Hardly a week goes by these days without some lazy journalist, facing a deadline and stuck for a story, taking a cheap shot at complementary therapies.
Most of the time, these stories are based on hearsay, and have very little evidence to back them up – which is ironic when one of their common complaints is that there is no evidence to back up the effectiveness of complementary therapies.
A classic example happened recently, when the guest doctor on Jeremy Vine’s lunchtime Radio 2 show denounced colonics as dangerous because ‘people have ended up with perforated bowels and nasty infections’. There was of course, no evidence of who these ‘people’ were.
The bowel perforation ‘risk’ is a favourite claim in tabloid scare stories, but what are the real facts?
- The speculum used in a colonic is not inserted as far as the bowel, so it cannot perforate it. There is much more risk of perforation from a routine colonoscopy, where the equipment is inserted along the full length of bowel.
- The speculum is a piece of medical equipment that has been specifically designed for its purpose. What’s more, it is inserted by a trained therapist, who has been taught exactly what to do and how to do it safely.
- The water pressure of a colonic is less than the natural pressure from bowel peristalsis and so does not put the bowel under stress.
The only real risk from perforation is if the client has a severe bowel condition, such as diverticulitis or Crohn’s disease, which weaken the bowel wall. However, these conditions are known as contra-indications, which means that ARCH therapists will not perform the treatment if you have them. You’ll find a full list of contra-indications for colonics here.
Your safety is of paramount importance to us and we would never knowingly put you at risk.
Another favourite of the tabloid press, and media ‘medical experts’, is the lack of scientific evidence to back the effectiveness of colon hydrotherapy.
In truth, we do only have anecdotal evidence for our therapy at this stage, but when does anecdotal evidence start to carry weight and show that something really is happening? When a hundred people report the same thing? A thousand? ARCH members perform over 200,000 treatments every year for people who find genuine, tangible benefits from the therapy.
When 200,000 people every year report the same benefits from a therapy, surely that stops being just anecdotal evidence and becomes, well, evidence.