Cleanse diets and "toxins"

From reading about different cleanse/raw food/fasting diets, I have been able to put together pieces of the theory that these appear to based on. It goes roughly like this.

Your body has toxins stored up, primarily in the fat cells. These toxins come from different places: chemicals in the environment, food additives, etc. Stored toxins mess with your body chemistry, your hormones, your metabolism; they make you hungry, lethargic, depressed. They can also cause things like hypothyroidism, diabetes, obesity, bad skin, mental health problems, and just general unwellness.

So what you need to do is get rid of the toxins. Some people claim that there are herbs and special diets that can extract toxins from cells. Other people claim that things like saunas, colonics, fasting, whatever else you can imagine, will cause toxins to be released. And, presumably just losing fat will get rid of the toxins being stored in the fat cells. Moreover, you should to take lots of fiber and antioxidants to flush toxins out of your system safely and prevent them from messing you up on the way out. And you should eat organic foods because they have less toxins. And maybe you should only eat (preferably raw) vegetables because animals and fish are all full of chemicals and hormones.

So, my question is, is there a scientific basis for all/any of this? It seems that the scientific community is pretty dismissive of the whole idea of "detox" diets, their opinion seems to be that the body is very good at getting rid of toxins, that's what the liver does, and all this "cleanse" talk is just nonsense. Now, I am scientific and skeptic by nature, but that answer doesn't seem fully satisfactory. It's one thing to say that most "cleanse" or "detox" diets are fads, but that doesn't mean the whole theory of toxins is incorrect. In other words, maybe there are lots of stored-up toxins in fat cells, they are extremely harmful, it is possible to get rid of them and thereby increase your health significantly, but a week of maple syrup and cayenne pepper is not going to do it.

So my questions are, to those who are knowledgeable about this sort of thing:

1) Is it in fact true that fat cells store toxins that affect your hormones, metabolism, and are generally damaging to your health?
2) Is there any reliable way of getting rid of the toxins, or of neutralizing their effects?
3) Is there scientific research backing this theory?

sticky foot pads and things that make people go number 2.

Also, some historical examples of people doing it wrong:

http://whatstheharm.net/detoxification.html

there with the medicine shows of the 19th century. Lots of flash, no substance.

I was obese as a child. When I was in high school, I dropped down, but I was still carrying a good chuck o' fat on me.

For years, I've tried to take it off, and finally last year I did it. Last January with a trainer, I went on a 12 week "low carb" diet with daily weight training/cardio and I dropped 37 pounds; my body fat dropped big time. That being said, I did this when I was 44 years old. I felt sickly and weak the entire time. Now while one can argue it was the routine, which definitely affected the way I felt, there was a feeling like I was getting something out of my system.

I did the 12 week again this past January and I can tell you that I did not have that sick feeling (just hungry). I figure I'd had "bad juju", for lack of better words, in my system for decades. I think getting rid of the fat made it come out.

That's my experience anyways.

to you. Be very wary of such stuff. There's a lot of nonsense out there that passes for sense. Don't fall for extreme things.

Eat properly, get exercise, avoid harmful things, and live well and long.

All of the thread topic? Or colonics? I haven't had a colonic but I do do cleansing things and I definitely feel the benefit when I do.

And studies have shown that this is simply the placebo effect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo



But hey, if it makes you feel better, more power to you. I just hope you don't think these products are actually DOING anything, other than eliminating money from your pocket.

a change in the way my body feels. When I do the drink mix known as clay and psyllium husks, or my own mix-my-own version of it, I have an effect of being energized, more focused, and the following day I have this very large elimination that is neither constipated nor (the other extreme) and I feel just less tired and sluggish in general. I usually do this every day for a period of time (maybe two whole weeks, missing some days on accident) and then I get lazy and won't bother for a week or so.

There ***is*** a big difference for me. Maybe it is because I AM prone to constipation, and this specific cleansing isn't needed for EVERYBODY.

When I read forum discussions like this one I just am 'dumstruck' by some of the attitudes here that NOTHING you try to do for yourself regarding what you eat or drink, or don't eat or don't drink, has ANY effect on your real health or how you feel whatsoever.

I know what I know, I haven't tried everything, but some things make a HUGE difference in health and well-being. This is one of them for me.

People who feel sluggish and tired and have problems with elimination probably would benefit from what I do. And this type of thing won't hurt you. Some things must be done with caution, or with a doctor's supervision / knowledge.

People who have never tried this do not know for a fact that it can't help you. I know for a fact that it CAN.

bacteria back up into the intestines and from what I've read the body is very good at getting rid of toxins.

Better to stay away or at least consumption of processed foods and OTC medicines, drink water and exercise because sweat is the body's natural way to flush out the system.

The fact there is a huge industry built up around the fear of toxins in the body indicates that these companies directly profit by instilling fear.

I am only talking about the stuff that goes in ONE end and OUT the OTHER. I know nothing first-hand about colonics.

to cleanse your wallet of that toxic money, but nothing more.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=88

Would you like a liver flush with that colon cleanse?
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=93

I've read a few others others like it, and it seems to be the scientific consensus:

"The waste products produced by the human body are easily metabolized by organs such as the liver, and excreted by organs particularly designed for that purpose such as the kidneys."


OK, but what about the theory that "toxins are stored in fat cells"? Is there any truth behind that at all? Or do fat cells just store fat, and nothing else and that's it.


As I mentioned in the OP, I'm very skeptical of "cleanse diets", because I figure if you do have substances stored up in fat cells, you're not going to get rid of them in a one week crash diet.

But I'm also skeptical of the "no worries, the liver will sort it all out" theory. For example, unless I am mistaken, even reputable doctors advise against eating too much fish (tuna, swordfish, ...) because of the high mercury content. So presumably, it's actually bad to have lots of mercury in your body. Does that make mercury a "toxin"? What does the "liver will sort it all out" theory have to say about mercury?

As for the question of whether or not, one can poison oneself, I think that has been solved long ago. The issue is that quacks are selling people on cleanse diets in order to "cleanse" toxins are not likely out of the ordinary, and that wouldn't work even if those toxins were out of the ordinary.

Your body clears out environmental toxins on it's own via the liver.

But I have almost as much trouble believing that as I do the "cleanse theory".

For example, how about mercury or lead? Is it really the case that the liver simply clears mercury out of your system, so there's no need to worry? If so, why do even reputable medical authorities warn against too much mercury intake?

Apparently mercury does get stored up in the body, and it is harmful, so that appears to be disprove the "no worries, the liver takes care of toxins" theory.


Now, whether cleanses diets are actually effective at removing "toxins" is a whole different question. I am inclined to agree with you there, that cleanse diets are BS.

But that doesn't mean that there are no elements of truth to the "toxins" theory.

And other toxins from the body. That would be magic! Good grief, mercury can even be found in human hair. I don't know where the BS came that toxins are simply eliminated from the body. That is quackery of the highest order. Sheesh!

Of course the chemical industry tries to promote such nonsense so we don't enact health saving legislation like banning BPA

http://environmentalhealthnews.org/newscience/2008/2008-0818hugoetal.html

if we aren't eliminating mercury from our body, then why is it found in hair? Do you ever read what you are writing?

think fat, liver, bloodstream, muscles, etc.

Toxins are eliminated through breast milk too. I suppose you consider that a good thing?????

True, the hair is cut, but the mercury in hair is just a proxy for how it is deposited in other tissues.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19909946

"Toxins are eliminated through breast milk too."

:rofl:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

We eliminate food as well, but we also store it.

Severe diarrhea might make food go through you really fast, but no. We don't eliminate food. Feces is not food.

The OP was really an honest attempt to ask whether there is any science behind the idea that toxins are stored in the body. I asked because I am not a doctor, and am not familiar with the scientific literature on this topic. I am a skeptic in many ways, which is why I don't believe the claims of people peddling cleanse diets. But I also find the theory that the liver takes care of all toxins, so there's nothing to worry about to be very difficult to believe.

Celebration has actually provided links to research indicating that a variety of different toxic substances do get stored in the body, in a number of different ways. For example, here's the first sentence of one of the links: "Organochlorines are fat-soluble chemical compounds resistant to degradation, so they are stored in the adipose tissue of practically every organism on the planet, including humans." Now I have no f-ing clue what an organochlorine is, but, based on the description from the abstract of that study, it seems to fit the definition of a "toxin stored in body fat" pretty damn accurately.

On the other hand, the supposedly "scientific and skeptical" side of this argument is resorting to juvenile argumentation and mockery.

Do you not understand that the fact that toxins can be found in breast milk actually supports the theory that toxins are stored up in the body? Really? As I mentioned above, I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure I can explain this one. If toxins were actually taken care of quickly and efficiently by the liver and kidneys, then you wouldn't actually find any in breast milk. You also wouldn't find any in hair. If there are toxins in hair and breast milk, it means those toxins are being stored up in the body.

Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't think anyone objects to the idea that SOME toxins are eliminated by the liver, kidneys, etc. Of course the liver eliminates SOME toxins. The question is whether enough toxins are eliminated so that what remains are really minute traces that don't have adverse health effects.

It's a matter of degree. Nuance, if you will. Are stored-up toxins actually a health concern?

shown that what you're offering is misinformation?

:shrug:

Celebration claimed (falsely) that "we don't simply eliminate mercury and other toxins from the body. That would be magic!" then in the very next sentence, gave an example of how the body eliminates toxins such as mercury.

Read closely:

In the next response, Celebration then gave more examples of how we 'magically' eliminate mercury and other toxins from the body.

Instead of getting all giddy about catching someone in a phony "contradiction", try instead to figure out what the person meant. In this case, it's pretty clear; see my last post for an explanation, I'm pretty sure I got it right.

As an analogy, suppose I said "the Celtics killed the Knicks in that last series, I bet the Knicks feel like crap". I suspect you would jump down my throat and say "HAHAHAHA if the Knicks are DEAD, how can they FEEL anything!!!!!! You CONTRADICTED yourself in the SAME SENTENCE!!!!!!!"

Your behavior in this case is just as juvenile.

Either you truly don't understand what Celebration was saying, or you do understand and you're intentionally being a pain. And either way, it's not a flattering look.

Some members MAY waste your time and consider logical discussion a target to tangent. Just sayin..

first you mock the idea that we eliminate toxins, but now you admit that not only do they leave our body through our hair, they also leave via breast milk?

This'll rock your world: they ALSO leave our body through our urine! ZOMG! What a crazy idea that our body has ways of eliminating toxins!

If that were true, it'd be possible to test urine for trace amounts of a substance a person might have ingested/inhaled/injected.

Could you imagine? Testing urine for various substances?

but we don't *select* it out for elimination, which was my point. Toxins, water and food can go through our body, obviously. Stored mercury (ARE YOU DENYING THIS) is not selected out to be eliminated.

Interesting, this,

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12608524

They recommend slow weight loss because of the organochlorines in fat tissue. If a person looses fat too fast, the organochlorides in the fat tissue have the capability of overwhelming the system, causing problems. In this case it is best NOT to eliminate the toxins too fast.

Toxins do get stored in fat. Is anyone here denying this? The toxins are not self selected out for elimination, but are eliminated when the fat tissue is lost.

"We don't simply eliminate mercury and other toxins from the body. That would be magic! Good grief, mercury can even be found in human hair. I don't know where the BS came that toxins are simply eliminated from the body. That is quackery of the highest order. Sheesh!"

So, we don't eliminate mercury, but we do, but we don't? :crazy:

Trying to shift the goalposts with a pathetic "I really meant this" won't fly. You claimed that toxins aren't eliminated. This is factually incorrect. You even listed two ways in which they're eliminated. Shifting the goalposts can't help you save face.

means we don't select them for elimination, jeez.

What is this some kind of game? I don't think so. Toxins are stored in fat, and once there, stay there unless the fat is eliminated. The liver does not magically come in and take the mercury out of the fat and eliminate it.

I recall you saying that eliminating toxins would be magic, then citing several ways in which the body eliminates toxins.

Through breast milk.

Are you only able to focus on one part of a system at a time?

"We don't simply eliminate mercury and other toxins from the body. That would be magic! ... I don't know where the BS came that toxins are simply eliminated from the body. That is quackery of the highest order. Sheesh!"

I should have said tha the STORED mercury (and it DOES store) does not simply get eliminated from the body, and that if the liver was able to do that, it would be magic.

Pesticides and other toxins get STORED in fat and tissues. Sure they can excrete through normal processes, just as food and water is excreted. But toxins also get stored in the tissue, and that was what the OP wanted to know.

But other than trying to do some one upmanship or something juvenile like that, I am not sure of your point here.

The OP asked a basic question.

"1) Is it in fact true that fat cells store toxins that affect your hormones, metabolism, and are generally damaging to your health?"

Note that he did not ask if some of the toxins were eliminated through the urine.

An answer was given

"Your body clears out environmental toxins on it's own via the liver."

That left the impression that environmental toxins are all removed magically from tissue. In fact, they aren't. Whether I left out some wording on a reply has nothing to do with what the OP was asking and I personally find verbal oneupmanship a bit juvenile. But if you find it amusing to continue along that path and it thus boosts your ego, be sure to keep going and ignore the whole point of the original post, and ignore the fact that nobody in this thread besides me answered his first question. The answer is YES it is true that fat cells store toxins and are generally damaging to your health.

This entire subthread is you trying to save face by equivocating. Just give it up.

The body DOES have multiple ways of eliminating toxins, and none are magic.

Not a single person here has addressed the OP's first question. I was referring to the question in the OP. Toxins stored in fat are not magically removed by the liver.

It only was misleading if not read in the context of the OP.

That's OK though, you've changed your story so many times I'm not surprised you can't remember what was said.

Oh, and you must have missed this response to the OP: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=103886&mesg_id=104373

It answers all three questions posed by the OP. It's understandable if you missed it though, it's only been up for a full day.

"Hair" is not an organ of elimination. If 'it' is in the hair, 'it' has been incorporated into body structures.

And probably other places as well. If toxins weren't stored in the bodies of animals, we would not be cautioned against eating tuna, etc. when pregnant (due to stored mercury in the the body of tuna and some other cold water fish).

Furthermore high levels of cadmium in breast tissue is related to breast cancer.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8677430

I can't comment on the effect of cleanses on all this, because I am not knowledgeable about that. Generally cleanses are done to get rid of persisting candida infections. Then the gut can be recolonized with probiotics.

It is true that perspiring is a good way to cleanse the body. One could either exercise outside on a hot, muggy day, or take an infrared sauna.

The constant toxic cleansing and high colonics must make life miserable for the renally challenged.

I have. I do not understand why people argue that it is all quackery and sit on the sidelines and wait for proof. What about feeling better, what about seeing your own skin look younger, having more energy, less depression, ETCETERA?

I do not know know about every specific 'cleanse-diet' or regime out there. I know when I do the following I feel better although I have not been consistent:

-- eating raw food
-- eating LESS
-- avoiding bread / sugar
-- using clay / psyllium husk cleanses

and simply:
-- drinking lots of fresh water
-- getting exercise outside in the fresh air

If none of the above have any effect on our health, what DOES have an effect on our health, according to the debunkers here? Nothing? Born with pre-defined genetics, and there is nothing we can do about it? Getting plenty of x-rays, anal probes, vaccinations?

I can't prove anything to anyone here. But I can tell you from experience, it matters. It matters alot.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=729

Enough with anecdotes and logical fallacies. Ugh.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Thanks for sharing your experience! :hi:

1) Is it in fact true that fat cells store toxins that affect your hormones, metabolism, and are generally damaging to your health?

Some toxins are stored in fat. Some are eliminated by varied organs. Some circulate around your circulatory system and aren't eliminated or stored. It depends on the toxin.


2) Is there any reliable way of getting rid of the toxins, or of neutralizing their effects?

I think you are asking about getting those toxins that are stored in fat out of your body or neutralizing their effects. Going on that assumption, if they are simply stored, they are not doing anything but sitting there. Things like mercury are circulating in your blood and causing problems. I'd be skeptical of anything pulling toxins out of where they are stored to begin circulating and causing problems.

Here is a link to the Mayo Clinic. I've found they knowledgeable about health issues.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/pregnancy-and-fish/PR00158



3) Is there scientific research backing this theory?
Not that I've found.

Don't be all science-like on this OP. Just say NO!

:rofl:

house across the street might not be the same gray as the sides I see.

Scams and quacks kind of turn things black and white at times, and, at those times, it's worth calling a spade for what it is.

As a follow-up question/comment. You mention that if toxins are simply stored in fat and not doing anything, it may be a bad idea to pull the toxins out and get them circulating.

One question, to me, is whether or not the toxins stored in fat cells actually do anything or not. As I understand, (some) fat cells are metabolically active, and it thus seems at least plausible that toxins stored in fat cells could affect this metabolic activity. In other words, perhaps fat cells with toxins stored in them behave differently than fat cells without toxins stored in them.

As I mentioned in the OP, I don't know the answer, that's why I'm asking. I'm well outside my field here, but I've found that the best way to learn and understand things is to ask a lot of (possibly naive-sounding) questions.

And really, there may not be answers yet at all; the question of how stored toxins affect metabolic activity of fat cells may still be an open research problem. In fact, I can imagine it would be a very complex question. Because after all, there are many kinds of "toxins", each of which may have a unique effect on metabolic activity.

If "detox" diets worked, there'd be a lot of people with hepatic and renal disease. Think about it... How does your body eliminate toxins? Hint: They're processed through the liver and kidneys.

They have no actual meaning, and make any supposed discussion absolutely pointless.

Google scholar finds 1.2 million scholarly articles with the word "toxin"
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=toxin

Just to choose one random example to refute your silly claim, here's an article from Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine about mercury. The authors are from Mass General Hospital and Harvard Med.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14632570

From the conclusions:
"However, fish such as swordfish and shark are also a source of exposure to the heavy metal toxin, mercury" (emphasis added)

Obviously, I could go on (1.2 million times).

Seriously, you really, really need to start reading the scientific literature before tossing out these boneheaded claims. You just made an assertion with 1.2 million counterexamples.

Words do have differing definitions. The questions in the context of the OP clearly indicate that this is about the scam pushers use of the terms, as they try to sell "diets" and "cleanses" by pushing meaningless versions of the terms toxins and detox. (Interestingly, you did not note how many hits one finds on Google for the detox/toxin/cleanse/diet nonsense as pushed in the OP.)

Yes, I know you'll go off in another direction, but that's what you do.

Seriously, you need to understand the basic tenets of science, as well as the use of terminology in context, before you push your nonsense and make more ridiculous personal attacks.

Further, I will remind you that this is not something that hasn't been noticed by others:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=3193

I even used mercury as an example.

Maybe the whole disagreement is that what I mean by "toxin" is different from what you mean by "toxin". I guess you must have thought I was asking about fictitious substances invented by scam-pushers. But what I actually meant was toxic substances like mercury and lead.

Anyway, as much fun as this has been, I've gotta go for now.

In a few minutes, I'm probably going to be ingesting a toxin called "ethanol". My liver will then go to work, first transforming this ethanol into another toxin called "acetaldehyde". If I ingest too much ethanol, this acetaldehyde might have me feeling pretty miserable come tomorrow morning.


But since there's no such thing as toxins, I guess I won't worry about it too much.

Well, at least not most people, I suspect. Unfortunately, far too many do fall for the cleanse diet nonsense your OP addresses, even though you think can conveniently ignore that now. :rofl:

But thanks for cracking me up some more. :rofl:

And after the laughter: :boring:

Unless you're snacking on lead paint chips and mercury thermometers, of course.

B-)

It's a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qin_Shi_Huang#Death_and_aftermath">TCM treatment for immortality.

I got a colonic and within two or three hours my sinuses were full of pus. I had a full blown sinus infection. I assume this was from the bad germs being stirred up.

The lady who did colonics told me about other people who had long worms that came out of them. I assume these were segmented parasites.

Once I had a stupid doctor that took me OFF thyroid pills. When you are hypothyroid, you have to take thyroid pills the rest of your life. You can die if you are off of it for several years.

I went to a doc that x-rayed me and my bones were practically transparent.

Then I went to a smart doctor who cut off a piece of my hair, got it bombarded with radioactive isotopes, and the lab figured out how much of each element was excreted in my hair.

As it turned out, I had 20 times the normal amount of calcium in my hair. It was going to my hair instead of my bones because i was not taking thyroid extract.

I was off thyroid for nearly five years, and almost went into a myxedema coma and died.

:cry:

I am not going to try to tell you what's right or wrong about colonics because I have never had one. (By the way, did you feel you benefited from that, or was it a negative experience? I am not sure from what you did say here and am curious.)

However, there are several threads here about colon-cleansing, which I have done with the clay/psyllium/ plus flax/cayenne. Many times over. It will ***not*** make you sick nor stir up toxins, it willl simply pull them out. Even doing it ONCE a person will notice a benefit, and probably will want to try it again, and end up doing it on a regular basis.

We end up mixing up topics in these threads, talking about mercury and what-not, and then when I try to describe my personal experience I have replies that it is only the placebo effect.

I am saying I DO this and IT WORKS. The arguments all seem to be coming from people who have never even tried it.

At least, you are talking about the effects you noted from something you have actually experienced.

So I had wanted to clarify that my colon-cleansing is not the same thing as a colonic, and although they are both under the 'colon-cleansing' category, they are not the same thing.

To all the nay-sayers, we all are aware that colon cancer is a huge thing in America, and all the people who have diverticulitis or 'irritable-bowel syndrome,' and such, and (gasp.) W-O-R-M-S and PARASITES. Well, don't you acknowledge that many people have dirty contaminated colons that could use a cleansing?

This is part of 'alternative medicine.'

This really works. I'd sure like to hear from other posters who know this first hand. I just know they're out there, but it seems the health forum is not one of the busiest places here on DU. (Which puzzles me a little.)

I DID have a colonic, and I DID get extremely sick within a couple of hours.

Why is that so upsetting to you? It was my experience. It is what some people call a herxheimer reaction.

I was just asking if you thought it was a good thing or a bad thing and pointing out that what I do is not a colonic.

They put a cry smilie just after my post.
I was assuming they felt sorry for me or thought I was delusional, or I was lying.

I really do not know.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

When I see a claim that something removes toxins, they get about five seconds to tell me something sensible before I tune them out. Now, don't get me wrong--I'm definitely not among the crowd that knee-jerk rejects every health idea that doesn't come from Big Pharma, and I take gobs of supplements. But my experience has been that when "alternative" people start talking "toxins," they're usually beyond their level of expertise and don't have a clue what they're talking about. Ask them to name at least one of the toxins that they are removing, and how their product/procedure gets that particular toxin out of where it was.

If you drink a glass of water, it will remove some toxins. If you take Ex Lax, it will remove some toxins. If you inhale and then exhale, it will remove some toxins.

We are talking along the same lines, then, aren't we? If you take psyllium husks (or Metamucil), it will remove some toxins. If you take psyllium husks with clay (and if you feel like it add flax and cayenne pepper), it will remove some toxins. I say it will remove so much toxins you will really feel the difference.

I'm no expert, only a person who has been using this stuff for several years and I really feel the benefit.

There are many things we can do, without a doctor's help, that can have profound effects on our health.