Hello.

I rarely come to curezone, but whenever I do, it seems like the same questions and debates concerning what the stones are, how the liver can hold such large things, much less pass them etc..... always arises. I don't know why it has not been posted before or referenced but there is a study that was done decades ago that answere many of the questions that always appear here.

Since I am not allowed to post links, I can point you in the right direction so that you can read this clinical report.

If you go to google and type in exactly the following, the first listing is the link for the study. There are actually many links that follow as well, citing it. It is a PDF file, which means some people may have trouble downloading or opening it. Here is what to type with brackets.....

"intrahepatic stones: a clinical study"

It is 12 pages.

The study was done by two doctors, Chung-Chieh Wen, M.D. and Hsin-Chao Lee, M.D. at the National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan, on 150 patients, between the years 1957 and 1969.

All questions concerning the following are answered, leaving no room for debate.

1. liver stones exist and can be VERY large.

2. liver stones are able to pass through the sphincter of ODDI, into the duodenum, due to the fact that this sphincter is almost always "loose and patulous", when Liver Stone Disease, or excessive intrahepatic stones are present.

3. The liver ducts can be as large as the index finger. And the common duct as large as the small intestine.

4. Colors of the stones can be varied - black, green, brown or yellow. Although green and yellow are the most common.

5. STONE RECURRANCE is one of the common charactoristics of Liver Stone Disease. And btw, Liver Stone Disease is what the authors of the 12 year clinical "hands on" study have called excessive intrahepatic stone formation.

6. The intrahepatic stones are translucent to x-rays, due to their bilirubinate compostion. Ultrasound is another matter, since this technology did not exist back then. And of course, x-ray technology is not the same either.

All of the points above are not debatable.

I find the RECURRANCE of stones to be most interesting, in view of the fact that some people doing the the Hulda Clark liver cleanse keep making them due to this same RECURRANCE problem. Myself being one of them. I was a mass producer of intrahepatc stones for years. In the last 12 - 18 months, my production has reduced approx, 75 - 80%. That is over a period of just 2 - 3 weeks. So it is still far too many. However, the fact that they have reduced this much, speaks to the truth that the stones are NOT produced by the cleanse, and that they ARE coming out of the liver.

The stones are not a product of soapification since it is NOT EVEN NECESSARY TO USE GRAPEFRUIT OR LEMON JUICE AT ALL, for the cleanse to successfully remove them from the liver. The claim of soapification is not true.

I hope this thread and post will finally put an end to certain questions and useless debate.

The question I have is, do Ultrasound and other technologies only see the odd calcified or crystalized stone that may be present at times, but not the many bilirubinate ones. I know it does see some of them. I am just not sure if it sees ALL of them, since the vast majority are bilirubinate, according to the authors. In fact, the Doctors (and authors) of the study did not believe there were any calcified or crystalized stones found in the liver. I have seen ultrasound scans online which do show the odd stone, and that is why I am questioning just HOW MUCH it is actually seeing.


I could go on. But this is enough for now.