Why Is There So Much Soluble Fibre In Human Breast Milk?

[Kasper]

@Suikerbuik Thanks for your great post. That is the kind of critique that only helps this discussion forward :)

I think he is just smart and knows what to tell and what not.. I'd not dare to say that it is a blindspot since carrots, charcoal, antibiotics etc. all minimize the burden of a disfunctional microbiome.

Yeah, he speaks about how to minimize the burden. But I would like him to talk about how to get a healthy balanced gut flora, so you don't need to minimize the burden. He talks about the benefits of a sterile gut, and antibiotics. I don't think anitbiotics is going to help you with getting a balanced microbiome, only help you minimize the burden.

It is unknown however, if a disfunctional microbiome can be cured with additional fiber, I highly doubt. Being honest here, I think fiber is harmful when there is a disfunctional microbiome.

Didn't you talk about the benefits of fermentable fiber yourself (resistant starch in patotoes) and how those short chain fatty acids can help improve metabolism ?

I think you could get the same argument to sugar btw. And this is the argument many people give against sugar. If you have disfunctional microbiome, pathogens can use this sugar as fuel, and increase serotonin and endotoxin like crazy. I believe this is one of the reason not every one reacts well to lots of sugar/ice cream.

I believe that fermentable fibers have the tendency to feed the good bacteria, and sugar can feed bad bacteria in an unbalanced micriobiome. I don't have much scientific reasons for this, but I do percieve/think/act.

Percieve: If I eat very much plain sugar or ice cream, and very little fermentable fiber (potatoes in my case), the first thing I notice something going wrong is with my teeth. I will get a layer of dental plaque, sticky bacteria. If I continue such a diet, I will feel a slight discomfort in my gut. And after that my poop will get worse. I can see those sticky bacteria are not only on my teeth but also in my poop. My poop will stick to the toilet. It will stick to my **** (needing a lot of paper to get it off my ****).

Think: I think these sticky bacterias, which seem to increase if I take very much sugar, are the worst kind. As I can clearly observe them in my mouth and in my poop, I think that my whole digestive tract will be filled with those bacteria. I think it is hard for the immune system to get rid of them, they form biofilms, they are not just freely swimming around. Maybe a not totally rational argument, but sticky bacteria look, and feel gross. I think this is my body giving me a signal.

Percieve: If I take more fermentable fiber, which in my case is mainly potatoes, some onions, some fruit, supplementing inulin and physilium fiber. I don't get those sticky bacterias in my mouth and in my poop. I feel better in general and no discomfort in my gut. My poop looks cleaner, less gross. It doesn't stick to the toilet, it doesn't stick to my **** (I allmost need no toilet paper).

Think: I think these bacteria are the good guys. Just mainly intuition. Even if they are not totally good, I think the immune system can get rid of them easier, as they just freely swim around, instead of sticking together in biofilms.

Act: I don't eat insanely much sugar, I eat icecream allmost every day, just not too much. I eat a LOT of potatoes. I eat onions. Just starting to add some boabab.

 

[Amazoniac]

Is CSP male or female?

Sounds like a male in his 20s, no offense, just that young certainty/slight arrogance.
I like his posts though, he (?) barely filters himself and has always brutal honesty tonality to them. He's like that sound in our head that we try to shut due to fear but is there anyway in case you want to consider..

 

[Amazoniac]

Such_, whenever I read someone with the perceive, think, act motto; I recall your adaptation: perceived, thought and drowned themselves on gallons of the supplement. Haha!

 

[Amazoniac]

@Suikerbuik Thanks for your great post. That is the kind of critique that only helps this discussion forward :)

I think he is just smart and knows what to tell and what not.. I'd not dare to say that it is a blindspot since carrots, charcoal, antibiotics etc. all minimize the burden of a disfunctional microbiome.

Yeah, he speaks about how to minimize the burden. But I would like him to talk about how to get a healthy balanced gut flora, so you don't need to minimize the burden. He talks about the benefits of a sterile gut, and antibiotics. I don't think anitbiotics is going to help you with getting a balanced microbiome, only help you minimize the burden.

It is unknown however, if a disfunctional microbiome can be cured with additional fiber, I highly doubt. Being honest here, I think fiber is harmful when there is a disfunctional microbiome.

Didn't you talk about the benefits of fermentable fiber yourself (resistant starch in patotoes) and how those short chain fatty acids can help improve metabolism ?

I think you could get the same argument to sugar btw. And this is the argument many people give against sugar. If you have disfunctional microbiome, pathogens can use this sugar as fuel, and increase serotonin and endotoxin like crazy. I believe this is one of the reason not every one reacts well to lots of sugar/ice cream.

I believe that fermentable fibers have the tendency to feed the good bacteria, and sugar can feed bad bacteria in an unbalanced micriobiome. I don't have much scientific reasons for this, but I do percieve/think/act.

Percieve: If I eat very much plain sugar or ice cream, and very little fermentable fiber (potatoes in my case), the first thing I notice something going wrong is with my teeth. I will get a layer of dental plaque, sticky bacteria. If I continue such a diet, I will feel a slight discomfort in my gut. And after that my poop will get worse. I can see those sticky bacteria are not only on my teeth but also in my poop. My poop will stick to the toilet. It will stick to my **** (needing a lot of paper to get it off my ****).

Think: I think these sticky bacterias, which seem to increase if I take very much sugar, are the worst kind. As I can clearly observe them in my mouth and in my poop, I think that my whole digestive tract will be filled with those bacteria. I think it is hard for the immune system to get rid of them, they form biofilms, they are not just freely swimming around. Maybe a not totally rational argument, but sticky bacteria look, and feel gross. I think this is my body giving me a signal.

Percieve: If I take more fermentable fiber, which in my case is mainly potatoes, some onions, some fruit, supplementing inulin and physilium fiber. I don't get those sticky bacterias in my mouth and in my poop. I feel better in general and no discomfort in my gut. My poop looks cleaner, less gross. It doesn't stick to the toilet, it doesn't stick to my **** (I allmost need no toilet paper).

Think: I think these bacteria are the good guys. Just mainly intuition. Even if they are not totally good, I think the immune system can get rid of them easier, as they just freely swim around, instead of sticking together in biofilms.

Act: I don't eat insanely much sugar, I eat icecream allmost every day, just not too much. I eat a LOT of potatoes. I eat onions. Just starting to add some boabab.

I think that that type of sugar is digested too quickly to cause any trouble. Perhaps the dairy in ice cream?
I also think that biofilms are present in most of us, at least to some degree.
I'm just speculating here but plenty of dairy provides plenty of micronutrients for bacteria to form biofilms, especially if for some reason you cannot process it properly. Dental plaques are just an example of pboyliftinggravity successful biofilm formation, almost like an enamel. And since our mouth receives a constant supply of those nutrients, the risk is high for bacteria to develop biofilms in there.

 

[tara]

@Stuart,
Do you define the microbiome as all microbes except the parasitic ones? If you happen to currently have out of control salmonella, or campylobacter, or noro virus, or candida, or methanogenic archaea, etc, are they part of your microbiome, by your definition? What about all the gram-negative endotoxin-shedding bacteria? If you rule out all parasites as being part of the idealised microbiome, then you may be right about it being protective against parasites, but only circularly so. My understanding of the word is that it includes all the microbes in us, not just the human symbiants.

You are right that I am resistant to calling the microbiome and organ of the human body. It may be a fine metaphor in some ways. But I don't intend to participate in redefining the word. The microbes in my microbiome have their own DNA and their own purposes, which sometimes are helpful to my survival and capabilities, and sometimes not. They are not literally one of my organs. You can think of that way if you like, but expecting other people to use your new definitions of words doesn't seem reasonable to me.

 

[HDD]

Caller: On the last show, you had mentioned that tetracycline destroys harmful intestinal bacteria while preserving the good bacteria. Do we know that for sure? How does it selectively spare the "beneficial" bacteria? I've always heard there is a symbiotic relationship with certain intestinal bacteria that help to absorb certain nutrients. So, I'm assuming that would be considered a beneficial bacteria, if that is true...

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.

Caller: So, what do you think of the idea that certain nutrients are absorbed through the actions of so-called beneficial bacteria? Is that kind of a fallacy?

RP: Ya, I think it's...there's a little effect there, but I don't think it makes a big nutritional difference. The totally germ-free animals had extremely efficient digestive systems.

viewtopic.php?f=73&t=5774

 

[tara]

Nice find, HDD. :)

 

[narouz]

Nice find, HDD. :)

Yes indeed.
Thanks, HDD. :)

 

[schultz]

Here is a clip of Ray talking about Lactobacillus bacteria. It seems like if we are going to have - or have to have - bacteria in our gut, this type is a good one to have.

 

[narouz]

Interesting program on NPR this morning
about gut bacteria and mood.
Prozac in the Yogurt Aisle: Can Good Bacteria Chill Us Out.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt...e-yogurt-aisle-can-good-bacteria-chill-us-out

 

[Suikerbuik]

@Suikerbuik Thanks for your great post. That is the kind of critique that only helps this discussion forward :)

I think he is just smart and knows what to tell and what not.. I'd not dare to say that it is a blindspot since carrots, charcoal, antibiotics etc. all minimize the burden of a disfunctional microbiome.

Yeah, he speaks about how to minimize the burden. But I would like him to talk about how to get a healthy balanced gut flora, so you don't need to minimize the burden. He talks about the benefits of a sterile gut, and antibiotics. I don't think anitbiotics is going to help you with getting a balanced microbiome, only help you minimize the burden.

One the questions of the 21st century :P.

Yeah, though only if a permanent change (increase) in metabolism is not durable than indeed it is unlikely. This is also speculative of course, but still gives one hope. I mean speculative in a sense that because in progressed disease approx. 25% of the proteome is changed, at this point it is unknown why, but, extrapolating in a cell harboring 10s of thousands of proteins, it is quite worrisome and raises doubt that this can be reversed with the given interventions. Preliminary insight tell us that these proteins are mainly related to inflammatory pathways.

It is unknown however, if a disfunctional microbiome can be cured with additional fiber, I highly doubt. Being honest here, I think fiber is harmful when there is a disfunctional microbiome.

Didn't you talk about the benefits of fermentable fiber yourself (resistant starch in patotoes) and how those short chain fatty acids can help improve metabolism ?

When you're low in SCFA, increasing these is indeed going to be pro-metabolic. However adding in things like potato starch (no blame on real potatoes, they are just amazing!) may well put you over the edge. Personally I tolerate potatoes quite well, but fiber supplements or excess starch in the form of maize tortillas give me anxiety, night waking, coldness, etc. especially raw potato starch which I tried like 3 independent times in the past. It was just terrible and literally inflamed my whole body. The point is that fiber needs to be taken into context.

I think you could get the same argument to sugar btw. And this is the argument many people give against sugar. If you have disfunctional microbiome, pathogens can use this sugar as fuel, and increase serotonin and endotoxin like crazy. I believe this is one of the reason not every one reacts well to lots of sugar/ice cream.

Sure, true point. I’ve said this somewhere too I guess, but honey is usually least troublesome in that case and it could differ if you eat sugary things in the morning, afternoon or evening.

I believe that fermentable fibers have the tendency to feed the good bacteria, and sugar can feed bad bacteria in an unbalanced micriobiome. I don't have much scientific reasons for this, but I do percieve/think/act.

Percieve: If I eat very much plain sugar or ice cream, and very little fermentable fiber (potatoes in my case), the first thing I notice something going wrong is with my teeth. I will get a layer of dental plaque, sticky bacteria. If I continue such a diet, I will feel a slight discomfort in my gut. And after that my poop will get worse. I can see those sticky bacteria are not only on my teeth but also in my poop. My poop will stick to the toilet. It will stick to my **** (needing a lot of paper to get it off my ****).

Think: I think these sticky bacterias, which seem to increase if I take very much sugar, are the worst kind. As I can clearly observe them in my mouth and in my poop, I think that my whole digestive tract will be filled with those bacteria. I think it is hard for the immune system to get rid of them, they form biofilms, they are not just freely swimming around. Maybe a not totally rational argument, but sticky bacteria look, and feel gross. I think this is my body giving me a signal.

Percieve: If I take more fermentable fiber, which in my case is mainly potatoes, some onions, some fruit, supplementing inulin and physilium fiber. I don't get those sticky bacterias in my mouth and in my poop. I feel better in general and no discomfort in my gut. My poop looks cleaner, less gross. It doesn't stick to the toilet, it doesn't stick to my **** (I allmost need no toilet paper).

Another good point. The adhesiveness is probably a pathogenic property, one that may predispose to SIBO is my observation, but I’d like to find out more about this. This is the context I was referring to earlier. For some this is the case, for others it just isn’t. In the past when I tried FOS my poo seemed to get stickier, no idea about now though. It could also hint poor fat digestion e.g. liver function, another predisposing factor for a disturbed microbiome and increased gut permeability.

Think: I think these bacteria are the good guys. Just mainly intuition. Even if they are not totally good, I think the immune system can get rid of them easier, as they just freely swim around, instead of sticking together in biofilms.

Most are not considered pathogenic and our bodies help those that have more difficulties growing compared to a more pathogenic like species, but we still don't know what most of these are really doing.. We’ve evolved with them and the body seems to have learned how to 'culture' the least damaging or even the micro-organisms that may have benefits. But it that case it's still US that direct and not our microbiome imo.

Act: I don't eat insanely much sugar, I eat icecream allmost every day, just not too much. I eat a LOT of potatoes. I eat onions. Just starting to add some boabab.

Same here, I also try to not excessively eat 400gms of sugar. Fruits, honey some vegetables and a good portion of potatoes works best for me. But increasing fiber with especially supplements or raw onions increases fermentation, tension and clearly serotonin in my case, and is definitely not supportive for my productivity or general feeling!

I think that the interactions of the intestinal bacteria are too complicated to divide them neatly into beneficial and harmful

Could not have been said better I guess!

 

[sugar daddy]

great post HDD

 

[Such_Saturation]

@Suikerbuik Thanks for your great post. That is the kind of critique that only helps this discussion forward :)

I think he is just smart and knows what to tell and what not.. I'd not dare to say that it is a blindspot since carrots, charcoal, antibiotics etc. all minimize the burden of a disfunctional microbiome.

Yeah, he speaks about how to minimize the burden. But I would like him to talk about how to get a healthy balanced gut flora, so you don't need to minimize the burden. He talks about the benefits of a sterile gut, and antibiotics. I don't think anitbiotics is going to help you with getting a balanced microbiome, only help you minimize the burden.

It is unknown however, if a disfunctional microbiome can be cured with additional fiber, I highly doubt. Being honest here, I think fiber is harmful when there is a disfunctional microbiome.

Didn't you talk about the benefits of fermentable fiber yourself (resistant starch in patotoes) and how those short chain fatty acids can help improve metabolism ?

I think you could get the same argument to sugar btw. And this is the argument many people give against sugar. If you have disfunctional microbiome, pathogens can use this sugar as fuel, and increase serotonin and endotoxin like crazy. I believe this is one of the reason not every one reacts well to lots of sugar/ice cream.

I believe that fermentable fibers have the tendency to feed the good bacteria, and sugar can feed bad bacteria in an unbalanced micriobiome. I don't have much scientific reasons for this, but I do percieve/think/act.

Percieve: If I eat very much plain sugar or ice cream, and very little fermentable fiber (potatoes in my case), the first thing I notice something going wrong is with my teeth. I will get a layer of dental plaque, sticky bacteria. If I continue such a diet, I will feel a slight discomfort in my gut. And after that my poop will get worse. I can see those sticky bacteria are not only on my teeth but also in my poop. My poop will stick to the toilet. It will stick to my **** (needing a lot of paper to get it off my ****).

Think: I think these sticky bacterias, which seem to increase if I take very much sugar, are the worst kind. As I can clearly observe them in my mouth and in my poop, I think that my whole digestive tract will be filled with those bacteria. I think it is hard for the immune system to get rid of them, they form biofilms, they are not just freely swimming around. Maybe a not totally rational argument, but sticky bacteria look, and feel gross. I think this is my body giving me a signal.

Percieve: If I take more fermentable fiber, which in my case is mainly potatoes, some onions, some fruit, supplementing inulin and physilium fiber. I don't get those sticky bacterias in my mouth and in my poop. I feel better in general and no discomfort in my gut. My poop looks cleaner, less gross. It doesn't stick to the toilet, it doesn't stick to my **** (I allmost need no toilet paper).

Think: I think these bacteria are the good guys. Just mainly intuition. Even if they are not totally good, I think the immune system can get rid of them easier, as they just freely swim around, instead of sticking together in biofilms.

Act: I don't eat insanely much sugar, I eat icecream allmost every day, just not too much. I eat a LOT of potatoes. I eat onions. Just starting to add some boabab.

vice versa for me

Guys let's talk about the benefits of our liver flukes. I feel we've been too judgemental with them.

 

[Stuart]

great post HDD

Yes indeed. That caller asked the very question I wanted put to Dr. Peat.
@Kasper
Did you know that the baobab powder you are using is virtually the way it comes out of the baobab pods? A fine dry powder held together by a thin matrix. It's called 'a producer's dream'. Amazing watching video of traditional living humans (like the Hadza) cracking a baobab pod and eating the 'slightly sweet chalk' inside.

@ Tara
Pathogenic bacteria surround us. One of the functions of a healthy microbiome is to keep pathogens from making us ill. Only one mind you. You can have a dysfunctional unhealthy liver in the same way as you can have a dysfunctional unhealthy microbiome. And although the entire human microbiome includes skin microbiota as well, this discussion is about the bacterial populations that are found throughout the digestive tract. Dr. Peat seems to think the fewer bacteria you have in your S.I. the better. It is been established incontrovertibly that this is false. I'm still not sure what he thinks the bacterial population in the colon should be. The numbers of bacteria there are prodigiously greater. I wonder if he's in favour of making your colon 'as sterile as possible' too?

'Regardless, the very notion of even aspiring to be germ free anywhere in your digestive tract ( which Dr. Peat clearly advocates) strikes me as not only impossible but nutritionally unwise. That ship sailed over 3 million years ago.

All the best everyone. It's been a very interesting experience. And my apologies for ruffling a few feathers.

I'll continue to keep an eye on what people are posting if that's O.K. But the people who think I'm a troll will be very relieved to hear I won't be commenting further. The Peat quote HDD posted makes it abundantly clear that Dr. Peat see's the very notion of a healthy gut microbiota as an oxymoron. And this is The Ray Peat Forum after all.

 

[Amazoniac]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GSzCBv1-qA

 

[EnoreeG]

Suik, I respect what you have to say, but the method leaves a little to be desired. I suggest fairness, and behaving by the same rules as you expect others to behave by. By my count, Stuart's claims are backed up by more NCBI studies than others' here.

It is unknown however, if a disfunctional microbiome can be cured with additional fiber, I highly doubt. Being honest here, I think fiber is harmful when there is a disfunctional microbiome. The emphasis on enhanced metabolic rate resulting in increased stomach acid, enzyme production, bile, motility, phagocytosis, etc. is more easy and straightforward and changes the microbiome in a profound positive way.

Any studies you can provide?

What I find most lacking in "the microbiome support hypothesis" is proper resources. Stuart has some very polished sayings like "by controlling the germs in the colon you prevent overgrowth in the small intestine", but I find it disappointing that it is mostly without additional sources, and if so it's those general sites instead of ncbi/ pubmed articles.

"Those general sites." You mean like a Peat site?

My experience and feelings are neatly described by Peat, questions I've been pondering about for years suddenly became obvious. It's a model that agrees with my experiences and therefore far closer to my nature and reality than giving credit to a microbiome in a disbalanced and stressed enviroment.

So If Peat says it, and you agree with it, and it's closer to your "nature and reality", then it needs no NCBI support. Sadly, just a double standard.

Peating is by no means an end point though, so no offense Stuart or anyone else. It is clear that the microbiome, especially in everyone having health issues, is having pronounced effects on us. As stuart suggested I'd also be interested in Peat's latest opinion on the microbiome. How he thinks it is regulated by the host, environment, stressors, etc. It is clear that a disfunctional microbiome is a result of hypometabolism and excess inflammation, however, a disfunctional microbiome foster both these phenotypes, so vicious circels as with every problem.

Now finally, you mention "Peating is not and end point". So really, lets get the NCBI studies out here and dispense with the double standard. The only reason to "be interested in Peat's latest opinion on the microbiome" is to convince people who accept no other standard. But I think if you expect one person to provide NCBI studies, you should expect them all to do so, no?

Let's start with your main point in this post, possibly

It is clear that a disfunctional microbiome is a result of hypometabolism and excess inflammation

Studies?

On quorum sensing, and how it allows many things claimed for the benefit to the host from a massive set of gut bacteria, notice that "symbiosis, virulence, competence, conjugation, antibiotic production, motility, sporulation, and biofilm formation" are some of the "features" of quorum sensing.

quorum sensing

If you take this simple phrase, and instead of dropping it from consideration, you actually get on the internet and explore what each word means, in terms of a quorum sensing microbiotic community, you may find an overwhelming respect for what's going on inside you, that in no way whatsoever can be explained, let alone managed by what you mention as

enhanced metabolic rate resulting in increased stomach acid, enzyme production, bile, motility, phagocytosis, etc.

Take just one word from the quorum sensing article, "symbiosis". Not only are the bacteria symbiotic with the human host, they are symbiotic species to species. They take sides, much as a United Nations peace keeping force would. But also on the pathogenic side. They are talking. They are counting. They are turning on virulence when they think it has a chance to be effective, but otherwise saving the resources, just as any army would do. They, as symbiotic forces use anti-biotics against each other. This all goes on while you sleep. It's done in spite of all the "enhanced metabolic rate" and "stomach acid" that you imagine has some effect on it. It is totally the way germs work and have always worked, since way before there was a human to occupy. You can raise the human metabolic rate high enough to kill the human, and you won't have killed off all the bacteria yet. They are not controlled by metabolic rate, or any of the other human features you described such as enzymes and bile. The are a force to be reckoned with, but not controlled by the human. Medical antibiotics are human's attempts at control, and they have failed to do anything but build more powerful pathogens. Powerful in that they are now often resistant to antibiotics, leaving the humans even more vulnerable, unless protected by beneficial microbes.

Here's more on quorum sensing. This focuses on it's use by pathogenic bacteria. As you peruse this, remember that the same methods are used by beneficial bacteria to keep pathogens in check, else there would be no host bodies to read this. It's all good. Whether we accept it or not.

Pathogenic Relationships

To show how one species of bacteria can function as commensal in one species of animal, but function as a pathogen in another, check this out regarding Escherichia coli. It behaves quite differently in humans compared to cattle:

http://www.pnas.org/content/107/21/9831.long

I could bring 50 more studies in here, but it would be to no avail if you wish to follow your current path. I say go for it. We all believe what we want to believe. Studies prove nothing to one who doesn't want to open their mind to the content. But if you are going to ask for studies, I say that's fair if the rule is followed by all participants. Can we agree?

 

[oxidation_is_normal]

I hope people pay attention to what you took time out of your day to write, EnoreeG. Thanks.

 

[Sea]

Suik, I respect what you have to say, but the method leaves a little to be desired. I suggest fairness, and behaving by the same rules as you expect others to behave by. By my count, Stuart's claims are backed up by more NCBI studies than others' here.

From following the thread and responding several times to Stuart's post I would disagree. Stuart makes numerous claims, none of which he can support via scientific or personal experience. When Stuart is pressed for a source to back up one of his claim's it is rare that he actually provides one. When he does provide a source, the source does not back up what he claims.

Stuart's most recent claim is a good example of this:
"Dr. Peat seems to think the fewer bacteria you have in your S.I. the better. It is been established incontrovertibly that this is false." (Stuart)

Apparently Stuart knows for a fact that having Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth is better than not having it. I won't bother asking Stuart for a source that supports this claim.

It is unknown however, if a disfunctional microbiome can be cured with additional fiber, I highly doubt. Being honest here, I think fiber is harmful when there is a disfunctional microbiome. The emphasis on enhanced metabolic rate resulting in increased stomach acid, enzyme production, bile, motility, phagocytosis, etc. is more easy and straightforward and changes the microbiome in a profound positive way.

Any studies you can provide?

Earlier, I provided meta-analysis of over a dozen studies which showed that fiber does not cure IBS or bowel cancer. The only effect fiber seems to have is reliving constipation. Ray Peat has explained that fiber can relive constipation via stimulating serotonin throughout the digestive tract. As a result, Ray Peat argues to limit fiber so that the intestine isn't irritated and so that bacteria have less food to ferment.

From personal experience, I can tell you without a doubt that fiber will not cure IBS. I had IBS and spent a significant amount of time testing various fiber supplements as well as fermentable fiber from whole food sources. My experience with fiber is not unique. In the many forums in which people are searching for cures for IBS you will be hard pressed to find anyone who cured their IBS with fiber. People with digestive problems generally seem to find relief from low fodmap, low carb, and other approaches that limit dietary fermentable fiber.

What I find most lacking in "the microbiome support hypothesis" is proper resources. Stuart has some very polished sayings like "by controlling the germs in the colon you prevent overgrowth in the small intestine", but I find it disappointing that it is mostly without additional sources, and if so it's those general sites instead of ncbi/ pubmed articles.

"Those general sites." You mean like a Peat site?

Peat's website is well sourced and the claims made by Peat are virtually always backed up by numerous studies and coherent logical thought. See the Scientific Studies subsection of the forum for even more studies backing up and tying together the ideas of Ray Peat.

My experience and feelings are neatly described by Peat, questions I've been pondering about for years suddenly became obvious. It's a model that agrees with my experiences and therefore far closer to my nature and reality than giving credit to a microbiome in a disbalanced and stressed enviroment.

So If Peat says it, and you agree with it, and it's closer to your "nature and reality", then it needs no NCBI support. Sadly, just a double standard.

It isn't a double stand since Peat supports his ideas. Stuart and most of those arguing that the microbiome is the key to everything don't have science on their side, at least at this point in time. It is a lot of people making correlation=causation mistakes and seeing that wow the bacteria influence the immune system, they must be our allies!

From my study of the microbiome I know that H.pyiori can lower stomach acid: "In addition to using chemotaxis to avoid areas of low pH, H.pylori also neutralizes the acid in its environment by producing large amounts of urease, which breaks down the urea present in the stomach to carbon dioxide and ammonia. The ammonia, which is basic, then neutralizes stomach acid." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicobac ... nvironment)

Someone like Stuart might take that information and conclude that H.pylori modulates gastric acid secretion so that our stomach knows how much acid is needed to digest out food. Therefore, to cure low stomach acid we need to take H.pylori supplements and feed it with fermentable fiber.

Peating is by no means an end point though, so no offense Stuart or anyone else. It is clear that the microbiome, especially in everyone having health issues, is having pronounced effects on us. As stuart suggested I'd also be interested in Peat's latest opinion on the microbiome. How he thinks it is regulated by the host, environment, stressors, etc. It is clear that a disfunctional microbiome is a result of hypometabolism and excess inflammation, however, a disfunctional microbiome foster both these phenotypes, so vicious circels as with every problem.

Now finally, you mention "Peating is not and end point". So really, lets get the NCBI studies out here and dispense with the double standard. The only reason to "be interested in Peat's latest opinion on the microbiome" is to convince people who accept no other standard. But I think if you expect one person to provide NCBI studies, you should expect them all to do so, no?

Let's start with your main point in this post, possibly

It is clear that a disfunctional microbiome is a result of hypometabolism and excess inflammation

Studies?

On quorum sensing, and how it allows many things claimed for the benefit to the host from a massive set of gut bacteria, notice that "symbiosis, virulence, competence, conjugation, antibiotic production, motility, sporulation, and biofilm formation" are some of the "features" of quorum sensing.

quorum sensing

If you take this simple phrase, and instead of dropping it from consideration, you actually get on the internet and explore what each word means, in terms of a quorum sensing microbiotic community, you may find an overwhelming respect for what's going on inside you, that in no way whatsoever can be explained, let alone managed by what you mention as

enhanced metabolic rate resulting in increased stomach acid, enzyme production, bile, motility, phagocytosis, etc.

Take just one word from the quorum sensing article, "symbiosis". Not only are the bacteria symbiotic with the human host, they are symbiotic species to species. They take sides, much as a United Nations peace keeping force would. But also on the pathogenic side. They are talking. They are counting. They are turning on virulence when they think it has a chance to be effective, but otherwise saving the resources, just as any army would do. They, as symbiotic forces use anti-biotics against each other. This all goes on while you sleep. It's done in spite of all the "enhanced metabolic rate" and "stomach acid" that you imagine has some effect on it. It is totally the way germs work and have always worked, since way before there was a human to occupy. You can raise the human metabolic rate high enough to kill the human, and you won't have killed off all the bacteria yet. They are not controlled by metabolic rate, or any of the other human features you described such as enzymes and bile. The are a force to be reckoned with, but not controlled by the human. Medical antibiotics are human's attempts at control, and they have failed to do anything but build more powerful pathogens. Powerful in that they are now often resistant to antibiotics, leaving the humans even more vulnerable, unless protected by beneficial microbes.

Here's more on quorum sensing. This focuses on it's use by pathogenic bacteria. As you peruse this, remember that the same methods are used by beneficial bacteria to keep pathogens in check, else there would be no host bodies to read this. It's all good. Whether we accept it or not.

Pathogenic Relationships

To show how one species of bacteria can function as commensal in one species of animal, but function as a pathogen in another, check this out regarding Escherichia coli. It behaves quite differently in humans compared to cattle:

http://www.pnas.org/content/107/21/9831.long

I could bring 50 more studies in here, but it would be to no avail if you wish to follow your current path. I say go for it. We all believe what we want to believe. Studies prove nothing to one who doesn't want to open their mind to the content. But if you are going to ask for studies, I say that's fair if the rule is followed by all participants. Can we agree?

From briefly reviewing your sources on Quorum sensing, they don't support what you are claiming. Quorum sensing mainly deals with bacteria interacting with other bacteria. It doesn't show that bacteria communicating with other bacteria are beneficial to humans, nor does it show you can't control the bacteria with a faster metabolic rate or antibiotics.

Like, suikerbulk, I think that bacterial overgrowths result from a lowered metabolic rate which chiefly controls stomach acid, enzyme production, peristalsis and generally the rate of digestion and extraction of nutrients from food. I think that bacteria interfere with these processes and should be exterminated at every opportunity. My own experience of reversing numerous food intolerances with antibiotics and a metabolic supporting approach to diet is in line with the results of the following studies:

"OBJECTIVES:

Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth is defined as an abnormally high bacterial population level in the small intestine. Intestinal motor dysfunction associated with hypothyroidism could predispose to bacterial overgrowth. Luminal bacteria could modulate gastrointestinal symptoms and interfere with levothyroxine absorption. The aims of the present study were to assess the prevalence and clinical pattern of bacterial overgrowth in patients with a history of overt hypothyroidism and the effects of bacterial overgrowth decontamination on thyroid hormone levels.
METHODS:

A total of 50 consecutive patients with a history of overt hypothyroidism due to autoimmune thyroiditis was enrolled. Diagnosis of bacterial overgrowth was based on positivity to a hydrogen glucose breath test. Bacterial overgrowth positive patients were treated with 1,200 mg rifaximin each day for a week. A glucose breath test, gastrointestinal symptoms, and thyroid hormone plasma levels were reassessed 1 month after treatment.
RESULTS:

A total of 27 patients with a history of hypothyroidism demonstrated a positive result to the breath test (27 of 50, 54%), compared with two in the control group (two of 40, 5%). The difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001). Abdominal discomfort, flatulence, and bloating were significantly more prevalent in the bacterial overgrowth positive group. These symptoms significantly improved after antibiotic decontamination. Thyroid hormone plasma levels were not significantly affected by successful bacterial overgrowth decontamination.
CONCLUSIONS:

The history of overt hypothyroidism is associated with bacterial overgrowth development. Excess bacteria could influence clinical gastrointestinal manifestations. Bacterial overgrowth decontamination is associated with improved gastrointestinal symptoms. However, fermenting carbohydrate luminal bacteria do not interfere with thyroid hormone levels." (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17698907)

"Fifty two strains of anaerobic bacteria isolated from the upper gut of patients with small intestinal bacterial overgrowth were screened for phospholipase activity. Bacteroides melaninogenicus spp intermedius had the greatest activity. The effects of culture supernatants of this organism and deoxycholate on intestinal calcium absorption and disaccharidase activity were studied using a rat closed loop model. The supernatant decreased the in vitro uptake of calcium by 15% (p less than 0.001). Deoxycholate reduced calcium uptake by 16% (p less than 0.001). Combined culture supernatant and deoxycholate reduced calcium uptake by 39% (p less than 0.001) suggesting a potentiation of supernatant activity by deoxycholate. Culture supernatant and deoxycholate, both alone and combined, significantly reduced lactase, sucrase, and maltase activity. Electron microscopic evidence showed degeneration of microvilli, disruption of mitochondrial structure, and swelling of the endoplasmic reticulum after exposure of the intestinal loops to the supernatant or deoxycholate." (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1973395)

 

[sugar daddy]

EnoreeG would you be so kind as to link to the study which proves that we need to consume over 100g of fibre per day to live a healthy long life?
Or a study that shows how and why the micro biome is only fully functioning on a high fibre intake?

If you can then I would be very interested.

The problem with this hole thread is Stuart has a very clear and fixed idea that he considers unquestionable. ( based mainly on questionable evolutionary ideas)

Every time someone disagreed he simply told them how naive their view was without any real proof to back up his claims. No one was asking him to change his view they just wanted some evidence. After 30 + pages this superior attitude gets a tad annoying which is why I posted.

 

[oxidation_is_normal]

OK... Someone explain to me how this isn't trolling...

Suik, I respect what you have to say, but the method leaves a little to be desired. I suggest fairness, and behaving by the same rules as you expect others to behave by. By my count, Stuart's claims are backed up by more NCBI studies than others' here.

From following the thread and responding several times to Stuart's post I would disagree. Stuart makes numerous claims, none of which he can support via scientific or personal experience. When Stuart is pressed for a source to back up one of his claim's it is rare that he actually provides one. When he does provide a source, the source does not back up what he claims.

Stuart's most recent claim is a good example of this:
"Dr. Peat seems to think the fewer bacteria you have in your S.I. the better. It is been established incontrovertibly that this is false." (Stuart)

Apparently Stuart knows for a fact that having Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth is better than not having it. I won't bother asking Stuart for a source that supports this claim.

Here Sea claims that Stuart claims that Ray Peat claims that (basically) the fewer the bacteria the better. The Sea claims that Stuart claims that SIBO is basically a good thing to have. WTF? Moderators? This is your job.

It is unknown however, if a disfunctional microbiome can be cured with additional fiber, I highly doubt. Being honest here, I think fiber is harmful when there is a disfunctional microbiome. The emphasis on enhanced metabolic rate resulting in increased stomach acid, enzyme production, bile, motility, phagocytosis, etc. is more easy and straightforward and changes the microbiome in a profound positive way.

Any studies you can provide?

Earlier, I provided meta-analysis of over a dozen studies which showed that fiber does not cure IBS or bowel cancer. The only effect fiber seems to have is reliving constipation. Ray Peat has explained that fiber can relive constipation via stimulating serotonin throughout the digestive tract. As a result, Ray Peat argues to limit fiber so that the intestine isn't irritated and so that bacteria have less food to ferment.

From personal experience, I can tell you without a doubt that fiber will not cure IBS. I had IBS and spent a significant amount of time testing various fiber supplements as well as fermentable fiber from whole food sources. My experience with fiber is not unique. In the many forums in which people are searching for cures for IBS you will be hard pressed to find anyone who cured their IBS with fiber.

What I find most lacking in "the microbiome support hypothesis" is proper resources. Stuart has some very polished sayings like "by controlling the germs in the colon you prevent overgrowth in the small intestine", but I find it disappointing that it is mostly without additional sources, and if so it's those general sites instead of ncbi/ pubmed articles.

"Those general sites." You mean like a Peat site?

Peat's website is well sourced and the claims made by Peat are virtually always backed up by numerous studies and coherent logical thought. See the Scientific Studies subsection of the forum for even more studies backing up and tying together the ideas of Ray Peat.

This forum is not about enforcing every article of Peats. This forum is about Peat-related discussion. His research inspires more research.

My experience and feelings are neatly described by Peat, questions I've been pondering about for years suddenly became obvious. It's a model that agrees with my experiences and therefore far closer to my nature and reality than giving credit to a microbiome in a disbalanced and stressed enviroment.

So If Peat says it, and you agree with it, and it's closer to your "nature and reality", then it needs no NCBI support. Sadly, just a double standard.

It isn't a double stand since Peat supports his ideas. Stuart and most of those arguing that the microbiome is the key to everything don't have science on their side, at least at this point in time. It is a lot of people making correlation=causation mistakes and seeing that wow the bacteria influence the immune system, they must be our allies!

Again! No one is arguing that the microbiome is the key to everything! Especially not people who are keen on Peat's work... Like I said in my first post in this thread, these are straw men - and they deserve to be moderated as such.

From my study of the microbiome I know that H.pyiori can lower stomach acid: "In addition to using chemotaxis to avoid areas of low pH, H.pylori also neutralizes the acid in its environment by producing large amounts of urease, which breaks down the urea present in the stomach to carbon dioxide and ammonia. The ammonia, which is basic, then neutralizes stomach acid." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicobac ... nvironment)

Someone like Stuart might take that information and conclude that H.pylori modulates gastric acid secretion so that our stomach knows how much acid is needed to digest out food. Therefore, to cure low stomach acid we need to take H.pylori supplements and feed it with fermentable fiber.

Again with the straw man arguments. No one is arguing that it is good to have extra bacteria in the small intestine or stomach! Again, how is this not trolling? Are you that uncomfortable with new lines of questioning that don't fit into an "everyone agrees with x paradigm" that you need to go tearing ***t down that doesn't exist (the definition of a straw man)?

Peating is by no means an end point though, so no offense Stuart or anyone else. It is clear that the microbiome, especially in everyone having health issues, is having pronounced effects on us. As stuart suggested I'd also be interested in Peat's latest opinion on the microbiome. How he thinks it is regulated by the host, environment, stressors, etc. It is clear that a disfunctional microbiome is a result of hypometabolism and excess inflammation, however, a disfunctional microbiome foster both these phenotypes, so vicious circels as with every problem.

Now finally, you mention "Peating is not and end point". So really, lets get the NCBI studies out here and dispense with the double standard. The only reason to "be interested in Peat's latest opinion on the microbiome" is to convince people who accept no other standard. But I think if you expect one person to provide NCBI studies, you should expect them all to do so, no?

Let's start with your main point in this post, possibly

It is clear that a disfunctional microbiome is a result of hypometabolism and excess inflammation

Studies?

On quorum sensing, and how it allows many things claimed for the benefit to the host from a massive set of gut bacteria, notice that "symbiosis, virulence, competence, conjugation, antibiotic production, motility, sporulation, and biofilm formation" are some of the "features" of quorum sensing.

quorum sensing

If you take this simple phrase, and instead of dropping it from consideration, you actually get on the internet and explore what each word means, in terms of a quorum sensing microbiotic community, you may find an overwhelming respect for what's going on inside you, that in no way whatsoever can be explained, let alone managed by what you mention as

enhanced metabolic rate resulting in increased stomach acid, enzyme production, bile, motility, phagocytosis, etc.

Take just one word from the quorum sensing article, "symbiosis". Not only are the bacteria symbiotic with the human host, they are symbiotic species to species. They take sides, much as a United Nations peace keeping force would. But also on the pathogenic side. They are talking. They are counting. They are turning on virulence when they think it has a chance to be effective, but otherwise saving the resources, just as any army would do. They, as symbiotic forces use anti-biotics against each other. This all goes on while you sleep. It's done in spite of all the "enhanced metabolic rate" and "stomach acid" that you imagine has some effect on it. It is totally the way germs work and have always worked, since way before there was a human to occupy. You can raise the human metabolic rate high enough to kill the human, and you won't have killed off all the bacteria yet. They are not controlled by metabolic rate, or any of the other human features you described such as enzymes and bile. The are a force to be reckoned with, but not controlled by the human. Medical antibiotics are human's attempts at control, and they have failed to do anything but build more powerful pathogens. Powerful in that they are now often resistant to antibiotics, leaving the humans even more vulnerable, unless protected by beneficial microbes.

Here's more on quorum sensing. This focuses on it's use by pathogenic bacteria. As you peruse this, remember that the same methods are used by beneficial bacteria to keep pathogens in check, else there would be no host bodies to read this. It's all good. Whether we accept it or not.

Pathogenic Relationships

To show how one species of bacteria can function as commensal in one species of animal, but function as a pathogen in another, check this out regarding Escherichia coli. It behaves quite differently in humans compared to cattle:

http://www.pnas.org/content/107/21/9831.long

I could bring 50 more studies in here, but it would be to no avail if you wish to follow your current path. I say go for it. We all believe what we want to believe. Studies prove nothing to one who doesn't want to open their mind to the content. But if you are going to ask for studies, I say that's fair if the rule is followed by all participants. Can we agree?

From briefly reviewing your sources on Quorum sensing, they don't support what you are claiming. Quorum sensing mainly deals with bacteria interacting with other bacteria. It doesn't show that bacteria communicating with other bacteria are beneficial to humans, nor does it show you can't control the bacteria with a faster metabolic rate or antibiotics.

Like, suikerbulk, I think it that bacterial overgrowths result from a lowered metabolic rate which chiefly controls stomach acid, enzyme production, peristalsis and generally the rate of digestion and extraction of nutrients from food. I think that bacteria interfere with these processes and should be exterminated at every opportunity. My own experience of reversing numerous food intolerances with antibiotics and a metabolic supporting approach to diet is in line with the results of the following studies:

"OBJECTIVES:

Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth is defined as an abnormally high bacterial population level in the small intestine. Intestinal motor dysfunction associated with hypothyroidism could predispose to bacterial overgrowth. Luminal bacteria could modulate gastrointestinal symptoms and interfere with levothyroxine absorption. The aims of the present study were to assess the prevalence and clinical pattern of bacterial overgrowth in patients with a history of overt hypothyroidism and the effects of bacterial overgrowth decontamination on thyroid hormone levels.
METHODS:

A total of 50 consecutive patients with a history of overt hypothyroidism due to autoimmune thyroiditis was enrolled. Diagnosis of bacterial overgrowth was based on positivity to a hydrogen glucose breath test. Bacterial overgrowth positive patients were treated with 1,200 mg rifaximin each day for a week. A glucose breath test, gastrointestinal symptoms, and thyroid hormone plasma levels were reassessed 1 month after treatment.
RESULTS:

A total of 27 patients with a history of hypothyroidism demonstrated a positive result to the breath test (27 of 50, 54%), compared with two in the control group (two of 40, 5%). The difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001). Abdominal discomfort, flatulence, and bloating were significantly more prevalent in the bacterial overgrowth positive group. These symptoms significantly improved after antibiotic decontamination. Thyroid hormone plasma levels were not significantly affected by successful bacterial overgrowth decontamination.
CONCLUSIONS:

The history of overt hypothyroidism is associated with bacterial overgrowth development. Excess bacteria could influence clinical gastrointestinal manifestations. Bacterial overgrowth decontamination is associated with improved gastrointestinal symptoms. However, fermenting carbohydrate luminal bacteria do not interfere with thyroid hormone levels." (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17698907)

"Fifty two strains of anaerobic bacteria isolated from the upper gut of patients with small intestinal bacterial overgrowth were screened for phospholipase activity. Bacteroides melaninogenicus spp intermedius had the greatest activity. The effects of culture supernatants of this organism and deoxycholate on intestinal calcium absorption and disaccharidase activity were studied using a rat closed loop model. The supernatant decreased the in vitro uptake of calcium by 15% (p less than 0.001). Deoxycholate reduced calcium uptake by 16% (p less than 0.001). Combined culture supernatant and deoxycholate reduced calcium uptake by 39% (p less than 0.001) suggesting a potentiation of supernatant activity by deoxycholate. Culture supernatant and deoxycholate, both alone and combined, significantly reduced lactase, sucrase, and maltase activity. Electron microscopic evidence showed degeneration of microvilli, disruption of mitochondrial structure, and swelling of the endoplasmic reticulum after exposure of the intestinal loops to the supernatant or deoxycholate." (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1973395)