Beliefs and Cleansing

February 27, 2002

Wow, Dale,

You certainly put a lot of time into this email!

Thanks for the focus,

Dale <Da_@...> wrote: Once again I see we have the

mind of an engineer in debate; stones or no

stones, does diet and processes of the liver flush work to remove stones or

create them? Are stones in fact in such numbers as to be inhabiting the

liver and the gallbladder in the hundreds? Does Magnisium Sulfate (Epsom

Salts) really do anything with the bile ducts so as to help in the dilating

of the structure so as to permit the passage of large bodies of matter?

The facts are these;

Magnisum

http://www.execpc.com/~magnesum/rod16.html

The assumption that the magnisum dialates is wrong but I've not been too

concerned about that fact here because of it's overall benifit. Here you

will not only find that it really works to help the cellular elasticty but I

think the information will help in reasoning its benifit in doing a flush

and dealing with bile ducts and any inflamation or infection that may be in

them.

Stones in the liver

The fact of the matter here is the bile coagulants that are refered to as

gallstones do congest the liver as well as the gallbladder. It just simply

is called a bile stone instead of a gallstone even though they look the

same. However, unless one takes a liver and slices it into many smaller

sections it just isn't going to be possible to see the stones that are there

because of their size and the internal density of the liver compared to the

gallbladders being a sack. They are, for the most part, not all that large

in the liver so an ultrasound or an X-ray are not going to detect them as

being there, unless they are another substance other than wax, such as

calcium. An MRI however may be the best means of detection but that's pretty

cost preventative for most proceedures. For calcium or wax stones it isn't

going to be too hard for an MRI to make a detection of a biliary obstruction

called.......bile stones.

http://www.kumc.edu/instruction/medicine/pathology/ed/ch_14/c14_s28.html

The effect of bile and bile stone formation (note that it will be now a bile

stone, for engineering effectiveness of the primary property of the stones

formation) can be considered much the same as the soap purchased to wash the

dishes to clean off the fat deposits that may be there, like the fat left

from the dripping meat of a sweet and juicy hamburger that just happened to

be loaded with fat (but what else to make it so tasty and palitable). Bile

comes in quality levels much the same as the purchase of quality detergents.

Cheap detergents may require more to be poured in the water to act as a

surfactant to get the fats emusified and held in suspention, and thereby

keeping it from precipitating back to the plates or the side walls of the

sink. Quality soaps can have a better emulsifying and surfactant factor in

water for suppension of fat particles.

As regards the manufacturing of stones by the body from the consuming of oil

and citrus fruit I don't think that's going to merit any time for disucssion

as it can be easily reasoned away by the most basic of cognizance of the

process needed to produce various forms of soaps by saponification. There

are plenty of sites to check out on how to make soaps that will convince

most anyone reading them that it is time consuming and requires substantive

heat of which the human body just can not provide.

And last but, I certainly hope not the least, is the fact that I personally

went thorough the living hell that many of the posters, who come here

looking for a means of getting rid of bile stones, have gone. For seven

months I tried to learn just enough to get by with, and hopefully get rid

of, the " A " stone that my doctor reported to me as existing in my

gallblader, which was also thickened and therefore diseased and needing

removeal, or so he said, at that time. As far as I knew my stone was a

golfball but after a month of preparation I decided to take a dive into

fate, whatever that may be, to see if I couldn't get rid of that " A " stone.

At the end of 1999 I had my fourth, and to this day worst attack that sent

me to the hospital. But, interstingly enough it wasn't because of an

obstruction by a bile stone or any other obstruction for that matter. I had

a liver attack because of my ingnorance and laziness in dealing with my

condition. I had an attack in August and swore to stay away from any forms

of fats, and from that time on I did really good at staying away from fats.

So good in fact that I damaged my liver doing so. I, in my ignorance, didn't

realize this until I went to the hospital in October of that year, was stone

free, but had elevated levels of AST, ALK, ALT, and bilirubin. My liver and

gallbladder looked normal excepting enlarged bile ducts in the liver and its

damage from no fat consumption. I haven't been back to get another

ultrasound to see just how things are doing, but I'm going to have to assume

that since I've been appling what I learned from Dr. Cabot on how to eat for

my liver's benifit, and haven't had an attack in over two years, that

something must be getting done right.

One important fact was when I did vist with my doctor for the follow-up to

this last emergency visit I asked him what he thought about the fact that

there was no stone and that my gallbladder now looked healthy. His statement

to my wife and I was " You can't argue with success! " . However, some will.

Ira, if you really are looking for an answer that would be great. However, I

can't say that I've really seen you as seeking an answer because I'm of the

belief (see that word appeared here too, sorry) that you have some sort of

agenda of which I can't decide just what it is you're trying to do. Perhaps

you would be so kind as to just come right out and say just what you really

are thinking and not keep playing games with these people who have kept

trying to help you.

I can appreciate that you are an engineer. So, I know that to be of that

education you certainly have mental prowness and can more than likely really

come out with some substantive information from which to debate. I'm just

asking that you be sure to back it up with cognisant reasoning and some

facts. I wish to be convinced, and I'm sure the others here are too, that we

are wrong in doing what we've been doing to get to and to maintain better

health. But, if you think you're going to be able to find information here

that you can take to a common doctor and expect to convince him otherwise I

don't think that's going to happen. That is unless they have the demeanor of

a doctor such as Dr. Cabot. There are doctors to whom you can talk

about your liver or gallbladder condition, if in fact you have a contition

needing their care, but don't expect there to be too many who will advise an

alternative means besides surgury or some other AMA approved medication.

Ira, I'm sorry to have to say this but I find you to be wormwood to this

group. You have not supported one thing that you written with substantive

backing at to why you would be needing the information. Nor have you been

thankfull for anything that's been written to you. I've just seen bitterness

and abuse in question form. If you would like to email me in direct debate

regarding the subject of gallstones I invite you to do that. Other than that

I would only ask that you not be so high minded to the people on this group

when in fact you're seeking to do the opposite. and others here are

new to the process of liver and gallbladder cleansing and try to do good by

being encouraging but often times go overboard and are short of acuracy in

giving answers to questions that are still in debate within the medical

community, but at least they are genuinely concerned and are doing the best

they know how to do to help others who come here seeking help. You on the

other hand have found a forum for devil's advocacy and relish within that.

This sure reminds me of a Star Teck adventure regarding an entity that lived

for the day in getting things perturb.

Dale

<<<<<< sent the following text in Digest Number 1000:

>So yes, I'd say it's critically important that a person believe that

>what

>they are doing is successful and good for their health. And so yes,

>I can

>understand why there are those who feel strongly about posting about

>what

>they believe about what they are doing.

While I would find it hard to disagree with your thoughts, , i

fear you have missed my point. Of course it's good to believe that

what you are doing will be of benefit. I'm talking about another

type of " belief " that I read here every day.

That is a " belief " that Epsom salts dilate ducts. A " belief " that

everyone's liver is full of stones, when gastroenterologists tell us

that intrahepatic stones are fatal unless treated in very aggressive

manner! A " belief " that a liver cleanse causes the gall bladder to

expel stones, while Barry bemoans the fact that he has passed 100s of

what he regards as gallstones, yet the single one that makes him so

uncomfortable still remains in place.

These are the kind of beliefs that are passed on from one list member

to another, each time reinforcing these beliefs, so that everyone has

these beliefs, and they don't look for or find corroboration from

people who have studied the matter scientifically. That would be

fine in a religious discipline, but here we are dealing with the

health of each and every one of us, and many treat it as a form of

belief in the unknown.

" I've also heard that . . . . " is a recurrent theme. Can I tell this

to my doctor and expect to convince him/her?

I hope I have made my observation more clear, so that can see

that she didn't really answer my point.

And now, *why* is this pseudo-religious faith of concern to

me? Because I have to deal with medical professionals to whom I go

for help, and I would love to be able to convince them that I have

the answer. If a physician tells me, for example, that he has

investigated, dissected, treated, imaged hundreds of livers and gall

bladders and has seen none of the phenomena that all our list members

belive in, my only response can be that Adrienne told me so, that she

read it in a book written by someone who took a 100-hour

correspondence course. And that Agnes believes it, and that Barry

believes it but cannot understand why, despite all his efforts, he

still has the painful gallstone that led him to his beliefs. (No

offense to any of these people, of course, and my apologies to those

whom I have not mentioned.)

You understand that I do not have a leg to stand on in a discussion

with a physician that has devoted tens of years to studying and

treating people with the problems that you and I have. And I would

like to be rid of my stones! And I'd like to keep my gall bladder.

Is my position clear to anyone, or have I not explained myself

clearly again? Does anyone see things the way I do?

-----------------------

IRA L. JACOBSON

-----------------------

mailto:laser@...>>>>>>>>>>>>

February 27, 2002

barry91162@... writes:

> I think the proof is more in the personal results than in the information.

> If you clean your liver and gb of (whatever) sludge, sand, grain,

> crystal, stones, globs, gunk, balls and you feel great because you

> still have your vital digestive organ, what other proof would anyone

> want or need?

>

I think this is so true. Otherwise, how many other sources would it take? I

mean - would the analysis of one person's stones do the trick or would

someone say " well, that's just ONE person. " How about two, five, twenty?

How many websites would it take? How many personal stories would one have to

read? How much convincing would be necessary?

To be honest, I don't think I would buy into half of this if I hadn't done it

myself. I'm very glad I did. It's unlikely that I will ever have an

opportunity to have any of my stones analyzed. Would it make a difference to

me if I did? Nope. I don't need a lab to tell me that what I'm doing is

good for my health. Would it make a difference if a lab told me something

contrary to what I've read? Actually, no. Because the proof is still in 2

things: what comes out and how I feel. That's enough for me.

But that's just me. Others are skeptical, and there will always be those who

are skeptical. I just hope for their own health sake that they will give the

flush a try and see for themselves.

in health,

rachel~

February 27, 2002

If you clean your liver and gb of (whatever) sludge, sand, grain,

crystal, stones, globs, gunk, balls and you feel great because you

still have your vital digestive organ, what other proof would anyone

want or need?

Barry. >>

_________________________

AMEN!!!

Susie

February 27, 2002

But that's just me. Others are skeptical, and there will always be those

who

are skeptical. I just hope for their own health sake that they will give

the

flush a try and see for themselves. >>

______________

Hi, ,

I would like to have mine tested, however, I do agree with the rest of your

post. The reason that I want mine tested is not because I don't believe I'm

passing GB and liver stuff, but I'd like to know their makeup, so to speak.

And then maybe if there's parasites or something, this I'd like to know. I

know some parasites you probably can't see, I don't guess. Especially with my

eyesight. Heehee!

I do want to state that even though Debra probably has a decent doctor, from

what I'm seeing from her posts, she has a rosy-colored view of the medical

world, in my opinion, that truly isn't reality. No, I don't think all

doctors are bad either. Like I stated before, Dr. Cabot is a rare one.

She's an expert.

Now, Dr. Mercola has an article at his website about the medical schools,

that many are now starting to teach natural medicine also. There's hope for

the medical world yet. Debra might benefit if she read this article. I can

find the link for her, if she is interested.

Take care,

Susie

February 27, 2002

Hi,

I have to disagree. I've not read one post questioning your stoneless

condition, or getting mad about it.

Adrienne

D B <fairyflight@...> wrote:

>>. A " belief " that

everyone's liver is full of stones, when gastroenterologists tell us

that intrahepatic stones are fatal unless treated in very aggressive

manner! <<

This puzzles me also, as does everyone's seeming reluctance to hear that my

liver had no stones, and my gallbladder only had four. This is my factual

experience, yet people get mad at me for relating it.

Debra

_________________________________________________________________

MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:

http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

February 27, 2002

Why should anyone get upset that you only had four stones? I would think you

would be getting congrats that your liver/kidney is free of those wretched

things! *teehehehe*

Peace

Lucinda

----- Original Message -----

From: D B

gallstones

Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 12:30 PM

Subject: Re: Re: Beliefs and Cleansing

>>. A " belief " that

everyone's liver is full of stones, when gastroenterologists tell us

that intrahepatic stones are fatal unless treated in very aggressive

manner! <<

This puzzles me also, as does everyone's seeming reluctance to hear that my

liver had no stones, and my gallbladder only had four. This is my factual

experience, yet people get mad at me for relating it.

Debra

_________________________________________________________________

MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:

http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

February 27, 2002

Dale,

You and I have agreed, and respectfully disagreed on some issues over the

past few years. I have always respected the way you respond to people. I

disagree with you about Ira, though. He is persistent in his search for the

truth, and is looking for hard evidence. He has not felt satisfied, so he

keeps asking. I think he would love to feel that

he has been offered proof, but he doesn't. Others feel that they have

enough. I don't think he is trying to convince anyone that they are wrong.

You are entitled to feel he is dead wrong, but he is not hurting anyone. I

feel his search, and his intentions, are honest. Who knows, maybe if he

hangs around long enough he will try a flush himself, and write in a rave

testimonial.

Debra

_________________________________________________________________

MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:

http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

February 28, 2002

>>I've not read one post questioning your stoneless condition, or getting

>>mad about it.<<

Adrienne,

Well, I certainly did not mean you. You have never been anything but calm

and respectful, even though you disagree with some of what I think. But if

you have been reading during the past week or so, you will have seen me

referred to as ignorant more that once, along with being told that people

here shouldn't have to hear my opinions, etc.

Debra

_________________________________________________________________

Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.

http://www.hotmail.com

February 28, 2002

>><< I wouldn't be concerned who agreed with me. I am more concerned with

taking responsibility for my own health. >>

Well said, Vince! <<

I second that.

Debra

_________________________________________________________________

Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.

http://www.hotmail.com

February 28, 2002

>>Not everyone is reluctant to hear it.<<

True. Didn't mean to imply that. Sorry.

>>I mean absolutely no disrespect when I

say this, but I, for one, am not really concerned with how many stones your

liver has or doesn't have. <<,

LOL. None taken. Don't blame you. It doesn't even interest ME that much!

>>I'm not being unkind here, just pointing out that

nobody's out to get you because you say you had no stones in your liver and

I

have never seen a post that indicated that anyone was mad at you for saying

that you didn't have any. Perhaps you're reading into things we all

share experiences and each one is different than the next.<<

Well, I don't blame you if you haven't read word-for-word the responses, and

again, the source was very limited, but there was some definite resentment

of my implying that if everyone had stones in there liver, than I should

too, and I didn't. Again, limited source.

>>

Perhaps you have

no stones in your liver and perhaps you're the only one out here who

doesn't,

but sharing that information is no problem. If you were to imply that

nobody

else has stones in their liver either, then that's not appropriate.<<

I was questioning the implication that everyone has stones in their liver.

I know that stones do form in the liver, but my opinion as to why and when

is different from others'. It is this opinion that ruffles a minority, not

my stoneless liver.

>>Personally, I have no idea whether or not I have stones in my liver and it

>>is

of no consequence to me where the stones are or what you call them as long

as

they come out. <<

Can't argue with that.

Thanks ,

Debra

_________________________________________________________________

Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

February 28, 2002

This shouldn't be hard to understand if you choose to try and

openmindedly look at the facts. The fact that a gb has 4 stones means

that the bile 'globs' (if you don't want to call them stones) started

as wads of little cholesterol that traveled out of the liver and

rested in the gb. Bile is created by the liver and also creates

stones eventually. Dale has explained why doctors cannot see bile

stones (or softer round globs) in the liver unless it is dissected

open. They are too small and soft to detect in the liver. We can see

pictures of a liver dissected on curezone.com where a liver has a

small pigment stone in the liver bile duct. Once the cholesterol

stone (glob) rests in a diseased or sluggish gb it will either stay

there ar stick to the wall and calcify. Calcified stones will show up

on ultrasound whereas softer cholesterol stones that have recently

arrived in the gb will not.

You may have had someone tell you that your liver was free of hard

stones but the globs of bile that has been seen in your gb as stones

got their start from the liver. The liver will clean sludge and globs

out very easily because they are still new and soft globs of bile.

The sluggish gb will turn them into hard stones or even cholesterol

gb stones. Bile stones (globs in the liver) are not the same as gb

stones. If you can understand the two differences, you will see that

they are the same thing only in advanced form.

No one is getting mad at you. We are getting alittle frusterated

trying to explain over and over again the function of the liver.

Also, for someone who has never done the flushes that we are doing

here, it is hard to convince them of the results we are seeing and

the better well-being we are feeling in our digestive systems. I

believe in my own results. No doctor needs to tell me otherwise.

Whereas I still have a 1cm stone in my gallbladder doesn't mean that

I have not cleared my liver/gb and ducts of sludge, gunk, globs of

cholesterol bile (pre-problem stones), gb stones, grainy toxin and

other parasites, etc. I feel great and have seen the results. I am

still working to desolve the 'problem stone' but feel so great for

the results I have experienced first hand already.

Barry.

>

> >>. A " belief " that

> everyone's liver is full of stones, when gastroenterologists tell us

> that intrahepatic stones are fatal unless treated in very aggressive

> manner! <<

>

> This puzzles me also, as does everyone's seeming reluctance to hear

that my

> liver had no stones, and my gallbladder only had four. This is my

factual

> experience, yet people get mad at me for relating it.

>

> Debra

>

> _________________________________________________________________

> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:

> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

February 28, 2002

Debra,

If the explantion and photos on http://www.curezone.com and " Are you

stoned " is not proof enough for anyone in this group, than probably

nothing will be except for personal experience and results. I think

the proof is more in the personal results than in the information.

If you clean your liver and gb of (whatever) sludge, sand, grain,

crystal, stones, globs, gunk, balls and you feel great because you

still have your vital digestive organ, what other proof would anyone

want or need?

Barry.

>

> Dale,

>

> You and I have agreed, and respectfully disagreed on some issues

over the

> past few years. I have always respected the way you respond to

people. I

> disagree with you about Ira, though. He is persistent in his

search for the

> truth, and is looking for hard evidence. He has not felt

satisfied, so he

> keeps asking. I think he would love to feel that

> he has been offered proof, but he doesn't. Others feel that they

have

> enough. I don't think he is trying to convince anyone that they

are wrong.

> You are entitled to feel he is dead wrong, but he is not hurting

anyone. I

> feel his search, and his intentions, are honest. Who knows, maybe

if he

> hangs around long enough he will try a flush himself, and write in

a rave

> testimonial.

>

> Debra

>

> _________________________________________________________________

> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:

> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

February 28, 2002

Debra,

Maybe you are reffering to me when you said you were

called 'ignorant'. Once again, don't take it personal or wrong. You

are not an ignorant person. Being ignorant of a situation or topic is

different. Ignorant in that form is only a lack of sifficient

knowledge. I'm sorry if you thought I, or anyone else, called

you 'ignorant' but that was definitely taken wrong by you.

Also, your opinions are respected. Others opinions may be different

but no opinion is bad. Opposition to cleanse beliefs, facts, and

results may be debated on here. That is different as well.

Be Healthy.

Barry.

> >>I've not read one post questioning your stoneless condition, or

getting

> >>mad about it.<<

>

> Adrienne,

>

> Well, I certainly did not mean you. You have never been anything

but calm

> and respectful, even though you disagree with some of what I

think. But if

> you have been reading during the past week or so, you will have

seen me

> referred to as ignorant more that once, along with being told that

people

> here shouldn't have to hear my opinions, etc.

>

> Debra

>

> _________________________________________________________________

> Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.

> http://www.hotmail.com

February 28, 2002

>From: " D B " <fairyflight@...>

But I still

>have to wonder, where were the many stones that should have been in my

>liver

>and gallbladder?

>

>Debra

>

The odds are, sadly, that they are all still right there - multiplying,

growing and undetected by modern medical exam methods.

Vince Richter

_________________________________________________________________

Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.

http://www.hotmail.com

February 28, 2002

Bravo ,

You know, with all this talk about facts, proof, beliefs, etc. I

think that this (as well as a lot of alternatative methods) requires

a step out in (at least a little) faith. What you've said reminds me

of a parable found in the Holy Bible (whether anyone believes in the

Holy Bible or not, this story is the answer to all this 'belief'

stuff)....The blind man was healed by Christ and recieved his sight.

The 'doubters' asked him if it was from God or Satan. His one reply

was...Who cares? (paraphrased of course), I was blind and now I see!!

This personal experience (along with a few others) caused millions of

others to believe with faith the proof they saw by fact. No one can

prove it, but anyone can experience it for themselves. :-)

How does this relate to this group? Well, I was tired, sick, in

constant pain, and blotted. Now I'm healthier, more alert, feeling

well, pain reduced dramatically (or gone in others), and I still have

my digestive organs!!!

End of debate.

Barry.

> barry91162@y... writes:

> > I think the proof is more in the personal results than in the

information.

> > If you clean your liver and gb of (whatever) sludge, sand, grain,

> > crystal, stones, globs, gunk, balls and you feel great because

you

> > still have your vital digestive organ, what other proof would

anyone

> > want or need?

> >

>

> I think this is so true. Otherwise, how many other sources would

it take? I

> mean - would the analysis of one person's stones do the trick or

would

> someone say " well, that's just ONE person. " How about two, five,

twenty?

> How many websites would it take? How many personal stories would

one have to

> read? How much convincing would be necessary?

>

> To be honest, I don't think I would buy into half of this if I

hadn't done it

> myself. I'm very glad I did. It's unlikely that I will ever have

an

> opportunity to have any of my stones analyzed. Would it make a

difference to

> me if I did? Nope. I don't need a lab to tell me that what I'm

doing is

> good for my health. Would it make a difference if a lab told me

something

> contrary to what I've read? Actually, no. Because the proof is

still in 2

> things: what comes out and how I feel. That's enough for me.

>

> But that's just me. Others are skeptical, and there will always be

those who

> are skeptical. I just hope for their own health sake that they

will give the

> flush a try and see for themselves.

>

> in health,

> rachel~

>

February 28, 2002

Barry,

I love this parable, indeed, fine example.

And here I am today not smelling like garlic even though I ate 3 cloves today

and I know this cuz people tell me I don't.....what this has to do with this

thread....well maybe only that some don't try something because they have a

belief about it.

Peace

Lu

PS. Never mind if I am in neverland here. LOL

----- Original Message -----

From: barry91162

gallstones

Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 8:22 PM

Subject: Re: Beliefs and Cleansing