harmful detoxification

John,

I will be honest, I am well familiar with Mercola. I think he was at one point legit, but what once was revolutionary is kinda common. He has gotten into laetrile and all kinds of stuff that make him edgy, but (I'm being sensitive with wording) I don't find his articles compelling. My mentor died of stomach cancer because he went to a clinic in Mexico that was going to cure him. He spent 40k on it. He would have died anyway, we all die of something. This quest for immortality is sort of bizarre to me, and there is always a bogeyman keeping the secret knowledge from being revealed.

Seyfried is more like Linus Pauling. Pauling was an unequivocal genius. He believed to the end of his days that vitamin C would cure cancer. He really wanted it to be true. Seyfried wants to be the guy that cures cancer just like Pauling, he is only human. I did my Masters research on this topic of cancer/glucose metabolism. It was very cutting edge 20 years ago, the wartburg effect was well described. Then I got jaded because people are programmed to die. I got a job and got out of graduate school. I worked as a carpenter. I quit taking the pharma money doing research, and anyone who thinks these companies are smart enough to suppress something have never dealt with them. Most of them couldn't run a fast food joint. They are politically connected but that is the only positive (?) think I can say about them.

The issue is that the world is getting more and more divided into the true believers and the infidels. And my infidel is someone else's true believer. Money sloshes through it, either from Dr Oz or pharma or CDC, but its all about money. I read real articles (as I have time), and some make sense to me, because they match what I see- dogs get cancer, they don't smoke. Mine had melanoma.

Cancer is an expiration date. Put life in the years between now and then. I am sorry there are lots of videos and websites out there. They fit neatly into categories according to the infidel/believer schema. I don't have time to watch/read them. I frankly get angry with most of them, because once you have been in the "industry" they are practically parodies. I have relatives that are all into this stuff and frankly, I could sell them a bridge if it was made of a compound with a latin name.

I did not watch Blue Zones. It sounds like the people are well suited to their environment. In North America we probably aren't. I'm jaded about easy answers. Like said prior, I try to follow a paleo eating habit, but I have no idea if it will be helpful. I kinda doubt it. But my current years are good!

Hi TJ,
Thanks for your nuanced and carefully worded response.  The BLue zones are places where people, through their habits, have managed to live significantly longer than in the West, with much less obesity, diabetes, cancer and heart disease.
Dan Buettner has written several books about them. They've been out for decades.  They also seem healthier and happier than in other places, with less crime/ prison, mental health services, drug/alcohol addiction, depression and violence.  Their culture seems more on a human scale, as if it were designed to benefit the people in that culture, rather than the corporations.

I hear what you're saying on Mercola and the others.  I annoy people on those websites because I am not a true believer in any of them. I take them all with a grain of salt.  Piecing together a sensible health plan using details and ideas from many sources including history, culture and nature is what I use.

I don't plan on living forever and I don't know anyone with that aim.  Living healthier for a longer time is a goal of mine however. My grandfather died at 63, but his wife, my grandmother died at 93. I would like those extra years, particularly if I could use my body during them.  I'm 54, so 63 is not far away.    I skateboard, play baseball, unicycle,  hang glide, and white water kayak. I would enjoy continuing with those efforts. When I eat particular foods, I am able to do more of them.  I hope to continue to participate in enjoyable activities, and that's a big part of my strategy.
Thanks,
John S
PDX OR

I wish to pop in and state the official permies.com position on this sort of thing.

It is possible that some practice (P47) works great for most people, and for the rest of people it works poorly or makes no change.   Further, it is possible that a different practice (P48) works REALLY GREAT for just a few people, but is not great for a large majority.  

Therefore, if one were to do a study on P48, the study would prove that P48 sucks when applied to the general population.   A person could reference this study and state that it is a fact.   Only if the study were done a bit better, they would find that for 11% of the people, it did large positive things.  

You could, for example, do a study where you gave chemotherapy to 1000 people.   You might find that it makes 100% of the subjects miserable, but a few people ended up better for it.   Is it, therefore, universally bad?  

And this doesn't even begin to touch on the studies where "we fed half of the group nothing but hamburgers from a fast food restaurant laced with a massive collection of additives and toxins, and the other half of the group an organic vegan diet prepared by a chef keenly focused on nutrition and discovered that everybody would do better on a vegan diet."

So, the official policy at permies.com is to clearly state YOUR POSITION and not THE TRUTH.  Because for a topic like this there will be thousands of positions.   And suggesting that your position is the only position allowed is not withing my comfort zone.  

PLUS:   advocating for anything less than organic is not within my comfort zone.  


I think any detox will help some people while not helping others.  Therefore, the position of "everybody should _____" or "nobobdy should _____" is outside of my comfort zone.   Instead, people could present "I like the idea of _______" or "I once tried _____" or "I was going to _______, but I read _______" or "I've decided to ________"   etc.  



Your position.   Not "the truth."

This site is for sharing what we have learned.  Not for shaming other people into obeyiong your whims.

I like the idea of consulting an allopathic doctor if I am also consulting a holistic doctor. I have often seen it generalised that, while traditional systems of medicine usually do a better job of treating the person, and at fostering living conditions over time that obviate the need for much of Western medicine, that Western medicine often does a better job at treating conditions of immediate lethality, like things that require intensive intervention.

I don't think it wise to dismiss allopathic medicine, but it is not a panacea. There are no panaceas. I would love it if we as a species could divest ourselves of this penchant for thinking that there's some magical thing in this world that will cure everything, do everything, be and know everything, and leave it all smelling minty-fresh.

The closest thing to a panacea I have found is the design philosophy of permaculture, and that is simply because its scope is so vast, it literally encompasses all human, animal, and other activity in the universe.

-CK

Chris Kott wrote:I like the idea of consulting an allopathic doctor if I am also consulting a holistic doctor. I have often seen it generalised that, while traditional systems of medicine usually do a better job of treating the person, and at fostering living conditions over time that obviate the need for much of Western medicine, that Western medicine often does a better job at treating conditions of immediate lethality, like things that require intensive intervention.

I think this is an extremely important point that is often over-looked.  If I am in a horrific, fiery car crash, please, please get me to a well-equipped emergency room with the best western-trained physicians money can buy.  If you want to talk about adding to my overall quality of life, by all means, let's discuss herbs and a good diet.  I don't see the two as being at odds.  I also work at a hospital and know doctors.  Most are not money-grubbing assholes that are trying to suppress natural substances that could easily cure cancer, but would take money from their pockets.

Well, another way to look at it is to say that modern lifestyles and SAD (the Standard American Diet) are ill advised experiments performed on our culture by corporations.  Never before in history have people been told to eat completely processed foods, with no vegetables, berries or fruit.  Wait until you're so sick that Big Pharma can reap a giant profit off of you, then buy their crisis million dollar surgery/chemo/radiation as the only possible way to get well.  Exercise, movement, calm low stress lifestyles, eating vegetables, mushrooms and fiber are the traditional ways that people have maintained their health, so it doesn't get to a million dollar crisis.  That's how the healthiest people in the world stay the healthiest and happiest (BLue Zones ).  And they don't have to be rich to afford this lifestyle.

John S
PDX OR

"Never before in history have people been told to eat completely processed foods, with no vegetables, berries or fruit."

I have NEVER heard anyone advocate this...frankly, all health officials, doctors, nurses, nutritionists etc. always seem to me to be vehemently against this sort of diet.

My personal experience is, from the government down, they ALWAYS advocate eating NON processed foods, and to ensure there is LOTS of fresh fruits and veggies. Further, we are specifically told to NOT eat processed crap; to look at labels seeking items with the least number of ingredients, and to avoid products with ingredients we do not recognize or cannot pronounce. We are told to ensure our plate is HALF fresh/cooked veggies, 1/4 protein and 1/4 carbs (rice, potato, pasta...). Do most folks follow this advice...probably not; but policing what folks eat is, for me, a step too far.

Perhaps this is unique to Canada, but somehow I doubt it.

I agree that most health professionals will tell the individual to make a heroic fight against the predominant culture.  However, what happens in our society?
Who controls the culture? In the US Big Pharma controls social media and all media. You can't put an article in a magazine about natural health because the other advertisers, mostly Big Pharma, will prohibit it. Google, Facebook, Instagram, You Tube and other social media puts natural health down at the bottom of the algorithm to hide it because they don't make money from advertisers with it.   What kind of restaurants do people go to? Mostly fast food. What do most people eat? Processed food.  Most people are obese or overweight.  Diabetes and cancer have shot up, with estimates to 100 times what it was when I was a child. What percentage of people actually exercise enough? Like 15%.  Doctors get paid more for giving prescriptions and they only have 7 minutes with each patient.  They get paid less if they advise people to exercise, eat whole plant foods, etc.  Advertisers and culture are always advising people to work more hours so you can spend more and have that glorious, luxurious vacation, cars, houses, clothes, dinners, etc.  Corporations force politicians to follow their mandates. Why does the government advise people to eat so much grain? Not for health reasons.  The force of the culture is pushing people into unhealthy lifestyles, and it is working, even if there are a few individual voices fighting against the tsunami.

John S
PDX OR