Tweet
Re: Is taking a few days to detox 1st ok?
I understand where you are coming from and agree that a lot of food has a lot of 'extras' along with its nutrient content. That is why I qualified everything I said by adding "provided you are eating good food". I also know that a lot of people believe they have seen considerable benefit from the use of these remedies, and if they do I have no problem with that at all.
As I said, we all do our own thing and do what we believe is best for our bodies, and that is a very good thing. However I genuinely worry when people advocate things like fasting or very, very low calorie and restricted diets as offering health benefits, in the absense of any compelling evidence that they do. Which was why I posted.
However I still have to see evidence than there is anything you can do to 'tone', 'condition' or otherwise affect the functioning of your internal organs using any helbal or other agent, and I certainly don't accept that fasting has that effect. If you can point me to any literature on the subject I'm happy to read it and take it on board - I made a 360 degree change in my thinking to embrace low-carb, so I am not in any way closed minded about these things. I am just suspicious in the absense of compelling evidence.
I don't believe you are comparing like with like there. The metabolism of calcium and it's role in bone formation and resorbtion is long established and easily demonstrable in a controlled scientic manner. The role of the herbs you mention, or more importantly of their active ingredients, is not. In fact I know of no scientific evidence at all that they have any of the claimed effects.
I am also extremely skeptical of anything written in support of the sale of a product - that goes for conventional drugs (don't even get me started on that topic!), alternative remedies, herbal remedies, food, in fact pretty much anything. I always look for an independent view and to credible published scientific literature. I have become more rigorous about this now than I ever was, but even before starting Atkins I read not just the book, but also as many rebuttals of it as I could find and a very large amount of scientific literature on both sides of the debate.
Call me suspicious by nature, I dunno, but where I see a lot of positive things about something written by the people selling it, but little or no published literature to support it scientifically, I am not convinced. I really believe that many people are duped into spending a lot of money on useless items in the search for a solution that actually lies in simply eating well.
I'm not saying for a moment that all or even most of those selling or promoting them are not sincere - they usually believe whole heartedly in what they are doing. I just don't accept that their beliefs are always built on a solid or credible foundation.
I understand where you are coming from and agree that a lot of food has a lot of 'extras' along with its nutrient content. That is why I qualified everything I said by adding "provided you are eating good food". I also know that a lot of people believe they have seen considerable benefit from the use of these remedies, and if they do I have no problem with that at all.
As I said, we all do our own thing and do what we believe is best for our bodies, and that is a very good thing. However I genuinely worry when people advocate things like fasting or very, very low calorie and restricted diets as offering health benefits, in the absense of any compelling evidence that they do. Which was why I posted.
However I still have to see evidence than there is anything you can do to 'tone', 'condition' or otherwise affect the functioning of your internal organs using any helbal or other agent, and I certainly don't accept that fasting has that effect. If you can point me to any literature on the subject I'm happy to read it and take it on board - I made a 360 degree change in my thinking to embrace low-carb, so I am not in any way closed minded about these things. I am just suspicious in the absense of compelling evidence.
If you mean to say that dandelion and milk thistle does not clean the liver, and that parsley and uva ursi does not affect the kidneys, then I'm sure you're of the opinion that calcium does nothing for the bones, and omega-3's does squat for the brain.
I am also extremely skeptical of anything written in support of the sale of a product - that goes for conventional drugs (don't even get me started on that topic!), alternative remedies, herbal remedies, food, in fact pretty much anything. I always look for an independent view and to credible published scientific literature. I have become more rigorous about this now than I ever was, but even before starting Atkins I read not just the book, but also as many rebuttals of it as I could find and a very large amount of scientific literature on both sides of the debate.
Call me suspicious by nature, I dunno, but where I see a lot of positive things about something written by the people selling it, but little or no published literature to support it scientifically, I am not convinced. I really believe that many people are duped into spending a lot of money on useless items in the search for a solution that actually lies in simply eating well.
I'm not saying for a moment that all or even most of those selling or promoting them are not sincere - they usually believe whole heartedly in what they are doing. I just don't accept that their beliefs are always built on a solid or credible foundation.
Comment