From: charlesv@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca (Charles Van Duren)
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg
Subject: Re: Vegan dilemma concerning pancreatic enzymes.
Date: 26 Aug 92 16:16:40 GMT

georgec@eng.umd.edu (George B. Clark) writes:

#In article <altar.714682614@sfu.ca> altar@beaufort.sfu.ca (Ted Wayn Altar) writes:
#>Can you cite a literature review on this topic?  Have
#>you done a literature review?  Why should we take your word?

#Ted,

#Leaving the reference shelve, I walked to the stacks where all the
#paperback books and popular press are shelved. There I found
#several books on "alternative medicine," each containing a
#chapter on the merits of colon cleansing. None of these books
#were written by medical doctors, however. They were written by
#people like Jane Heimlich, i.e. self-proclaimed medical journalists
#with no academic credentials.

Would you please quote her credentials? They might be interesting to
all sides of this argument. (I have a distrust of this blind belief
in credentials).

#I did find one book written by a medical doctor. He said colon
#cleansing is quackery, and several states have even outlawed it.
#He said the procedure has even been credited with eight fatalities.

"He said" or was this claim supported with evidence (since evidence
seems to be very much in demand here)?

#Ted, while you seem open minded, it's really pointless to spend time
#convincing people like Anne. By her own admission, she hates
#medical doctors, and she is as mean as a snake.

#                                                 She's the kind of
#person, like so many others, who would rather listen to the clerk
#in a health-food store.

This is a totally unwarranted statement. There is nothing in the
preceding sentence that justifies it.

#Throughout recent years, I've listened to a talk-radio show whose host
#is a doctor, board-certified in four specialties, and he is also a
#professor in a medical school. His position has always been that
#colon cleansing is quackery, and he has discussed the history of
#it several times. Also, this topic was recently discussed in
#detail on sci.med. Several medical doctors ridiculed it, but
#none defended it. That and my own common sense are enough evidence
#to convince me.

This is the same medical profession that makes it's living largely
from prescribing drugs. The average person over 65 is on three types
of medication. A significant number are up to ten or twelve. This
same profession treats common colds with antibiotics, and uses 
various tranquilizers as "treatment" for all kinds of problems. Not to
mention the fact that medical schools do not teach nutrition as any
real aspect of health care. (Oh, I forgot. The medical profession isn't
into health care. It hardly knows what health is. It does know about
disease, though.) And then there are wonders of modern medicine such as
chemotherapy - if the disease doesn't kill you, the treatment will.
And I haven't even mentioned iatrogenic diseases. Talk about the cure
being worse than the disease.

And if you want to talk about the scientific impartiality of the medical
profession, consider the long-standing dispute between the AMA and
the chiropractors. The AMA conspired, with no medical justification,
to prevent it's members from using the services of chirpractors. 

I rant. But the point I wanted to make is that an unwavering belief in
"science" and modern medicine won't necessarily keep you healthy. It
may keep you alive longer than in the past, but this is mainly due to
antibiotics and hygiene.

Steve wants references, but doesn't supply them. Michael supplies some,
but Steve discounts them. I think they're both out to lunch with that
particular paper chase. With the amount of "research" being published
these days, it is simultaneously possible to both support any position one
wants with the appropriate references, and to be totally unable to gain
any real knowledge about the subject at hand.

I prefer Ann(e) Nields' approach, and it is one we practice. It is not
impossible for an intelligent individual to make intelligent choices
about health, diet, and about the health practitioners one chooses to
deal with. After all, I do live in this body, and I'm not at all unaware
about how it functions, and how it reacts to inputs and stimuli. There
is no need to blindly abdicate responsibility to "science" and established
medical practice. They have been wrong before. They will be wrong again.

#None of this has anything to do with being a vegetarian, which
#used to be what this newsgroup is all about.

But it does. Many vegetarians have made a choice because of health
concerns. Traditional medical practice hasn't supported us in this
choice. So we need to build our own support group, and develop our
own rationalizations. That's what this argument is all about.

CvD
*----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
| Charles van Duren - Senior Systems Analyst - Center for Distance Education |  
|      Athabasca University, Athabasca, Alberta, Canada T0G 0B0              |
*-------------------------------------\/-------------------------------------*
| Now Tom he claims, that a man's true joy, is in the work he likes to do    |
| And if I understand, Tom's a right joyous man...                           |
|                                             Tom Blasingame (Ian Tyson)     |
*-------------------------------------/\-------------------------------------*
Newsgroups: rec.food.veg