Re: Something I've always wondered... Re: Sad truth: liver flush with that colon cleanse?

 ...if you believe this is true (as you obviously do), when there are many people claiming it is not true and your hypothesis isn't valid-

Using Uny's line of reasoning then we can also conclude that she believes chemotherapy and radiation therapy are effective for cancer.  And that vaccines and fluoride are perfectly safe.  After all so many people claim these are true, so according to Uny they therefore must be true!!!

Of course I disagree with her line of reasoning and know for a fact that chemo and radiation are not effective for cancer and that vaccines and fluoride are not safe despite so many people claiming they are.

--- and you are aware (as you obviously are) that the CureZone Liver Flush forum (and liver flush poll) is a huge compendium of liver flush experiences (which documents the empirical data of  thousands of liver flush experiences)...

Then why don't you simply compile the data from the forum/poll and offer solid evidence of how many liver flushes ended with a gallstone stuck in a duct,  that lead to pancreatis and/or required emergency surgery?

LOL!!!!  Typical.  I have been asking for the "liver flush" supporters to provide real evidence to their claims for how long now and I have been ignored.  Now they are asking me to provide evidence that can be found in the medical journals if they look just so they can ignore the evidence just like all the other evidence I have presented and they still claimed did not exist. Games "liver flushers" play!!!

Don't try to make others post more evidence when you are unwilling to post ANY evidence yourself and you are just going to continue ignoring evidence that has already been presented.

Since I have seen how terrible you are doing real research I will even help you get started on your path to enlightenment about gallstone pancreatitis:

www.mssurg.net/Team5Conferences/Gallstone%20Pancreatitis.pdf

"GALLSTONE PANCREATITIS

Responsible for 40-50%% of all cases of acute pancreatitis"

http://www.umm.edu/patiented/articles/how_gallstones_gallbladder_disease_diag...

"Pancreatitis. It is sometimes difficult to differentiate between pancreatitis and acute cholecystitis, but a correct diagnosis is critical, because treatment is very different. About 40% of pancreatitis cases are associated with gallstones. The risk for gallstone-associated pancreatitis is highest in older Caucasian and Hispanic women. About 25% of pancreatitis cases are severe, and the rate is much higher in people who are obese."

And yes, I have seen cases of pancreatitis from flushes reported in the medical journals.  But if you are really interested in these cases you will take the time to do proper research and put the time in to do the search.  Again I have already completed part of the work for you.  But I am not going to do all of it for you and the other "liver flush" supporters just to have the LFs pull the same games of either ignoring the evidence and claiming it was never posted even though it was.  Or their other favorite game of falsely claiming I am pro-pharma because they falsely claim that I spend all night combing the internet looking for anti-liver flush evidence.  Therefore, based on the LFs history of game playing I am in a no win situation whether I post the evidence for you or make you do it yourself.  So why should I waste my time any further doing your homework for you when you really don't care about the truth to begin with?  If I am wrong then you would have already taken the time to look up the fact that gallstones are in fact a major cause of pancreatitis.  And they DO NOT cause pancreatitis by remaining in the gallbladder.

As I said though I have looked through the medical journals, not CZ's forums and have found cases of pancreatitis from trying these flushes.  So the first lesson for you on doing proper research is to search credible sources.

In any debate (or court, or laboratory), when someone makes a claim of something being true (a hypothesis) and another person challenges it, then the person who made the original claim carries the 'burden of proof' ...they must provide evidence their claim is true.  If they will not (or cannot) they lose the debate, or they are laughed out of the debate, court or laboratory.  You have been challenged to provide evidence that supports your claim regarding the alleged risks of liver flushing many times.

First of all in order to lose a debate there must first be a debate.  And debate involves taking a stand and providing the evidence to back that stand.  But the only person here who has been really doing that is me.  The "liver flush" supporters have been taking a stand, but backing their beliefs with constant personal attacks and games instead of real evidence.  Therefore, I have had no opponents debating and thus cannot be losing the debate.

Funny thing is that the "liver flush" supporters were making their bogus claims long before I even came to Curezone.  This is easy to verify by checking how long this board has been active to how long I have been posting on Curezone.  So the "liver flushers" are making the original claims that they have never provided any real evidence to back up.  Therefore Uny has just pointed out that she and all the other "liver flush" supporters have already lost the debate for failure to back up ANY of their claims with real evidence despite being requested to provide this evidence numerous times.  Instead they keep responding with games and personal attacks to try and derail the debates and chase me off the forum since they are unable to back their claims with real evidence.

Actually reminds me a lot of when I used to post on someone else's board who attacked me for recommending an herbal extract.  She went off on me claiming that it was not natural.  So when I pointed out to her that the teas and tinctures, which are also unnatural extracts, and thus are really no different than the herbal extract I recommended she banned me from her forum because she did not care about the real truth, only her version of the truth.  Remember doing that Uny?!!!  I see nothing has changed.  You made the false claim, but I had to provide the evidence you were wrong, even though the burden of proof was on you, just like you are trying to do again here.

In fact, here is another of Uny's claims  where she is the one making the claim first , thus has the burden of proof.  Let's look at this statement made by Uny 6 years ago long before I even came to Curezone:

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=166720#i

"Your gallbladder empties through one duct into your intestines...and can be flushed out using a variety of different flushes that have been used by natural healers for centuries."

So here she is making the claim that these "flushes" actually cleanse the gallbladder of stones.  And this was long before I came to Curezone.  So according to Uny's own argument the burden of proof is on her to show that these flushes can really cleanse the gallbladder of stones with real evidence.

In addition, numerous posts by Uny clearly state that the colon needs to be cleansed first since years of accumulated toxins in the liver can dump in to the colon, get backed up and be reabsorbed.  Again, where is the proof to these claims?  Where has she proven that the oil even cleanses the liver at all?  More claims first made by Uny that she has the burden of proof on but is trying to get me to counter the claims she first made and thus has the burden of proof to back up with real evidence.

So you better get busy Uny.  According to your own argument you have a lot of claims you made first and thus the burden of proof is on you to prove with REAL evidence!!!