[enziobodoni]

I run a hospital lab, and I see requests for testing for all sorts of bizarre things, largely by naturopaths, deriving from the "philosophy" expressed here. We refer to people who believe this stuff as being on the "Quest for Purity", a quixotic drive to remove all "toxins" from their bodies. Regardless of whether or not there are substantiated examples of low doses of chemicals causing effects, the worry about this problem being widespread is a very common delusion that consumes an enormous amount of attention and money, is preyed upon by charlatan doctors (or naturopaths, who call themselves doctors), and is incredibly confounding. The rub in these potential illnesses is that you can never actually remove any of these exposures completely, and thus you are required to continue to purchase diagnostics, cures, and consultations forever. If there is a true toxicobiologic effect in here, it will be essentially impossible to discern from the obvious and overriding psychiatric issues and financial conflicts at play.

[claar]

Yep, this was pretty much my opinion.

But then my wife got sick. Spent 5 years with myriads of specialists, who all did their testings, and threw their hands up in the air.

So guess where we eventually land, when traditional medicine gets us no where? Within months of removing these effect-less "toxins" from her diet, I have a wife back.

So believe what you want -- I'd do the same if it hadn't radically effected my own life.

[zenkat]

My wife has nearly the same story. Complaints of fatigue, nausea, cognitive difficulties (feeling spacey, fuzzy-headed). Tried a radical elimination diet, and then reintroduced different dietary components one-by-one to see which we're causing the symptoms. Dairy and soy products were the worst, along with products containing yeast extract. Gluten also had an effect, but not as strong. She's cut these from her diet, and feels much better.

Both of us have a background in the biological sciences (she has a PhD in Biochemistry from Washington University), and we both have a skeptical mindset. Neither of us are particularly susceptible to "woo". But the evidence is clear -- these foods make her very ill, and avoiding them makes her feel much better.

The clincher for me were the inadvertent double-blind experiments that we occasionally run when she eats something without checking the label first. All sorts of foods contain dairy, soy, or yeast extract, so it's very easy to make a mistake. Nothing drives the point home like watching your wife hurl by the side of the road after a snack -- and then checking the label on the salami she just ate, only to find it contains "nonfat dry milk solids". It's hard to remain skeptical after that has happened a dozen times.

We are still puzzled by the etiology of the disease. It seems like there is an immunological component (she also has asthma and hives, both of which flare up when she eats these foods), but she doesn't test as "allergic" in standard tests. I'm a bit skeptical of the low-level exposure hypothesis in this article (hard to test, hard to treat). However, the connections to the limbic system hinted at in this article are an interesting lead. The immune system can be affected by the nervous system, and I could see the olfactory system becoming sensitized after "learning" a correlation between a chemical and nausea, etc ... but these are just musings at this point.

Anyone know of good research along these lines?

[mod]

Can you back up your anecdote with more facts?

What kind of sick was your wife? What was her recovery like? What were the toxins you removed?

[enziobodoni]

It is devilishly difficult to separate correlation and causation. This difficulty has to be the reason why some forms of "medicine" persist, ie naturopathy will have to work sometime, just as a stopped watch is right twice a day. I would never be so foolish as to discount your story, however, without knowing the actual facts, and without acknowledging that some people do, in fact, have food allergies, celiac sprue, etc... The problem is that not nearly as many people actually have these things as they might believe. And, combined with the STRONG financial motivation for folks to exploit the sufferings of others like yourself, my point is just hat its devilishly hard to make sense of anything.

[ArkyBeagle]

But is what you observed an actual ... chemical process, or is it the placebo effect? Can we even tell?

The placebo effect is just as real as any other medical phenomenon. It's just very hard to measure.

[icebraining]

I don't think you actually read enziobodoni's post. (S)he certainly didn't say there were no toxins or they were effect-less.

[jpmattia]

> and I see requests for testing for all sorts of bizarre things

It would be interesting: Can you list a bunch?

[enziobodoni]

Micronutrients, even in hair. Trace metals, especially after chelation therapy, when the results are definitely misleading. Labs that associate Candida with everything. "Stealth" virus testing. Quack Lyme disease serology labs that always give positive results. Anti-malignin antibodies. Multi variate index assays predicting irritable bowel disease. IgG food allergies. Outrageously large (>50-100 component) IgE allergy tests.

[canvia]

As a scientist, wouldn't you want to perform extensive formal experimentation before reaching your definitive conclusions? Your dismissive attitude on this topic seems a bit closed minded.

[enziobodoni]

Believing that everything yet undisproven is somehow valid or worth study does not indicate open-mindedness, necessarily. The question you ask also presupposes that there has been no formal experimentation on his sort of thing before, which is not true. We know much that supports the old saw that, "the dose makes the poison," gleaned from years and years of study of environmental toxicology. One of my favorite musicians, Tim Minchin, once said that if you open your mind too much, your brain will fall out.