An obstructed colon, therefore, being itself unnatural, man is obviously justified in using the brains that Nature has endowed him with to cleanse it. An artificial limb is unnatural, but would the same objection hold good that because a man has had the misfortune to suffer amputation, he must, therefore, limp through life on crutches, rather than use the mechanical substitute that man's ingenuity has devised? Common sense teaches us, and experience has amply confirmed the teaching, that flushing is not only the easiest, but the most effectual means of accomplishing this purpose; and it is unmistakably the most harmless, inasmuch as we use Nature's most simple and effective cleansing agency in the process--pure water. Sickness is in itself unnatural, and until the system can be restored to its natural condition reason plainly shows us that we must co-operate with Nature and assist in removing these impurities from the system, a task which our disregard of her warnings has prevented her from accomplishing. Cathartics simply excite the excretory processes, and stimulate Nature to a violent effort to expel them, the unnatural exertion being followed by a feeling of languor, for all purgative action is debilitating. Flushing, on the contrary, acts directly on the accumulated matter in the colon (which cathartics never do), and, instead of causing an unnatural excitation of any of the natural processes, it induces a calm, restful feeling and a sense of profound relief. "It is a debilitating practice," the objectors urge. Here, again, I join issue. I am in a position to prove a decided negative. I have the evidence of thousands of people to the contrary--people who have tested the treatment, and, setting aside the weight of testimony, even the most prejudiced mind must admit, that actual, personal experience is more to be relied on than unsupported theory. Dr. Contrary--people said that his patients who had used the treatment for months, and even years, had steadily gained in strength and flesh all the time. Another favorite objection is that "it causes the intestines to become weakened and dependent upon this unnatural method." To this I reply that it is a well known fact that at least fifty per cent, of people in civilized (?) communities are slaves to the purgative habit, the system refusing to fulfil its functions without this unnatural excitation; therefore, if dependence must be placed in something, we should unhesitatingly give the preference to water, as against cathartics, but the whole weight of evidence shows that the objection has no foundation in fact. On this subject Dr. Forrest said: "Flushing the colon does not cause a weakening of the intestines. When this procedure is no longer necessary, owing to restored health, the intestines have also been restored and improved in tone and will carry on their functions unaided."