Detox is a pseudo-science word anymore. Is that detox or just your blood sugar level going down?
I meant to say it's painful, not 'pure detox'. Headaches and agitation isn't fun to deal with on a constant basis. But science barely understands the wide range of benefits from fasting. Whether that means empowering your immune system (which is what fasting does, energy to digest is now used to fight illnesses, etc.)
A nice read for the uninformed: http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1834
There is no science behind it. There is also no science behind extended fasting, giving your body a "break" from digesting and so forth. By all means fast if you feel like it and you believe there is some health benefit - you are harming no one, after all - but please don't try to justify it with medical science.
If your colon isn't working properly you are very sick and you need a doctor ASAP not a fast.
The fact fasting (perhaps) has benefits has absolutely nothing to do with "toxins."
I don't want an exact number, just a ballpark. Is it micrograms, milligrams or grams per kg body mass? Surely these people who know so very much about "toxins" must know the one fact that distinguishes the things we informally call toxic from the ones we don't.
It would be the hieght of intellectual dishonesty to claim something was "toxic" without having any knowledge of the LD50.
But to be clear, I think a lifestyle of eating fruits and veggies is more effective than fasts, when trying to achieve this.
There are a lot of medical, yes scientific, benefits to fasting. At the end of the day, it helps the body out (strengthens immune system), among other ways, whereas it might be struggling with eating regularly. Also, most research would never encourage people to go without eating more than seven days, as that's starvation mode and the Hippocratic oath has some things to say about that.
I'll ask again - Which specific toxins are stored in your fat? Its a simple question.
All I do know is that fasting has tremendous benefits to our bodies, which is based on science (most papers speak of 12 hours to three days; rarely longer). As for the granular details (answering the 'how' and 'why' questions), I'm not certain science has a definitive answer for that. My perspective is that, subjective.
Also, the tone of your comments are a bit harsh. If it's a simple question, well, cite the scientific papers that establish your point of view. Contraction point of views aren't constructive, what's your more scientifically established idea, as it relates to the benefits (or lack thereof) of fasting?
(I agree with you mostly, just don't think your argument is holding water.)
If the LD50 of the "toxins" is similar to water, how can one claim that "de-toxing" will have any benefit?
In other words, how can you call it "detoxing" if none of the things are toxic?
Just because sugar doesn't kill you fast (in an LD50 way), doesn't mean it's not bad for you.
You are indeed right that those `toxins' people `detox' for are pretty nebulous.
"My liver and kidneys work pretty well."
Also headaches, migraines, agitation can be caused by lower blood sugar and lower blood pressure than what you are used to.
http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Hypoglycaemia/Pages/Symptoms.as...
Can you name any of the toxins?
Can't code, can't solder, can't do circuit design....