I am aware of everything you speak regarding plant calcium (particularly in dark leafy greens) and plant fats (not high quantity in most plants). That is why I was confident in my claim. When I said juice fast, I meant carrot, which does not have much appreciable fat content nor is it rich in calcium content.
Calcium availability is dependent on various factors including whether or not the source is also high in oxalates. Carrots, which contain more calcium that human breast milk, do not contain high levels of oxalates. So it is a good source of calcium, especially when juiced.
As for fats, that depends a lot on the part of the plant being used and the plant. Look at nuts and avocados for example.
Also keep in mind that fatty acids are generated by the fermentation of fibers by our intestinal flora. So there can be hidden sources people do not think about.
Now I can't remember if on my fast I absolutely ate zero greens that day or the day before, in addition to my carrot juice I may have eaten some fruit and some spring greens. So I will run the test again during my next flush, with a carrot juice fast in the spirit of experimental inquiry.
As I mentioned above there are often other sources of fats people over look. You just mentioned fasting. Guess what is increased in the process of fasting, or even the consumption of bitter foods like some greens? The body breaks down fat stores, much of which is excreted through the intestines. For example, when people start using bitters they will generally find that their stools float. This is from the flushing of fats that were being stored in the body.
What strikes me clearly from the article you present is the emphasis on milkfat (with it's combination of high calcium and high fat at the same time). I wonder how much soapstone formation has been documented from dietary sources other than that.
Well, if we check the research on fecal soaps a lot of the research in is cattle grazing on grass. I have also seen some research on poultry that were not feeding on milk either.
My hard shell stone, though I did not measure it, had an apparent size from visual assessment of roughly half an inch (12.5 mm). Now I know you will first claim that being unofficially measured, that the number is inadmissable, although in real life applications, technicians often operate successfully by quick assessment which can be made accurately when they have enough experience. I had already measured many stones so I believe I had some capacity to make an accurate visual measurement.
That aside, let us take the claim as a possible truth. I'm sure that 8 mm maximum diameter of the bile duct is an average number, so some people could pass larger than this.
No, actually that is the maximum. The average is 2-4mm.
Furthermore, where, when and how were these maximums determined, do you know any sources on this?
Off hand I cannot tell you where I found it since that was quite a while ago. But I have quite a library on science and medicine at home and I do a ton of research from Medline and other medical sources, both mainstream and alternative, all the time. So again I could not tell you off hand where that information is. But I have never seen any evidence anywhere that the bile ducts can expand to 25mm, which is the size of some of the fecal soap stones people have claimed to be gallstones. I even heard one person claim to have passed a baseball sized stone!!! First of all the gallbladder is not even large enough to hold a stone that big without rupturing. But more importantly is that real gallstones have specific characteristics that can tell someone whether or not it is a real stone or a soap stone. And the photos that were presented of the "stones" after flushing by LisaMarie clearly were not real gallstones. The texture alone was a major give-a-way that they were fecal soaps. Look and compare them to the picture of the real gallstones in the gallbladder she also posted. If you look closely you will see what I am talking about.
It seems conceivable to think that the hyperdosing with magnesium could possibly effect the duct to have different properties (and I doubt the reference number was measured under those conditions).
That is like saying that if I heat up a rubber band a few degrees it will significantly increase its elasticity. If a rubber band can only stretch 4 inches maximum, warming it up a few degrees is not going to make it go another inch, or even a 1/16th of an inch. A rubber band can only expand so far regardless just like the bile ducts can only expand so far. This is why people have lodged stones in their bile ducts during flushes despite taking magnesium.
I do know that during my third flush (my first truly eventful flush, after which they have all been successes) I had a substantial, fiery pain in the gallbladder region followed by a euphoric release. There was something substantial loosened and expelled. If subsequent blobs were mostly soap stones formed with oxidated, biliverdin rich bile that was finally able to flow, then so be it.
I believe your soap stone claim has some legitimacy. Especially when speaking of stones that are the size of a baseball or a golfball, which I have read a couple times. Yes, that doesn't make much sense. It is also hard to imagine where all these stones are being stored for people releasing several tens of thousands (although as it is typically done over the years, and many here seem to not correct the diet, perhaps they are reforming many stones)
Stones are extremely slow to form and grow to any significant size. This is why the people who claim to pass cups of stones then do the same thing a few days later are simply providing more evidence that those big blobs are nothing more than soap stones. And as I pointed out before the sterols in olive oil will also bind cholesterol creating congealed matter. Impurities get caught in it during the formation creating the colors. And the dye experiment where people mix dye in the olive oil then ingest it further proves this fact since the dye never reaches the liver or gallbladder. So the fact that the dye ends up in the middle of these "stones" conclusively proves that they were formed in the intestines, not the liver nor the gallbladder.
As I have mentioned in various other posts over the years the large amount of oil can contract the gallbladder to help remove sludge and even tiny stones, as well as helping to prevent bile stagnation. That is why I recommendsmallamounts of fats/oil with meals to help keep the bile moving. One thing I find very ironic though is that anyone who disagrees with "liver flushing" is branded "pro-pharma". But the "liver flush supporters are using a pro-pharma mentality of using the old shotgun approach to address a problem. The non-pharma approach to healing is small doses and slow and steady. The pro-pharma approach is to force the issue with high doses, just like the “liver flush” supporters are doing. For example, you bought up calcium earlier. Why is the recommended daily intake 1200mg when the body needs nowhere near that amount? Simple, the study was based on the very poorly absorbed calcium carbonate. So the researchers surmised that if the person just took a much larger dose that enough of this calcium would absorb to have an effect. Even with later stage of type 2 diabetes they put the person on insulin even though the body is producing enough to more than enough insulin. The idea is that if they push larger amounts of insulin then they can bypass the insulin resistance rather than addressing the insulin resistance. Again the “liver flush” supporters method of attempting to deal with gallstones is the alternative mirror image of allopathic big pharma’s lack of reasoning in treatment.
And this extends beyond the shotgun approach reasoning. It also applies to the same thing people in the alternative healing fields complain about allopathic medicine and big pharma of treating the symptom and not the cause. Liver flushing does not treat the cause of gallstones either. So ironically the “liver flush” supporters are the Siamese twin of allopathic medicine and big pharma!!!
I'm curious, what do you think of the liver flukes?
Not sure what you want to know. Yes they exist, and yes they are a problem especially in some parts of the world. But Hulda Clark really over hyped the issue to the point of giving alternative medicine a real big black eye with her ridiculous claims.
By the way, I want to thank you for having a nice discussion of the subject. It is a nice change from the constant having to fight back against the numerous trolls here on Curezone that simply think that their word is solid proof and make up claims about you if you disagree with them. Their false claims then become like pheromones singling the attack by the other trolls who then swarm in. I have enjoyed the change and the calm discussion, so thanks again.