colon hydrotherapy

Hi ladies,


Anyone tried colon hydrotherapy? Would it be painful? would it really work for weight loss? and good for health?


Regards,

Loveduckie

read this (and other sources) before you make a decision:


http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/gastro.html

My wife (yes, I am a man!) had about 5 of these and said they made her feel much 'lighter' and 'cleaner' both inside and out. It is a generally accepted fact that we have lots of waste material, old meat, etc stuck inside our guts for years, and a colonic is one way of helping to remove this.


There is lots of info on http://curezone.com/forums/f.asp?f=128 and most of your questions will be answered by people who have been using/doing what you ask about. The 'home' alternative to a colonic irrigation is something called a 'colema board' and its derrivatives(sp?) which can be used at home. Although it does not use as much water as a colonic irrigation it is however, more thorough than an enema.


Painful - well probably not, although the first time would be a little strange maybe and you would have to feel comfortable/trust with the therapist as obviously you have to get undressed etc.


Weight loss often has many components to it and there may be other issues which need addressing as well as 'just' eating the 'right' foods.


Check out EFT (Emotional Freedom Technique) (www.emofree.com) for a free painless answer to life, the universe, and everything :-)


Also, beware of people who condemn it and also add that they have not had one....experience counts for a lot.


Hope this helps.

Tinkerbella trashes the Quackwatch article and then goes on to agree with everything it says!

In Asia in particular, I'd be a little worried about the infection control aspects. In hospitals, equipment undergoes complex high level disinfection or sterilization....this is not always true in clnics. There have been outbreaks of some nasty things like amebic dysentery associated with colonic irrigation.

Yes, I am sure there have been outbreaks of amoebic dysentry where the water is not properly processed, but I think that most reputable (this is in the west, anyway) will have a proper unit which filters and kills the bugs with UV light in the water before it goes into you. This is what you should be looking for when you search for a therapist - a proper qualified one, or one who has been recommended to you as reputable/kind/clean/professional etc. A search on Google will bring up the kind of equipment you should be looking for.


If you go for a colonic in a clinic, they should have this equipment anyway, espescially at the prices westerners are charged. I assume you will check out the place before you have a treatment anyway. Thats only sensible.

Contamination of the water is only one possible route of infection, the bigger problem is contamination of the equipment. Most people have no way of judging the quality of disinfection or sterilization being carried out on the equipment. UV light alone is definitely not adequate...


Also, I don't think price guarantees you anything. It's just a reflection of what the market will bear. In the west, there may be more controls and checks on what clinics can do than there are out here.


See: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=6283354&query_hl=2&itool=pubmed_docsum

and

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=3351397&query_hl=2&itool=pubmed_docsum

I think the article in question offers pretty good substantiation for its claims, whereas you offer none! No need to get nasty....

Of course we would all like to see more controls and it would be nice to say that all clinics were hygenic and followed proper procedures, but to get this in proportion one article you quote says that this study was conducted at one chiropractic clinic in Colorado. There will always be some 'rogue' clinics and some clinics will be better than others. If it was a study using more clinics, it would lend more weight to your argument. The other article says with authority that [quote]Inadequately disinfected colonic irrigation machines have been the source of documented iatrogenic infection with Entamoeba histolytica. The potential for iatrogenic transmission of AIDS in a similar fashion must be considered.[/quote] but it does not qive any details or references. For all we know it might be using this first article as a basis for 'an informed opinion' which it is not. It then goes on to use scare tactics to suggest that AIDS might be transmitted in this way. I would say it was irresponsible to make suggestions where no references are given and we do not know what qualifications these authors have in making their statements. The fact that the first article was published in the New England Journal of Medicine does not mean that this is a proper study.


I have no reason to promote colonics at all, but I do not want to see others attacking it either unless there is some good reason, and I dont consider either atricle to lend much weight to your argument.


Overall, more people have probably died from doctors negligence and super-bugs in hospitals than they have from colonics or other 'fringe' medicine and as such hospitals and visits to your doctor should have similar warnings.


The reference I made to cost was to indicate that where there is more money available, there might be more attention to cleanliness as they have more to lose if word starts to get out that they are sloppy with their cleaning and people are getting sick. That does not necessarily follow though....

You are willing to accept anecdotal evidence of benefit (there is no other evidence for benefit of colonic therapy) but to discount or discard anecdotal evidence of harm (and by the way, there are other case reports - gangrenous perianal abscesses, perforations,etc). It is true that all of these things and worse could also happen after standard medical colonoscopy....but colonoscopy is normally only done to look for serious pathology and not promoted as a way of improving bowel health. Risks explained, informed consent and all that.

The point is that until there is good evidence (not purely anecdotal) of benefit, the anecdotal reports of harm have to be taken seriously. It is only worth taking a risk, even a very small one, if there is an expected benefit that outweighs it. People doing colonics are mostly healthy people looking to stay that way - their tolerance for risk should therefore be much lower than, say, a sick cancer patient who has to take the risk of super-bugs in a hospital.


And I agree, by the way, that there are plenty of things in modern medicine that could be accused of the same..... but how does that make colonic irrigation any better? Still no good evidence of benefit, still worrisome anecdotes of harm. At least western medicine will do the research on itself and change its practices, even if sometimes too slowly.

i've done it a few times in one hospital in BKK and i feel good after that. I am not too sure whether it is really good for health but i feel better and my stomach works better. My mom also done that with me once and she really like it, she like to go and do it again sometime.


They do not only use water, they add in something else as well, they say it "coffee water" so it gets you cleaner, but first time users only use water.


The equipment that use that contacts you is "new", and will dispose after that, i am not too worry about the water cos they done it pretty professionally, it's a hospital! If we worry about everything, we should not even drink water right? it is not that painful too...

Natural cures cannot afford the millions spent on research and development. How much anecdotal evidence does a process need before the 'weight of evidence' becomes so much that it is 'believable'. Of course this is different for everyone, and everyone needs to take responsibility for the things they put into their body and the things they do to their body. Currently the medical system 'knows best' what is good for us and a lot drug company money goes into persuading us (or our doctors/hospitals) to use their products. I would like to see, in an ideal world, medical care based on prevention rather than cure and as such I like to try an suggest that we become informed about the decisions we are about to make rather than our decisions almost being made for us.


What I am trying to say, is that the large drug companies only produce drugs which will give them a return on their investment (ie: the money they spent getting licences, research, field trials etc). Any natural remedy, or one which does not provide a return to their shareholders will not be developed however 'wonderful' it is and however well it works. Thats the way of the world at the moment, and the medical institutions are not helping by only considering 'proven' drugs which have been licensed. Many drugs have side effects, some cause serious problems with long term use, or cause deformities in unborn babies. Let us consider this when we consider more 'natural' therapies.


The world has many natural cures which people have been using effectively for thousands of years before the medical institutions came along to try and take over the management of our bodies. Enemas for example are one of these ancient natural cures and I believe is even mentioned in the bible somewhere. Colonics are an extension of this natural process.

it is hard to argue with deeply held cynicism! The drug companies are all over "natural" cures that actually show benefit - recent example would be Artemisn for malaria.


In addition, "Natural" medicine is now a huge multi-billion dollar industry with plenty of money - I just don't accept that they can't afford the money for properly testing their products. More likely, they don't want to risk results that show that many are nothing more than expensive placebos.


So just remember, as you make your "own decisions" - without the help of scientific study, just based on anecdote and opinion - that "natural" does not equate in any way with safe. Some ancient "natural" cures did have benefit, some had none, and some were downright harmful. It is definitely worth figuring out which ones are beneficial, but "natural" is a truly meaningless word in this context.


And "prevention" is a Motherhood issue ....everyone would rather see medical care based on prevention rather than cure, it's just that there is not enough known about how to prevent many major human health problems. The ones that are known - like vaccination against infectious diseases, Pap smears etc. - are often rejected by the very people who espouse "natural" methods. Those ancients with their "natural" cures also lived much shorter, less healthy lives than we do now.

I haven't bothered to read all the for and against arguments written above as I'm guessing that most of the againsts are written by people who have never tried it or who have had a bad experience and the fors are written by people who have tried it and who felt it did them some good.


Whatever treatment "fad" or otherwise that people try there are always going to be people who are for and against so it is very much an individual's experience and there is often no absolute right or absolute wrong - I personally don't have any time for holier than thou people who say "no no no" and yet have never tried something when others have obvioulsy benefitted.


After all, crossing the road, yoga, being married, jogging, and breathing in this city can kill you!


The sensible thing is use your best judgment on the reputation of the place, quality assurance, certificates, attention and knowledge of the staff etc - then at least you can feel that you have made some effort in judging the safety of a place.


Otherwise you only have yourself to blame - if you find yourself walking up a back alley to have someone stick a tube up your back passage then you've got every right to question cleanliness.


And for the record, yes, I've tried it - I visited a couple of places in Hong Kong, chose one on the general feel of their professionlism, lack of hype, attention of staff etc. I booked for a session of 5 (I figured if I'm going to do this I've got to give it a proper go - like a diet or fitness programme - it is not just for a day).


I didn't tell any of my friends I'd done it, but a lot of people complimented me and said my skin looked better and asked if I'd been for a facial and I myself felt better as well, more lively and awake and I would certainly do it again.


There are other considerations about the method as well as there are different types of tubes and different ways of getting rid of the waste - I know I was happy with what I chose and probably wouldn't try the other way but again that is up to you.


OF COURSE a healthy diet is the best thing you can do - I don't eat particulary unhealthily but I certainly felt an extra boost of energy. Not everyone feels the same.


I have no qualifications to say anything about how diets of humans have changed over the years but they obvioulsy have so to say that it is not a "natural" thing to do is like saying that we don't eat chemicals, pesticides, processed foods, have sedentary lifestyles etc - but we do and so perhaps the treatments we give ourselves need to evolve as well. I'm not saying absolutely yes or absolutely no but at least don't be blinkered!


Anyway - that's my tuppence worth!

i think you can only done it with "back passage" right?


My way: the nurse stuck a new tube up you back passage..(not deep) then pump in water/ specific stuff (just slight pressure), and then you just feeling like you going to the toilet...in and out just like that!!! Simple.

what about if you go get it done in a reputable hospital in hk island,less concerns mabbe?

Witley, I don't know the terminology for the different types of tubes but my understanding is that one kind is big enough that the water goes in and the waste comes out of the same tube - personally I think that sounds a bit like a traffic jam. I've had no experience of this method but I would imagine that might be more uncomfortable - don't know, never tried and happy to hear others thoughts on it.


The kind I tried was a tube that was the diameter of a pencil and only about half an inch goes inside you. The water goes in there and the waste comes out a bit more "normally" (controversial word in this thread!). The staff explain what to do and you are left to insert the tube on your own. It's not difficult at all. You are completely covered and it's all very discreet. The staff come back, check you are comfortable, turn on the water and check you are happy with the temperature. They then leave the room to avoid any embarrassment as things start happening. They come back in every now and again to massage your tummy but check first that you are not "mid-movement!" There is a buzzer in case you have any problems but I can't imagine anything too bad because if you are really having trouble you can just take the tube out.


In terms of discomfort - my experience anyway - it feels a little odd at first but nothing too uncomfortable, throughout the process you feel that you need to go to the loo, then you relieve yourself, then you need to go to the loo etc. At some points I felt like I had mild cramps like period pains but they disappeared as soon as things moved!


Lulu - yes, you only have it done up the "back passage" - I think Witley was being witty and referring to location, not parts of the body! I went to Hydrohealth - I just felt more comfortable with them. Others may have different experiences and I am not endorsing them.


In terms of weight loss - be sensible!!! This is not for weightloss, all you are doing is getting rid of waste. Yes you might see the numbers on the scale go down a bit but you are not fundementally changing your body weight, your fat/muscle ratio, BMI or whatever.


That said I felt afterwards that I didn't want to eat junk food, I wanted to put healthier things inside me, so to kick start a detox, or a lifelong weightloss programme then it could be an option.


All the above are my own experiences and opinions - it is not for everyone and you need to make up your own mind.


Hope it helps.