are a valuable tool despite the criticism from science (bigpharma) based medicine .

I am doing them twice per day, and drinking 3 cups of raw organic juice per enema to replenish minerals.

I have severe constipation so if i don't have a bowel movement i do a quick water enema then follow up with CE

So come in, join the thread and share your experience with CEs or ask any questions
 

douglasmich

Senior Member
Messages
311
Likes
126
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
 
Messages
10,157
Likes
17,058
There are no reputable studies to support anything that the quack Gerson has claimed.

Take a look how it all works, coffee will have more of an effect by mouth over enema.

Any enema will relieve constipation which is why they are used.

You are making some pretty heavy claims, how about some replicated research with significant results,

https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.or...acist-what-are-the-benefits-of-coffee-enemas/

http://www.insufferableintolerance.com/coffee-enemas-dont-know-now-coffee-goes-feel-bad/

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2006/09/29/your-friday-dose-of-woo-coffee-doing/
 
Last edited:

douglasmich

Senior Member
Messages
311
Likes
126
I never claimed any of the research was satisfactory, if you had read my post you would have seen that.

Also this is the ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES section.

And thanks for linking some big Pharma mouthpiece blogs.

I guess i should stop coffee enemas and go back to a state of severe brainfog, depression and pain and stop being able to take rifaxamin due to the herx that the CEs have stopped.

I cannot drink coffee due to the anxiety, but a CE is like a benzo.

This is an alternative therapies section & thread. Please don't spoil this thread as i know many here have benefitted. If you don't want to do them because some bigpharma mouth piece sites say so then don't, even though their fear mongering is absolutely ridiculous.

"Could cause burns" what a ridiculous reason.
Must be 100% useless that it was in the merck manual at one stage... because that book is for quacks
 

IreneF

Senior Member
Messages
1,552
Likes
2,579
Location
San Francisco
I never claimed any of the research was satisfactory, if you had read my post you would have seen that.

Also this is the ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES section.

And thanks for linking some big Pharma mouthpiece blogs.

I guess i should stop coffee enemas and go back to a state of severe brainfog, depression and pain and stop being able to take rifaxamin due to the herx that the CEs have stopped.

I cannot drink coffee due to the anxiety, but a CE is like a benzo.

This is an alternative therapies section & thread. Please don't spoil this thread as i know many here have benefitted. If you don't want to do them because some bigpharma mouth piece sites say so then don't, even though their fear mongering is absolutely ridiculous.

"Could cause burns" what a ridiculous reason.
Must be 100% useless that it was in the merck manual at one stage... because that book is for quacks
All you have to do is explain what symptoms it's relieved, what your procedure is, and for how long you've felt better. Other people are free to respond, and that doesn't mean they will "spoil the thread".

Going to make a cuppa joe right now.
 

douglasmich

Senior Member
Messages
311
Likes
126
All you have to do is explain what symptoms it's relieved, what your procedure is, and for how long you've felt better. Other people are free to respond, and that doesn't mean they will "spoil the thread".

Going to make a cuppa joe right now.
By "spoiling the thread" i mean turning it into a silly debate over if they a useful or not, using big Pharma endorsed blogs and not self experimentation to make a judgement.

If i was looking for scientific criticism I wouldn't have put it in the "alternative " section, which is obviously for treatments that have little scientific basis, but potential benefit that's portrayed by anecdotes
 
Messages
10,157
Likes
17,058
I never claimed any of the research was satisfactory, if you had read my post you would have seen that.
I read your post and found that it contains a lot of erroneous information and was responding to that.

Also this is the ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES section.
Just because a thread is in the 'Alternatives Therapies' forum doesn't mean it is exempt from discussing the medical value of the therapy and the science behind it. It is entirely reasonable to respond with information that refutes the claims made in a thread. What if a member came along and started a post that suggested an alternative therapy that is both harmful and dangerous, is nobody allowed to speak out about that just because a post is in the 'Alternative Therapies' section.

Members are allowed to discuss a posted topic in any manner they want as long as it is on-topic and doesn't involve rule breaches. You posted some 'science', I chose to address that -- so not off-topic, and definitely not a rule breach

And thanks for linking some big Pharma mouthpiece blogs.
I am not sure what Big Pharma has to do with it and I am not sure how being sceptical of alternative treatments or presenting science that refutes something translates into 'big Pharma mouthpiece blogs'. I prefer to look at the information contained in the blogs rather than judge the writer of the blog. A pharmacist is an author of one of the blogs and if you look further into the content he discusses some are related to actually going against big pharma by addressing the uselessness and over-prescription of some medications. This thread is about coffee enemas not about the evils of Big Pharma, so let's not turn it into that.

I guess i should stop coffee enemas and go back to a state of severe brainfog, depression and pain and stop being able to take rifaxamin due to the herx that the CEs have stopped.
Nobody said you should stop taking coffee enemas.

I cannot drink coffee due to the anxiety, but a CE is like a benzo.
Whatever the route of administration, caffeine will have the same effect. Caffeine is known to cause insomnia, restlessness, increased heart rate, nervousness... . This will occur via taking by mouth or via the rectum. Caffeine can have really deleterious effects of people with ME.

Route of administration by mouth --> caffeine is absorbed from the proximal small intestine --> superior mesenteric vein --> the portal vein.

Route of administration by rectum --> hemorrhoidal veins -->inferior mesenteric vein --> portal vein

Drugs are administered by various routes -- by mouth, intravenously, by the rectum for various reasons - usually speed of delivery or one route has advantage over another -- this doesn't change the action of a drug. For example, suppositories for nausea are given because the patient can't tolerated any thing by mouth -- end effect whether by mouth or in a suppository = suppression of the nausea.

It's important for those who can't tolerate drugs, supplements etc to know that they will potentially be affected, depending on dose, by the caffeine in an enema. I am not saying that you are not getting the effect you are experiencing. The point is that caffeine has the same effect on the majority of people. For some, the effect of a small dose of caffeine can cause jitteriness, increased heart rate which can cause severe issues with a person with ME. I believe there is some genetics involved re: how caffeine is processed and affects the body. For example, my mother can drink coffee before bed and be able to fall asleep immediately. I, on the other hand, can't drink coffee after about 2 pm or else I will be up for most the night. Reading that caffeine via rectum has a benzo effect on you might mislead some to believing that the effect is experienced by all, which it clearly isn't.

This is an alternative therapies section & thread. Please don't spoil this thread as i know many here have benefitted. If you don't want to do them because some bigpharma mouth piece sites say so then don't, even though their fear mongering is absolutely ridiculous.
Referring to "big pharma mouth piece sites" and "fear mongering" isn't necessary. The links provided some good science that directly refutes the information you provided in your first post.
"The purpose of the enemas is
to remove toxins accumulated in the liver and to remove free radicals from the bloodstream. In the 1920s, two
German professors tested the effects of infused caffeine on rats. They found that the caffeine travels via the
hemorrhoidal vein and the portal system to the liver, opens up the bile ducts and allows the liver to release bile, which contains toxins."
The results of a coffee enema = rectum --> portal vein. True. What are the toxins being released via the bile? I think the big piece that is totally missed by those that promote the use of coffee enemas is that you get more caffeine going straight to the liver by drinking it rather than by enema. And the liver is a major organ of cellular waste removal. Absorption through the rectum shunts a significant fraction of the absorbed caffeine away from a first pass through the liver which is why drinking it would be more beneficial. It is a large jump to claim a rat study from the 1920's supports using coffee enema's because how does the finding translates into what Gerson has stated. It doesn't. It's all extrapolation based on nothing.

Doctors at the University of Minnesota showed that coffee administered rectally also stimulates an enzyme system in the liver called glutathione S-transferase by 600%-700% above normal activity levels. This enzyme reacts with free radicals (which cause cell damage) in the bloodstream and makes them inert. These neutralized substances become dissolved in the bile, are released through the bile flow from the liver and gallbladder, and are
excreted through the intestinal tract.
You can only have 100 percent of any thing -- 100 percent means all, not some. 600 - 700 percent is meaningless.

Are there any independent papers other than what is cited that supports the above statements which appears to be pseudoscience nonsense produced by the Gerson Institute. Perhaps some research performed by a group of impartial scientists looking at the effects of coffee enemas on the body would be beneficial. There have been no independent studies, no peer reviews and really the big red flag is that the information comes from a person who sells coffee enemas as a means of a living. This is very important and relevant especially when the information being presented is so dismally wrong and/or skewed.

A Gerson patient holds the coffee enema in the colon for 12-15 minutes. During this time, the body’s entire blood supply passes through the liver 4-5 times, carrying poisons picked up from the tissues. So the enema acts as a form of dialysis of the blood across the gut wall.
Yes, the body's blood supply passes through the liver continuously as the liver is one of our 'detox' or waste removal organs. And this happens regardless where the caffeine enters the body or how caffeine acts on the body. It's not a coffee enema clearing the body -- it's the liver, kidneys, etc doing their usually work of removing waste from the body -- they do this on a continous basis unless of course you have liver or kidney damage.

"Could cause burns" what a ridiculous reason.
Must be 100% useless that it was in the merck manual at one stage... because that book is for quacks
It's not so ridiculous to a person who has burned/scalded their rectum. Generally, enema's do come with risks that shouldn't be ignored or downplayed or ridiculed. I know the risks, learned them during my nursing career. Side-effects from enema use can include nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. Not something that any person with ME should ignore -- these side-effects can cause a person with ME a lot of problems including a worsening of their symptoms. The risk of enemas include perforation of the rectum. Perforation of the rectum requires surgical repair and even damage to the internal organs. Constant use of enemas can interfere with the body's normal absorption of nutrients and fluids causing chemical imbalances.

This is not fear mongering, it's reality.

The Merck Manual is medical manual that condenses medical knowledge into practical information of use to a practicing physician. A 'quack' is a person who pretends to have the skill, knowledge, or qualifications that he/she does not possess. I very much doubt that the seller of coffee enemas has ever picked up the Merck Manual as the reliance is on the purveyance of unsubstantiated pseudoscience. The Merck Manual contains years and years of medical knowledge. Lots of what was once accepted as medically true has been replaced by newer knowledge coming from replicated studies, increased knowledge of the human body related to the invention of MRI's, CT scans etc. Information in the Merck Manual is relevant and up-to-date medical knowledge.

Presenting coffee enemas as something they are not is fine and members are allowed to present and discuss information why the presented information is erroneous. There are always two sides to every conversation -- those who agree, those who disagree, those who will refute statements, those who do not ... . There is nowhere on Phoenix Rising that states members are not allow to post different views, or state that the information being presented is erroneous. Just because one or a few members benefit from something they are doing, doesn't mean it is going to benefit all members. I think a discussion of the science, the pros and cons can benefit those who are considering trying something. I don't think added knowledge about any topic is hurting anybody. Alternative therapies have the least amount of research and when the science does exist why can't that be discussed. Anecdotes are always important but not the whole picture and in this case there is a lot of science that refutes the claims in the first post. Referring to biased big pharma references, accusations of spoiling the thread aren't really helpful. "Judgements" certainly can be made from balancing both the research with anecdotes. Often anecdotes lead to further research, it all starts from people noticing things.
.
In the end, members will take from a thread what they want. Better to have lots of information rather than just a little.
 
Messages
5,256
Likes
32,006
It's not so ridiculous to a person who has burned/scalded their rectum. Generally, enema's do come with risks that shouldn't be ignored or downplayed or ridiculed.
I agree. Enemas stimulate that colonic muscle to contract. If the wall is weak or the gut partially obstructed it can rupture. You then have faeces throughout the abdomen and no matter how clever a surgeon you have you are dead by tomorrow night. I have seen it happen in A and E. In fact, a past dean of our medical school died this way. He was an anesthetist and after having a colon washout he had he said to his wife - 'I know I have faecal peritonitis - I have seen it so often before - it is time for us to say goodbye.' He was dead by the next night.
 

justy

Donate Advocate Demonstrate
Messages
5,524
Likes
12,274
Location
U.K
I agree. Enemas stimulate that colonic muscle to contract. If the wall is weak or the gut partially obstructed it can rupture. You then have faeces throughout the abdomen and no matter how clever a surgeon you have you are dead by tomorrow night. I have seen it happen in A and E. In fact, a past dean of our medical school died this way. He was an anesthetist and after having a colon washout he had he said to his wife - 'I know I have faecal peritonitis - I have seen it so often before - it is time for us to say goodbye.' He was dead by the next night.
If this is the case, then I am slightly alarmed that my GP sent me a prescription for predsol enemas daily for 7 days without seeing me and when he knew I had never done this before. There is also no warning of this in the patient information leaflet, which only contains information about the risks of prednisolone and NOTHING about the risk of enemas.
 
Messages
5,256
Likes
32,006
If this is the case, then I am slightly alarmed that my GP sent me a prescription for predsol enemas daily for 7 days without seeing me and when he knew I had never done this before. There is also no warning of this in the patient information leaflet, which only contains information about the risks of prednisolone and NOTHING about the risk of enemas.
Predsol enemas are not irritant and of small volume. I suspect they are pretty safe. The problem is when the enema contains a stimulant like phosphate or caffeine. All the same, I would never have prescribed an enema of any sort without a direct consultation. I learnt the lesson as a surgical houseman dealing with disasters in the middle of the night.
 

justy

Donate Advocate Demonstrate
Messages
5,524
Likes
12,274
Location
U.K
Predsol enemas are not irritant and of small volume. I suspect they are pretty safe. The problem is when the enema contains a stimulant like phosphate or caffeine. All the same, I would never have prescribed an enema of any sort without a direct consultation. I learnt the lesson as a surgical houseman dealing with disasters in the middle of the night.
Thanks for this information. Unfortunately GP's don't like coming out to visit severe ME patients at home - I consider myself lucky to be able to get a phone consult, but im aware its not adequate.
 
Messages
10,157
Likes
17,058
3 deaths from coffee enemas reported from all time.

How many deaths from properly prescribed pharmaceutical drugs per YEAR?

100,000.

Yet no "science based " blog bats an eye

You guys Crack me up.
Don't know where you got the three deaths thing. I doubt that the family of those people who died 'cracked' up over their loved ones death. Since you seem to have a deep seated hatred for anything mainstream re: medicine, Big Pharma etc -- here's an article written by a person who is not a big Pharma mouth-piece.

http://www.thepaleomom.com/2015/06/coffee-enemas-what-the-science-says-versus-what-youve-heard.html
 

TiredSam

The wise nematode hibernates
Messages
2,677
Likes
21,245
Location
Germany
If i was looking for scientific criticism I wouldn't have put it in the "alternative " section, which is obviously for treatments that have little scientific basis, but potential benefit that's portrayed by anecdotes
I'm a little confused. Your original post borrowed heavily from the language of science, and invited readers to "ask any questions". When following posters tried to continue the discussion on a scientific basis, you criticise them for doing that and switch to anecdotes as a basis for your belief in enemas. Then a poster contributes an anecdote:

You then have faeces throughout the abdomen and no matter how clever a surgeon you have you are dead by tomorrow night. I have seen it happen in A and E. In fact, a past dean of our medical school died this way. He was an anesthetist and after having a colon washout he had he said to his wife - 'I know I have faecal peritonitis - I have seen it so often before - it is time for us to say goodbye.' He was dead by the next night.
Which I find quite persuasive, don't you?
 

barbc56

Senior Member
Messages
3,657
Likes
4,964
3 deaths from coffee enemas reported from all time.

How many deaths from properly prescribed pharmaceutical drugs per YEAR?

100,000.

Yet no "science based " blog bats an eye

You guys Crack me up.
It's not just the number of deaths that are important for judging risks. More people are on prescriptions than those who take coffee enemas. Therefore you would expect the number to be higher in the former than the latter. However, the percentage of adverse events will give you a clearer idea of what is really happening.

Patients on prescription drugs are taking medication for health conditions so adverse events/deaths would again be expected to be larger. Also these events may be from the health condition and not the actual pharmaceutical. The two can be easily conflated.

There are other of factors that are important to consider when it comes to evaluating data.

http://blogs.plos.org/absolutely-ma...things-to-know-about-data-on-adverse-effects/
 
Messages
8
Likes
23
Gastrointestinal Quackery: Colonics, Laxatives, and More
Colonic irrigation, which also can be expensive, has considerable potential for harm. The process can be very uncomfortable, since the presence of the tube can induce severe cramps and pain. If the equipment is not adequately sterilized between treatments, disease germs from one person's large intestine can be transmitted to others. Several outbreaks of serious infections have been reported, including one in which contaminated equipment caused amebiasis in 36 people, 6 of whom died following bowel perforation [7-9]. Cases of heart failure (from excessive fluid absorption into the bloodstream) and electrolyte imbalance have also been reported [10]. Direct rectal perforation has also been reported [11]. Yet no license or training is required to operate a colonic-irrigation device. In 1985, a California judge ruled that colonic irrigation is an invasive medical procedure that may not be performed by chiropractors and the California Health Department's Infectious Disease Branch stated: "The practice of colonic irrigation by chiropractors, physical therapists, or physicians should cease. Colonic irrigation can do no good, only harm." The National Council Against Health Fraud agrees [12].

Proctocolitis Caused by Coffee Enemas
Complications associated with coffee enema have rarely been reported. There were two cases of death related to coffee enemas that were associated with electrolyte imbalance caused by frequent enemas (2). In addition, one case of polymicrobial enteric septicemia from coffee enema in an advanced breast cancer patient was reported (3). However, there have been no reports on colonic inflammation caused by coffee enema. Recently, a case of rectal burn associated with hot-water coffee enema was reported, but it seems to have been caused by hot water and not by the coffee itself. In our case, the coffee enema fluid was prepared from two tablespoons of roasted ground coffee without additives and 1liter of water, and the solution was cooled. Thus, the complication can be attributed not to thermal injury but to certain chemicals in coffee. Coffee is a complex mixture of chemicals that contains chlorogenic acid, caffeine, cafestol, and kahweol, which may cause adverse effects. Although the mechanism on coffee enema-induced proctocolitis is not known, the possibility of chemical colitis should be considered. In Korea, two more cases of acute proctocolitis related to coffee enema have been reported (4,5). All three cases, including ours, demonstrated a similar enema procedure and clinical course. The time interval from carrying out coffee enema to the appearance of the first symptom, as well as endoscopic findings and outcomes, in all three cases was similar. Proctocolitis was not dependent on the concentration of coffee fluid and retention time. Furthermore, a single enema procedure was enough to cause proctocolitis in all three patients.

Coffee enema has no proven benefit and carries considerable risk of provoking unwanted complications. Currently, we do not know which chemicals in coffee are responsible and what the mechanisms are, but it is certain that coffee enema should be reconsidered as an alternative treatment.

Colonic irrigation and the theory of autointoxication: a triumph of ignorance over science.
Autointoxication is an ancient theory based on the belief that intestinal waste products can poison the body and are a major contributor to many, if not all, diseases. In the 19th century, it was the ruling doctrine of medicine and led "colonic quackery" in various guises. By the turn of the century, it had received some apparent backing from science. When it became clear that the scientific rationale was wrong and colonic irrigation was not merely useless but potentially dangerous, it was exposed as quackery and subsequently went into a decline. Today we are witnessing a resurgence of colonic irrigation based on little less than the old bogus claims and the impressive power of vested interests. Even today's experts on colonic irrigation can only provide theories and anecdotes in its support. It seems, therefore, that ignorance is celebrating a triumph over science.

Starbutts, or: How is it still a thing that people are shooting coffee up their nether regions?
. . . there is an old concept mentioned before known as autointoxication. It’s an ancient concept, dating back to ancient Egypt, that posits that our fecal wastes are poisoning us. Now, back then they had no idea of the portal circulation, but the idea was that the “unclean” stuff from the feces could back up and slowly poison the body. A more sophisticated version of the concept of autointoxication rose to prominence in the 19th century and persisted even in mainstream medicine until even the 1920s. The idea was little different, namely that putrefactive products of digestion remained in the colon, there to leech into the bloodstream and sicken patients. There were even surgeons—and prominent ones!—who advocated total colectomy for the autointoxication that was thought to cause diseases ranging from epilepsy to “lassitude.” Indeed, I was reminded by this last season on The Knick, the Cinemax TV show about a surgeon from turn of the century (as in 1900) New York City, there was a storyline involving a woman with severe psychiatric problems who was treated by removal of her teeth and her colon. Although autointoxication was not explicitly mentioned, it was the rationale for such barbaric treatments unrelated to the actual pathophysiology. In the show, the doctor who subjected the woman to colectomy for her psychiatric issues came to be viewed as a quack, but there were others out there who advocated surgery who were not so considered. What’s particularly amazing about this whole “autointoxication” concept was that, in the time before antibiotics, colon surgery, even relatively straightforward colon surgery, had a high mortality due to infection. It was pretty risky surgery.

By the 1920s or so, science had shown that the various symptoms observed in patients with chronic constipation were largely due to distension of the bowel and were not due to autointoxication. As is its wont, scientific medicine moved on from a failed hypothesis. Alternative medicine practitioners, as is their wont, never did, hence the continued popularity of coffee enemas, which are supposed to correct autointoxication both through their physical action removing fecal matter and “stimulating” the liver to produce bile through the absorption of the various substances in the coffee, such as palmitic acids, straight into the portal circulation. Of course, one of those substances, one of the main reasons people drink coffee, is caffeine; so symptoms of caffeine overdose are another set of potential adverse events due to this exceedingly silly alternative treatment.
 

u&iraok

Senior Member
Messages
427
Likes
516
Location
U.S.
I read your post and found that it contains a lot of erroneous information and was responding to that.



Just because a thread is in the 'Alternatives Therapies' forum doesn't mean it is exempt from discussing the medical value of the therapy and the science behind it. It is entirely reasonable to respond with information that refutes the claims made in a thread. What if a member came along and started a post that suggested an alternative therapy that is both harmful and dangerous, is nobody allowed to speak out about that just because a post is in the 'Alternative Therapies' section.

Members are allowed to discuss a posted topic in any manner they want as long as it is on-topic and doesn't involve rule breaches. You posted some 'science', I chose to address that -- so not off-topic, and definitely not a rule breach



I am not sure what Big Pharma has to do with it and I am not sure how being sceptical of alternative treatments or presenting science that refutes something translates into 'big Pharma mouthpiece blogs'. I prefer to look at the information contained in the blogs rather than judge the writer of the blog. A pharmacist is an author of one of the blogs and if you look further into the content he discusses some are related to actually going against big pharma by addressing the uselessness and over-prescription of some medications. This thread is about coffee enemas not about the evils of Big Pharma, so let's not turn it into that.



Nobody said you should stop taking coffee enemas.



Whatever the route of administration, caffeine will have the same effect. Caffeine is known to cause insomnia, restlessness, increased heart rate, nervousness... . This will occur via taking by mouth or via the rectum. Caffeine can have really deleterious effects of people with ME.

Route of administration by mouth --> caffeine is absorbed from the proximal small intestine --> superior mesenteric vein --> the portal vein.

Route of administration by rectum --> hemorrhoidal veins -->inferior mesenteric vein --> portal vein

Drugs are administered by various routes -- by mouth, intravenously, by the rectum for various reasons - usually speed of delivery or one route has advantage over another -- this doesn't change the action of a drug. For example, suppositories for nausea are given because the patient can't tolerated any thing by mouth -- end effect whether by mouth or in a suppository = suppression of the nausea.

It's important for those who can't tolerate drugs, supplements etc to know that they will potentially be affected, depending on dose, by the caffeine in an enema. I am not saying that you are not getting the effect you are experiencing. The point is that caffeine has the same effect on the majority of people. For some, the effect of a small dose of caffeine can cause jitteriness, increased heart rate which can cause severe issues with a person with ME. I believe there is some genetics involved re: how caffeine is processed and affects the body. For example, my mother can drink coffee before bed and be able to fall asleep immediately. I, on the other hand, can't drink coffee after about 2 pm or else I will be up for most the night. Reading that caffeine via rectum has a benzo effect on you might mislead some to believing that the effect is experienced by all, which it clearly isn't.



Referring to "big pharma mouth piece sites" and "fear mongering" isn't necessary. The links provided some good science that directly refutes the information you provided in your first post.


The results of a coffee enema = rectum --> portal vein. True. What are the toxins being released via the bile? I think the big piece that is totally missed by those that promote the use of coffee enemas is that you get more caffeine going straight to the liver by drinking it rather than by enema. And the liver is a major organ of cellular waste removal. Absorption through the rectum shunts a significant fraction of the absorbed caffeine away from a first pass through the liver which is why drinking it would be more beneficial. It is a large jump to claim a rat study from the 1920's supports using coffee enema's because how does the finding translates into what Gerson has stated. It doesn't. It's all extrapolation based on nothing.



You can only have 100 percent of any thing -- 100 percent means all, not some. 600 - 700 percent is meaningless.

Are there any independent papers other than what is cited that supports the above statements which appears to be pseudoscience nonsense produced by the Gerson Institute. Perhaps some research performed by a group of impartial scientists looking at the effects of coffee enemas on the body would be beneficial. There have been no independent studies, no peer reviews and really the big red flag is that the information comes from a person who sells coffee enemas as a means of a living. This is very important and relevant especially when the information being presented is so dismally wrong and/or skewed.



Yes, the body's blood supply passes through the liver continuously as the liver is one of our 'detox' or waste removal organs. And this happens regardless where the caffeine enters the body or how caffeine acts on the body. It's not a coffee enema clearing the body -- it's the liver, kidneys, etc doing their usually work of removing waste from the body -- they do this on a continous basis unless of course you have liver or kidney damage.



It's not so ridiculous to a person who has burned/scalded their rectum. Generally, enema's do come with risks that shouldn't be ignored or downplayed or ridiculed. I know the risks, learned them during my nursing career. Side-effects from enema use can include nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. Not something that any person with ME should ignore -- these side-effects can cause a person with ME a lot of problems including a worsening of their symptoms. The risk of enemas include perforation of the rectum. Perforation of the rectum requires surgical repair and even damage to the internal organs. Constant use of enemas can interfere with the body's normal absorption of nutrients and fluids causing chemical imbalances.

This is not fear mongering, it's reality.

The Merck Manual is medical manual that condenses medical knowledge into practical information of use to a practicing physician. A 'quack' is a person who pretends to have the skill, knowledge, or qualifications that he/she does not possess. I very much doubt that the seller of coffee enemas has ever picked up the Merck Manual as the reliance is on the purveyance of unsubstantiated pseudoscience. The Merck Manual contains years and years of medical knowledge. Lots of what was once accepted as medically true has been replaced by newer knowledge coming from replicated studies, increased knowledge of the human body related to the invention of MRI's, CT scans etc. Information in the Merck Manual is relevant and up-to-date medical knowledge.

Presenting coffee enemas as something they are not is fine and members are allowed to present and discuss information why the presented information is erroneous. There are always two sides to every conversation -- those who agree, those who disagree, those who will refute statements, those who do not ... . There is nowhere on Phoenix Rising that states members are not allow to post different views, or state that the information being presented is erroneous. Just because one or a few members benefit from something they are doing, doesn't mean it is going to benefit all members. I think a discussion of the science, the pros and cons can benefit those who are considering trying something. I don't think added knowledge about any topic is hurting anybody. Alternative therapies have the least amount of research and when the science does exist why can't that be discussed. Anecdotes are always important but not the whole picture and in this case there is a lot of science that refutes the claims in the first post. Referring to biased big pharma references, accusations of spoiling the thread aren't really helpful. "Judgements" certainly can be made from balancing both the research with anecdotes. Often anecdotes lead to further research, it all starts from people noticing things.
.
In the end, members will take from a thread what they want. Better to have lots of information rather than just a little.
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.