Gut Bacteria Overgrowth, Regardless Of Type, Causes Obesity

Discussion in 'Scientific Studies' started by haidut, Nov 2, 2015.

  1. haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    17,022
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    This study should be shown to any nutrition "coach" or doctor advocating probiotics and "healthy gut bacteria". As the study eloquently shows, overgrowth of gut bacteria is a causal factor of obesity and liver damage, and it does not matter what kind you have. I guess having C. Difficile is slightly worse than having something else, but it's still going to ruin metabolism and liver. Another major point is that it is precisely the soluble fiber that so many "gurus" recommend that serves as food for gut bacteria and causes de-novo lipogenesis and liver disease through its metabolites like SCFA. Unfortunately, in its desire to please the alternative crowd, the food industry has been adding soluble fibers like pectin to pretty much any packaged food, especially yogurt. Finally, while the study does not mention endotoxin by name, I think everybody can make the connection.

    http://news.psu.edu/story/378025/2015/1 ... te%20Today
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 311500515X

    "...While it's true that neither people nor mice can digest plant-derived fiber, their gut bacteria can readily ferment the fibers and then release them as energy-rich short-chain fatty acids, such as acetic acid. Once they reach the liver, these compounds convert into lipids and add to fat deposits that could potentially lead to the development of metabolic syndrome, especially in people and mice lacking toll-like receptor 5 (TLR5)."

    "...In the current study, published today (Oct. 29) in the journal Cell Metabolism, the researchers found a link between unchecked bacterial fermentation, short-chain fatty acids and increased liver lipids -- which can cause non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, leading to liver damage. They also found that overconsumption of dietary fiber may have adverse consequences in mice with compromised TLR5 function and gut bacterial overgrowth."
     
  2. Kasper

    Kasper Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2013
    Messages:
    671
    Gender:
    Male
    @haidut

    "As the study eloquently shows, overgrowth of gut bacteria is a causal factor of obesity and liver damage, and it does not matter what kind you have."

    Taking antibiotics in infancy is also associated with obesity. Strange no? Maybe we need some "good" bacteria, to make sure we don't overgrow bacteria. I'm still not convinced by Ray Peat's and your argument about this.
     
  3. narouz

    narouz Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Messages:
    4,429
    I'm not a health guru or a health coach,
    but I confess :cry: to being open to the possibility
    that there may be such a thing as helpful gut bacteria.

    Put another way,
    I'm open to the idea that the best way to achieve/maintain a healthy gut microbiome
    might be to encourage/cultivate certain helpful bacteria
    and maybe even to feed those critters what they want in order to so encourage/cultivate them.

    I don't think this general notion is necessarily too far off from being Peatian.
    Listening, for example, to Peat in a radio interview,
    when asked about gut bacteria/probiotics/etc,
    he said something to this effect:
    We've evolved so that our gut health involves a balance,
    a balance of some bacteria vs other bacteria.

    If that is the case,
    is it obvious that the best approach to a healthy gut microbiome
    is to continually seek, through various tactics, to knock down all bacteria?
    Like with carrot, vinegar, bamboo, etc and up to pharma antibiotics?

    Or could there be another viable strategy to achieve balance,
    by using certain strains of helpful bacteria (helpful yeast too, perhaps)?
    If a healthy gut depends upon a balance--as Peat says--
    of some bacteria counter-balancing other bacteria,
    then what is so unthinkable about probiotic/prebiotic (foods for good bacteria) intervention strategy?

    I'm not arguing for such an approach as a slam-dunk Believer.
    I'm just saying I am open to such strategies.
    (Indeed I've tried some on myself, and
    though I confess my experimental method leaves a lot to be desired :lol: ,
    I have seen some positive results.)

    Now getting back to the quote at the top of this page:
    "...overgrowth of gut bacteria is a causal factor of obesity and liver damage..."
    Most of the time we tend to think of causality running the other way, don't we?
    We think that if a liver is fatty or damaged,
    that gut problems are to be expected.
    But what if it is the other way around?
    What if disruptions/imbalances in the gut
    lead to problems in the liver....?
     
  4. OP
    haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    17,022
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    Peat has said this many times and I think the evidence is pretty clear - gut issues lead to liver issues. He even said in one of his articles that people with IBD have several times higher risk of cirrhosis and liver cancer. So, when I said it in my post it was meant as a confirmation of his opinion rather than as a novel suggestion. Whatever toxins gets absorbed by the colon go back to the liver through the portal vein and if liver is working well it excretes these toxins. However, chronic overproduction of endotoxin and other crap we eat and gets undigested to the colon can slowly damage the liver over time. A person can even get acute hepatic failure from too much endotoxin.
    Also, if you know of a beneficial mechanism through which gut bacteria acts please send me some references. I have been struggling to find evidence disproving Peat's ideas on gut bacteria and so far I am empty-handed. Combined with the study on essentiality of gut bacteria for serotonin production the case against gut bacteria is looking rather strong right now:):
     
  5. Lightbringer

    Lightbringer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2014
    Messages:
    233
    In a recent interview I do remember the Herb doctor asking about resistant starch which Peat was not in favor of. However, I think a caller asked about some strain of probiotics which Peat seemed to be ok with - will listen in to the interview again to hear what was said..
     
  6. YuraCZ

    YuraCZ Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2015
    Messages:
    674
    pls link to this recent interview. :)
     
  7. narouz

    narouz Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Messages:
    4,429
    Such studies may exist, I'll keep my eyes open.
    But what I was getting at in my earlier post was a bit different, more basic perhaps.

    Peat has said a healthy gut depends on a balancing act between different kinds of bacteria.
    (I mean, if stipulated we can't live in a germ-free lab.)
    If that is the case,
    then Peat would seem to accept the necessary presence of some amount of gut bacteria.
    The question then becomes:
    is there a way to influence/cultivate a certain desirable balance of bacteria
    which will result in a relatively clean and well-functioning gut?

    In other words,
    we as Peatians usually think of maintaining good gut health
    by consistently killing/removing bacteria by carrot, etc.
    And by starving them.
    And by, maybe, taking tetracycline or minocycline, etc.
    But maybe that same lower bacteria state
    can be achieved by helping along the natural bacteria vs bacteria balancing act
    Peat accepts as healthy...?
     
  8. nograde

    nograde Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    133
    Acetic acid as the culprit for fatty liver? Then what about vinegar some of us use to get rid of bacteria in the first place?
     
  9. Lightbringer

    Lightbringer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2014
    Messages:
    233
    Help me out here.. Do you remember the interview where they briefly touched on resistant starch? Hope I wasn't high on something and imagined it :crazy:
     
  10. brandonk

    brandonk Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    145
    Agree with narouz here. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3859987/)

    A quick search leads to Ray Peat saying that yogurt that "isn't acidic" (which contains the gram-positive facultative aerobes typically called "healthy") is "similar to cottage cheese and is safe":
    Obviously, gram-negative bacteria that make endotoxin should be avoided, along with a lot of the dangerous gram-positive anaerobes.

    PS. As much as I wish it were true, I can see no basis in the abstract of this study for any general claim broader than the one that the authors make regarding TLR5-deficient (T5KO) mice. And worse, even that claim is based on the authors' dubious assumptions about the genetics of TLR5-deficient (T5KO) mice. The typical hype to get more funding.
     
  11. brandonk

    brandonk Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    145
    I think you might mean this one:
    viewtopic.php?style=14&f=73&t=5774
     
  12. Lightbringer

    Lightbringer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2014
    Messages:
    233
    Probably it was reading Peat's comment rather than something I heard him say :lol: :
    viewtopic.php?f=3&t=266&p=104781&hilit=probiotic#p104781

     
  13. tara

    tara Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2014
    Messages:
    10,263
    Gender:
    Female
    I was wondering about the vinegar, too.
     
  14. Giraffe

    Giraffe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,749
    They did not talk about resistant starch here, but I think it fits.

    Digestion and emotion, KMUD, january 2015

    RP: "People have experimented with even killing the lactobacillus and in itself, even when it's dead, it has a very definite anti-inflammatory effect in the intestine."

    RP: "I think that the interactions of the intestinal bacteria are too complicated to divide them neatly into beneficial and harmful. In the germ-free animals, they've done experiments with introducing a single species of lactobacillus, and even the supposedly beneficial bacteria will make the germ-free animal susceptible to injury that it wasn't susceptible to before. So, it's the context and interaction of the different bacteria, and generally the healthier a person is, the more sterile their small intestine is."
     
  15. mmartian

    mmartian Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2012
    Messages:
    32
    I gained like 30lbs in the past two years I think from not-properly-dissolved gelatin feeding bacteria and initializing the cascade of inflammation leading to obesity.

    Haidut, how can one reverse abdominal fat by dealing with bacteria? Carrots alone can't do the trick.
     
  16. Peata

    Peata Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    3,402
    Gender:
    Female
    Yeah, that ever-important context.

    What if optimal IS a sterile gut.

    But because so many have less than great health, then having certain bacteria is serving some "emergency" purpose. I guess similar to how raised NO or cortisol is a sort of stop-gap if the body needs it. It doesn't mean we should have the bacteria, but having the "good" kind if it's unavoidable to have any at all, is better than overrun with bad.
     
  17. onioneyedox

    onioneyedox Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2012
    Messages:
    108
    I think most of the pro-probiotic people aren't trying to get as much as possible of bacteria, but rather to balance the species so that they control each other. I'm not sure but I believe there is usually overgrowth of yeast, bifidobacteria or lactobacillus rather than of diverse population.

    Probiotics probably are not good or needed in long term. But I'm thinking there might be some benefits in small amount of prebiotics, so that the obscure species can limit the stuff that lives on simpler sugars/starches ( thegutinstitute.com stuff). As well as limiting the general growth with antibacterial things such as carrots. Or even antibiotics. Maybe when metabolism is high the body can control the population by itself, but for me at the moment it seems that many are subject to the bacteria rather than other way around (or symbiosis) so guidance and limitation is needed.
     
  18. narouz

    narouz Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Messages:
    4,429
    Even here, lot to wonder about.
    "So, it's the context and interaction of the different bacteria, and generally the healthier a person is, the more sterile their small intestine is."
    So, is a person healthier because of, say, getting enough protein, nutrients, light, etc,
    and that in turn produces a more sterile intestine?
    or
    Does a person--somehow or another, diet, bacteria bearing foods, parents, breastfeeding, whatever!?--achieve a favorable gut bacteria balance,
    which makes for a more sterile intestine, which in turn allows for a healthier person....?
     
  19. Sea

    Sea Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2014
    Messages:
    164
    I think it is the former. Most can reach a somewhat sterile intestine via antibiotic usage, even with poor overall health yet notice a huge benefit which Ray Peat has often spoken about. I also notice that many of the Ray Peat supplements produce a similar effect to an antibiotic via the increasing of metabolism. Caffeine, methylene blue, niacinamide, aspirin, activated charcoal, and vitamin A have had effects similar to antibiotics in my experience.
     
  20. brandonk

    brandonk Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    145
    He seemed to say the "small intestine". It's been noted since the 60s that the small intestine should be, and typically is, relatively sterile.

    http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.asp ... eid=660202

    The controversy seems to arise over whether the large intestine should also be relatively sterile, as in breast-fed newborns. The healthy breast-fed newborn has a large intestine populated by relatively few strains of bifidobacteria.

    https://books.google.com/books?id=Yw1Wq ... &q&f=false
     
Loading...