As we are well aware, probiotics are promoted as a cure-all remedy for most any type of GI distress. And yet whenever their use is evaluated under controlled conditions (such as in a controlled trial where they are compared with a placebo), they typically don't seem to cut the mustard.
In a recent trial with babies suffering from colic, not only did the probiotic strain that was used fail to bring relief or improvement, but it actually seemed to make the suffering worse. Where have we heard that before?
Note that there were no apparent benefits from the use of the probiotic. And note that feeding the babies a proper diet (namely, their mother's milk) overcame the negative effects of the probiotic supplement. No surprises there — babies evolved to begin life digesting their mother's milk, not some probiotic supplement.After the researchers took into account other factors, such as age and the amount of crying at the study's start, the probiotic group cried or fussed about 49 minutes more a day than the placebo group.
The increased fussing occurred only in the formula-fed babies. The probiotic did not affect crying or fussing time if babies were entirely breast-fed.
There was also no improvement in sleep, maternal mental health, family or infant functioning in the probiotic group, she found.
What puzzles me is why some people seem to feel that humans in any life stage have somehow evolved to benefit from probiotics. Why would that be the case? Looking back at the archaeological record, if the evidence is there, I'm overlooking it. In general, the less bacteria and other unnecessary debris in our diet, including pathogens, the healthier we are.
Am I wrong?More Evidence That Probiotics Won't Ease Baby's Colic
Tex
