NYT: How Microbes Defend and Define Us
Dr. Alexander Khoruts had run out of options.
In 2008, Dr. Khoruts, a gastroenterologist at the University of Minnesota, took on a patient suffering from a vicious gut infection of Clostridium difficile. She was crippled by constant diarrhea, which had left her in a wheelchair wearing diapers. Dr. Khoruts treated her with an assortment of antibiotics, but nothing could stop the bacteria. His patient was wasting away, losing 60 pounds over the course of eight months. “She was just dwindling down the drain, and she probably would have died,” Dr. Khoruts said.
Dr. Khoruts decided his patient needed a transplant. But he didn’t give her a piece of someone else’s intestines, or a stomach, or any other organ. Instead, he gave her some of her husband’s bacteria.
Read the full article in The New York Times HERE.
"Gut Bacteria Might Guide The Workings Of Our Minds"
NPR Radio Broadcast aired Dec 5, 2013
http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=244526773&m=245913171
Posted by: SarahW | December 10, 2013 at 10:14 AM
Fascinating post and discussion! This topic goes directly to the heart of the foundation upon which most of Western “orthodox” medicine is practiced today.
Here are two links from wikipedia to inform the discussion,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immune_system
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacteriophage
Here’s a simple Q&A: Who said this? They have gained some notoriety and been labeled as a Quack at Stephen Barrett’s website, yet to my way of thinking there is a compelling logic to his answer, in quotes below. Those of you who recognize who I’m referring too are fairly well read on this topic. No current theory in medicine today should be beyond reconsideration, including Pasteur's Germ Theory. No one should ever be criticized for questioning “conventional wisdom”. Sometimes the conventional wisdom is wrong.
Do you think it is possible to determine in advance (using medical tests or clinical examination) who is most likely to react / which individuals are predisposed to very serious reactions to vaccines?
“Yes, however, vaccines are not addressing the common cause of disease and disorder in human physiology. It is not the germs causing disease and death and chronic illness, it is the bodies common, generic, non-specific immune response and electrostatic instability of blood flow that is causing disease, and many states of autoimmunity, including multiple sclerosis, and much much more. We do not need to vaccinate for all the pathogens on earth, since all pathogens are inducing disease and death and disability via a singular common set of mechanism. It is these mechanism that need to be addressed on an as needed basis. This is now do -able it always was. Louis Pasteur’s germ theory was just that, a theory. His contemporaries, Dr Antoine Bechamp and Dr Rudolph Virchow were closer to the truth as to the cause of disease. Remarkably, this means that much of what we are doing in western medicine is wrong, we have been practicing medicine in a state of confusing cause and effect and causing more harm, globally, than good – for over 200 years!”
Posted by: patrons99 | July 19, 2010 at 08:42 AM
Anyone have experience either with fecal transplantation or bacterial surveying of autistic children?
I have known people who have done this yes. But the host person is not just some random person. The person normally fellow child has to have a clean organic diet, really good functioning immune system. Not just any kid like they just used her husband which I don't think is prudent because the "host" needs to be super clean first.
I have never done it with my own son as the persons doing this are not doctors and I certainly was too scared to do it. But if doctors started to do this practice which I have known about for many years now, I might feel more comfortable. But again the host child needs to have a very clean system and very healthy immune system. So important.
Posted by: Kristie Burchit | July 17, 2010 at 05:56 PM
People being responsible in their use of antibiotics won't do much good if antibiotics are being used by the truckload by corporate animal farms.
Posted by: MinorityView | July 17, 2010 at 04:44 PM
Amy, RN. Your points are well taken. My point was that the NY Times article made use of the term "pathogens", not specifically, bacteria, or viruses. The method of attack for bacteria and viruses are quite different, it is true. Overwhelming our blood streams with either, is unwise, whether the pathogen is attenuated (as reassortment can occur), or not.
Posted by: Not an MD | July 17, 2010 at 11:54 AM
Amy,
You make some valid points. But tell me this. How does bathing oneself in Purell have anything to do with protection against superbugs? If naturally occurring bacteria truly are a symbiotic part of our existence, maybe we ought to let ourselves get dirty once in a while.
Posted by: Mark Blaxill | July 17, 2010 at 10:08 AM
In response to 'Not an MD' let me start by saying that I am NOT pro-vaccine at all. I think the vaccine schedule is recklessly dangerous and the cause of most cases of autism.
However, there is a huge difference between bacteria and viruses. Most vaccines are developed to kill viruses. This article is about bacteria.
Equating viruses and bacteria is like equating a sheet of music notation for the song 'Happy Birthday' with a full, live symphony orchestra performance of Beethoven's Ninth. The virus is a piece of DNA or RNA wrapped in a protein coat that is on the border of what we define as life. The bacteria is a fully developed cellular organism without which none of us would be alive.
And yes, many doctors are too quick to prescribe antibiotics. But then, many patients are too quick to ask for them. And American consumers buy anti-bacterial everything. All this does is teach pathogenic bacteria resistance.
You want to kill super-bugs? Clean with bleach, avoid antibiotics unless you know the infection is bacterial and take ALL the prescribed antibiotic you are given. And wash your hands, or use hand sanitizer, every time you come into your house from outside, even if you only went out to check the mail (that alone has been shown to reduce colds and flus by 50%).
To me, what is interesting about this article is what they didn't state. We are symbiotic organisms to a far greater degree than we used to believe. We are completely a part of this world, our own little walking ecosystem. The human body is comprised of groups of similar cells working together... and maybe the bacteria are just as fundamental and just as much US as our hearts, livers, or kidneys?
Posted by: Amy, RN | July 17, 2010 at 09:53 AM
This is not so new. I saw a report on this almost two years ago, because they have a high rate of success in treating C Difficile with it.
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/11/13/fecal-transplant.html
Posted by: Schwartz | July 16, 2010 at 10:35 PM
Forgive my ignorance...does fecal transplantation work in a similar manner as helminthic (worm) therapy?
Posted by: Jennifer Flinton | July 16, 2010 at 01:29 PM
The article says that fecal transplantation has been done a few times before; the new part is that they did a survey of the bacteria in her gut before and after.
Anyone have experience either with fecal transplantation or bacterial surveying of autistic children?
Posted by: Carol | July 16, 2010 at 11:34 AM
well I guess that explains why many of our children were "self-medicating" - if you know what I mean! :P
Posted by: Janet Sheehan | July 16, 2010 at 10:22 AM
My grandfather was performing colonic implants using acidophilus bacteria starting in the 1920s and continuing through the early 1950s. Sigh. These folks are so darn slow they might as well be sloths.
Posted by: MinorityView | July 16, 2010 at 08:48 AM
From the NY Times article:
"One way the immune system fights pathogens is with inflammation. Too much inflammation can be harmful, so we have immune cells that produce inflammation-reducing signals."
For me, the question that begs to be asked is, "Why are we shooting our kids up with so many vaccines with so many different antigens in a single day?" It goes against common sense and logic. Are we trying to create an overwhelming inflammatory response in a baby? Are we trying to harm our babies? Don't they have enough germs upon their birth to deal with naturally, as is proclaimed in this article?
The other thing that continues to confound me is that doctors of medicine are so quick to prescribe antibiotics, when it is entirely possible that probiotics would be of much greater benefit. Are not probiotics what many of us use to help our children overcome their gut problems? I know I use them for my children and for myself.
Using fecal matter from a healthy person to properly populate and overtake the messed up gut flora of an unhealthy person. What a concept.
Posted by: Not an MD | July 16, 2010 at 07:55 AM
This is a prime example of what "science" is capable of doing .. but ... unfortunately .. as things stand today .. it will be only a matter of time before corporations file "patents" making them "owners" of any microbes found to be beneficial in fighting off diseases.
Efforts should be underway to make certain that corporations cannot do to "microbes" what Monsanto has already done to food .. which is .. patent "genetically modified seeds" making Monsanto virtually "owners" of all corn produced in world.
Indeed, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that applications to own the "patent" on the microbes described in this article have already been applied for.
Posted by: Bob Moffitt | July 16, 2010 at 07:18 AM