Does the Purification Rundown actually remove chemicals from the body?

The central claim behind Hubbard’s detoxification program is surprisingly easy to test. If the protocol helps remove stored chemicals, measure those chemicals before treatment. Run the program. Measure them afterward.

Researchers began doing exactly that more than forty years ago. And they found something. Persistent chemicals declined. Some declined substantially.

In one controlled experiment, reductions differed significantly from matched untreated controls. In another case, researchers simultaneously measured a dramatic decline in PCB concentrations in body fat and blood while observing increased excretion of intact PCBs through skin oil.

This doesn’t tell us everything about Hubbard’s theory. But it tells us something important: the intervention has produced measurable changes consistent with the thing it was designed to do.

It is also worth being precise about what the researchers were testing. These were not simply experiments on niacin plus sauna. Hubbard’s intervention was a coordinated system involving niacin, exercise, prolonged heat, high-dose vitamins, escalating minerals, Cal-Mag, oils, lecithin, hydration, food, and recovery. The newer historical research into the nutrient schedule makes that distinction more important: Hubbard regarded the pharmacological nutrient network as part of the mechanism, not as incidental supplementation.

That means a fall in chemical body burden cannot automatically be assigned to one component. Niacin and heat may be central, but the nutritional environment could also affect mobilization, metabolism, tolerance of repeated heat, biliary handling, tissue recovery, or other parts of the process.

1984: persistent pollutants in human fat

One of the clearest early experiments appeared in AMBIO in 1984. Seven people accidentally exposed to polybrominated biphenyls underwent Hubbard’s program.

Researchers didn’t ask whether they “felt detoxed.” They biopsied adipose tissue. Sixteen organohalogen compounds were measured, including:

• PCBs
• PBBs
• chlorinated pesticides

Immediately after treatment, 13 of the 16 compounds were lower. Seven reductions were statistically significant. Across all sixteen chemicals, the average reduction was 21.3 percent. Individual reductions reached 47.2 percent.

Then researchers waited four months. This matters because a temporary drop in adipose concentration could theoretically reflect redistribution rather than true reduction.

At four-month follow-up, all 16 compounds were lower than baseline. The average reduction was 42.4 percent. Ten reductions were statistically significant. Individual reductions reached 65.9 percent.

That’s an important result. It doesn’t tell us which component caused the change. It tells us that persistent chemicals measured directly in body fat were substantially lower following the intervention and remained lower months later.

1986: now add controls

Two years later, researchers improved the design. Electrical workers with continuing potential exposure to PCBs and related chlorinated compounds were paired according to age, sex, and exposure potential and divided into treatment and control groups.

Researchers measured adipose tissue before treatment, immediately after treatment, and three months later. Daily treatment continued for three weeks.

After adjustment for re-exposure represented by the control group, hexachlorobenzene fell approximately 30% immediately after treatment and remained 28% lower three months later. Mean PCB congeners fell 16% immediately and remained 14% lower at three months.

The reported analysis found the treatment-related reductions statistically significant at p < 0.001.

This is one of the most important papers in the literature because the treated workers didn’t merely improve relative to their own baselines. They moved differently from similarly exposed controls. Something about the intervention affected measured body burden.

The blood didn’t spike

Researchers also monitored serum concentrations during treatment. A reasonable concern with deliberately mobilizing persistent pollutants from adipose tissue is that one might merely dump them into circulation. Yet serum levels did not show the increase that would be expected if mobilization greatly exceeded elimination.

The authors interpreted this as evidence that enhanced excretion was keeping pace with mobilization. That doesn’t settle exactly which route of excretion was responsible. But it is exactly the kind of finding Hubbard’s model would predict if mobilization and elimination were occurring together.

1990: one extraordinary PCB case

In 1990, researchers published a detailed case involving a female capacitor-factory worker with extensive PCB exposure. She presented with severe abdominal complaints, chloracne, liver abnormalities, and spontaneous nipple discharge approaching 50 mL per day.

Before treatment her PCB concentrations were:

• adipose tissue — 102 mg/kg
• serum — 512 µg/L
• skin lipids — 66.3 mg/kg
• nipple discharge — 712 µg/L

After treatment, adipose PCB fell to 37.4 mg/kg — a 63% reduction — and serum PCB fell to 261 µg/L — a 49% reduction.

Her nipple discharge ceased. Her symptoms improved.

But the most interesting mechanistic finding involved the skin. Researchers measured intact PCBs in sebum and found that excretion increased by as much as fivefold during treatment.

Sebum is not ordinary watery sweat. It is a lipid-rich secretion from sebaceous glands. That distinction matters. But so does the result: a persistent fat-soluble industrial pollutant was reaching the skin surface at a higher rate while concentrations in serum and fat declined.

1995: drug metabolites

The often-cited drug-residue evidence actually comes from more than one presentation and should not be treated as a single study.

One 1995 APHA presentation, “Reduction of Drug Residues: Applications in Drug Rehabilitation,” by Megan Shields, Shelley Beckmann, Forest Tennant, and R. Michael Wisner, reported metabolite measurements in a small group of rehabilitation clients alongside a separate 249-client symptom series.

Cocaine, opiate, and benzodiazepine metabolites were examined in sweat and urine. Some metabolites increased after treatment began, and in two reported cases compounds that had initially been below detection subsequently became detectable.

A separate 1995 College on Problems of Drug Dependence report by Shelley Beckmann and Forest Tennant, “The Precipitation of Cocaine Metabolites in Urine of Addicts Undergoing Sauna Bath Treatment,” followed four cocaine-dependent subjects and investigated the appearance of cocaine metabolites in urine and sweat during sauna-based treatment. The report was published in the National Institute on Drug Abuse research-monograph proceedings.

These are conference/proceedings-level observations rather than a modern definitive pharmacokinetic trial. But that is the correct way to describe them: interesting preliminary evidence that drug metabolites could change or reappear during treatment, not a settled demonstration of long-term drug storage for every compound.

What about perspiration itself?

Independent researchers have since demonstrated that perspiration can contain a variety of undesirable environmental substances. Studies have detected arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, and some PCB congeners in perspiration.

A 2012 systematic review of arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury found that dermal excretion can be meaningful under some exposure conditions. Later Blood, Urine, and Sweat work found some PCB congeners in perspiration while common PFAS compounds were not efficiently removed that way.

This is exactly what chemistry would lead us to expect. There is no universal category called “toxins” that all behave identically. A PCB molecule behaves differently from lead. Lead behaves differently from PFOS.

The meaningful scientific question is: Which compounds leave through which routes, and can an intervention increase the total amount eliminated enough to affect body burden?

The Hubbard studies suggest that for some persistent organic compounds, the answer may be yes.

Chernobyl: an informative negative result

Chernobyl-related research is sometimes overstated. A 1998 paper presented at the U.S. EPA International Radiological Post-Emergency Response Issues Conference examined 24 men from contaminated areas.

Cesium-137 could be detected in perspiration and researchers reported a variety of physiological and health changes. However, the adult investigation did not clearly demonstrate accelerated Cs-137 elimination.

The correct lead author citation is A.S. Tsyb, with E.M. Parshkov, J. Barnes, V.V. Yarzutkin, N.V. Vorontsov and V.I. Dedov.

That negative result is useful. It suggests that the protocol should not be imagined as a universal chemical vacuum cleaner. Different substances respond differently.

World Trade Center responders

After September 11, rescue and cleanup workers encountered a complex mixture of dust, smoke, and combustion products. A Hubbard-derived treatment program was subsequently used by large numbers of responders with persistent symptoms.

In 2007, a Chemosphere pilot study examined seven exposed men and measured — PCBs, polychlorinated dibenzofurans, polychlorinated dioxins — before and after treatment.

Multiple congeners declined. Some reductions reached statistical significance despite the small sample, and the authors reported that health symptoms either resolved or improved satisfactorily.

The paper generated a formal methodological criticism from Edmund Crouch and Laura Green, who challenged aspects of the analysis and interpretation. The original authors then published a reply defending their methods and interpretation.

Both belong in the literature rather than only the original paper. This is what a healthy research discussion looks like.

The WTC paper remains a small pilot. It also remains a real measurement study in which several persistent pollutants declined following treatment.

The pattern is the interesting part

One tiny study can be noise. One extraordinary case can be unusual. But now put the observations together.

PBBs declined. PCBs declined. Chlorinated pesticides declined. Hexachlorobenzene declined relative to controls. PCB concentrations declined in both fat and blood. PCB excretion through sebum increased. Persistent pollutants declined in a WTC pilot. Drug metabolites changed or reappeared in excretory measurements in preliminary rehabilitation work. Independent researchers have also demonstrated that some unwanted chemicals do leave through perspiration.

These findings aren’t all equal in quality. They don’t need to be. The interesting thing is the recurrence of the same general pattern across different populations and measurement approaches.

What might be happening?

The complete mechanism remains unfinished. Several processes could occur simultaneously.

Exercise changes circulation and fuel use. Heat profoundly increases peripheral blood flow. Sweating creates an additional excretion route for compounds capable of entering sweat. Sebaceous glands provide a lipid-rich skin route. Nicotinic acid alters adipose metabolism and is followed by rebound release of free fatty acids. The liver metabolizes circulating compounds. Bile and stool remove others. Kidneys remove water-soluble metabolites.

The high-dose nutrient network adds another possible layer. Hubbard deliberately raised B vitamins, vitamin C, vitamin E, calcium, magnesium, trace minerals, oils, and lecithin alongside niacin. Some of those substances are present at pharmacological rather than merely nutritional doses. They could influence metabolic capacity, enzyme/cofactor availability, neuromuscular tolerance, lipid handling, recovery, or the body’s ability to repeat the mobilization-and-heat cycle day after day.

The important point is that the published body-burden studies tested the whole coordinated intervention. Whatever combination of mechanisms ultimately explains the reductions, the nutrient architecture belongs inside the causal question rather than outside it.

What we still don’t know

The research base should be larger. We still need to know which chemicals respond best, how important nicotinic acid is, whether rebound lipolysis matters, how much removal occurs through sweat versus sebum, urine, and stool, whether one hour of heat can accomplish what four hours does, whether infrared, steam, and traditional sauna differ, what the oils and lecithin contribute, and which nutrient quantities are actually necessary.

Those are important questions. But notice the distinction. They are questions about how the intervention works, for whom, and how to optimize it. They are not equivalent to nothing happens.

So, does it remove chemicals?

For at least some persistent compounds, researchers have documented measurable reductions during Hubbard-style treatment. That is a factual statement.

The 1986 controlled work found significant HCB and PCB reductions relative to matched controls. The 1984 cohort showed lower persistent-organic-pollutant concentrations immediately and still larger reductions four months later. The 1990 PCB case showed a 63% adipose reduction, a 49% serum reduction, and increased intact-PCB excretion through sebum.

These observations happened. The remaining scientific argument is about how widely they generalize, which components produced them, which chemicals respond, and what the optimal protocol should be.

That is a much more interesting conclusion than simply saying: “Detox isn’t proven.”

Something measurable happened. Body burdens changed. People frequently improved at the same time. We understand part of the process. We do not yet understand all of it.

Forty years later, perhaps the strangest part of the story is not that Hubbard’s hypothesis attracted researchers. It is that such provocative early results never produced the large independent replication capable of telling us exactly how far the effect goes.

Research & references

• Schnare DW, Ben M, Shields MG. “Body Burden Reductions of Polychlorinated Biphenyls, Polybrominated Biphenyls and Chlorinated Pesticides in Human Subjects.” AMBIO. 1984;13(5–6):378–380.
• Schnare DW, Robinson PC. “Reduction of the Human Body Burdens of Hexachlorobenzene and Polychlorinated Biphenyls.” IARC Scientific Publications. 1986;(77):597–603. PMID: 3110064.
• Tretjak Z, Shields M, Beckmann SL. “PCB Reduction and Clinical Improvement by Detoxification: An Unexploited Approach?” Human & Experimental Toxicology. 1990;9(4):235–244. doi:10.1177/096032719000900406.
• Shields M, Beckmann SL, Tennant F, Wisner RM. “Reduction of Drug Residues: Applications in Drug Rehabilitation.” Presented at the 123rd Annual Meeting of the American Public Health Association, 1995.
• Beckmann SL, Tennant F. “The Precipitation of Cocaine Metabolites in Urine of Addicts Undergoing Sauna Bath Treatment.” In: National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph 162, College on Problems of Drug Dependence proceedings, 1995/1996.
• Tsyb AS, Parshkov EM, Barnes J, Yarzutkin VV, Vorontsov NV, Dedov VI. “Rehabilitation of a Chernobyl Affected Population Using a Detoxification Method.” Proceedings of the U.S. EPA International Radiological Post-Emergency Response Issues Conference. Washington, DC, 9–11 September 1998:162–166.
• Dahlgren J, Cecchini M, Takhar H, Paepke O. “Persistent Organic Pollutants in 9/11 World Trade Center Rescue Workers: Reduction Following Detoxification.” Chemosphere. 2007;69(8):1320–1325. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.05.127.
• Crouch EAC, Green LC. “Comment on ‘Persistent Organic Pollutants in 9/11 World Trade Center Rescue Workers: Reduction Following Detoxification.’” Chemosphere. 2007;69(8):1330–1332. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.05.098.
• Dahlgren J, Cecchini M, Takhar H, Paepke O. “Reply to Comment of Edmund A.C. Crouch and Laura C. Green…” Chemosphere. 2007;69(8):1333–1336. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.06.076.
• Sears ME, Kerr KJ, Bray RI. “Arsenic, Cadmium, Lead, and Mercury in Sweat: A Systematic Review.” Journal of Environmental and Public Health. 2012;2012:184745.
• Genuis SJ, Beesoon S, Birkholz D. “Biomonitoring and Elimination of Perfluorinated Compounds and Polychlorinated Biphenyls Through Perspiration.” ISRN Toxicology. 2013;2013:483832.