The gut microbiome and its role in digestive health

System

This discussion was created from replies split from: CICO and Menopause.

Fuzzipeg

Living in the UK, it has been bliss to my ears to hear in recent months, some of our general news items being about digestive health and microbes. Its common knowledge among those who listen and keep up with the science, our digestive biome has a massive impact on our health and general wellbeing.

For years I took my doctors advice time and time again, I took those antibiotics which kill not only the cause of one's immediate problem but take with them the very microbes which create our wellbeing. I ended up house bound with chemical sensitivity and loads more which was caused by my depleted gut microbe imbalance. I've improved my microbiome and am more healthy than I was 30 years and more ago. Antibiotics, I never take them, I have not needed them since I kept up with modern science and followed where it goes assiduously. There is a raft of information available on ones digestive biome if one looks.

snickerscharlie

Fuzzipeg wrote: »

Living in the UK, it has been bliss to my ears to hear in recent months, some of our general news items being about digestive health and microbes. Its common knowledge among those who listen and keep up with the science, our digestive biome has a massive impact on our health and general wellbeing.

For years I took my doctors advice time and time again, I took those antibiotics which kill not only the cause of one's immediate problem but take with them the very microbes which create our wellbeing. I ended up house bound with chemical sensitivity and loads more which was caused by my depleted gut microbe imbalance. I've improved my microbiome and am more healthy than I was 30 years and more ago. Antibiotics, I never take them, I have not needed them since I kept up with modern science and followed where it goes assiduously. There is a raft of information available on ones digestive biome if one looks.

So, the rest of us are ignorantly deaf?

Or just not willing to jump on every bandwagon that comes along until real peer-reviewed human research catches up with the assertions?

GaleHawkins

@snickerscharlie I expect YES or NO could be the correct answer to both of your question depending on other factors as well.

https://sciencealert.com/this-is-why-a-lot-of-peer-reviewed-research-is-actually-wrong

https://newrepublic.com/article/135921/science-suffering-peer-reviews-big-problems

https://bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778

https://vox.com/2015/12/7/9865086/peer-review-science-problems

https://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/believe-it-or-not-most-published-research-findings-are-probably-false

https://elsevier.com/connect/editors-update/when-reviewing-goes-wrong-the-ugly-side-of-peer-review

https://spectator.co.uk/2016/10/how-many-scientific-papers-just-arent-true/

https://economist.com/science-and-technology/2008/10/09/publish-and-be-wrong

https://newfoodeconomy.org/nutrition-research-statistics-problem/

https://medium.com/@devonprice/peer-review-is-not-scientific-bf3283069ffd

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_16

https://archive.attn.com/stories/18389/how-tell-good-scientific-study-bad-one

https://realclearscience.com/articles/2018/07/16/when_not_to_trust_peer-reviewed_science_110696.html

snickerscharlie

GaleHawkins wrote: »

@snickerscharlie I expect YES or NO could be the correct answer to both of your question depending on other factors as well.

https://sciencealert.com/this-is-why-a-lot-of-peer-reviewed-research-is-actually-wrong

https://newrepublic.com/article/135921/science-suffering-peer-reviews-big-problems

https://bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778

https://vox.com/2015/12/7/9865086/peer-review-science-problems

https://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/believe-it-or-not-most-published-research-findings-are-probably-false

https://elsevier.com/connect/editors-update/when-reviewing-goes-wrong-the-ugly-side-of-peer-review

https://spectator.co.uk/2016/10/how-many-scientific-papers-just-arent-true/

https://economist.com/science-and-technology/2008/10/09/publish-and-be-wrong

https://newfoodeconomy.org/nutrition-research-statistics-problem/

https://medium.com/@devonprice/peer-review-is-not-scientific-bf3283069ffd

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_16

https://archive.attn.com/stories/18389/how-tell-good-scientific-study-bad-one

https://realclearscience.com/articles/2018/07/16/when_not_to_trust_peer-reviewed_science_110696.html

So, if new scientific research refutes your deeply-held beliefs, you can simply dismiss it as flawed?

But wouldn't that work the same way for research that upholds them?

CSARdiver

There isn't a debate on whether or not gut microbiome has on digestive health. This is a poorly constructed strawman.

The issue is what impact this has and if it is even possible to manipulate without severe ramifications. From studying gnotobiotics we know that bacteria serve as a remarkable defense mechanism in defending eukaryotic (animal) cells from viruses and pathogenic strains. Note that this is why immunocompromised people require a physical protective barrier - bubble life.

The bulk of scientific knowledge is acquired through a method of isolation, parameter establishment, review of data, and adjustment of hypothesis. To understand complex structures and open systems such as gut microbiome this would require expansive knowledge of syntrophy - how bacteria behave in the environment together. So while there may be volumes of information available, very little is usable in terms of health other than eat a wide variety of foods and eat in moderation.

GaleHawkins

snickerscharlie wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

@snickerscharlie I expect YES or NO could be the correct answer to both of your question depending on other factors as well.

https://sciencealert.com/this-is-why-a-lot-of-peer-reviewed-research-is-actually-wrong

https://newrepublic.com/article/135921/science-suffering-peer-reviews-big-problems

https://bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778

https://vox.com/2015/12/7/9865086/peer-review-science-problems

https://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/believe-it-or-not-most-published-research-findings-are-probably-false

https://elsevier.com/connect/editors-update/when-reviewing-goes-wrong-the-ugly-side-of-peer-review

https://spectator.co.uk/2016/10/how-many-scientific-papers-just-arent-true/

https://economist.com/science-and-technology/2008/10/09/publish-and-be-wrong

https://newfoodeconomy.org/nutrition-research-statistics-problem/

https://medium.com/@devonprice/peer-review-is-not-scientific-bf3283069ffd

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_16

https://archive.attn.com/stories/18389/how-tell-good-scientific-study-bad-one

https://realclearscience.com/articles/2018/07/16/when_not_to_trust_peer-reviewed_science_110696.html

So, if new scientific research refutes your deeply-held beliefs, you can simply dismiss it as flawed?

But wouldn't that work the same way for research that upholds them?

Because of past experiences I have gotten out of the Belief business for the most part because I found they were too tied to emotions.

johnslater461

GaleHawkins wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

@snickerscharlie I expect YES or NO could be the correct answer to both of your question depending on other factors as well.

https://sciencealert.com/this-is-why-a-lot-of-peer-reviewed-research-is-actually-wrong

https://newrepublic.com/article/135921/science-suffering-peer-reviews-big-problems

https://bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778

https://vox.com/2015/12/7/9865086/peer-review-science-problems

https://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/believe-it-or-not-most-published-research-findings-are-probably-false

https://elsevier.com/connect/editors-update/when-reviewing-goes-wrong-the-ugly-side-of-peer-review

https://spectator.co.uk/2016/10/how-many-scientific-papers-just-arent-true/

https://economist.com/science-and-technology/2008/10/09/publish-and-be-wrong

https://newfoodeconomy.org/nutrition-research-statistics-problem/

https://medium.com/@devonprice/peer-review-is-not-scientific-bf3283069ffd

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_16

https://archive.attn.com/stories/18389/how-tell-good-scientific-study-bad-one

https://realclearscience.com/articles/2018/07/16/when_not_to_trust_peer-reviewed_science_110696.html

So, if new scientific research refutes your deeply-held beliefs, you can simply dismiss it as flawed?

But wouldn't that work the same way for research that upholds them?

Because of past experiences I have gotten out of the Belief business for the most part because I found they were too tied to emotions.

Your post history proves otherwise

snickerscharlie

GaleHawkins wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

@snickerscharlie I expect YES or NO could be the correct answer to both of your question depending on other factors as well.

https://sciencealert.com/this-is-why-a-lot-of-peer-reviewed-research-is-actually-wrong

https://newrepublic.com/article/135921/science-suffering-peer-reviews-big-problems

https://bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778

https://vox.com/2015/12/7/9865086/peer-review-science-problems

https://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/believe-it-or-not-most-published-research-findings-are-probably-false

https://elsevier.com/connect/editors-update/when-reviewing-goes-wrong-the-ugly-side-of-peer-review

https://spectator.co.uk/2016/10/how-many-scientific-papers-just-arent-true/

https://economist.com/science-and-technology/2008/10/09/publish-and-be-wrong

https://newfoodeconomy.org/nutrition-research-statistics-problem/

https://medium.com/@devonprice/peer-review-is-not-scientific-bf3283069ffd

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_16

https://archive.attn.com/stories/18389/how-tell-good-scientific-study-bad-one

https://realclearscience.com/articles/2018/07/16/when_not_to_trust_peer-reviewed_science_110696.html

So, if new scientific research refutes your deeply-held beliefs, you can simply dismiss it as flawed?

But wouldn't that work the same way for research that upholds them?

Because of past experiences I have gotten out of the Belief business for the most part because I found they were too tied to emotions.

But if the things you advocate for aren't yet backed by credible science then they are still just personally-held beliefs. Whether you're in the "Belief business" or not.

johnslater461

snickerscharlie wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

@snickerscharlie I expect YES or NO could be the correct answer to both of your question depending on other factors as well.

https://sciencealert.com/this-is-why-a-lot-of-peer-reviewed-research-is-actually-wrong

https://newrepublic.com/article/135921/science-suffering-peer-reviews-big-problems

https://bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778

https://vox.com/2015/12/7/9865086/peer-review-science-problems

https://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/believe-it-or-not-most-published-research-findings-are-probably-false

https://elsevier.com/connect/editors-update/when-reviewing-goes-wrong-the-ugly-side-of-peer-review

https://spectator.co.uk/2016/10/how-many-scientific-papers-just-arent-true/

https://economist.com/science-and-technology/2008/10/09/publish-and-be-wrong

https://newfoodeconomy.org/nutrition-research-statistics-problem/

https://medium.com/@devonprice/peer-review-is-not-scientific-bf3283069ffd

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_16

https://archive.attn.com/stories/18389/how-tell-good-scientific-study-bad-one

https://realclearscience.com/articles/2018/07/16/when_not_to_trust_peer-reviewed_science_110696.html

So, if new scientific research refutes your deeply-held beliefs, you can simply dismiss it as flawed?

But wouldn't that work the same way for research that upholds them?

Because of past experiences I have gotten out of the Belief business for the most part because I found they were too tied to emotions.

But if the things you advocate for aren't yet backed by credible science then they are still just personally-held beliefs. Whether you're in the "Belief business" or not.

magnusthenerd

GaleHawkins wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

@snickerscharlie I expect YES or NO could be the correct answer to both of your question depending on other factors as well.

https://sciencealert.com/this-is-why-a-lot-of-peer-reviewed-research-is-actually-wrong

https://newrepublic.com/article/135921/science-suffering-peer-reviews-big-problems

https://bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778

https://vox.com/2015/12/7/9865086/peer-review-science-problems

https://bigthink.com/neurobonkers/believe-it-or-not-most-published-research-findings-are-probably-false

https://elsevier.com/connect/editors-update/when-reviewing-goes-wrong-the-ugly-side-of-peer-review

https://spectator.co.uk/2016/10/how-many-scientific-papers-just-arent-true/

https://economist.com/science-and-technology/2008/10/09/publish-and-be-wrong

https://newfoodeconomy.org/nutrition-research-statistics-problem/

https://medium.com/@devonprice/peer-review-is-not-scientific-bf3283069ffd

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_16

https://archive.attn.com/stories/18389/how-tell-good-scientific-study-bad-one

https://realclearscience.com/articles/2018/07/16/when_not_to_trust_peer-reviewed_science_110696.html

So, if new scientific research refutes your deeply-held beliefs, you can simply dismiss it as flawed?

But wouldn't that work the same way for research that upholds them?

Because of past experiences I have gotten out of the Belief business for the most part because I found they were too tied to emotions.

I'm not following what that would even mean. Everything I claim to know, I also believe - knowledge is generally taken to be a subset of beliefs, those produced by some reliable form of justification. Would you say then, that you know nothing, Gale Snow?

GaleHawkins

https://forbes.com/sites/daviddisalvo/2019/06/10/study-our-gut-bacteria-may-be-dismantling-the-pills-we-take-what-you-should-know/#4a0eaa451c74

Study: Our Gut Bacteria May Be Dismantling The Pills We Take - What You Should Know

So I guess Gut Microbiome screening will may help new drugs have a better shot of making it through future drug trials.

OK I did not know about the testing until just finding this 5 year old article below so maybe this technology is older than I thought. Not sure if they are around 5 years later.

https://sciencenews.org/blog/gory-details/here%E2%80%99s-poop-getting-your-gut-microbiome-analyzed

Here’s the poop on getting your gut microbiome analyzed
BY SCIENCE NEWS STAFF 4:38PM, JUNE 17, 2014

johnslater461

GaleHawkins wrote: »

https://forbes.com/sites/daviddisalvo/2019/06/10/study-our-gut-bacteria-may-be-dismantling-the-pills-we-take-what-you-should-know/#4a0eaa451c74

Study: Our Gut Bacteria May Be Dismantling The Pills We Take - What You Should Know

So I guess Gut Microbiome screening will may help new drugs have a better shot of making it through future drug trials.

OK I did not know about the testing until just finding this 5 year old article below so maybe this technology is older than I thought. Not sure if they are around 5 years later.

https://sciencenews.org/blog/gory-details/here%E2%80%99s-poop-getting-your-gut-microbiome-analyzed

Here’s the poop on getting your gut microbiome analyzed
BY SCIENCE NEWS STAFF 4:38PM, JUNE 17, 2014

You don't read the articles you post at all, do you?

FTA

I asked two different companies to analyze my gut microbiome. American Gut (left) gave nearly opposite results to those from uBiome (right) with respect to the major phyla of bacteria in a duplicate sample.

CSARdiver

johnslater461 wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

https://forbes.com/sites/daviddisalvo/2019/06/10/study-our-gut-bacteria-may-be-dismantling-the-pills-we-take-what-you-should-know/#4a0eaa451c74

Study: Our Gut Bacteria May Be Dismantling The Pills We Take - What You Should Know

So I guess Gut Microbiome screening will may help new drugs have a better shot of making it through future drug trials.

OK I did not know about the testing until just finding this 5 year old article below so maybe this technology is older than I thought. Not sure if they are around 5 years later.

https://sciencenews.org/blog/gory-details/here%E2%80%99s-poop-getting-your-gut-microbiome-analyzed

Here’s the poop on getting your gut microbiome analyzed
BY SCIENCE NEWS STAFF 4:38PM, JUNE 17, 2014

You don't read the articles you post at all, do you?

FTA

I asked two different companies to analyze my gut microbiome. American Gut (left) gave nearly opposite results to those from uBiome (right) with respect to the major phyla of bacteria in a duplicate sample.

As expected. Both companies are likely correct as well.

Gut microbiome is a constantly changing open system. There is no feasible way to screen for this.

johnslater461

CSARdiver wrote: »

johnslater461 wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

https://forbes.com/sites/daviddisalvo/2019/06/10/study-our-gut-bacteria-may-be-dismantling-the-pills-we-take-what-you-should-know/#4a0eaa451c74

Study: Our Gut Bacteria May Be Dismantling The Pills We Take - What You Should Know

So I guess Gut Microbiome screening will may help new drugs have a better shot of making it through future drug trials.

OK I did not know about the testing until just finding this 5 year old article below so maybe this technology is older than I thought. Not sure if they are around 5 years later.

https://sciencenews.org/blog/gory-details/here%E2%80%99s-poop-getting-your-gut-microbiome-analyzed

Here’s the poop on getting your gut microbiome analyzed
BY SCIENCE NEWS STAFF 4:38PM, JUNE 17, 2014

You don't read the articles you post at all, do you?

FTA

I asked two different companies to analyze my gut microbiome. American Gut (left) gave nearly opposite results to those from uBiome (right) with respect to the major phyla of bacteria in a duplicate sample.

As expected. Both companies are likely correct as well.

Gut microbiome is a constantly changing open system. There is no feasible way to screen for this.

Except that both samples were taken at the same time.

And I sent fecal samples to both places. I gave the services as close to duplicate samples as I could, swiping big cotton swabs over the same section of used toilet paper — per their instructions — within seconds of each other

johnslater461

.

CSARdiver

johnslater461 wrote: »

CSARdiver wrote: »

johnslater461 wrote: »

GaleHawkins wrote: »

https://forbes.com/sites/daviddisalvo/2019/06/10/study-our-gut-bacteria-may-be-dismantling-the-pills-we-take-what-you-should-know/#4a0eaa451c74

Study: Our Gut Bacteria May Be Dismantling The Pills We Take - What You Should Know

So I guess Gut Microbiome screening will may help new drugs have a better shot of making it through future drug trials.

OK I did not know about the testing until just finding this 5 year old article below so maybe this technology is older than I thought. Not sure if they are around 5 years later.

https://sciencenews.org/blog/gory-details/here%E2%80%99s-poop-getting-your-gut-microbiome-analyzed

Here’s the poop on getting your gut microbiome analyzed
BY SCIENCE NEWS STAFF 4:38PM, JUNE 17, 2014

You don't read the articles you post at all, do you?

FTA

I asked two different companies to analyze my gut microbiome. American Gut (left) gave nearly opposite results to those from uBiome (right) with respect to the major phyla of bacteria in a duplicate sample.

As expected. Both companies are likely correct as well.

Gut microbiome is a constantly changing open system. There is no feasible way to screen for this.

Except that both samples were taken at the same time.

And I sent fecal samples to both places. I gave the services as close to duplicate samples as I could, swiping big cotton swabs over the same section of used toilet paper — per their instructions — within seconds of each other

As expected. Swabs taken in a non-sterile environment of a waste product of a constantly changing system. There is no measure of accuracy or precision, so your results will be predictably chaotic.

GaleHawkins

JUNE 11, 2019

Study reveals a microbe's molecular role in Crohn's disease
by Stephanie Mcpherson, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2019-06-reveals-microbe-molecular-role-crohn.html

"Changes in the gut microbiome have long been linked with Crohn's disease and other forms of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but the biology behind those links has remained murky. Researchers at the Broad Institute, Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), and Harvard Medical School (HMS) have now found that one bacterium, Ruminococcus gnavus, which is associated with Crohn's disease, releases a certain type of polysaccharide (or a chain of sugar molecules) that triggers an immune response."

gatamadriz

I regularly eat yogurt, sauerkraut and other fermented foods like pickles. Helps the microbes do their job. If the get to an article on gut health it almost always includes some pill or potion you are supposed to take, so no thanks.

Aaron_K123

Right now data on microbiome effects on health is akin to scattered tea leaves. You can either peer at them until you think you see your future or you could just recognize that although there are likely some legitimate health effects from symbiotic organisms living within us (be they commensal, mutual or parasaitic) the interactions are not so clear cut as to be prescriptive of what you "should do" or "shouldn't do" with regards to your diet.

Only thing I think it is fair to say would be that gut flora are important for digestive health and so regular antibiotic use can be detrimental. But I wouldn't go much past that at all.

For example...yes there are bacteria in your gut that help with digestion, yes there are bacteria in yogurt. That doesn't mean that eating yogurt is healthier than not eating yogurt due to live cultures. The only ones claiming that are companies who sell yogurt and people echoing their claims in online posts.