Hi,
I saw this article, but I don't know if this is a reliable website or not?
The research shows that if we have a low-fiber diet, our gut bacteria will start eating the mucus of the lining of our intestines.
http://labblog.uofmhealth.org/lab-repor ... -for-fiber
Lilja
Fiber
Moderators: Rosie, Stanz, Jean, CAMary, moremuscle, JFR, Dee, xet, Peggy, Matthew, Gabes-Apg, grannyh, Gloria, Mars, starfire, Polly, Joefnh
Hi Lilja,
That's an interesting article. Thanks for the link. Yes, Cell is indeed a prestigious medical journal (at least it used to be), but those researchers, and especially the joker who made this comment quoted in the article you cited, have a vivid imagination. They should be producing Sci-Fi movies, not wasting their time in research labs.
But here's why that claim is a sham:
The researchers began with gut bacteria-free mice and implanted 14 bacterial species so that the progress of the bacteria could be followed. They noted that on a low-fiber diet, bacteria that depend on fiber for survival, cannot survive normally. They noted that in desperation, one of the species attempted to survive by ingesting mucus.
However, in the real world, the environment in the gut is governed by the rule of survival of the fittest. Bacterial species that are in survival mode obviously are not thriving. And gut bacteria that are not able to thrive in the gut are soon crowded out by species that are able to thrive on the current diet. In other words, gut bacteria that cannot thrive, typically die because they are unable to compete for space. They do not "eat you", as speculated by the article, because their eating days are limited, and so are their numbers.
The bacteria that the article claims will "eat you" is named in this quote from the original article in Cell:
How many people have you ever heard of who have become sick because of an overgrowth of C. rodentium? None, right? And the reason why is because C. rodentium is a bacterium specific to the gut of mice (that can even be seen in their name). So while I have no doubt that this research is almost surely accurate for mice, unless you or I have a mouse hidden somewhere in our family tree, we are not likely to have C. rodentium in our gut.
Lest someone decides to point out that C. rodentium in mice is similar to E. coli in the human gut, yes,I realize that this species is considered to be a murine analogue for studies of colitis in humans. But the claims regarding the implications for humans made in the article cited go far beyond the limits of good science. It's mostly smoke-and-mirrors-based sensationalism.
At least that's the way I see it. But maybe I'm just biased — I like to see actual facts, not misleading sensationalism.
Tex
That's an interesting article. Thanks for the link. Yes, Cell is indeed a prestigious medical journal (at least it used to be), but those researchers, and especially the joker who made this comment quoted in the article you cited, have a vivid imagination. They should be producing Sci-Fi movies, not wasting their time in research labs.
Really? First of all, gut mucus is not "me", nor is it "you". Gut mucus is the gut equivalent of snot in the nose. Bacteria can eat all the snot or mucus they want, it macht nichts to me. Unless serious dehydration is present, the human gut can produce more mucus than bacteria are ever likely to be able to consume.“The lesson we’re learning from studying the interaction of fiber, gut microbes and the intestinal barrier system is that if you don’t feed them, they can eat you,”
But here's why that claim is a sham:
The researchers began with gut bacteria-free mice and implanted 14 bacterial species so that the progress of the bacteria could be followed. They noted that on a low-fiber diet, bacteria that depend on fiber for survival, cannot survive normally. They noted that in desperation, one of the species attempted to survive by ingesting mucus.
However, in the real world, the environment in the gut is governed by the rule of survival of the fittest. Bacterial species that are in survival mode obviously are not thriving. And gut bacteria that are not able to thrive in the gut are soon crowded out by species that are able to thrive on the current diet. In other words, gut bacteria that cannot thrive, typically die because they are unable to compete for space. They do not "eat you", as speculated by the article, because their eating days are limited, and so are their numbers.
The bacteria that the article claims will "eat you" is named in this quote from the original article in Cell:
http://www.cell.com/action/showMethods? ... %2931464-7Dietary fiber deprivation, together with a fiber-deprived, mucus-eroding microbiota, promotes greater epithelial access and lethal colitis by the mucosal pathogen, Citrobacter rodentium.
How many people have you ever heard of who have become sick because of an overgrowth of C. rodentium? None, right? And the reason why is because C. rodentium is a bacterium specific to the gut of mice (that can even be seen in their name). So while I have no doubt that this research is almost surely accurate for mice, unless you or I have a mouse hidden somewhere in our family tree, we are not likely to have C. rodentium in our gut.
Lest someone decides to point out that C. rodentium in mice is similar to E. coli in the human gut, yes,I realize that this species is considered to be a murine analogue for studies of colitis in humans. But the claims regarding the implications for humans made in the article cited go far beyond the limits of good science. It's mostly smoke-and-mirrors-based sensationalism.
At least that's the way I see it. But maybe I'm just biased — I like to see actual facts, not misleading sensationalism.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
Unlike politicians, as a group, medical professionals tend to avoid criticizing other medical professionals. For one thing, that would make the profession look bad. And most outsiders either don't understand the details of most research well enough to feel confident enough to critique it, or they are not interested.
The research itself is fine. It's the inappropriate conclusions and claims made about the research that leave a lot to be desired. Medical research news releases are becoming more and more like political press releases — full of hype.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.