From: altar@beaufort.sfu.ca (Ted Wayn Altar)
Subject: Re: Vegan dilemma concerning pancreatic enzymes.
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 04:16:06 GMT

>George Clark writes:
>
>Having read your challenge to Steve Dyer to provide references about
>colon cleansing, I stopped by the public library on my way home
>from work today to see if I could assist.

Good for you!  I mean it.  Too many of our would-be nutrition
"pundits" don't do any homework on these kinds of issues.  It is
important to look things up and not simply presume to know.

Now, we have had 3 intelligent people report having undergone
something pertaining to what the original poster referred to as a
"DIGESTIVE SYSTEM CLEANSING PROGRAM".  It is quite evident that
we should be cautious in presuming that there is a single,
uniform procedure at issue.  With that caution in mind, I am very
glad that you, at least, made the effort to look further into
this thing called "colon cleansing".  Thank-you for your
intellectual curiosity and diligence.



>None of the medical encyclopedias for home use, such as "Mayo Clinic
>Family Health Book," even mention colon cleansing in their index. I
>looked in several of these encyclopedias.

Ok, very good.

Maybe we should keep in mind what John Webster (17th C.
dramatist) once said, "Physicians are like kings, --- they brook
no contradiction". [from "The Duchess of Malfi, V:2]     :-) 

Incidentally, did these same references have anything informative
to say about vegetarianism, documenting that it is the single
best means of preventative health to reduce one's risk for CHD
and cancer?  Probably not, which is why I recommend that for
information on preventative health measures we sometimes have to
go further to the primary souces buried away in academic journals, 
which unfortunately, are only to be found at a major university 
library.



>
>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.

Hmm, I agree, not very credible at all.

Now, your skepticism and worry about colon cleansing has more
validity to me than that of Steve Dyer's remarks since now I know
what sources you are drawing upon and where you are coming from.
Thank you.

>
>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.

I didn't know that the procedure actually resulted in deaths.
Was this due to the procedure directly or due, say, to bowel
cancer patients not seeking proper medical help but instead
wasting time with colon cleansing?


>
>Ted, while you seem open minded, it's really pointless to spend time
>convincing people like Anne Nield.

Please, I am not here to convince Anne Nield or you of one thing
or another.  Like Anne Nield, I am simply attempting to provide
and receive information and helpful answers to queries.  What
people do with the information and arguments relevant to
vegetarianism that I might proffer is their business.  But
neither Anne Nield, nor myself, nor Michael Traub deserve to be
derisively insulted for our efforts.



>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.

George, let's be fair and not MISREPRESENT people's positions.
No where has Anne Nield said that she "hates medical doctors" but
she does have a healthy skepticism about the medical
establishment being ALWAYS right and the ONLY source of health
information.  In response to the argument that "not one single
health-care professional defended" colon cleansing on sci.med.,
she simply pointed out that even our well-heeled health-care
community is not unerring as evidenced by a history of very
grievous mistakes, sanctioned fads and iatrogenic disease (see
Illich's LIMITS TO MEDICINE, 1976, for a powerful and well
documented statement).  In any case, Anne Nield correctly saw
through this weak `argumentum ad populum'.

George, after starting out so sensibly, this digression to
insulting Anne Nield is really unbecoming of your better
intelligence.  No, Anne Nield is not "mean as a snake" as
evidence by her silence after being so rudely addressed here on
the net (incidentally, snakes or any other non-humans in my books
are not "mean", only people are "mean").  Also, neither you nor I
know Anne Nield well enough to say who she might listen to more.
Really, can't you see that this is the very kind of rudeness and
mean-spirited remarks to real people who also have feelings like
you and me, that I have been attempting to invite our omnivorous
kibitzers to stop making, or at least reflect upon?

In any case, Anne Nield has here been shabbily treated for her
honest posting, and I would hope that you might consider
apologizing to her.  I don't expect this from Steve Dyer, but you
seem more reasonable.  Did you know that Anne Nield on another
occasion had to once suffer from the repeated and continuous e-
mail assult of the message, "YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE" for 2 hours one
day?  Probably not.



>
>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.

Well, let us keep in mind that our three posters who have
reported a direct experience with something that has been
originally referred to as "A DIGESTIVE SYSTEM CLEANSING PROGRAM"
may or may not be the same thing as what these doctors refer to
as "COLON CLEANSING".  Maybe we will NOW never find out since
more heat and little light has been the main thrust of our
omnivorous critics.

Again, I too have my doubts about any program involving "special"
ingredients like, say, laxatives, herbal or otherwise (if that is
indeed a key part of each and every program).  As I once said
before, there are no miracle foods or miracle cures, but there
are real life-style changes that can make a real and substantial
difference.   A vegetarian diet and exercise being 2 simple, but the
most effective lifestyle changes that I know of, as empirically
documented by respectable scientific papers.  

Let us remember that what Anne Nield talked about was a three
week program starting off with some kind of fast and then an
introduced specific vegetarian diet.  This may indeed have some
real effects above and beyond a mere placebo effect.  There is
some evidence that short-term fasting or semi-fasting incurs some
benefits and we certainly know about the benefits of
vegetarianism.  Again, I am not advocating any such programs
involving specific supplements, am only trying to understand what 
is going on and what might be the real agency(ies) of benefit in 
Anne Nield or Daniel Poirier's experiences.


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

Originally it did!  At least it did until our omnivorous
kibitzers jumped in deflecting Daniel Poirier's original concern
about using what might be animal derived products.

If you would care to review the thread, you will see that Michael
Traub NEVER explicitly endorsed this kind of program.  He simply
observed that they seem to work for some people (as Anne Nield
and Daniel Poirier have testified for themselves), but that
"colon-cleansing is an absolute waste of time for a vegan and
probably a waste of time for most vegetarians".  Also, keep in
mind that Michael Traub only defended people's right to try out
such programs, if they so want.  Michael Traub attempted to
simply provide a helpful suggestion to the original poster,
Daniel Poirier, that he simply stay with acidophilus and NOT
attempt to use such "weird additions" like pancreatin.

Anne Nield also attempted to be helpful to Daniel Poirier by
mentioning that from her direct experience with this kind of
digestive cleansing program, each doctor "personalizes the
program" so that they may use a variety of supplements, and that
a vegetarian can request vegetarian alternatives.

This sounds to me like stuff relevant to being a vegetarian.  I
can't always say the same about SOME of our omnivorous kibitzers
who are too intent on making derisively rude remarks than to
seriously contribute good information relevant to vegetarianism
and useful to the vegetarians here who are attempting to 
advance their understanding and practice of this dietary choice.  
I will, however, give Steve Dyer credit for at least confirming 
Daniel Poirier's suspicion that the pancratic enzyme of "porcine 
orgin" was indeed derived from pork pancreases.  I am only sorry 
he would subsequently detract from such helpful comments by taking 
recourse to some sacrcasms and insults directed at Anne Nield and 
Michael Traub.

                                              ted



Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA