I think I have to agree with Abby here. There is this whole philosophy in Western conventional medicine that any form of "feeling bad" is a bad thing and that any illness should be avoided at all costs. But there does seem to be a body of evidence emerging that if your body is never confronted with infections, if your body's immune system never has to do any "real work", then it turns on itself and auto-immune diseases can raise their ugly head.

I think there may well be something to this "feeling bad is a good sign" philosophy, insofar as the "feeling bad" is an indicator that your body is actually working. Cold symptoms are not caused by the cold virus but by your body's reaction to them.

The problem with the "feeling bad is a good sign" philosophy is that most of us are too out of touch with our bodies to know which kind of "feeling bad" really is a good sign, and which kind of "feeling bad" simply means that what we are doing is not good for us.

The concept of "feeling bad before you get to feel properly better" is quite common in German alternative medicine and I've kind of gotten my head round that one. It goes against the grain of what antibiotics promised us: instant relief from our symptoms. Little did we know that although those antibiotics gave outward relief they were trashing our guts at the same time! In that case, "feeling better" was not really the case after all...

Die-off symptoms in the case of candida are well-documented; induction flu after caffeine and carb withdrawal are also well known on this site. There really is something to this idea, I'm sure of it.

amanda