• HEALTH & RECOVERY
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules Thread Directory 1 Thread Directory 2
    Mindfulness Links Addiction & Mind
    Sober Living Partner Program (SLiPP)
  • H&R Moderators: VerbalTruist | cdin | Lil'LinaptkSix

Colon Cleanse / Cleansing your System / Colonic Irrigation

a pH "20 times weaker" means nothing. Our stomach pH is around about 2 to 3. 20 times stronger would be a pH of 0.1, and no animal produces a stomach pH of that. Conversely, an animal with a stomach pH 20 times greater than a pH of one would be a pH of 20 - basic as hell.

If they mean the H+ ion concentration is 20 times less, then you're still only talking about a pH change of 1.3, which (though significant) isn't that enormous
 
Thank you for correcting me. Let me fill in the correct pH.

Carnivore: Less than or equal to pH of 1 with food in stomach
Herbivore: pH of 4 to 5 with food in stomach
Human: pH of 4 to 5 with food in stomach
 
Carnivore: Less than or equal to pH of 1 with food in stomach
Herbivore: pH of 4 to 5 with food in stomach
Human: pH of 4 to 5 with food in stomach
Click to expand...

This is mere taxonomy and simply can't be used to disprove an argument over diet. Besides, you're turning this into an anti-meat campaign rather than an unbias look on nutrition itself - something that cannot be ignored when getting tunnel vision on colon health.

[National rates of colon cancer are also strongly associated with per capita consumption of animal fat and meat, with correlation coefficients ranging between 0.8 and 0.9 [32, 35]. Based on these epidemiologic investigations and animal studies, dietary fat increasing has been hypothesized to act by excretion of bile acids, which can be converted to carcinogens or promoters [47]. However, many studies have found that higher levels of physical activity are associated with reduced risk of colon cancer [48]; thus, the high rates in affluent countries previously attributed to fat intake are probably, at least in part, due to sedentary lifestyle.
Click to expand...

The fact that heavy meat eaters live a sedentary lifestyle now seems to play a factor in colon cancer. Also, you're forgetting one thing. We are not talking about a diet heavy in red meat. We're talking about a sensible, balanced diet with appropriate amount nutrients and fiber.

>>We discontinued eating meat and chicken over 3 months ago. My bowel movements are the very best. Removing meat from my diet produced a more noticeable change than colonics.

Yes, and I too am proud to say my poo has no problem ejecting as well.
Click to expand...

I'm sure everyone here is happy and proud of you for saying how big your dick is, but the fact that you mention this just tells me your motives are beyond simple colon discussion. (time to hop on over to thoughts & awareness) Also, I never said colonics can replace good dietary colon health as you suggested. I merely suggested that it's a good supplement for people that have abused their colon.
Diet however is the best solution to a healthy colon.
Click to expand...
^^ Hey! Guess who's quote that is?

I eat meat from time to time and I can bet my life that my colon and overall health is just as good as any other's. I just happen to get the same nutrients from a wider variety of foods than people with a more narrow diet.
 
Last edited:
Most cultures (at least until recently) have been aware of the importance of keeping your colon clean. It's actually common sense-- the first suspect will always be what you put in your body. It's not like everything exits your pooper.

My grandfather was telling me yesterday that whenever they had any sort of sickness, their mom would give them an enema. In Voltaire's Candide, this syphilitic dude was complaining about not having enough money even for an enema.

However, I suggest that nobody take the enema thing to an extreme. It would be better to get a colonic irrigation at a reputable, hygenic place that preferably provides you with replacement probiotics. This is because good bacteria in your colon is also flushed out.
 
DJDannyUhOh, I thought you were going to actually respond to my factual argument, rather than slander me repub-style. Oh well.

>>I'm sure everyone here is happy and proud of you for saying how big your dick is, but the fact that you mention this just tells me your motives are beyond simple colon discussion.

Shows everyone how you interpret things. Ever since turning vegetarian, I have had to spend virtually no time in the bathroom trying to get stuff moving. It appears that someone else noted this who is not a vegetarian but had dipped into the pool, so I think it's noteworthy.. unlike your trollish responses.

>> This is mere taxonomy and simply can't be used to disprove an argument over diet. Besides, you're turning this into an anti-meat campaign rather than an unbias look on nutrition itself - something that cannot be ignored when getting tunnel vision on colon health.

Actually, I was aiming more for physiological depth here. Noting the similarities between humans and herbivores and the differences between the former and carnivores might just shed some light on what our bodies physiologically are built to handle in the long term. Sure, we can eat charred flesh, but is it healthy for our digestive track? Obviously, from what I've noted here, fruits and vegetables indeed are shown to have protective effects on the colon, while meat arguably causes many problems. There is no bias involved when focusing on a part of our bodies and tracking where the problems come from. It's common, logical sense that you seem to be biased against (maybe because of your diet?).

>>The fact that heavy meat eaters live a sedentary lifestyle now seems to play a factor in colon cancer. Also, you're forgetting one thing. We are not talking about a diet heavy in red meat. We're talking about a sensible, balanced diet with appropriate amount nutrients and fiber.

Yes, how do you expect to flush out the animal fat fast without some exercise?

>>Most cultures (at least until recently) have been aware of the importance of keeping your colon clean. It's actually common sense-- the first suspect will always be what you put in your body.

Exactly.
 
I'm saying you can eat meat and still maintain a healthy colon. You are saying you can't so I beg to differ. You're saying that eating any red meat will compromise colon health but you couldn't be farther from the truth. Notice that all of the studies mention "a high intake of red meat" which is unhealthy in itself. Having a healthy colon DOES NOT require turning vegetarian and that's what I'm debating against.
 
It is not necessary to be vegetarian to have a healthy colon. The fact of the matter is that most people who eat meat have diets devoid of fiber, which aid in its journey through the digestive tract. Potatoes, white bread and all that stuff really don't help it get through.

I have been vegetarian for more than 3 years, and have found it to be ideal for me. However, there are people who do very well on it. The key is to get more fiber in. A vegetarian who eats mostly refined carbs will have the same problems as a person who eats more meat and no fiber I think.

BUT as with everything, you need to balance things out. Just like when you compost or get things to turn into nutrients for the soil, you need a balance of fiber, "wet" material, and air. If there is too much wet goopy stuff in your compost, it will go into anaerobic decomposition (i.e. fermentation and grossness). If there is too much fiber like hard twigs and all, it will take ages to decompose (i.e. people get gassy or feel heavy). If you put animal matter into the compost, it will take longer to decompose, but with enough good stuff around it, will eventually be okay.

*Ends environmental nerdiness*
 
Lets not make this a pro meat or meat is the devil style argument. I think you can still eat meat and have a healthy colon, but it probably wouldnt be AS healthy as a vegetarians.

Dtergent, that was a nice analogy. I think the MOST important thing Ive learned from my time moderating HL and reading all these threads, is balance is very important, probably more important than any extreme diet or workout, etc.
 
I don't think that colon cancer is really even that common. I don't know what you all are so worried about. I think you should be more worried about lung cancer, b/c I know at least half of you probably smoke and we won't even get into what drugs do to your body.

I think the colon should be on the lower end of your worries. Parden the pun. :)
 
Hehehe...well Im no smoker and certainly dont touch drugs, but you are right on about that. It always confuses me when smokers worry about their health in seemingly every aspect BESIDES their lungs. You might be wrong about the colon cancer though, its my understanding its one of the more common cancers and a very deadly one if not caught early (I think its pretty curable if caught early enough though)
 
djwhirlpool said:
I don't think that colon cancer is really even that common. I don't know what you all are so worried about. I think you should be more worried about lung cancer, b/c I know at least half of you probably smoke and we won't even get into what drugs do to your body.

I think the colon should be on the lower end of your worries. Parden the pun. :)
Click to expand...

Actually in the context of cancer, from the early 90's up until 2003, colorectal cancer was the second leading cause of cancer related deaths in the United States, however like you said, colon cancer is just one of many worries you should have. And in relation to cancer, red meat is just a speck in the risk factors involved in colon cancer. First of all, it is estimated that anywhere between 6% and 23% are hereditary - hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer or HNPCC. It's difficult to accurately diagnose because it's difficult to PCR the gene sequence for it. Eating red meat has no bearing on the % of risk in this case of colon cancer. As for colon cancer in general, you can't talk meaningfully about risk factors unless you also include sex, age, other dietary carcinogens (saccharine, aspartame, acrylamide found in fries and other deep fried potatoes, etc..), ethnicity, family history of the disease, weight, physical activity, smoking, and alcohol intake. Most of these are significantly more important than eating a cheeseburger once in a while.

More importantly, it is crucial to focus on the quality of nutrition rather than the actual food. I went to an osteopathic med school (DO) and osteopathy focuses on treating the whole person as well as the disease, not just the disease itself. It's a more holistic approach than allopathy (MD). And like what MynameisnotDeja and djwhirlpool said, what good is focusing on one thing when you might be faltering in 10 others?
 
DJDannyUhOh said:
I'm saying you can eat meat and still maintain a healthy colon. You are saying you can't so I beg to differ. You're saying that eating any red meat will compromise colon health but you couldn't be farther from the truth. Notice that all of the studies mention "a high intake of red meat" which is unhealthy in itself. Having a healthy colon DOES NOT require turning vegetarian and that's what I'm debating against.
Click to expand...

NO, that is NOT what I'm saying. Yes, you probably COULD eat meat and still maintain a healthy colon. Sure, with moderation of vegetables and fiber, this could happen by balancing out the meat and dairy which would clog your colon. This is called harm reduction. Many people do it, as I have yet to find someone who soley eats meat.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS that meat does NOT contribute to a healthy colon in any way, shape or form, and some studies show that it is DETRIMENTAL. Therefore, what I am saying is, why would anyone want to eat meat if they want a healthy colon?
 
why would anyone want to eat meat if they want a healthy colon?
Click to expand...

Because it's something they like and if proper care is taken, you can have a healthy colon while enjoying meat now and then. Simple as that.
 
DJDannyUhOh said:
Because it's something they like and if proper care is taken, you can have a healthy colon while enjoying meat now and then. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

Then please post in the lounge about interests.. because this is the healthy living forum. If someone posted that they enjoy slitting their wrists now and then, would you tell them that it's alright if they moderate it?
 
Healthy living doesn't require you to be a meat nazi. I'm not going to say that you must avoid meat to have a healthy colon because that is just a flat out lie.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS that meat does NOT contribute to a healthy colon in any way, shape or form
Click to expand...

And doing drugs does? 'Cause there are people posting in this forum that do. Do I sense a bias on meat?
 
You smoke tobacco and weed right? So then how can you press the issue of contributing to a healthy colon when smoking, especially THC, is just as much of a risk factor to colon cancer as eating red meat is??
 
THC is harmless to the body.

And actually, smoking has a contributing synergistic cancerous effect with the nitros that are emitted from cooking meat. So unless I eat meat, which I don't, I hardly see how tobacco or cannabis smoking is affecting my colon health.

With all these pointless posts, and the most pointful ones being thinly shielded attacks, it's very hard to not consider you a troll and detrimental to any progress in this thread.

I strongly recommend you to (re)read my statements, and try to answer the questions: What role does meat play in colon health? Should anyone with a healthy colon in mind consume any type of meat?

And please try to use references, as it will make you appear more credible.
 
THC? Smoking? Harmless to the body? Your ignorance isn't a good thing. Why am I even debating with you?

Smoking. Studies at the Harvard School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston have linked cigarette smoking to colon cancer. The studies also found that smoking at a young age (in your twenties) increases your lifetime risk of colorectal cancer. But remember that the longer you smoke, the greater your risk, so it's never too late to stop.
Click to expand...

http://www.thehealthpages.com/articles/ar-colon.html

http://coloncancer.about.com/od/smoking/

Journal Article: Cigarette Smoking, Colorectal Cancer, and Genetic Mutations
From Donna Myers,
Your Guide to Colon Cancer.
FREE Newsletter. Sign Up Now!
Click to expand...

http://coloncancer.about.com/od/abstracts/a/2005Abstract51.htm

Cigarette Smoking Causes Genetic Damage Linked to Colon Cancer
Click to expand...

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/c...ses_Genetic_Damage_Linked_to_Colon_Cancer.asp

If you smoke, the American Cancer Society (ACS) has another reason why you should quit. A 14-year study shows that smokers and ex-smokers are more likely to die from colorectal cancer than people who never smoked.
Click to expand...

http://www.healthatoz.com/healthatoz/Atoz/dc/caz/suba/smok/alert12162000.jsp

Women more vulnerable to risk of colorectal cancer from tobacco, study
Click to expand...

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=32945

It just goes on and on like this. Credible enough or do you need a pie chart with pretty colors?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top