Re: ultra sound proof - A very important question

[Guest guest]

At 01:22 PM 20-04-03 +0200, Agnes stated:

>At 02:32 20.04.2003 -0700, you wrote:

> >Has anyone had an ultrasound before &

> >after a cleanse and had successful results.

>

>

>Read here:

For background, khawakaqaiser@... had asked:

>>Has anyone had an ultrasound before &

>>after a cleanse and had successful results. What I

>>mean to say that a person has been proved by

>>ultrasound that he has stones in gb and later on after

>>doing flush, he went for ultrasound again and it

>>proved that the stones were removed by doing flush.

There were a number of references in Agnes Tiller's response that ought to

have shown that ultrasound (US) before a flush showed GB stones, and the US

afterwards showed no stones.

I checked the references that Agnes Tiller gave, and the details of each

case are indicated below, after each citation. The conclusion I came to

was that there was not a single case answering the request of

khawakaqaiser@... for cases of US before and after. My observations

follow

> * <http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=73 & i=158>Re: Has anyone had an

>ultrasound before & after a cleanse? by Koeller 10:44 Jan 04 200

Observation: US after but not before the flush

> * <http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=73 & i=145>Re: Has anyone had an

>ultrasound before & after a cleanse? by Boris 12:03 Jan 04 2002

Observation: No US either before or after

> * <http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=73 & i=144>Re: Has anyone had an

>ultrasound before & after a cleanse? by Dale 12:09 Jan 04 2002

Observation: US after but not before

> * <http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=73 & i=161>Re: Has anyone had an

>ultrasound before & after a cleanse? by Sara Klein Ridgley 12:09 Jan

>04 2002

Observation: US after and before did not show stones

> * <http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=73 & i=185>Re: Has anyone had an

>ultrasound before & after a cleanse ? by Weebs 22:44 Jan 04 2002

Observation: US after but not before

> * <http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=73 & i=146>Re: Has anyone had an

>ultrasound before & after a cleanse? by Mason 18:24 Mar 19

Observation: No information regarding US

> *

><http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=73 & i=499>Lab<http://curezone.com/forums/m.a\

sp?f=73 & i=499>

>

>documentation of stones by Serenitii7 1 months ago

Observation: US before and after did not show stones

> * <http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=73 & i=199>Re: Stones being

>analyzed ??? by The Lancet 00:59 Apr 05 2002

Observation: No information about US before or after.

> * <http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=73 & i=223>Re: Stones being

>analyzed ??? by Jay 20:29 Apr 20 2002

Observation: No US either before or after

> * <http://curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=73 & i=226>Re: Stones being

>analyzed ??? by Dr. D. Koh 10:10 Apr 22 2002

Observation: No indication of US results.

At this point I stopped checking, because up to this point the request was

not fulfilled in even a single case.

The question therefore remains unanswered. Have there been any cases in

which an ultrasound showed GB stones, the patent did a flush and then an

ultrasound showed no stones.

Isn't there even one such case?

----------

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.473 / Virus Database: 271 - Release Date: 17-Apr-03

[Guest guest]

Wally,

Carefully read Dale's post again..

http://www.curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=73 & i=144

You will see thathe had an Mri in Feb '99 that showed a stone and he

later had an ultra sound in October '99 which found no stones.

[Guest guest]

Wally, I had an ultrasound before that showed stones, did one flush, got

rid of about 200 stones, plan to do another flush this weekend and will

go for an ultrasound the following week, will report results. I did the

same search and did not find a single straight answer to the question.

It will be nice if people would get to the point , because I do believe

in the power of flushing . erika

[Guest guest]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

----- Original Message -----

From: " Wally Gordon " <wally.gordon@...>

<gallstones >

Cc: <khawakaqaiser@...>

Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 2:33 AM

Subject: Re: ultra sound proof - A very important question

> At this point I stopped checking, because up to this point the request was

> not fulfilled in even a single case.

>

> The question therefore remains unanswered. Have there been any cases in

> which an ultrasound showed GB stones, the patent did a flush and then an

> ultrasound showed no stones.

>

> Isn't there even one such case?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Wally;

I am such a case. So, yes there is! but sad to say I had an MRI and then

seven months later an

Ultrasound. So, it wasn't an US before and after.

The best part regarding the results, I didn't post in that reply that Agnes

posted on the CureZone. It is that my doctor made a statement regarding my

results, which was extra ordinary statement to come from a doctor. He stated

to me that my liver and gallbladder both looked perfectly healthy, except

for the enlarged bile ducts, and the elevated enzyme levels. I then asked

him what he thought of the fact that I had done the flushes and that the

gallbladder of which was diseased and not working seven months previous to

this

was now looking healthy. He stated very simply " You can't argue with

success " .

Dale

[Guest guest]

At 10:09 PM 21-04-03 -0400, Wittmann <ewscorpion@...> stated:

>Wally, I had an ultrasound before that showed stones, did one flush, got

>rid of about 200 stones, plan to do another flush this weekend and will

>go for an ultrasound the following week, will report results. I did the

>same search and did not find a single straight answer to the question.

Good, . What you are saying is that until you do your next

ultrasound, there is no proof shown by a US showing GB stones, a flush

being done, and a US showing all the stones gone.

I wish you good luck, so that you will be the very first one to prove the

thesis.

>It will be nice if people would get to the point , because I do believe

>in the power of flushing . erika

Belief is a theological term. We were looking for proof, . And I

truly hope that you will come up with that proof. Until then, the question

that khawakaqaiser asked has a negative response. The questions was:

>Has anyone had an ultrasound before &

> after a cleanse and had successful results. What

> I mean to say that a person has been proved by

> ultrasound that he has stones in gb and later on

> after doing flush, he went for ultrasound again and it

> proved that the stones were removed by doing

> flush.

----------

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.474 / Virus Database: 272 - Release Date: 18-Apr-03

[Guest guest]

At 07:51 AM 22-04-03 -0700, Dale stated:

>Wally;

>

>I am such a case. So, yes there is! but sad to say I had an MRI and then

>seven months later an

>Ultrasound. So, it wasn't an US before and after.

Right. The question was about ultrasounds, not MRI.

----------

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.474 / Virus Database: 272 - Release Date: 18-Apr-03

[Guest guest]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>Wally;

>

>I am such a case. So, yes there is! but sad to say I had an MRI and then

>seven months later an

>Ultrasound. So, it wasn't an US before and after.

Right. The question was about ultrasounds, not MRI.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Wally;

Isn't this being a little ....pig headed??? An MRI is far more definitive than

an Ultrasound. But you simply want something saying ultrasound / ultrasound??

As everyone can see from your response my doctor was wrong. You can argue with

success just as you're doing on this group.

The problem with this type of research you are wanting is that it just has the

anecdotal quality to it because there simply doesn't seem to be anyone willing

to put out the money to make the proof definitive, as you would like to have it.

I'm glad I didn't wait for that type of information or I'd be without my

gallbladder today and I probably would be still squirming around on the floor in

pain from a liver problem.

I'm sorry I wasn't able to provide you the satisfying and definitive answer to

yours and Khawakaqaiser's request for an ultrasound before and after, and I hope

I don't have to find a reason to provide that in the future, from personal

experience.

A problem with this request is that you would have to have a monitoring of the

gallbladder's contents before a flush and then after a flush, and an ultrasound

wouldn't even compare with the results available from an MRI, which cost around

$300.00, or more, to have done compared to a few dollars less for an ultrasound.

IF anything, an ultrasound should preempt an MRI's more definitive result. So,

if you really want to get technical you should be requesting results of an MRI

as your before and after. Then, just maybe, you will be satisfied with the

results. One can only hope someone out there has the money and inkling to do

this.

Dale