The Master Cleanse Part II

For this week’s blog I had planned on moving on to a new pharmaceutical; however, after I posted my last blog on the Master Cleanse I got into a lengthy discussion/debate with a friend of mine. I felt it would be beneficial and important to share that discussion with you so that you can see the other side of the argument.

It’s no secret that many people in the medical field are not in agreement with cleansing for health. I felt that posting the comments (and my responses) to my friend’s discussion would be beneficial to my readers because she is someone I hold in high regard not only because of her intelligence but also her knowledge on the subject – she is a Research Dietitian. I also want to emphasize the importance of diet and exercise with regards to health. She also emphasizes this and therefore I think it drives home the point that all health advocates (traditional/conventional and natural/homeopathic) stress the importance of diet and exercise.

I do not want to detract from the discussion on the cleanse but I do think it is necessary to leave in our comments on vaccinations to understand the context in which they were used. With that said, below is the discussion verbatim with my additional comments in brackets and italics.I added this information after the fact to provide more information on my position. Feel free to comment and add your own experiences and expertise as you see fit.


After posting my blog, the first comment from my friend began with this:

Friend: Probably worth checking this out http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchives/tdmay2008pg34.shtml.

My response: I've read pages and pages of people "trying to help" by saying cleansing is bad for you. I don't buy it. My logic tells me our bodies aren't digesting properly due to our diets. I've done an extreme cleanse 5 times and have only gotten positive outcomes. I do agree that the particular cleanse I do is not for everyone but that's why I recommend that anyone interested read the books on the subject. [And although I say it’s not for everyone, I believe there are only a small few that don’t benefit]

Friend: My only problem is that the science doesn't support it....and being in research, I tend to support that school of thought. The first step to improving your health is to change your diet. Your body is designed to digest a mixture of foods while your liver does the detox. Best way to keep both your digestive tract and liver healthy is to consume your vegetables and fruit…and your whole grains and fluid. There is nothing wrong with the food supply, only the choices we make in nourishing our bodies. [I would have to differ here because I believe our food supply gets worse every year. I believe that people with a decent income have access to high quality food in our country but most people don’t have a decent income and/or their money is already spoken-for. With the increase of feedlots and the use of pesticides, our food supply is becoming more and more harmful] But you’re right, it is an individual choice.

Me: I totally agree with the first step being a diet change. However, what I've found is that a cleanse is a good way to get that change rolling. It has a way of resetting the way you think. Diet change is mostly psychological. [In my experience people that are able to complete an entire cleanse change the way they eat so that it's much healthier]. It’s a pipe dream to think that people have always had healthy diets. I totally agree, we have access to healthy foods but too many people take the “convenient” route. If you’ve always had a healthy diet more power to you but that’s rare.

It really bothers me that doctors discourage something that I see (and have experienced) as being highly beneficial based on science not supporting it. Nobody has ever done studies [as far as I know] so we can’t say that science does or doesn’t support it. It’s also hypocritical considering that studies have actually been done on the lack of efficacy of vaccines and the flu shot yet doctors still PUSH them on people.

The concept of everything supported by science is nice but it’s just not possible. Sometimes we have to use common sense. And sometimes we have to think for ourselves and not follow everything that doctors say. They’re human just like me and I’m confident in my own logic and common sense…obviously I’m MORE confident in my own opinion. The most important thing is to do our own research and make our judgments based on what makes sense and not just taking the word of doctors. They’re only doctors…not gods, IMHO.

Friend: Overall, the cleanse idea is a band-aid to the real problem and it distracts people from focusing on the real issue at hand – changing the diet. Exercise (gravity works wonders) and a fiber-rich diet will manage healthy system and aligns with sound health and nutrition recommendations. I also think there’s a way to embrace both eastern and western medicine logic without criticizing one or the other. Now without getting off on a tangent, there are valid reasons for the flu shot but that’s another issue. [She later sent me this article: http://www.cppah.com/article/S1538-5442(10)00004-0/abstract]

Yes, there are major problems with poor dietary choices in America, which is why over 2/3 of our population is considered overweight. We also know that most Americans don’t meet the recommended servings of fruits and vegetables – possibly a HUGE factor in the sluggish gut issue. But cleansing, really, isn’t helping. [I never really got a solid answer as to why she felt cleansing isn’t helping. Is there actual data that shows this?] For those less educated and/or not willing to do the research, seeing something like this purported by someone so highly educated may sway some to do it because it sounds great. Likely, many of those same people have diabetes or other underlying ailments and don’t know it. So I see your good intentions, however, do you see how this could cause more harm than heal? As of now, it’s not recommended by health professionals simply, I’m guessing, because it sounds like quackery. Rule #1 in quackery is, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. [I neglected to ask this but I think it’s valid: isn’t a quick-fix medication also too good to be true? The fact that there are ads for medicines every minor ailment tell me that to have a little pill that claims to fix any issue, big or small, is too good to be true – therefore the quackery argument could be used on medical doctors as well]. You also have to remember, the outcome you have isn’t going to be replicated by everyone, so you’re the exception, not necessarily the rule. [Again, I never really got anything supporting this assumption. I’ve seen many testimonials by people that have completed numerous cleanses and have gotten huge benefits.]

Me:

I think your way of dealing with problems (diet and exercise) is ideal. But we don’t live in a perfect world. Just because someone decided that quackery only applies to homeopathic medicine doesn’t mean it can’t also apply to allopathic medicine. I’ll tell you what my definition of quackery is: prescribing chemicals to “treat” problems that only the body itself can heal. Worse quackery is to prescribe chemicals to deal with the side effects that the first prescribed chemicals created. I believe Western medicine is beneficial in emergency situations but other than that they’ve lost all credibility with me.

I never said that cleansing is for everyone nor did I ever say someone should do it without understanding it completely. If you’ve ever had a conversation with me about this or if you read my blog you’d know that I in fact say the opposite. I’ve stated that it isn’t for everyone and if a person is truly interested in it they must read the books. I can’t emphasize enough the last point. I can’t exactly go into that level of detail in one blog. I wouldn’t even attempt to do so. If you read the blog you will see that I’m vague about the recipe and process. I’m vague for a reason…I want people to inform themselves before even considering it. With people that ask me about it (in person) I am vague there as well and I emphasize that they need to know what it’s about and that it’s NOT about weight loss. It’s about health.

Also, I’m not quite sure how cleansing sounds “too good to be true”. It’s not a simple feat. Cleansing is tough. Only the most disciplined people will even get through the first three days. If they are not informed or misinformed they won’t make it to the second day. It has a way of weeding out the people looking for quick-fixes.

I’m not going to try to convince you that cleansing is actually good for a person’s body. You have your reasons for not agreeing with it based on your own experiences and knowledge. What I will say is that I would never argue with you about something I haven’t done my research on. If I hadn’t researched this extensively I would have given up on your second post. I’m adamant about the benefits (for most people). If people want to take my word for it, it’s up to them.

I don’t think I’m doing any more (in fact I’m pretty sure I’m doing much LESS) harm than the typical doctor that prescribes 5 prescriptions for a little back pain (yes, this is a real-life story…it happened to me). [This was just one example, hence the concept of my blog; in almost every conversation I have regarding illness and doctors I hear the same thing – the first reaction to any illness is a prescription by and large]

So, thanks for the info. One of these days I’ll blog about the importance of exercise and diet to deal with health problems…oh wait, I’ve already done that. But nobody will ever convince me to go back to my allopathic doctor for anything but an emergency.

Friend:

Again, there are ways to embrace both sides of medicine to care for the individual as a whole. I agree with you in that society has become reliant meds/pills for a quick fix [this tells me that she agrees that the medical community provides “quick fixes” and that they’re not a good thing], and I assume some doctors are getting conditioned to this so they give out the pills because that’s what the majority seek. [I don’t totally agree with this; I think it is partly true – hence my response. I’ve heard and seen first hand how doctors prescribe medications to people that aren’t interested in any nor are they asking for medications. Here are a few examples:

When I went in for minor back pain I never asked for a single medication, I only wanted to know what I could do to help ease it. Immediately the doctor prescribed at least four different medications.

My mother’s nephrologist automatically wanted to prescribe medication for her kidney issues; however, my mother refused.

My sister-in-law’s regular doctor retired and when she started going to the doctor that took over his practice he wanted to prescribe a different medication for her blood disorder. She was not interested in a new prescription since the one she’d been on had worked fine for many years. In fact her dosage had progressively decreased. Against his persistence she did not allow the change. His reasoning for wanting to make the change was “This is the pharmaceutical company I go through”.

There are many more examples but here are just a few. I’m fairly certain that most people don’t go to the doctor specifically asking for pharmaceuticals, although I do know that some people do.]

This phenomena is similar to the restaurant industry (weird analogy, I know), but society demanded bigger portions of food when they ate out and over time, we got the super sized version of everything. Well, that contributed to the obesity problem, but it was the restaurants who got reprimanded. We demanded, they supplied, we got fat. In this case, we demand, they supply, we don’t necessarily get well. [Again, I tend to disagree that we “asked” for larger servings, etc.” I’ve never seen data stating so. It’s been said many times that serving sizes 30 years ago were much smaller than they are now. I’m fairly certain that McDonald’s didn’t introduce "supersizing" because people were ordering more than one burger or fries at a time.] So I wouldn’t place too much blame on the doctors…they’re doing what we’ve been asking for. [I would place most of the blame on pharmaceutical companies because of the techniques they use to “buy” doctors. Many times doctors don’t even realize what is happening. Big Pharma controls so much funding to medical schools and therefore most doctors are educated, essentially, by the pharmaceutical industry. A good book to read that echoes this – which I read some time ago – is “Selling Sickness: How the World's Biggest Pharmaceutical Companies Are Turning Us All Into Patients”] Yet, this is why there is currently a huge movement toward preventive medicine – exercise, eat well and modify your behaviors for long lasting health and disease prevention. I do think all sides of medicine essentially support this.

I love your definition of quackery, but leaves me with the impression that you’re clearly one-sided. Quackery is basically non-science. The word “quack”, as it relates to medicine describes a person who has a lot to say about nothing or a pretender to medical skill. [Clearly my bias is showing but I wasn’t always biased; at one time I trusted allopathic medicine completely. It wasn’t until I experienced the non-improvement using it and the improvement using naturopathic treatments and also researching many different resources and using common sense. Still I know there are quacks in natural medicine but this is not to say there aren’t quacks in allopathic medicine. What my friend failed to recognize is that my comment that prescribing drugs is also quackery fits her definition of quackery. Many pharmaceuticals do not undergo clinical studies. In fact, I’ve read that many data have been altered or fudged to get on the shelves. I’ve also read that many studies claiming to be used as support were not double-blind studies and in fact were skewed to get the results that the pharmaceutical companies are after so they can be sold to make a profit. Additionally, many of the studies conducted by the “FDA” are actually funded by Big Pharma so to say that prescribing medications doesn’t fit the definition of quackery is patently untrue. One just has to do a little research to find out the truth. There have been very few drugs that are legitimately approved based on scientific studies.]

I also agree that you make it clear as to your reservations on the cleanse, but I also (big time!) the health connotation you attach to it. If it were healthy, it would be incorporated into public health message. I’m glad to hear you’ve had good experiences with it, I only hope that others are as thorough in their research. [people don’t research the pharmaceuticals they’re prescribed by doctors so what is the difference between them blindly accepting the cleanse versus blindly accepting prescription drugs? I would say the difference is that it would be more logical to research medications since they are actually unnatural chemicals and are known to cause hundreds of side effects. Cleansing is an ancient tradition and was even advocated in the Bible – fasting is shown to be necessary so that “the spirit can overcome the flesh.” This was true in biblical times and is still true today, many people that have completed any kind of fast will tell you that their senses were heightened and their minds became clear. Incidentally, the fasting that was done in biblical times were more extreme than the Master Cleanse. Typically their fasting consisted only of water. Additionally, having the discipline and resolve to complete such a cleanse or fast is proof that the spirit has overcome the flesh. Also, I’m fairly certain that there are no references in the bible to pharmaceuticals or surgeries to treat illness.]

Now going back to the vaccination issue…it’s another form of disease prevention…it saves lives, health care money, and reduces work absences. [My question on this is where she got this information…the statistics? I’ve researched this extensively and haven’t found a single study that shows any of this. I’ve seen the opposite:
http://www.naturalnews.com/027985_H1N1_vaccines_safety.html
http://www.newswithviews.com/Tocco/mary1.htm
http://www.vaccinedangers.com
http://www.rxalternativemedicine.com/blog/post/Vitamin-D-and-the-Flu-Shot-Swine-Flu-Revisited.aspx

just to share a few. There are many more articles and references on the dangers and lack of efficacy of vaccines. I have not yet had a chance to go through her article as closely as I’d like but I will eventually. I will say that I’ve read in many places that the statistics that are constantly being quoted regarding the efficacy of vaccines are subject to serious scrutiny. Many times the data behind these "statistics" were not obtained in a scientific way. This year’s flu season was a case in point. It was one of the worst flu seasons in recent years yet MORE people received the flu shot than ever before: http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1030971/Brace-for-worst-flu-season, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33449637/ I’ve seen this type of statistic many times. I could go on and on, but this blog is about the cleanse, not vaccines.]

The minority who have side-effects are just that, the minority [I believe she is making the same argument here for vaccines that I make for the cleanse; there’s no difference, a small minority can’t or shouldn’t do the cleanse].

Me:

So, I will say (IMO) there is a need for Western medicine in third-world countries. I think, in the US, pharmaceuticals are so overused that they’re causing more harm than good. In small (very small) quantities I think they’re probably ok but that’s even a stretch. Here in America we have access to quality nutrition so there’s really no excuse to be looking for quick-fixes in meds [I initially agreed here but realized that the majority of Americans don’t have access to quality nutrition, still there is a way to keep healthy by prevention and there are cost-effective ways to eat healthy and keep your immune system strong so that it can fight off infection; which is the point]. I agree with what you’re saying about the public demanding larger portions and that doctors are not fully to blame. [I rethought this comment later as well and what I wrote above in brackets is more in line with what I believe. In some ways the public has demanded it but I would say only in the sense that they are actually purchasing the larger size meals and not “boycotting” them. In my opinion if it’s available on the cheap, the public will generally buy it. I could go into the psychology here but again, this isn’t the purpose of this blog]. I will say, however, that there are very few doctors that don’t automatically reach for their prescription pad or that counsel common sense practices such a diet, exercise and drinking enough water (read my second blog for an example). I don’t put all the blame on the public either. The public, in general, is not being informed on what they are really eating when they have fast food or just restaurant food in general. We place our “trust” in the government to look out for us and the media to keep us informed (read your comment about a public health message) but the bottom line is that they’re more concerned with big interests and not our health. I just recently watched Food Inc. I had no idea that ammonia was used in ground beef filler to kill potential bacteria. The FDA allows this not to mention the conditions at feed lots. But we’re trusting them to keep us informed about what’s healthy or not?

It’s funny that you would question the health connotation I attach to the cleanse. I attach that connotation because I truly believe it’s healthy. I’m not going to promote or even condone something I feel is unhealthy.

My quackery comment was the other side of the coin. This is not to say that I don’t believe there’s quackery in other (even natural) medicine. I was just trying to prove a point that quackery doesn’t only apply to homeopathic medicine. Still, I bet I could argue that most of the treatments touted as “quackery” wrt natural health really isn’t quackery.

As far as a “public health message” regarding the safety and efficacy of cleansing…or ANYTHING natural…you can forget about ever seeing anything like that. I believe there is something very sinister behind those public or lack thereof but that’s a topic for another day. Ultimately it goes like this: illness=perceived need for pharmaceuticals=profits to pharmaceutical companies=funding to law makers and the government=less stringent controls on pharma dangers=more strict controls on natural health=illness…and the cycle continues. At the end of the day the people that make the money make the rules and it is those people that benefit from illness in terms of profit. They also control the media and the government. As long as we’re kept in an unhealthy state, we’ll never widely hear about things that could help us become healthy. This is a fact. Why would Big Pharma bite the hands that feed them if they have the power to control the flow of information? [This same argument can be and has been made regarding the vaccination controversy http://ahrcanum.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/flu-shot-cost-taxpayers-600-each/. The point is that the pharmaceutical companies have $Billions to gain by “informing” the public of how “good” vaccines and medications supposedly are].

I have a question. So far you’ve made it clear that you disagree with cleansing as a viable healthy option; however, you haven’t told me why. You’ve said that there’s no science to support its benefits and that is harmful but you haven’t told me how you came to that conclusion. Where is the scientific support that states it is not beneficial or that it is harmful? [The article she initially shared states "there is 'little' scientific evidence" and appears to state mostly opinion of someone involved in the ADA. Anytime I see a statement made by someone involved in any "American X Association" (pick the industry) I am leery about their intentions. These types of associations tend to be funded by big interests and are therefore going to debunk anything that might detract from said big interest getting their payoff. What I mean here is that Big Pharma profits from illness and if there's a natural treatment that might prevent people from using pharmaceuticals, Big Pharma can and will do everything in their power to suppress the information." A simple search will show that the ADA gets funding from a variety of pharmaceutical companies as well as large GMO companies (i.e Monsanto and ConAgra) see http://cspinet.cc/integrity/nonprofits/american_dietetic_association.html. This means that their interests lie with their benefactors and NOT the general public. Normally I would have seen that and closed the article immediately but for argument's sake and because someone I have a great deal of respect for sent it to me I am willing to respond to it. Reading further into the story, the author and also the Johns Hopkins doctor point out some of the benefits I've already mentioned: 'detoxing or fasting can be used as a motivational tool for clients who are looking to take on healthier eating. “I think an ideal weight loss method is one where you are choosing a new way of eating that you’re going to be able to maintain rather than doing something for a short period of time and then returning back to your old habits."' The article also states the following: 'Detoxing may not be well researched, but Lanou (the doctor) says some scientists have taken an interest in the merits of fasting. “There is some interesting work that’s been done on fasting—both fasting with only a water fast and fasting with only specific liquids—that have shown real benefits to people with chronic conditions and also some real benefits for people trying to break an addiction, like a smoking habit or an alcohol consumption habit,” she says.' So with that said, the original article seems to be more in line with my reasoning anyway. All-in-all, the article actually supports my position over that against cleansing.]



I’m going to leave you with this; it came from a weekly e-mail sent by author of the (second) book on the Master Cleanse:

I was having dinner with my MD friend, Carlos Garcia, last night (an awesome alternative healer as described in last week's newsletter) and he was telling me he thought the Master Cleanse was a great cleanse. It got me thinking about other MD's who think it is a great cleanse, too.
Dr. Elson Haas, an authority on detoxification, nutrition and health, who has practiced medicine for 25 years and is the author of:
• Staying Healthy with the Seasons
• Staying Healthy with Nutrition
• The Detox Diet
• The Staying Healthy Shopper's Guide
• Vitamins for Dummies
• A Cookbook for All Seasons
• The False Fat Diet
says in his book, The New Detox Diet, that the Master Cleanse is his favorite fast. (p. 61)
"I believe in and consider the cleansing/fasting/detoxification process... to be the missing link in Western nutrition and a key to the health and vitality of our civilization. In over 25 years of medical practice, I have utilized extensively, various detox and healing/rejuvenation practices.... I truly believe that cleansing and detoxification... is virtually one of the most powerful healing therapies (real healing of ailments and not just suppression of symptoms) I have witnessed.... Its effects offer re-balance for the body/mind and are preventive for many health problems." (from "The Purification Process: Healing for Modern Times" by Elson Haas, MD)
He's also said, "Overall, after 35 years of medical practice, I have to say that the fasting/cleansing/detoxification process is the greatest and most effective healing tool I have found. It is an important component for the prevention of degenerative diseases and a key to transformational and evolutionary medicine and healing." (from "Spring Cleansing" by Elson Haas, MD)
Dr. James F. Coy, M.D., Past President of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine said, "In my environmental medicine practice, I attempt to identify toxic elements, physical and spiritual. Then I can help the patient avoid, protect against or detoxify them. I follow that with nutrition to promote as much additional healing as possible. In detoxification, my goal is always to use what works without further harming the patient and I use many, many things.
"The Master Cleanse is simple and combines & surpasses many other detox methods. It literally has been a God-send to my practice. I am grateful to Peter for seeing, loving, and promoting the values of this cleanse."
There were no more responses but I believe you get the gist of the discussion. I hope this shows that there ARE two sides of every argument. I also hope that it shows you that I would not recommend something without having thoroughly researched it.

I know I included many links in this blog and I urge you to try and get through most of them so that you can be informed as well. This is just the tip of the iceberg. There is so much information out there and so many reasons not to blindly trust what you are told.

I also know this is a lengthy blog but I felt it was important to share. This is also the reason I hadn’t posted a blog in over two weeks. I wanted to make sure to take the time and give this the attention it deserves. As usual, feel free to contact me with questions or comments.

Until next time, have a great and healthy week! (or two, depending on how quickly my next blog comes out :)