 | debunking detox
Every year the organization Sense About Science puts considerable effort into convincing us that detoxing is just a big old waste of time and money. For the last few years its reports have attracted much attention in the mainstream media. This year's offering was entitled "Debunking Detox".
SAS's message on the subject of detox is essentially (to paraphrase the gist of their comments over the last three years): Detox products don't work, our bodies are quite capable of handling anything we ingest, there's nothing we can do to help them, and the notion that we can "go on a detox" to do so has no scientific validity.
And they are far from alone in claiming all of this; these are the views of many scientists, doctors and dieticians. For example, Ben Goldacre, an NHS doctor writing in the January 18 edition of The Sunday Times, chimed in with the following: "The notion of detox is medically meaningless [...] That burgers and beer can have negative effects on your body is certainly true, for any number of fascinating reasons; but the notion that they leave a specific residue - toxins - that can be extruded by a specific physiological mechanism is nothing more than a marketing invention."
Now, we can certainly agree with these folks in white coats on some of the points they make. Yes, the majority of the "detox" products on the market really are a waste of money. Especially those that are made of synthetic, manmade ingredients, as many of the detox products Sense About Science covered in their recently published "Detox Dossier" were.
They are also quite right when they point out that the "quick fix" that allows you to eat and drink rubbish 360 days of the year and undo the effects of that in the other 5 truly does not exist.
But the anti-detox lobby takes it much further than this. They rubbish the entire notion that we can detox and worse still, inherent in their statements are some very questionable assumptions about health and nutrition.
Now, I'm no scientist myself and I have nothing but the greatest of respect for sound and sensible scientific endeavours. But science can be and often is anything but sound or sensible. The scientific mindset can allow very clever people to overlook the obvious, the likely and the logical in favour of the improbable or even the ridiculous. Here are some detox-related examples, all of them from Sense About Science's first press release on the subject:
1. "Our bodies are very good at eliminating all the nasties that we might ingest over the festive season." Dr John Emsley, Chemical Scientist, Popular Science Writer
Really? Really? Get in your car now, drive to any public place, get out and look around you at the faces and physiques you see. What do you think about how good our bodies are at eliminating all the nasties we ingest over the festive season, or any season for that matter? Are we to believe there is no link between the nasties we ingest and the nasty distended stomachs, puffy faces, bags under the eyes (and so on) that we see everywhere?
And those are just the outside manifestations of the much bigger problems going on inside (more about those below...) If we consider all of the evidence, it is pretty clear that our bodies can't keep up with the quantities of nasties many of us are ingesting and that they really could use our help.
2. "Whether or not people believe the biblical story of the virgin birth, there are plenty of other popular myths that are swallowed with religious fervour over Christmas. Amongst these is the idea that in some way the body accumulates noxious chemicals during everyday life, and that they need to be expunged." Professor Martin Wiseman, Visiting Professor of Human Nutrition, University of Southampton
If the body doesn't accumulate noxious chemicals, and/or said chemicals don't need to be expunged, why is it that ever since scientists starting tinkering with our food by spraying manmade chemicals on it, refining it and adding all sorts of substances nature never intended us to consume, we have had higher rates of cancer, diabetes, heart disease, obesity and mental illness (the list goes on) than at any other time in history?
And why is it that countries that base their diets around natural foods experience a fraction of the incidence of those diseases, but as soon as they start to adopt western eating habits the incidence starts to creep up - in what looks for all the world like a pretty obvious positive correlation?
Randall Fitzgerald, author of The Hundred Year Lie, has spent years investigating the consequences of the manmade chemicals in our environment and in our foods and medicines. Check out his Slippery Slope Index, which shows how manmade chemicals and chronic disease rates have spread in tandem with each other over the last century.
The book's website also features a Toxicity Test consisting of 65 questions. The average person in the UK or the US would answer "Yes" to over 60 of them, if not to all 65, since every question refers to something that is a normal and accepted facet of modern life, but that is actually far from being either natural or healthy.
3. "It is remarkable that people are prepared to risk seriously disrupting [the body's detoxification] systems with unproven 'detox' diets, which could well do more harm than good." Professor Alan Boobis OBE, Toxicologist, Division of Medicine, Imperial College London
and
"If you party to excess it is more than likely that you won't be feeling your best. The cure? A good night's sleep, your normal diet and plenty of water." Professor John Henry, Clinical Toxicologist, St Mary's Hospital, London
These two scientists are essentially stating that what most people are eating is ipso facto the right/sensible way to eat, and the first suggests that if we deviate from that (i.e. with "unproven 'detox' diets") we are taking an irresponsible risk with our health.
But where is the proof that the "normal" diet, also known as the standard diet, is the best choice for our health? The scientific view is that nothing can be considered fact until it is proven with a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, peer-reviewed clinical trial.
So let's see this evidence.
The onus is not on those promoting a natural diet to prove that this diet is better, because we are taking the very sensible, conservative, logical view that nature got it right.
Yet we are still waiting for those who take the extreme view that today's cooked, processed, denatured, manmade-chemical-laden diet is superior to the foods nature provided to show us the studies they've done which prove that!
The point these scientists are missing is that there is a better choice than going from festive over-indulgence back to the standard diet, and that is taking a more logical approach to deciding what to eat. The standard diet is just what most people eat. If we're looking at what it has to recommend it as optimal, it starts and ends there!
Furthermore, the standard diet is what most people eat in this part of the world and at this specific time in history, much of which is manmade and did not exist 50-100 years ago. At other times in history people have eaten much more natural diets and experienced a fraction of our current disease rates, and in other places in the world people are doing just that today.
Does all of this not suggest that perhaps it's time for a re-think?
4. "Hmmm - where to start about detox? The concept of 'detox' is a marketing myth rather than a physiological entity." Dr Catherine Collins, Chief Dietician, St George's Hospital Medical School, London
"Detox" is simply a shortened form of the word "detoxification". No scientist would argue that the body has specific detoxification pathways and mechanisms.
So we can probably all agree that detox(ification) is in fact a physiological entity rather than a marketing myth. The only point at issue is whether you can do anything to enhance or speed up your body's natural detoxification processes.
Are your body's systems affected by what you eat, what you drink, how much sleep, exercise and fresh air you get and so on?
Of course they are.
It follows that there is plenty we can do to positively influence our body's natural detoxification mechanisms. This is a logical assumption to make but we don't have to rely on only logic here. Just talk to anyone who has had their blood tested prior to undertaking a detoxification programme and again after it, and has seen the levels of numerous manmade chemicals in their blood (which all of us, by the way, have) decrease massively as a result of said programme.
Since the scientists are again taking the implausible and illogical view rather than the likely one, where is the study that proves to us that their view is correct?
In the leaflet "Debunking Detox", under the heading "Why is the concept of detox wrong?", the authors confidently assert that "The human body has evolved to get rid of unnecessary substances through your liver, kidneys and colon. It isn't possible to improve their function without medical assistance." Sure it is. If you stop putting so many unnecessary substances through these organs and creating so much unnecessary work for them.
These scientists set out to "debunk detox" but the words "baby" and "bath water" come to mind. So we are proud to now debunk detox with our own, more balanced statement on the subject:
1. We live in a toxic world, full of hundreds of manmade chemicals (in our foods, medicines and environment) that didn't even exist a century ago. We all store these chemicals in our bodies. The only question is to what degree, and that is dependent largely on where we live and what we choose to put in and on our bodies.
2. Most detox products on the market today are indeed a waste of money but to focus on products is to miss the point entirely. Ultimately, detox is not about any miracle potion or powder you can ingest; it is about what you stop ingesting.
3. There truly is no "quick fix", so nothing you do is going to have any lasting effect on your health (nor your toxic load) if it is just done for a few days and you then go back to eating the standard diet and living the standard lifestyle. To truly "detox" you need to make changes to your diet and lifestyle that are both major and lasting. Most people are not prepared to do this, so any "detoxes" they undertake will indeed be of limited benefit.
4. But if you are prepared to make those changes, there is a great deal you can do to help your body lighten its toxic load to the point where you will notice marked improvements in your health, wellbeing, appearance and quality of life.
5. So don't think of detox as something you do only once or twice a year. For optimal health we need to adopt a detoxifying lifestyle. Taking the Toxicity Test at The Hundred Year Lie website is a good place to start in identifying possible improvements you could make.
|
|
