Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
"Thin people have more gut microbes than fat people"
Replies
-
Here I was blaming that 10lb weight gain on Covid, it might have been the C.diff infection (and two months of antibiotics off and on) before covid?
I recovered from C.Diff like a week before the shutdown. I have gained 10lbs it seems my body is not happy to part with. I'm still at a healthy weight, but I want to be where I was.
I had an overgrowth of highly toxic gut bacteria, so I had to take super gut-bacteria specific antibiotics to get rid of it. So far, I have recovered pretty well. I wonder what the long term effects.
My oldest was born by c-section and given antibiotics at birth, he was premature and I was GBS unknown. He's pretty damn healthy, and thin. Almost too thin. I joked that if I ended up needing a fecal transplant, I wanted it from my kids (before I knew how much the donor had to go through) because they live in my house and have healthy digestion. Luckily my C.diff was successfully treated by the first round of antibiotics, it can be much more severe.
I am interested in gut bacteria research. I think we will learn a lot in the future. I think gut bacteria affect our life more than we know.3 -
The programs reported scientific studies.
I believe we are fortunate to have well reported scientific information here in the UK.1 -
The programs reported scientific studies.
I believe we are fortunate to have well reported scientific information here in the UK.
My point is that I don't think there are studies that establish the exact claims you've made. I'm not arguing with the quality of science reporting in the UK, I'm more curious about the specific conclusions you've drawn from the program.4 -
This is a pretty good general view of the state of the science in 2013 -- we may well know more know, but most of what I've read suggests it's still more questions than answers. (Perhaps some won't be interested in the article because it's from a US paper and US science/food reporter, who knows?)
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/19/magazine/say-hello-to-the-100-trillion-bacteria-that-make-up-your-microbiome.html
Relevant to some of the claims made above (and indicating that we don't actually know anything conclusive):
"It is still early days in this research, as Lozupone (and everyone else I interviewed) underscored; scientists can’t even yet say with confidence exactly what a “healthy” microbiome should look like. But some broad, intriguing patterns are emerging. More diversity is probably better than less, because a diverse ecosystem is generally more resilient — and diversity in the Western gut is significantly lower than in other, less-industrialized populations. The gut microbiota of people in the West looks very different from that of a variety of other geographically dispersed peoples. So, for example, the gut community of rural people in West Africa more closely resembles that of Amerindians in Venezuela than it does an American’s or a European’s.
These rural populations not only harbor a greater diversity of microbes but also a different cast of lead characters. American and European guts contain relatively high levels of bacteroides and firmicutes and low levels of the prevotella that dominate the guts of rural Africans and Amerindians. (It is not clear whether high or low levels of any of these is good or bad.) Why are the microbes different? It could be the diet, which in both rural populations features a considerable amount of whole grains (which prevotella appear to like), plant fiber and very little meat. (Many firmicutes like amino acids, so they proliferate when the diet contains lots of protein; bacteroides metabolize carbohydrates.) As for the lower biodiversity in the West, this could be a result of our profligate use of antibiotics (in health care as well as the food system), our diet of processed food (which has generally been cleansed of all bacteria, the good and the bad), environmental toxins and generally less “microbial pressure” — i.e., exposure to bacteria — in everyday life. All of this may help explain why, though these rural populations tend to have greater exposures to infectious diseases and lower life expectancies than those in the West, they also have lower rates of chronic disorders like allergies, asthma, Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease.
“Rural people spend a lot more time outside and have much more contact with plants and with soil,” Lozupone says. Another researcher, who has gathered samples in Malawi, told me, “In some of these cultures, children are raised communally, passed from one set of hands to another, so they’re routinely exposed to a greater diversity of microbes.” The nuclear family may not be conducive to the health of the microbiome.
As it happens, Lozupone and I had something in common, microbially speaking: we share unusually high levels of prevotella for Americans. Our gut communities look more like those of rural Africans or Amerindians than like those of our neighbors. Lozupone suspects that the reasons for this might have to do with a plant-based diet; we each eat lots of whole grains and vegetables and relatively little meat. (Though neither of us is a vegetarian.) Like me, she was proud of her prevotella, regarding it as a sign of a healthy non-Western diet, at least until she began doing research on the microbiota of H.I.V. patients. It seems that they, too, have lots of prevotella. Further confusing the story, a recent study linking certain gut microbes common in meat eaters to high levels of a blood marker for heart disease suggested that prevotella was one such microbe. Early days, indeed...."
The whole piece is interesting.1 -
The microbiome is a thing and is being researched. For example, there are peer-reviewed articles in print and underway for a number of autoimmune diseases (with human participants, as opposed to mice, monkeys, etc). I'm sure there are other potential health implications under study as well.
The controversy here, for me, is "thin" vs. "fat."
Also, no shade, but I'd rather that adult science communicators have graduated from university.
If you're interested in this topic @amandaeve then there are other people in this genre, with established credentials but who use accessible/lay language. For example, Eric Topol, M.D. was talking about the microbiome (in passing) in "The Creative Destruction of Medicine: How the Digital Revolution Will Create Better Health Care" (2011).
Since then, he has talked about it more often. Coincidentally, I'm rereading this book as of yesterday which is the only reason I can mention the above lol There are so many other reputable speakers on this topic, however, and perhaps some of their names will surface in this thread.
This is a current article on the subject that was interesting to me in light of the Type 2 Diabetes and COVID-19 connection.
https://medicalnewstoday.com/articles/gut-bacteria-could-help-diagnose-diabetes
@MaltedTea the microbiome is a thing and a relative new thing since it only because a researched field within the last 30 years with most of it in the last 5-10 years as the tools to detect and count the microbiome continue to improve.
Thanks for sharing about Eric Topol, MD's book. I just ordered a copy from Amazon for $6 with free shipping in new like condition. It has over 200 reviews with a 4.4 out of 5 rating. I like the date on it because it gives me a good way to see the known microbiome research at that point in time as I work to fill in the gap with newer research. I have already learned most autoimmune diseases may have a gut microbiome factor involved. When I started doing Keto in Oct 2014 and my 40 years of serious IBS resolved within the first 6 months I realized it was more than just ketones that were a factor but after I became aware of the research about the microbiome and diseases I then figured out most likely when I cut out all forms of sweeteners and all forms of all grains my microbiome shifted in to a balance that was more positive for my health.
1 -
We can't? Don't we for sure know their microbiomes were less healthy as they lived shorter lives? It must have been horrible in the past to have those microbiomes that caused death during child birth. Antibiotics must be slowly taking those to extinction in humans.janejellyroll wrote: »No mine was not an opinion piece. If one looks and reads the evidence is there for the enquiring mind, Most on here have enquiring minds, I consider the two posters between my posts are among them.
I'd hoped to get across the general impression that antibiotics and other medications are not "totally bad" just that they have the potential for severe down sides. I would not want to live without them but its good to have the ability to make up some of the deficit they create. Discovering what underlays modern health issues is getting somewhere towards reducing their impact. Given the opportunity and funding as well as the availability, I would have all door handles and similar surfaces covered in copper then we would not need as many antibiotics as we currently use. It would matter way less if someone left the bathroom without washing their hands. Pre covid while waiting for someone I did an observational study the result was appalling and they say boys are worse, I don't believe it.
As for the indigenous microbiome.- Here in the UK we have several science programs, on the bbc and Channel 4 which are held to account for their scientific accountability, unlike in some other countries. These programs have shown in their relevant diet related output have shown "an indigenous population" does not have the autoimmune conditions etc as we in the western world do. I did say, "overly processed foods" so if you eat as your ancestors did your microbiome would stand a better chance of be as healthy as theirs. Returning to my lavatorial tone from above its appalling the lavatorial microbes found on computer keyboards! Which is why I would have all door handles made in copper. If one had to choose then it would be hospital doors and high street doors when microbial infections would be radically reduced.
The programs, presumably, didn't conduct the studies demonstrating the assertion that indigenous populations following a traditional dietary pattern have better microbiome outcomes than both indigenous populations who don't, non-indigenous populations who do, and non-indigenous populations who don't. Comparing results between these four populations would be the only way to demonstrate that statement is "fact" rather than "opinion."
I don't know if we can know for a fact, either, than our ancestors had healthier microbiomes than we do. Some of them may have, but some of them lived in really unhealthy or insecure conditions that impacted their overall health.
I don't eat a traditional Irish pre-colonial diet (lots of grains and milk, some vegetables and fruit, some meat), I'm not sure that it's something I need to do for good health. Nor do I think my body can tell the difference between a healthfully constructed recreation of an Irish pre-colonial diet and a healthfully constructed recreation a diet of what someone else's ancestors ate. Given that there are very few people who are doing either, I don't think we could draw any conclusions about it resulting in better health outcomes or not.
What we have seen in studies that there do seem to be positive health outcomes with indigenous people adopting a more traditional dietary style, but it could be that is associated with it being a healthier diet overall. I don't know of anything demonstrating that it has to be that specific diet only (as opposed to one of the dozens of pre-colonial dietary patterns around the world) or that the improvements are microbiome-specific.
Yeah, that's sarcasm that attempts to counter this weird assumption people have about a golden past when we can demonstrably show so many things that were less healthy about people back then. People can't seem to grasp that maybe not dying at 30 of tuberculosis is one way to see a lot more cancer cases when people live to be 60, 70, or 80.
7 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »
We can't? Don't we for sure know their microbiomes were less healthy as they lived shorter lives? It must have been horrible in the past to have those microbiomes that caused death during child birth. Antibiotics must be slowly taking those to extinction in humans.janejellyroll wrote: »No mine was not an opinion piece. If one looks and reads the evidence is there for the enquiring mind, Most on here have enquiring minds, I consider the two posters between my posts are among them.
I'd hoped to get across the general impression that antibiotics and other medications are not "totally bad" just that they have the potential for severe down sides. I would not want to live without them but its good to have the ability to make up some of the deficit they create. Discovering what underlays modern health issues is getting somewhere towards reducing their impact. Given the opportunity and funding as well as the availability, I would have all door handles and similar surfaces covered in copper then we would not need as many antibiotics as we currently use. It would matter way less if someone left the bathroom without washing their hands. Pre covid while waiting for someone I did an observational study the result was appalling and they say boys are worse, I don't believe it.
As for the indigenous microbiome.- Here in the UK we have several science programs, on the bbc and Channel 4 which are held to account for their scientific accountability, unlike in some other countries. These programs have shown in their relevant diet related output have shown "an indigenous population" does not have the autoimmune conditions etc as we in the western world do. I did say, "overly processed foods" so if you eat as your ancestors did your microbiome would stand a better chance of be as healthy as theirs. Returning to my lavatorial tone from above its appalling the lavatorial microbes found on computer keyboards! Which is why I would have all door handles made in copper. If one had to choose then it would be hospital doors and high street doors when microbial infections would be radically reduced.
The programs, presumably, didn't conduct the studies demonstrating the assertion that indigenous populations following a traditional dietary pattern have better microbiome outcomes than both indigenous populations who don't, non-indigenous populations who do, and non-indigenous populations who don't. Comparing results between these four populations would be the only way to demonstrate that statement is "fact" rather than "opinion."
I don't know if we can know for a fact, either, than our ancestors had healthier microbiomes than we do. Some of them may have, but some of them lived in really unhealthy or insecure conditions that impacted their overall health.
I don't eat a traditional Irish pre-colonial diet (lots of grains and milk, some vegetables and fruit, some meat), I'm not sure that it's something I need to do for good health. Nor do I think my body can tell the difference between a healthfully constructed recreation of an Irish pre-colonial diet and a healthfully constructed recreation a diet of what someone else's ancestors ate. Given that there are very few people who are doing either, I don't think we could draw any conclusions about it resulting in better health outcomes or not.
What we have seen in studies that there do seem to be positive health outcomes with indigenous people adopting a more traditional dietary style, but it could be that is associated with it being a healthier diet overall. I don't know of anything demonstrating that it has to be that specific diet only (as opposed to one of the dozens of pre-colonial dietary patterns around the world) or that the improvements are microbiome-specific.
Yeah, that's sarcasm that attempts to counter this weird assumption people have about a golden past when we can demonstrably show so many things that were less healthy about people back then. People can't seem to grasp that maybe not dying at 30 of tuberculosis is one way to see a lot more cancer cases when people live to be 60, 70, or 80.
You could have an amazing microbiome and still die of an infectious disease, poor nutrition, or an accident. We do know that our health is generally better than a lot of our ancestors, but a microbiome is just part of health. That's why I think we don't have enough information to judge.
But I agree -- if I had the choice between living in wide swaths of the human past and now, I would choose now. If I get a bacterial infection, there's a good chance it can be treated. If my appendix decides to go, I've got a good chance of surviving it. If I get cancer, there are plausible treatment options.4 -
Not having read the entire thread, but if your digestive system is working, no constipation, no loose stools, and you are getting 30-60 g of fiber per day, then your microbiome is probably OK. Having sufficient fiber is very helpful and important mainly to feed the microbes. If they are happy, your gut will be happy. DR. Martin Blaser's book The Hidden Microbes will be a great read if you are interested in how many ways your microbiome influences your health and entire body.2
-
Reading this thread with some interest. I have had a huge interest in the human microbiome and I've worked with startup companies as an Executive Recruiter for many years (I've helped well over 25 company grow from inception, at least 3 now are over a billion dollars).
Because my wife's health years ago (she had Fibromyalgia), I started reading religiously about the human microbiome. My main focus in recruiting is actually construction and building products, but a few years ago, I started really going after Microbiome Therapeutics as a targeted niche'. I'm starting to make many inroads now. There are general practice life science recruiters out there, but few that specifically focus on Microbiome therapeutics/R&D. When I began to focus on it, there were only a few jobs in that area. Now, there are 100s weekly. It's one of the most rapid growing areas, not only for startups (where I focus), but there are divisions cropping up for all the larger big pharma companies.
They have made some significant breakthroughs in the science. But it is very hard to manipulate the microbiome and most changes take long term commitments and dietary changes. Fecal transplants, controversial but very effective, seem to have the quickest impact, but are very, very hard to get regulator approval for by the FDA. And it's not clear the impact is long lasting.
Just a few observations -- some won't like to hear this and likely will dismiss it. But there's more indication every day that the mucosal lining can be manipulated for health. Going gluten free does help tremendously and so does cranberry extract. Eating 30 plants a week helps generally. People that eat 30 plants a week (any sources) will generally have a more diverse and healthier microbiome). It's not that hard to do, but variety in the diet helps tremendously. Alcohol, for some, has a nearly immediate negative impact for inflammation. When the sample the microbiome the next day after drinking it's very negatively impacted (sorry wine lobby!). Probiotics nearly useless. There are some exceptions, though. B Breve has been recently found to seriously improve early dementia. There are many, many companies working on improving GABA inside the microbiome, because they found out it feeds on bacteria that everyone who is anxious or depressed seems to lack. Seaweed quickly improves the microbiome and there are very few things that do. Mushrooms seem to have a slower but positive benefit (and so do some mushroom supplements). A vegan or plant based diet changes, over time, the makeup of the microbiome. Fiber is fantastic. Oats are great. Inulin is very good for you, but you have to take it slow. Antibiotics are awful for your microbiome. Takes a long time to recover from one round of antibiotics (I'm not anti medicine, just stating from what I'm being told).
I'm talking to at least one drug discovery company (creating components for much larger, well established companies) that are concentrating on metabolites, for signaling, that have direct influences on the gut. They all readily admit that eating more fiber and a plant based diet would dramatically help people (getting rid of the traditional Western Diet), but that people want a pill and you likely won't change human behavior/opinions. So they are working on finding these metabolites, that in large volumes, dramatically can influence the microbiome. They have found some. But here's the issue -- once you stop taking them, like probiotics, your microbiome will likely just go right back to what it was prior. Longer term changes mean dietary changes/commitment. That's why it's not an easy fix and hard to get funding for doing it. One company is working on a device that measures/analyzes your microbiome every time you go to the potty. That's being created by a guy who is one of the pioneers in the field. The idea is if you eat something and your microbiome is generally impacted in a negative way (and they are finding out more and more what is correlated with a good or unhealthy microbiome every day), you now have information/data to go off of. If it improves, you have a diet log of what helped it improve, no matter how little.
Is it a slowly developing field/science? Absolutely. But that's not a bad thing. One drug CEO once said (related to the microbiome) that is was a minor miracle, before they knew about the influence of the microbiome, that they could come up with drugs that actually worked. Because it's an incredible influence on drug interactions and successes (and failures).5 -
Whenever someone starts going on and on about "gut health" and they aren't a proctologist, they are a quack selling snake oil.2
-
Fit_Chef_NE wrote: »Whenever someone starts going on and on about "gut health" and they aren't a proctologist, they are a quack selling snake oil.
Why would you word a post in a way to make it a false statement?0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Fit_Chef_NE wrote: »Whenever someone starts going on and on about "gut health" and they aren't a proctologist, they are a quack selling snake oil.
Why would you word a post in a way to make it a false statement?
I have more of an issue with the message than the format. It's the old way of thinking.
A Proctologist is just an a-hole doc that operates from the colon to the *kitten*. Gastroenterologist would be more on target, but even they are studying the Microbiome with new enthusiasm.
Giliad, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZenica, Chugai, Astellas -- these are all big Pharma companies with major investments in the Microbiome space. And their R&D leaders are generally Microbiologists, Computational Biologists, Geneticists with PhDs. Some of the brightest scientists being produced in the US. Not Proctologists though, for sure.0 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Fit_Chef_NE wrote: »Whenever someone starts going on and on about "gut health" and they aren't a proctologist, they are a quack selling snake oil.
Why would you word a post in a way to make it a false statement?
I have more of an issue with the message than the format. It's the old way of thinking.
A Proctologist is just an a-hole doc that operates from the colon to the *kitten*. Gastroenterologist would be more on target, but even they are studying the Microbiome with new enthusiasm.
Giliad, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZenica, Chugai, Astellas -- these are all big Pharma companies with major investments in the Microbiome space. And their R&D leaders are generally Microbiologists, Computational Biologists, Geneticists with PhDs. Some of the brightest scientists being produced in the US. Not Proctologists though, for sure.
Thanks for your report from the front lines. Many people may not understand how expensive it is to get to the bottom of this new area in human health. COVID-19 has put the human immune system in the spotlight for sure. We know the T cells are getting a lot of attention today.
The conference speaker below mentions our T cell immunity comes 100% from our gut microbiome. He lived from childhood with a potbelly and changed his focus in life after learning why. I rate him as very knowledgeable on his subject .
https://youtu.be/SRdEEC4i_3w
I notice with Chrome I have to highlight the link and tell it to go to the link to play his presentation.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions