MANUAL LYMPHATIC DRAINAGE THERAPY OPENING UP THE MAIN DRAIN This Manual Lymphatic Drainage Therapy has not been widely known as viable or important Let me ask you this question, What do you call the highest scoring student in a medical doctors college class? Magnum Cum Laude, Right? So out of a class of 75, what do you call The student with the lowest passing grade?
I'll tell you, Doctor That's right, doctors don't know everything. Look at these pictures, God made us with a complete lymphatic system primarily use to eliminate waste, and toxins from our bodies, it's our sewer system. Doctors forever have been going in performing surgeries and procedures and absolutely destroying this network of disposal, giving no regard to its importance to our complete wellness. Even though it is a very POWERFUL System it is also very delicate, fragile, easy to crush, the whole of the network lies just under our skin, it has no heart, no pump, its method of flow is by muscle contractions, movement, gravity, and manual expression.
I posted something a few days ago and some Friends reminded me of what God has done with me in my life And giving me this cancer, and Him knowing me, He wanted me to talk about it, teach About it, raise the consciousness of people about it Sometimes I feel like it's a fire shut up in my bones (The awakening and knowledge) and I got to talk about it! God doesn't want you and your love ones to suffer like we do with this cancer, but we've turned away from so many gifts that he has given us to fight and beat this disease, yet we still allow man to have precedence over God's Will We still Let man dictate and dominate our lives with poisons, lies, moneymaking schemes at the costs of people dying I hear him saying; 'I made these bodies, I designed them, perfectly, to work and perform for my glory, but you've given your trust over to man, they have forgotten about me', well, I guess you get what you pay for. 'If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land'.
2 Chron I gotta believe Healing our Bodies isn't part of that deal Learn all you can about our bodies Lymphatic Drainage System and see if I'm jest bayin at da moon! We made this for a friend, end up sending it to a couple more, response is amazing and it's kinda picked up its own momentum Step #1 in MLDT. There should not be a woman out here that is not doing this. Especially if you use underarm deodorant (Metallic Aluminum blocks pores) This explains one reason why women get breast cancer Clogged lymph portals, backs it (waste) into the breast, settles into breast cancer But this is about gettin rid of waste From our bodies naturally AS GOD DESIGNED AND INTENDED!!!! Pump and enjoy.
To ascertain the level and rate of olfactory dysfunction in patients with leprosy and to determine whether olfactory bulb volume is affected by the pathophysiology. Olfactory bulb (OB) volume, measured using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), was compared in 15 patients with leprosy and 15 healthy controls. All of the participants were evaluated using a detailed history to identify the probable causes of the smell dysfunction. Those who had a disease other than leprosy that may have caused the smell dysfunction were excluded from the study. OB volumes were calculated by manually tracing the OB on coronal sections. Orthonasal olfaction testing was used to assess smell function.
The orthonasal olfaction testing indicated that all patients with leprosy were anosmic or severely hyposmic. The smell function test indicated that the OB volume of the patient group was significantly lower than that of the control group. No within-group difference was detected between right and left OB volume in either group. The patients in the leprosy group were severely hyposmic or anosmic and their olfactory bulb volume was significantly lower than that of the control group. To our knowledge, this study is the first to show a reduction in olfactory bulb volume among leprosy patients. Introduction Leprosy, also known as Hansen’s disease, is a chronic granulomatous infection caused by Mycobacterium leprae. Leprae, primarily affects the skin, eyes, peripheral nerves, and testes and tends to spread to the ears, nose, upper aerodigestive system, hands, and feet.
The incidence of leprosy has decreased; but it remains a significant cause of neuropathy worldwide as a result of peripheral nerve involvement , and it is endemic in developing countries. Leprosy causes hearing, vision, and taste dysfunction –. The olfactory nerve is specialized and carries only sensory information.
The olfactory system consists of the olfactory epithelium, bulb, and tract and is connected to the cortical olfactory area known as the rhinencephalon. The olfactory bulb (OB) is a relay station between the peripheral olfactory receptors and cortical structures. The OB size changes with afferent neural activity and is plastic throughout life consequently, the OB volume reflects the degree of olfactory function. Volume measurement using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a reliable technique for measuring the OB volume and has been used to study post-traumatic olfactory dysfunction, congenital anosmia, neurodegenerative diseases, and the sense of smell in individuals who have no dysfunction –. Upper respiratory tract impairment has been reported in the majority of leprosy patients, but personal safety issues, such as the inability to detect smoke or other dangerous odor signals, have not been addressed. Few studies of olfactory dysfunction in leprosy have been published in the English medical literature , –.
Manual Lymphatic Drainage Technique
Furthermore, the number of patients who lose the function of smell is not known. Chaturvedi et al.
reported olfactory dysfunction in approximately 40% of patients with leprosy, Ozturan et al. reported that the rate was 91%, and Mishra et al.
observed olfactory dysfunction in all leprosy cases. Therefore, this study ascertained the level and rate of olfactory dysfunction in patients with leprosy and determined whether olfactory bulb volume is affected by the pathophysiology.
Materials and Methods This prospective study was conducted by the First Ear-Nose-Throat Clinic, Head and Neck Surgery Clinic, and Radiology Clinic of the Haseki Training and Research Hospital. The study was performed in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration (WMA 1997) and was approved by the hospital ethics committee. Written informed consent was obtained from the patients and healthy subjects. Fifteen randomly chosen patients with lepromatous leprosy (seven men and eight women) were included in the study. Their mean age was 68.6 years (range 53–82) and the mean disease duration was 48.4 years (range 30–65; Table ). The Ridley-Jopling classification system was used to confirm the diagnosis of lepromatous leprosy.
Septal perforation was observed in 11 (73%) patients during the examination. Patients who had a condition other than leprosy that could cause olfactory dysfunction were excluded from the study. Routine ear, nose, and throat (ENT) examinations, orthonasal olfaction testing, computed tomography of the paranasal sinus, and MRI to measure OB volume were carried out. A complete neurological examination and mini-mental test assessment was performed in all patients to exclude possible cognitive dysfunction and neurodegenerative disease. The control group consisted of 15 subjects (10 men and five women) who had normal olfactory function. Their mean age was 67.7 years and ranged from 61 to 74 years (Table ).
Orthonasal olfaction testing, developed by the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (CCCRC) and modified by Leon, were administrated to the subjects in both groups –. The CCCRC orthonasal test scores were classified as follows: 0–1.75, anosmia; 2.00–3.75, severe hyposmia; 4.00–4.75, moderate hyposmia; 5.00–5.75, mild hyposmia; and 6.00–7.00, normosmia (Table ).
Results The OB volume varied widely in the patient group. The mean left OB volume was 31.6 ± 11.35 mm 3 (range 17–55); the mean right OB volume was 30.26 mm 3 ± 10.58 (range 17–57); and the mean total OB volume was 30.93 ± 10.55 mm 3 (range 20–55; Table ). For the control group, the mean right and left OB volumes were 71.73 ± 10.97 mm 3 (range 56–91) and 75.06 ± 13.11 mm 3 (range 57–104), respectively, and the mean total OB volume was 73.33 ± 11.17 mm 3 (range 60–96; Table ). No within-group differences between the right and left OB volumes were detected (patient group, P = 0.4212; control group, P = 0.2524). The OB volume of the patient group was significantly reduced compared with that of the control group ( P. Box plots showing the distribution of olfactory bulb volume measurements in the patient and control groups Table summarizes the orthonasal olfactory test results.
On a seven-point scale for the butanol threshold and identification test, the leprosy group scored 1.41 ± 0.38 (range 0.75–2.75) and the control group scored 5.73 ± 0.5 (range 4.25–6.75). According to the CCCRC scoring system, the leprosy group was anosmic and the control group was hyposmic. The orthonasal test detected olfactory dysfunction in all of the patients: 12 were anosmic and three were severely hyposmic.
In the control group, two subjects were moderately hyposmic, five were mildly hyposmic, and eight were normal. Orthonasal olfactory function was significantly reduced in the leprosy group compared with the control group ( P. Discussion The OB is a neuroplastic structure and its size may change in relation the level of afferent neural activity. Although nasal pathology is common in leprosy, few studies have examined changes to the sense of smell in this patient group ,. Olfactory system dysfunction and anosmia have been observed in all types of leprosy, but no study has investigated the underlying physiopathology.
This study is the first to evaluate olfactory bulb volume changes caused by loss of the sense of smell in patients who have leprosy. Animal studies have shown that one of the most critical effects of olfactory deprivation is a reduction in OB size as a result of hypoplasia. Bulbar neuroplasticity is associated with the stimulation from the olfactory receptor neurons. Chaturvedi et al. observed olfactory loss in 41.7% of 225 patients with leprosy, and Ozturan et al. reported that 91% of their patients had olfactory loss. Mishra et al.
reported that all of their patients with leprosy suffered olfactory loss, but that medical treatment improved their olfactory test scores. However, the improvement was smaller in patients who had lepromatous leprosy, the more severe form of leprosy.
All of the patients in our study had lepromatous leprosy and our finding that all had severe olfactory dysfunction concurred with that of Mishra et al. Although other studies have examined olfactory function in patients with leprosy, to our knowledge, our study is the first to investigate involvement at the level of the OB. Mishra et al.
suggested that impairment of the olfactory receptors and OB developed in the early stages of the disease; however, no study was conducted to test this theory. It has been established that the non-myelinated axons of the olfactory receptor cells are the initial target of toxic agents and viruses. Leprae, which is spread through droplet infection, may infect the olfactory receptors and OB. Other changes affecting olfactory function occur in later stages of the disease. Lepra causes edema, swelling, ulceration, septic perforation, and collapse at the upper respiratory tract. Peripheral neuron infiltration, motor and sensorial abnormalities, autonomic nerve dysfunction, and ganglion infiltration have been reported in people who have leprosy.
Liu and Qiu suggested that the infection reaches the nerves through the blood, lymph, or by direct exposure. Primary atrophic rhinitis is caused by thinning nasal membranes that are the result of the regional effects of leprosy, such as defects in mucosal innervation and olfactory nerve end damage.
Furthermore, leprosy is known to cause secondary atrophic rhinitis. Conclusions To our knowledge, this study is the first to report olfactory bulb volume reduction in patients with leprosy. Olfactory dysfunction and a significant reduction in OB volume were observed in all of our patients. We believe that the OB dysfunction in patients with leprosy is the result of a primary or secondary rhinitis in the upper respiratory tract where the sense of smell originates. The rhinitis causes the peripheral neuropathy that leads to loss of the sense of smell and a subsequent reduction in OB volume.
Materials and Methods A 3.0T turbo‐spin‐echo (TSE) pulse train with long echo time (TE effective = 600 msec; shot‐duration = 13.2 msec) and TSE‐factor (TSE‐factor = 90) was developed and signal evolution simulated. The method was evaluated in healthy adults ( n = 11) and patients with unilateral breast cancer treatment‐related lymphedema (BCRL; n = 25), with a subgroup ( n = 5) of BCRL participants scanned before and after manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) therapy. Maximal lymphatic vessel cross‐sectional area, signal‐to‐noise‐ratio (SNR), and results from a five‐point categorical scoring system were recorded. Nonparametric tests were applied to evaluate study parameter differences between controls and patients, as well as between affected and contralateral sides in patients (significance criteria: two‐sided P.
Results Patient volunteers demonstrated larger lymphatic cross‐sectional areas in the affected (arm = 12.9 ± 6.3 mm 2; torso = 17.2 ± 15.6 mm 2) vs. Contralateral (arm = 9.4 ± 3.9 mm 2; torso = 9.1 ± 4.6 mm 2) side; this difference was significant both for the arm ( P = 0.014) and torso ( P = 0.025). Affected (arm: P = 0.010; torso: P = 0.016) but not contralateral (arm: P = 0.42; torso: P = 0.71) vessel areas were significantly elevated compared with control values. Lymphatic cross‐sectional areas reduced following MLD on the affected side (pre‐MLD: arm = 8.8 ± 1.8 mm 2; torso = 31.4 ± 26.0 mm 2; post‐MLD: arm = 6.6 ± 1.8 mm 2; torso = 23.1 ± 24.3 mm 2). This change was significant in the torso ( P = 0.036). The categorical scoring was found to be less specific for detecting lateralizing disease compared to lymphatic‐vessel areas.
I am a science writer and a former Registered Massage Therapist with a decade of experience treating tough pain cases. I was the Assistant Editor of for several years. I’ve written hundreds of articles and several books, and I’m known for readable but heavily referenced analysis, with a touch of sass. I am a runner and player. Many massage therapists believe that “toxins” are “flushed” into the bloodstream by massage and then washed away by drinking extra water after you get off the table. Exactly which toxins and how they are “flushed” by massage or washed away by water is completely unclear to anyone.
![Kbb Kbb](/uploads/1/2/3/8/123857114/482490158.jpg)
Many therapists know it’s all rather vague but apply the: drinking water certainly won’t hurt, right? No, probably not (although unnecessary worries about dehydration and over-hydrating are biggers problems than most people realize). It’s polite and pleasant to offer post-massage water, but there’s no biological, detoxifying need for it. It’s about on par with a recommendation to “think positively” or “go for a short walk to get your blood moving” — fine things, but tepid medical advice. How many massage therapists are still out there telling their clients that massage gets rid of toxins in the body? On any given day on Facebook, I see about half dozen people at least making that claim Would you maaahnd sharing with us exactly how that happens? — Which toxins are these, exactly?
There are real “toxins” and some legitimate “detoxification” treatments. But casual and careless use of these terms is almost always a red flag, and a strong theme in all the bizarre and medically illiterate “.” It is accompanied by a more or less perfect ignorance of which toxins. Are we talking about lead poisoning here? What chemicals? Dihydrogen monoxide? Magnesium sulfate? The toxin-talkers do not know.
Or, worse, they think they know — but give examples that are mythical, and/or absurdly extreme. The body deals with undesirable molecules in many ways.
It eliminates some and recycles others; some are trapped in a safe place; and quite a few can’t be safely handled at all (metals). Most alleged “detox” treatments are focused on stimulating an excretion pathway, like sweating in a sauna. But it’s not like sweating is broken and the sauna is fixing it! The only truly “detoxifying” treatments help the body eliminate or disarm molecules the body cannot process on its own. A stomach pump for someone with alcohol poisoning is literally “detoxifying.” So are antivenoms and chelation for heavy metals. When massage therapists talk (or think) about detoxifying, they need to be much more specific: what molecule, how it normally works, and how massage or water intake supposedly improves the speed or effectiveness of normal biological waste processing (recycling, sequestering, or elimination).
Metabolically speaking When pressed to be specific, most therapists will say “metabolic wastes” — chemical products of cellular activity — and never specify any exogenous toxin or poison that is remotely realistic as a target for “flushing” with massage or water. Metabolic wastes are much closer to the truth. The rest of the article will stick to the idea that the only “toxins” relevant to massage are waste metabolites. It’s also a really broad category, and it does not actually explain much, or narrow things down. Cellular chemistry produces a lot of molecules. And it’s not really nice to call them wastes — it’s a bit of a slur, a chemical prejudice based in ignorance. In fact, many of them are not really “wastes” at all Beautiful chemical you As in the rest of nature, not much in cellular chemistry is wasted.
Chemicals are re-used and re-cycled. There are many (many, many, many) of them, and they all go through complex pathways, many never even see the bloodstream (they hang out only in cells and between cells), and many are probably completely unaffected by any fluid balance issue (short of dying of thirst, which affects pretty much everything). Indeed, most metabolic “wastes” actually have utility throughout a cascade of functional interactions. You literally don’t want to “get rid of” them.
You want them to go through their normal chemical lifecycle, processed and re-processed. Trying to flush them out would be sort of like trying to improve a car engine by getting rid of the exhaust before it hits the turbocharger.
Metabolic by-products are not just nasty chemicals pooped out by cells that just hang around, stuck in tissue, waiting for your friendly neighbourhood massage therapist to come along and flush them away. There certainly is a class of molecules loosely described as “metabolic wastes,” but it’s unfair to paint them all with the same brush, assuming that they are harmful or toxic.
In many cases, it would actually be harmful to flush them, if you could — because they are a critical part of beautiful chemical you! Flushing: how could massage “release” toxins, anyway? It’s clear that we still don’t have a fix on which toxins therapists are talking about. Let’s work with an example of a rock-star-popular waste metabolite: lactic acid, or lactate. Lactic acid is the poster boy for the waste metabolites, probably the only one that’s a household name, and most massage therapists still assume that lactic acid can be squished out of muscle tissue and into the bloodstream.
This is not a difficult thing to test, and it has been tested, and some results were a bit shocking: not only does massage definitely not “reduce” lactic acid, perhaps massage even “ impairs lactic acid and hydrogen ion removal from muscle.” Whoops. This is not really surprising. If people needed massage to help them “clear” lactic acid, sprinters would drop like flies without emergency massage after every race. The effect must be minor or non-existent.
In any case, it’s worth emphasizing that lactic acid is not the cause of muscle pain at any time except the immediate aftermath of intense exercise, and probably not even then. Recent (2008-2010) research has shown that muscle fatigue and the “burn” that you feel as you exercise intensely is probably caused by calcium physiology, not an accumulation of lactic acid. In particular, lactic acid does not cause soreness the day after exercise — it’s long gone by then.
And there’s more: lactic acid is actually a useful molecule with a productive metabolic fate, not a dead-end waste product. Lactate as a “bad” molecule is one of the most persistent silly myths in all of exercise science. So presenting lactic acid as some kind of metabolic bogeyman that massage can get rid of is wrong, wrong, wrong on many levels. And any other metabolic waste is even less likely to fit the bill. So this is another nail in the coffin of the silly notion that massage somehow “detoxifies.” Now it’s time for a plot twist. Oh, irony: poisoned by massage!
Massage is toxic? But so is good scotch. And hard exercise. Not only is massage not a detoxification treatment in any sense, it is actually the opposite: a toxifying treatment.
A little bit. Post-massage soreness and malaise ( PMSM) is a common phenomenon after any strong massage. It is probably caused by mild rhabdomyolysis (“rhabdo”), a form of poisoning.
True rhabdo is a medical emergency in which the kidneys are poisoned by myoglobin from muscle crush injuries. However, many physical and metabolic stresses cause milder rhabdo-like states — even just intense exercise, and probably massage as well. This is substantiated by a case study of acute rhabdomyolysis caused by intense massage, by many well-documented cases of exertional or “white collar” rhabdo, and by the strong similarity between PMSM and ordinary exercise soreness. A rhabdo cocktail of waste metabolites and by-products of tissue damage is probably why we feel a bit cruddy after biological stresses and traumas — even massage, sometimes. It’s not that big a deal. Massage is still worthwhile.
But it is, technically, a little bit toxifying — not detoxifying. Nor can massage get rid of any rhabdo it causes. You can’t “flush” the rhabdo cocktail away with massage, or drinking a little extra water — or any amount of water. PMSM is just an unavoidable mild side effect of strong massage, just like soreness after intense exercise.
I have, which explains exactly why it can’t be “flushed.” The rest of this article explains the futility of flushing in more general terms. Rather than being DE-toxifying, deep tissue massage can probably cause a slightly toxic situation in the body 5,000 words And how is water supposed to help anyway? Even if there are problematic waste metabolites in your tissues, and even if they can be mostly liberated into the bloodstream why would drinking a couple extra glasses of water help get rid of them?
There’s a prevalent and vague belief that drinking water somehow “rinses” your blood vessels or cells or something. But your circulatory system is not a simple system of tubes that you can flush out by imbibing extra water. This makes about as much sense as adding fuel to a car to make it go faster. In fact, fluid balance is quite stable and somewhat independent of modest changes in water intake. Drink some extra, drink some less — your blood volume will stay almost exactly the same.
Your body is an “,” but the total amount of water in circulation — in your blood and between your cells — remains nice and steady. You only need so much of the stuff. Just like your respiratory system excels at maintaining constant levels of oxygen and blood acidity, your guts cleverly keep your insides just the right amount of wet. Drinking more water than you need doesn’t add it to your bloodstream — you just piss away the extra! The liver and the kidneys are the primary detoxifying organs: this is where most junky molecules are transformed, disarmed, and/or excreted. And they don’t require extra water to work any more than they need extra food to work. Their elaborate chemistry marches on unperturbed, whether you drink 4 glasses of water per day or 12.
Manual Lymphatic Drainage Videos
If you are significantly dehydrated, of course you would certainly start to have problems — but liver and kidney failure are not among the early consequences! The many fates of metabolites Carbon dioxide is a prevalent waste metabolite, and an easy one to understand: your cells produce it via combustion of fuels with oxygen, like a trillion teensy car engines. It may be found at high levels in myofascial trigger points (muscle knots), indicating that they are metabolically “revving.” To hammer home that this stuff really is a “toxin,” CO2 is also chemically equivalent to acidity: to be CO2-polluted is to be acidic! But CO2 disposal just has nothing to do with water, nothing at all. Its fate is completely separate from fluid balance. Carbon dioxide is processed at extreme speeds — quite “aggressively,” because we cannot tolerate much variation in acidity — primarily by a chemical pathway through the bloodstream and lungs: a pathway that does not much involve the kidneys, fluid balance, or fluid excretion.
And the amount of CO2 involved in trigger point toxicity is a drop in an ocean of chemistry anyway. Even if massage squished a trigger point’s full cargo of CO2 into the bloodstream, that’s an infinitesimally small amount of CO2 compared to the total CO2 produced in a single second by all of the body’s cells. We produce and process vast quantities of CO2 constantly, and we do it effortlessly. So much for that prominent toxin being flushed away by water! And so it is with all the other “toxins” in a trigger point — problematic when concentrated in a patch, they are otherwise trivial and unaffected by water intake in any case.
Even supposing that squishing a trigger point magically forces every molecule of every pain-causing metabolite into the bloodstream (not just into adjacent intercellular fluids, which is actually more likely), they still wouldn’t require further “flushing” by any means. Once in the bloodstream, they would be lost like motes in a sandstorm, joining billions of their metabolic siblings that are routinely produced — and processed — by all the cells of the body, and drinking water has no relevance to those processes.
A hydration detour: do you need to hydrate in general? Last year I stumbled across some evidence that surprisingly mild dehydration can make you a bit pissy and foggy which turned out to be funded in part by a giant corporation that sells bottled water!
Pretty fishy, right? Conflicts of interest aren’t always deal-breakers, but that one is highly suspicious. And that’s just the tip of an iceberg.
There’s much more to read about water and dubious industry-funded science. From “”: much of the science surrounding exercise and hydration has been underwritten by Gatorade, which obviously has an interest in pushing the notion of dehydration as a performance killer and hydration as the silver bullet. (In their book The Runner’s Body, Tucker and co-author Jonathan Douglas mention one fear-mongering study that suggests that “dehydration of 2 percent causes performance to decline by up to 20 percent.”) The whole thing is terribly damning and makes you wonder if any good science about hydration has ever actually been done.
Manual Lymphatic Drainage
Read it all: it’s quite good, albeit depressing. Or just read the title of this letter to a journal, which pretty much sums it up: What about “lymphatic drainage”? Isn’t that a clear example of detoxifying massage?
This comes up in most Facebook debates between massage therapists on this topic. It’s a red herring. Manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) is a fairly exotic and specialized manual technique for reducing swelling. Although it is performed with the hands and a natural fit for massage therapists to learn, it is not “massage” per se, and the effect is mostly absent from all other kinds of massage. It has a reputation for impressive, visible effects on swelling — which have been totally absent from some well-controlled tests, or (at best) quite a bit less impressive than its reputation would suggest.
In principle, MLD supposedly stimulates/exaggerates the normal action of the lymphatic system, the primary function of which is not waste disposal but the removal of excess tissue fluids, and then the filtration of lymph through nodules of immune cells (lymph nodes). Lymph nodes are really not at all like the liver, which actually is a “waste processing plant.” The liver is the organ that processes junk in your blood. Lymph nodes are about catching invaders, foreign microbes, which makes them more like “security check points.” You can see from this difference that it’s not really correct to say that lymphatic drainage is about “waste removal,” even if there are some cellular waste products in lymph (and there probably are).
Elephantiasis This is what happens when lymph doesn’t flow — swelling & lots of it. Not “toxicity.” It is easy to find many gruesome pictures of elphantiasis on the internet. If lymph were critical for waste removal, then the major impact of failure of lymphatic drainage would be tissue pollution. But failures of lymphatic drainage — for instance, drainage can fail because of surgical damage to lymph vessels and nodes, and indeed that is why MLD exists as a therapy — do not result in tissue “toxicity” at all, but severe swelling (elephantiasis, in the most extreme cases).
It’s super unpleasant, but it’s not an issue of toxicity. So MLD isn’t really “massage” as we normally know it, and doesn’t “release toxins/wastes” in any case: that’s a gross misrepresentation of the physiology as I understand it, and cannot be used as an example of detoxifying massage even if it weren’t for the evidence that it doesn’t work as advertised! A classic case of oversimplification The idea that drinking water after massage matters is a hopeless oversimplification, easily undermined by a cursory understanding of biochemistry. Metabolic wastes are already ubiquitous in tissue fluids, and they are constantly being produced and recycled. While massage has never been shown to have any significant effect on these processes — except to actually impair lactic acid removal! — it doesn’t even make logical sense that water would have anything to do with it. Anything the body can get rid of it is going to get rid of, with or without massage, and with or without any extra water.
The body is good at handling metabolic wastes, and even many exogenous poisons, without any special help. If it wasn’t, we’d really be up the creek. It’s certainly nice to offer patients some water after massage, to quench whatever thirst they may have. But it is not medically important for any specific biological reason, and it perpetuates several minor myths we would be better off without. Massage doesn’t really “detoxify.” Water doesn’t detoxify. And lactic acid is a useful metabolite, not a waste product.
Adequate hydration is easy and mild dehydration is not a health risk. Download mission impossible rogue nation in hindi dubbed.