Butchered 2 hogs today and..... 
greenie
20 y
4,855
carefully dissected out their liver and gallbladders intact to study. My wife and I carefully looked over the organs before beggining our internal dissection. While these animals are young and i would expect no stones what we did find suprised us. In looking at the internal structure of the liver and collecting bile ducts and the large ducts leading to the gall bladder as well as the ducts leading to the duodenum. We were suprised to find the these ducts were so small in the liver that even a grain of sans appeared huge. As the bile ducts ran into each other the ducts did become larger but nowhere, and I mean nowhere, were they big enough to pass the stones that are pictured as being liver stones . Right at the gall bladder the ducts were even larger but still not near large enough to pass any of the stones pictured. Looking at the gallbladder itself it was about the size of my fist and was only filled with bile. The ducts leading to the duodenum was about the size of a pencil but no larger. Even when out of the animal and fully relaxed these ducts would not expand or dilate to accomadate the size of the large stones pictured on the Liver Flush Forum .
I have saved on liver and gall bladder on ice in hopes that someone can offer me an explaination or directions on how to look at this liver and discover how so many stones can be found in these organs. By the way these animals were each about 300 lbs. and my understanding is that the internal organs of pigs is near identical to that of a human. Can anyone help explain these findings???
More
- I'm no expert but... MidlothianGirl
20 y
3,943
This is a reply to # 412,319It seems to me that this is comparing apples and oranges. First, the human diet and genetic factors seem to be THE precipitating factor in stone formation. I have no idea if pigs have the genetic propensity for stone formation, OR the diet that would cause the stagnation of bile because of an abundance of cholesterol in the blood from the consumption of animal products.
But besides that point.....there are pictures of autopsied livers with intrahepatic stones lodged in the bile ducts. All you have to do is a google search of "intrahepatic stones". You'll get thousands of hits with many research and treatment sites. Doctors acknowledge their existance, but they don't seem to be opened to "flusing" them out with a large liver contraction caused by the consumption of an acid and a fat (like citrus juice and olive oil). Nevertheless, there are tons and tons of sites documenting human treatment for intrahepatic stones.
More
- for example.... johng
20 y
3,510
MoreThis is a reply to # 412,320see link below- a scientific study of surgical removal of liver stones . funny that the article mentions they are prevelant in Asia. i wonder when doctors here are going to get the big clue that we in west probably have a greater prevelance of liver stones ....
John ghttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uid...
- Re: for example.... greenie
20 y
3,572
This is a reply to # 412,322Thanks for the link I read that article and a few more htis afternoon. Here's one that I found that described a study with 100 patients. Out of the hundred almost half only had a single stone and they don't describe thousands. I can't figure out why everyone that does the flush produces hundreds and thousands of stones when I can't find any references to a human having this many and looking at these livers where in the heck they might all fit. Don't get me wrong it is really easy to see where the stones can (and do) form but the volume of these areas jsut doesn't seem to match with the passed stone volume. The gall bladder and liver connections are really cool looking. My wife has teased out all the major colelcting ducts and how they connect to the liver....I wish everyone could see what this looks like!
http://www.joplink.net/prev/200207/cit/01z04.html
- Re: for example.... johng
20 y
3,499
This is a reply to # 412,326well i wonder what kinds of stones they were looking for, and how they "looked" for them. most "soft" stones don't show up on scans, so I wonder if the search they performed actually looked for the soft stones. from what I know Liver Flushing (17 done myself). the soft stones can occupy every nook and crany of the liver. and, other than cutting open the entire liver, you would not be able to find them. I doubt they do this. And, once someone dies, i suspect the soft stones melt, just as they do when outside the body for a little while. these are just educated guesses on my part. I know there is an explanation, even if I don't know it. I used to be very curious about the flushes and how they worked. after doing a few, I didn't care, as long as they worked. which for me, they did in a big way.
John g- Re: for example.... RufusG
20 y
3,638
This is a reply to # 412,329What Benefit have you experienced from doing your many Liver Flushes ?
The Forums are full of user experiences of doing a natural Liver Flush, but are very short on documented reports of medical results and user benefits.
It seems to me that we can show that:
1. Gallstones can be flushed without surgery
2. Medical Tests, taken before and after a Liver Flush, can show improvements in many Liver functions, especially Cholesterol.
3. User stories can show improvements in Acne, Psoriasis, food allergies , Digestion and Diabetes - and possibly Weight Loss.
Can I ask you to document your results - hopefully before and after flushing - and please contribute your data here on this Forum
- or email me at: rufus@greenbaum.com
- or fax me at +1-208-955 3764 or +44-870-132 0720
Regards
RufusG
- Re: for example.... johng
20 y
3,439
This is a reply to # 412,331Rufus-
Many of us don't test because docs wouldn't take seriously and at least for myself, I don't have the extra money to pay for lab tests. For me its mostly too late now, as all the problems I started Liver Flushing for are mainly resolved.
I had chronic sinusitis, which was what led me to the liver flushing. I tried almost every mainstream and alternative approach. nothing brought lasting relief until I started flushing. before flushing I had daily sinus headaches, and took advil or other drugs every day. I have not had an advil in over a year now. I had severve allergies most of my life, and atopic dermatitis. allergies mostly gone, atopic dermatitis about 90% gone. digestion greatly improved. energy levels back. lost 40+ pounds.... candida overgrowth... all of this I attribute to liver flushing. I don't have any "test results" though, because I turned my back on mainstream medicine. so, other than my experience, I don't really have any proof. but as someone posted before, I'm not selling anything and don't even have a web page. why would I continue to hang around here if i didn't believe in it? granted someone could say I am just delusional... but, if delusions make health problems go away, i'm all for delusions. (in my experience it doesn't happen that way though).
I understand your desire to get more info. and I hope you are able to do so. If you have health problems, I suggest you consider your own experience as a test subject. do the flushes, and get them documented.
John g
- Re: for example.... johng
20 y
3,439
- Re: for example.... RufusG
20 y
3,638
- Re: for example.... johng
20 y
3,499
- Re: for example.... greenie
20 y
3,572
- Re: I'm no expert but... greenie
20 y
3,511
This is a reply to # 412,320Thanks! I have looked at the photos and while I understand that stones do exist in some cases I don't think that means everyone has stones. I mean I have never seen an autopsy report or a description from an anatomy class describing the presence of hundreds or thousands of stones.
Looking at the liver and its structure I can see where there are a few places that stones the size of which are reported on the Liver Flush Forum could lodge or form but these areas are extreemly limited and would certainly accomodate any nubmer of stones. The largest portion of the liver is very smooth with the majority of the structures; hepatocytes, bile cannicula, portal veins, almost microscopic. I cannot discern how the liver could ever support the number of stones that is reported. There was jsut a report today of a volume of stones that was equivalent to the volume of the gall bladder and its connecting ducts. The duct emptying into the duodenum is only as big as a pencil and as I reported would/could never pass a stone 1.5-2 cm in size...it just won't fit from what I have seen.
Midlothian girl could you point me to some features in the liver structure or organization that I might look for on the liver and gall bladder we still haven't cut up. My wife is a firm believer in flushes but I am still skeptical and after helping me with the butchering today (first time in 20 years!) she is also questioning where all the stones could ever fit. Thanks for your response and help.- Re: I'm no expert but... Grog
20 y
3,451
This is a reply to # 412,323Greenie! How old where those pigs? A few years old or so if that! Its not the best comparison simply for that factor ! I would not suspect that a child of that age to have stones of anytype! Grog
- Re: I'm no expert but... greenie
20 y
3,490
This is a reply to # 412,324Grog you misunderstand me. I did not expect the pigs to have stones they are too young. Pigs that size are 8 months old FYI. What I did know is that the internal organs of a pig are near identical as humans so at the insistence of my wife I carefully removed them with a portion of the intestine (duodenum) so she (we) could study the structure of this organ and determine where all the stones would be found. the structure of the liver and ducts jsut does not seem to be able to accomodate the stones and chaff that people are describing. I was hoping someone else had done some dissections or research and could tell me where to look for these places. What was really surprising was the size of the duct leading to the duodenum...no way would it ever pass a stone 1.5-2 cm ...it just won't fit if these pig livers are any indication. Does anyone know if pig livers differ that much from human livers in structure?
- Re: I'm no expert but... Grog
20 y
3,529
This is a reply to # 412,325i think your making the assumption that these livers are not capable of containing stones is some preconcieved idea about the liver itself! To think you can analyze these livers and their capabilties just by looking at them is not a very scientific process and really doesn't prove or disprove anything! Nothing personal just my opinion and sorry I cant help you in your folly! Grog
- Re: I'm no expert but... greenie
20 y
3,551
This is a reply to # 412,327I don't understand your statements Grog . You say I am making an assumption that these livers can't hold stones. I never said anything like that. I did say that I cannot see where the large number and size of stones reported could possibly fit in the liver based on my personal observations. You then go on to say:
"To think you can analyze these livers and their capabilties just by looking at them is not a very scientific process and really doesn't prove or disprove anything"
Now I would think that looking at them and carefully dissecting the structures to see how the connecting ducts and all the other plumbing is connected would be a very good method of estimating the capability of the liver/gall bladder/ connecting ducts to hold stones and also gives a pretty good indication of how things work. I mean if you see pipes connected together and running to some palce you wouldn't find it hard to make a guess on how the system might work...kinda like looking at a plumbing tree in a house. I think if you can hold in your hands the connecting and common bile ducts in your very own hands I think you can make a fair assessment of what can or can not fit into it. How would you suggest a person should learn about liver structure and architecture? How do you think liver (opr any organ) structure and function was first determined?- Re: I'm no expert but... Grog
20 y
3,510
This is a reply to # 412,328Well you dont have to tear your plumbing apart to know the toilet flushes! But I say folly in a good sense I know it sounds patronizing its just that I realize your desire for the truth but to what extreme! You say you dont trust the flushes, but can't you just get past your own distrust of such a simple thing to just flush your self with out dissecting animal entrails! It is a funny image! Sorry, I see you are sincere so good luck with it!
- Lets me put it this way Grog millie
20 y
3,494
This is a reply to # 412,330If you flushed your loo (sorry John) and the water board/sewage company/whatever you call them in the US of A called you and said 'Heh, you've just blocked the system because flushing your John dumped 1000 pounds of *%#&¤?§* into the drains, instead of the 1 pound (at a big stretch) any normal person ever dumps". Wouldn't you tell them they were talking crap, because it wasn't possible?
Get the analogy? I doubt it.- Re: Let me put it this way Millie Grog
20 y
3,860
This is a reply to # 412,333If your comparing the human digestive system to the rigid piping used in plumbing, the analogy would not apply! The human body as most people know is very capable of moving much larger objects through what appear to the eye, incapable of passing ! Ask any mother! Excuse the analogy but very applicable! Once again millie your education has done nothing for your common sense! Of course we know that you've been banned a few times for your unreasonable posts so I dont expect common sense but jus annoyance on your part! And of course we know you would agree with anyone who think s they can debunk these Liver Flushes or the common sense approach behind them, no matter how absurd thier proposal was !
you 're pretty funny millie! lol!
©†ƒ……•™¼‡_Original_Message_¾€š½ž¢«»¬ï°©
If your comparing the human digestive system to the rigid piping used in plumbing, the analogy would not apply! The human body as most people know is very capable of moving much larger objects through what appear to the eye, incapable of passing ! Ask any mother! Excuse the analogy but very applicable! Once again millie your education has done nothing for your common sense! Of course we know that you've been banned a few times for your unreasonable posts so I dont expect common sense but jus annoyance on your part! And of course we know you would agree with anyone who think s they can debunk these Liver Flushes or the common sense approach behind them, no matter how absurd thier proposal was !
you 're pretty funny millie! lol!
- Re: Let me put it this way Millie Grog
20 y
3,860
- Lets me put it this way Grog millie
20 y
3,494
- Re: anatomy versus function DangerousProduce
20 y
3,690
This is a reply to # 412,328By studying the anatomy of the liver, gallbladder and ducts cetain important observations can be made. The fact that you can then better see some of how the liver functions does not mean you now see the entire picture. You see part of the liver's functions this way.
What you are studying is anatomy and you need to know some of what the liver and it's surrounding structures like the ducts and connections, for example to the gallbladder, do IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND THE STRUCTURE. You see the ducts and you wonder what they do. When you find out they carry bile, its important to the understanding of the liver structure. Just as it is important to people who have gallbladder attacks or stones elsewhere, like in the liver, to know from what structure in the body is this pain emanating. It takes the mystery out of the pain and makes them feel better.
But then what do you do? Just because you can name the lobes and every single part of the liver precisely does not mean you understand the function. You only know the function when you see it running which you cannot in a dissection. When the liver is removed from the body it doesn't function anymore. You cannot figure out how the liver stores things simply by looking at it anymore than you can figure out how the mother board in the computer's CPU works by simply looking at it. How does the computer store information, how does the liver store stones are questions pertaining to function. These questions are answered
by experimental tests and painstaking research while the liver is running without damaging the patient. I would be asking of doctors and researchers who are sincerely interested in health where are these tests (so I can read them) ?
How do you know how certain chemicals are stored throughout the liver and how it will react when this complex chemical factory is hit by an acid/oil combination (as in a liver flush)? My question would be could it be possible that the tiny grain-of- sand-sized stones are then precipitated out of the liver somehow following a chemical reaction? The reasoning would be it might be easier to move the chemicals that the liver wants out, because they interfere with function, in small particles throughout the liver. It's probably lighter and easier to remove for a burdened liver than a few gigantic stones that can't go or get anywhere once they are formed because it's too difficult to pass through the small ducts you described without doing damage to itself.
The analogy would be that it's easier to carry 25 small stones from one place to another, manually, than to pick up one large stone, the equivalent of those 25 small stones, and carry it, manually. For example, if you were building an addition on to a house, or creating a stone fence or landscaping and you had to do it yourself (say money constraints), you have to figure a way how you can move the materials (yourself) to where you need them. If you order rock material from a quarry or building supply and they deliver one large stone to your building site then you have to figure out how you are going to move this stone into place by the house or fence or landscape since you have to do the work yourself. Perhaps you have enough money to pay the delivery man extra this time so he can break the stone into smaller partsfor you. From this you learn that the next time you order stones, you are going to order the same amount of stone but in 25 smaller pieces so you can move them into place and not have to pay extra money to the delivery man to break it down.
Since you cannot go in and clean your liver with your hand the liver has to clean itself. And it has found, through evolution I imagine, that it is like the man who has to move the stones out himself so it makes the stones in sizes it can move out safely. And it can count on the ducts to have extra stretch in them, but not too often, when needed for large stones. I have read posts by expert "liver flushers" where they drink unfiltered apple juice to soften stones so they bend some or are more flexible as they move and jostle their way down the ducts. When the ducts stretch a little and the stones bend or compress a little you can get out larger stones then the size of the opening of the duct once it has resumed its normal or usual state or size. (You certainly don't want to do anything to make the ducts contract to the point where the stone won't pass through and cause you pain.)
The ducts are not made of plastic they are living, moving things.
When you consider the distended colon of John Wayne who had 40 lbs. of compacted matter in it due to cancer, you must realize that the width of that compaction in the intestines and colon far exceeded the 1 inch diameter of the normal sized colon. That means the intestines had to stretch themselves wide to accomodate this. I remember reading about the autopsy of a 38 year-old-male who had a colon that was 19 inches in diameter (impacted with feces). Different ducts or conduits stretch to different degrees.
The arteries have a very, very narrow range to stretch before they break or leak. If you are a larger sized man or woman can you have a larger liver with larger ducts and carry larger stones? When you are specific things then you have to make specific comparisons. Some of these things can only be answered by understanding the various functions of the superb chemical factory that the liver is. (Things go in in one form and come out another.) To try and "divine" how stones are made simply by looking at the dissected liver specimen is the inevitable outcome of only studying the anatomy of the liver.
To try and say you are skeptical of the function, in this case, because you know the anatomy is arrogant. Wouldn't your next step be to lay more of a foundation for yourself on what the biochemistry of the liver is so you could better understand how it might be possible that stones are produced in the liver? Are you a skeptic because you had extensive chem. and bio. courses, or because you lack knowedge of basic chemistry? Maybe you can come up with your own theory of where they came from.
What you don't know can hurt you. If you had taken the required liver/chemistry courses the conventional doctor took (who does nothing to flush out stones), you may not have come to the same conclusions he did. Lots of people equally schooled or better, didn't. If just by knowing anatomy you know everything about the liver, then why can't oncologists who hold to the conventional beliefs cure liver cancer? If all you need is anatomy?
- Re: anatomy versus function greenie
20 y
3,697
This is a reply to # 412,347"You cannot figure out how the liver stores things simply by looking at it
Couldn't you measure it? For example glycogen is stored in the liver but I nor you nor anyone can see it with their eyes but there are methods to measure it chemically..correct?
"These questions are answered
by experimental tests and painstaking research while the liver is running without damaging the patient. I would be asking of doctors and researchers who are sincerely interested in health where are these tests (so I can read them) ?
isn't this done everyday in toxicology and physiology labs across teh world? Have not countless experiments been made where a chemical, drug, or toxin has been administered to a lab animal or person and then analysis made of the urine and feces to see how much of the original compound is excreted as well as what types of metabolites are formed from the lvier enzymes transforming these chemicals into something that won't harm the body and can be excreted?
"My question would be could it be possible that the tiny grain-of- sand-sized stones are then precipitated out of the liver somehow following a chemical reaction? The reasoning would be it might be easier to move the chemicals that the liver wants out, because they interfere with function, in small particles throughout the liver"
Wouldn't it be even easier if the liver moved these toxins out as individual molecules dissolved in water or bile rather than some stone or sand that might physically clog up the works? Isn't it true that all sorts of chemicals and their metabolism ahve already been studyed. The instructor gave me a basic toxicolgy book that describes the P450 enzymes (phase 1 detoxification enzymes) and conjugation systems (like glucoronic acid) which the liver uses to metabolise chemicals and toxins. The metabolites are excreted in bile and urine and the book has references on how to extract and isolate these mteabolites as they call them.
FYI the John Wayne story is urban legend he did not weigh much mroe than that when he died...sorry no 40 lbs of impacted fecal material.
"To try and "divine" how stones are made simply by looking at the dissected liver specimen is the inevitable outcome of only studying the anatomy of the liver.
I was nevertrying to divine how stones are formed just where hte stones could be stored in the lvier and bile ducts...simple as packing a suitcase...you cannot get three suitcases of clothes into one it just won't fit..same thing appears to be true for the lvier there are no holes or spaces for stones the size that people claim to have passed within this organ.
"If just by knowing anatomy you know everything about the liver, then why can't oncologists who hold to the conventional beliefs cure liver cancer? If all you need is anatomy?"
This seems to be a strw man argument since I never claimed to knoweverything about the lvier and have just reported my results of my own dissections and those that I saw done on real dead humans. Also when did I ever say that all you needed was anatomy...that'sright I never did say that you did!!
-
Edited UserX
20 y
5,839
RN
This is a reply to # 412,361I cannot support the claim that John Wayne had 40# of waste in his colon at the time of his death. I was not present at his autopsy (if he had one) and I did not weigh the contents of his colon.
However, I can tell you that there is a medical condition known as toxic megacolon that includes a massive impaction and stretching of the colon far beyond the size of a normal capacity.
If you will click on the links below you can learn more about megacolon and view images, photographs and x-rays for yourself. I will warn you in advance that some of the photographs are very graphic and not for the squeamish! Pay particluar attention to the picture in the second link which includes a man's hand in the photograph. This gives you some perspective regarding the actual size of this colon. (The average normal adult colon is approximately 5 feet long and 3-1/2 inches in diameter at the widest section which is the cecum.)
While this post does not address the issues you've raised regarding liver/gallbladder stones, it does demonstrate that the organs and passageways through them are capable of expanding and holding far more than what might be expected simply by viewing the 'normal' anatomy of a pig liver or even a human liver.
In addition, when you are discussing the liver/gallbladder 'stones' (as commonly referred to on this site) with most people in the western allopathic medical community, you may be encountering a problem of semantics. When you use the word 'stone' most doctors will only consider the calcified Gallstones that are visible with ultrasound. The 'stones' that are most often mentioned on this site are cholesterol 'stones' that are not visible with ultrasound, and are either believed to be non-existent or non-problematic by most in the medical community. Neither of these assumptions is accurate, however. You can do a google search for images and information of intrahepatic stones and you will see for yourself that these 'stones' do, indeed, exist within the liver ducts, and if you read any of the articles you will find that they also pose significant health problems. Curiously, most of the scientific literature concerning intrahepatic stones comes from Asia (China, Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, Cambodia, etc.).
Considering that gallbladder removal is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures, and therefore highly lucrative to the medical community, it is no surprise that the 'scientific' answers that you are seeking are not readily available. And if you factor into this that the liver is also involved in cholesterol levels, and that statin drugs are one of the fastest growing pharmaceutical commodities ever, you can clearly see that there are major financial incentives to hinder and squelch true scientific understanding and discoveries.
Simply put, there is BIG, BIG money in keeping people uninformed and misinformed about their health, scaring them into believeing that they can't possibly take responsibility for their own health and must rely on 'experts', and offering them slash 'n burn treatments that only address symptoms (at best) and cure NOTHING! There is very little money, and hence incentive, in preventive medicine which is practically non-existent in allopathic medicine. It pays to be sick!...well, some are certainly cashing in on it!!!
*BTW I do not recall the specific details of a news story I recently heard on NPR, but I believe that some 5,000 noted scientists from around the world have filed a suit against the Bush Administration citing that political and economic influences have severely and dangerously compromised and corrupted the scientific process. I do not bring this up to enter a political debate, but merely to point out that the very foundations of true Science have been threatened and 'scientific' conclusions can no longer be relied upon to bring us any closer to the TRUTH, particularly when it centers around studies involving considerable money or those that might rattle the values and beliefs that are held by the majority. Scientific studies involving health and the environment were two cited examples. ©†ƒ……•™¼‡_Original_Message_¾€š½ž¢«»¬ï°©
I cannot support the claim that John Wayne had 40# of waste in his colon at the time of his death. I was not present at his autopsy (if he had one) and I did not weigh the contents of his colon.
However, I can tell you that there is a medical condition known as toxic megacolon that includes a massive impaction and stretching of the colon far beyond the size of a normal capacity.
If you will click on the links below you can learn more about megacolon and view images, photographs and x-rays for yourself. I will warn you in advance that some of the photographs are very graphic and not for the squeamish! Pay particluar attention to the picture in the second link which includes a man's hand in the photograph. This gives you some perspective regarding the actual size of this colon. (The average normal adult colon is approximately 5 feet long and 3-1/2 inches in diameter at the widest section which is the cecum.)
While this post does not address the issues you've raised regarding liver/gallbladder stones, it does demonstrate that the organs and passageways through them are capable of expanding and holding far more than what might be expected simply by viewing the 'normal' anatomy of a pig liver or even a human liver.
In addition, when you are discussing the liver/gallbladder 'stones' (as commonly referred to on this site) with most people in the western allopathic medical community, you may be encountering a problem of semantics. When you use the word 'stone' most doctors will only consider the calcified Gallstones that are visible with ultrasound. The 'stones' that are most often mentioned on this site are cholesterol 'stones' that are not visible with ultrasound and are either believed to be non-existent or non-problematic. Neither of these assumptions is accurate, however. You can do a google search for images and information of intrahepatic stones and you will see for yourself that these 'stones' do, indeed, exist within the liver ducts, and if you read any of the articles you will find that they also pose significant health problems. Curiously, most of the scientific literature concerning intrahepatic stones comes from China.
Considering that gallbladder removal is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures, and therefore highly lucrative to the medical community, it is no surprise that the 'scientific' answers that you are seeking are not available. And if you factor into this that the liver is also involved in cholesterol levels, and that statin drugs are one of the fastest growing pharmaceutical commodities ever, you can clearly see that there are major financial incentives to hinder and squelch true scientific understanding and discoveries.
Simply put, there is BIG, BIG money in keeping people uninformed and misinformed about their health, scaring them into believeing that they can't possibly take responsibility for their own health and must rely on 'experts', and offering them slash 'n burn treatments that only address symptoms (at best) and cure NOTHING! There is very little money, and hence incentive, in preventive medicine which is practically non-existent in allopathic medicine. It pays to be sick!...well, some are certainly cashing in on it!!!
*BTW I do not recall the specific details of a news story I recently heard on NPR, but I believe that some 5,000 noted scientists from around the world have filed a suit against the Bush Administration citing that political and economic influences have severely and dangerously compromised and corrupted the scientific process. I do not bring this up to enter a political debate, but merely to point out that the very foundations of true Science have been threatened and 'scientific' conclusions can no longer be relied upon to bring us any closer to the TRUTH, particularly when it centers around studies involving considerable money or those that might rattle the values and beliefs that are held by the majority. Scientific studies involving health and the environment were two cited examples.
http://health.allrefer.com/health/toxic-megacolon-toxic-megacolon.html
http://www.angelhealingcenter.com/MegaColon.JPG
http://www.proctosite.com/imagens/mega_colon/imega_colon.htm- Edited UserX
20 y
3,439
This is a reply to # 412,362Click on the link below to learn more about The Union of Concerned Scientists and their report on White House policies and the manipulation of science. To the right of the report there is a highlighted CONTENT box. Make sure that you check out the Prominent Statement Signatories as it is a very impressive list. ©†ƒ……•™¼‡_Original_Message_¾€š½ž¢«»¬ï°©
Click on the link below to learn more about The Union of Concerned Scientists and their report on White House policies and the manipulation of science.THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS
- Re: Toxic Megacolon greenie
20 y
3,637
This is a reply to # 412,362You are right the Conspiracy theories you brought up actually ahve nothing to do with the Liver Flush debate. I am pretty confident that livers have been dissected and looked at long before the big pharma ever existed. I am also confident that 100's and 1000's of stonees would be found in at least some of the dissections and autopsies that have been performed. In all the literature on anatomy I have yet to find a reference to these melting cholesterol stones.
As for the megacolon...what is the time course of the expansive growth of the colon? Did it happen overnight or for a prolonged period of time? I think that is a good example of how a organ might grow abnormally but I don't think it is that common. I also wonder abouthow often the lvier stones actually occur. One study that was posted on curezone stated that they looked at over 100 patients with laproscopic techniques through the bile ducts and into the liver and found no liver stones or so they say. That literature was also out of China. thanks for bringing some interesting things to think about.- Expand 20 messages, 21 to 40 of 54 UserX
20 y
3,492
- Edited UserX
20 y
3,439
-
- Re: anatomy versus function greenie
20 y
3,697
- Re: I'm no expert but... Grog
20 y
3,510
- Re: I'm no expert but... greenie
20 y
3,551
- Re: I'm no expert but... Grog
20 y
3,529
- Re: I'm no expert but... greenie
20 y
3,490
- Re: I'm no expert but... Grog
20 y
3,451
- for example.... johng
20 y
3,510
- I'm no expert but... MidlothianGirl
20 y
3,943
Expand 14 messages, 41 to 54 of 54 UserX
20 y
3,520
Share:
Translate This Page: