You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Weight Loss: Is Detox a Thing?
I have no use for studies funded by the people who make the additives. I have enough proof from the people who succeed in spite of those evil-doers. Since they know it is harmful, why do they still make it and allow it to be sold under the guise of GRAS? Once again, the answer is money.
If you do not like Diet Soda as an example, another is boxed rice mixes such as rice-a-roni vs making your own organic rice and doctoring it up with natural spices, herbs, and oils. You do not miss the colors, flavors and other addictive and harmful chemicals, it is healthier, and tastes better. The effort of buying the ingredients, learning to cook it and than actually cooking it are the stopping points for some people.
So, I want to get past the argumentativeness that we're both displaying and get into both where we're on the same page, where we diverge, and why I think it's important enough to engage with you about this "detox" thing.
If all you want to say is, "many people have unhealthy diets with low nutritional value, and they will feel better if they switch to diets high in nutritional value.", we have no disagreement. And there are many studies that will back us both up.
If you want to say, "capitalism encourages businesses to do things for profit, heedless of their impact on the well-being of humanity," I will likewise join my voice to yours with a resounding, "YES"
But I'm not sure why you're rejecting the scientific method whole cloth. If you want to say, "this study, funded by Pepsico, cannot be trusted because the people conducting were aware their funding would dry up if they didn't demonstrate xyz,", well, I will join you in being wary of it.
But there are several things that I can't get behind in this comment thread. The first is your repeated vagueness. I assume that you have specifics, but you want to acquaint me with the broad importance of this subject. I will be more able to understand your point of view if you give me specifics. One ingredient (or combination of ingredients) that, when removed from a diet (NOT accompanied by other lifestyle changes) resulted a particular symptom going away.
Another thing that has been difficult for me to understand from your perspective is why you "toxins" are the problem when you're asserting major life changes accompany this. If someone adds vegetables to their diet and removes soda, I expect them to feel better. That is the expected consequence, and many studies demonstrate that this does happen. What hasn't been demonstrated, and which you're trying to assert is, if you take their white rice that was raised with artificial fertilizers and pesticides and replace it with the same strain of white rice, but raised without artificial fertilizers and pesticides, and you do nothing else to change their diet and activity habits, they will feel better. You don't name the toxins you're trying to remove, but you just now mentioned "organic" rice.
I have no beef with your encouraging people to make healthy meals, and absolutely you can look at a box of rice-a-roni and see that the nutritional content isn't great. But that's not a matter of "toxins". That's information on the box. No scientist is lying to you. A marketing department, sure. Money that flows into the pockets of politicians who appoint business-friendly supervisors to head gov't organizations, sure. But a scientist? Not generally.
And the other thing that is problematic for me in your anti-science rhetoric is your assertion that you have hundreds and thousands of examples via FB groups. ...I belong to a number of parenting groups, and many of them have different perspectives. In one group I can find hundreds and thousands of examples of why this particular parenting philosophy works, and in another I can find just as many examples of why that first parenting philosophy DOESN'T work. People self-reporting are notoriously unreliable. We humans are susceptible to a variety of biases as we report. Sometimes we lie, sure, but that's not even the biggest problem. We BELIEVE things to be true, and we look for reasons that support what we already believe. So if you believe that diet soda is giving you headaches, well, maybe it is. After all, there's a lot of caffeine in that stuff. But just because your headache went away after you stopped drinking it, doesn't mean that's why. Maybe your headache went away because in lieu of diet soda you drank water, and you had been chronically dehydrated. Maybe your headache went away just because. Maybe you still have a headache, but you expect it to feel better, and so you think it's less of a headache. Maybe you stand up straighter (this has been proven to make you feel more resilient, even if you are feeling the same amount of pain).
Here's another example from real life. My friend Chris, like you, believes that there are a lot of herbal remedies that are being hidden from us by corporations. Things like echinacea, etc. So when he gets sick, he goes to the store and spends $50 buying these supplements (I think this is ironic.) He swears that after taking them and only after taking them he gets better. He usually gets around to dropping $50 at the store when he's frustrated because he's been sick for several days.
So, to him, he gets better because he takes these things.
I also have colds sometimes. I also get frustrated after having a cold for several days. I do not buy anything at the story in order to get better. Shortly after the peak of my frustration, I also feel better. That's how our immune system works.
The point is, the scientific method helps us distinguish between causal relationships, correlative links, and just coincidence. There are enough people in the world that you can find a bunch of them who have had similar experiences for common stuff like this, even if there's no actual causal relationship. To illustrate the point, I will put forth this thought experiment:
1000 people are given a glass of beet juice in the morning and are told "beet juice will make you happier". Statistically 50% of the people are happier than usual and 50% of the people are less happy than usual. The ones who are happier than usual will make a facebook group called "BEET JUICE WORKS". The other ones will make a group called "BEET JUICE IS A SCAM". Everybody will believe that they are correct. They will become invested in being right, and even if anomalous results occur, like a person doesn't have a good day while high on beet juice, they'll find excuses for why it was different that day. Maybe they'll form a sub-group, "BEET JUICE WORKS, but only if you've been to the dentist at least once this year" or whatever.
I hope that my beet juice example at least made you giggle so that you aren't upset about this.
The fallacies you believe in are many and you are not alone. This conversation stated by me finding your post stating that detox is not true. I have experienced it and see it happen for others.
I am not trying to prove scientific points to you. I am trying to help the 80% of Americans who are obese of overweight. I do not have any need to go though and talk about XXX vs XXX additive. People in that frame of mind are not ready to try to change. I am talking to the person who has tried "everything" but healthy living. Getting rid of the toxins in their food is only one of the suggestions I give - although it is one of the most important.
As I previously stated, there is no way to remove one of these products from the Standard American Diet. You can eat most of them or try to avoid most of them. There are 900 of them and untold numbers of combinations on regular food.
I challenge you to look into your own diet and especially that of your growing children to see how frequently you are ingesting these substances. Then remove them and see what happens. I'm my case, I stopped after researching a handful of the items. I assume you will need to see the warnings for them all, (because - science) but you never know.
I think if you spent as much effort to research a few of these substances as you are spending avoiding it, you might be ready to change - for your own health and for your kids. This information is not hidden. The risks are plainly stated.
You will only be able to find the GRAS substances easily with labels. GMO's and pesticides take a separate effort.
Unlike you, I do not find this topic funny at all. My 25 year old has severe ptsd due to my obesity issues and health scares during his young life. Several of his second mothers from the small town we lived are already dead from it. I'm upset by this topic every minute of every day.
I watch, follow, and help people people who are detoxing when they remove these substances from their diet almost every day. I try to persuade people to try this even though it is not easy in the beginning.
I used to run into a lot of people who believe these toxins are not so bad and that their hippy friend's experience was a joke. But those people are not as prevalent today as the truth is becoming easier to find.
If you believe that food and drug researchers have a free hand to study and report the truth against the wishes of the funders of their studies, you are very misinformed. No one else has the money to fund this work and therefore I ignore it.
I wouldn't spend this much time with you on this if I thought it was just a joke, but I do use humor to diffuse tension, especially when it's apparent that both speakers are having trouble getting across what they intend.
I think all you respond to is examples of personal experience, so here's mine. I was obese when I moved to L.A. I wanted to get healthier, so I began tracking nutrition and exercise. I lost 40 pounds over the course of half a year and kept it off. The secret is not "toxins" the secret is healthy eating. Hiding the simple, free truth behind products and routines that reject the notion of science will ultimately let us be swayed by marketing instead of verifiable truth.
Posted using Partiko Android
In my experience, removing the toxins from people's diets with no other changes, causes almost immediate detox symptoms and and soon after that an increase in health. This is based on the places I have worked for people and cooked for them, my own experience, long distance coaching, and that of people in various groups I am in.
If you remove the garbage from the food people eat, the detox happens. Often the people I work with are too sick to do much else at the beginning of their journey to health. If they are 50-60+ BMI, they might be bed-ridden.
It is not a change to the diet other than removing toxins, and they do not exercise or do anything else differently. One of the ladies I helped was in hospice care. She lost weight and had numerous health improvements over the months I was her care-giver. By the time the brain tumor killed her, she was pretty much otherwise healthy to the shock of all the medical pros I was working with.
The only change in her care was eating the food I made for her. Previously, he diet was a nightmare. Within days, we are saw huge changes in her bathroom habits and other good results.
"Science" is funded by the "bad guys" and does not interest me. Once I researched a few additives, it was enough and I do not plan to waste effort revisiting it. Is XXX chemical worse than YYY chemical? I do not care.
Healthy eating removes toxins and I would highly suggest organic potatoes and fats at the rates you eat them. The info about potatoes is in my post. Non-organic dairy is full of toxins. I'm not sure how you use cereal in your potato dish, but you will be better off with organics in that case as well.
That's much closer to useful information! Can you tell me specifically what her diet was before and after you began care-giving? Note that if you changed the nutritional content of her food, I will probably believe that that's why her health improved, rather than an elimination of unnamed toxins. Another way to test your theory would be to continue feeding people low-nutrition food, but without the "toxins". This should also result in improved health if your theory is correct.
Perhaps the most obvious to prove case would be, since you list fluoride, comparing two groups, between which the only difference is fluoridated or non-fluoridated water. I know you don't trust science because of who funds it, but this is something you could do yourself, then you can trust the data, right?
Posted using Partiko Android
She only ate processed food before I started cooking for her and was drinking sodas etc. Any garbage food you can think of was in her diet.
The toxins are named - all are listed in the GRAS file at the cdc. As I have already mentioned, they tell you the risks there - although nothing about the risks when combining the substances. Have you even looked at the GRAS list? Why are you so sure these products are not a problem when the cdc (scientists paid by the evil-doers) clearly state that they are?
It is almost impossible to find people who are not ingesting fluoride in the us. It is in every food and drink in the us that includes the ingredient "water." So therefore, only people who drink distilled/RO water and never eat processed food or drinks have a possibility of avoiding it.
I'm not sure these products aren't a problem. I am sure your antipathy towards science is a problem.
As I've stated before, I (and SCIENCE insofar as there is a voice called SCIENCE) agree that diets can be improved by substituting high-nutrition foods for low-nutrition foods.
Furthermore, I agree that corporations will do anything to protect their profits, including things that are detrimental to human health.
What I have a problem with is your rejection of science. We can't have a conversation about cause and effect, about evidence, about what is harmful, beneficial, or simply benign if we can't agree on how we gather reliable information.
Science has nothing to do with my work with individuals helping them to lose weight and get healthy. It is completely off the topic and irrelevant to the work I do.
Check into the effects of potato pesticides if you want to spend the time. A lot of it is in my post already. Then if you think you are your family should still be eating regular potatoes, I would love to know how you come to that conclusion. I do not bother looking anymore - I just don't eat that product.
I gather information from the 1000's of people I see in groups who are much more reliable then paid lackeys who are scared for their jobs and their lives. They cannot buck the company and govt lies or they will not have a job at the very least.
You say, "Furthermore, I agree that corporations will do anything to protect their profits, including things that are detrimental to human health." But I don't think you get the ramifications of this yet.