Author Topic: Gut Flora  (Read 3563 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online Satya

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16127
  • April 2014
Gut Flora
« on: October 11, 2011, 06:13:30 PM »
Okay, my new topic of interest, so I figure I may as well start collecting some science on it.  This review is pretty interesting.  Apparently humans have aerobic microbes in infancy, but once weaned the predominance is anaerobic bacteria.

A dynamic partnership: Celebrating our gut flora pdf
Quote
Comprised of 500 to 1000 bacterial species with two to four million genes, the microbiome contains about 100-fold more genes than the human genome and the estimated 1013 bacterial cells in the gut exceeds by 10-fold the total ensemble of human cells [2]. At least half of these organisms cannot be cultured but no one discounts the importance of these elusive microbes. In this vast community of gut bacteria, anaerobes outnumber aerobes by estimates of 100–1000 anaerobes to one aerobe. The mechanisms accounting for composition of the gut flora and how it is assembled are incompletely understood. However, it is clear that, at birth, humans become colonized with facultative aerobes including streptococci and Escherichia coli but, at the critical juncture of weaning, there is a dramatic shift in the flora with obligate anaerobes, particularly
Bacteroides species, becoming preeminent (Fig. 1) [5].


Will post more on this soon.

Offline Paleoeat

  • Support Warrior
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 985
  • "If man made it, don't eat it" Jack LaLane
    • State of the Art Comfort Dentistry
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2011, 09:14:27 PM »
interesting...

ive been taking probiotics for about 3-4 months. I like the refrigerated Jarodophylis formula.
Eating the Diet we evolved to eat: Meat, fat, water, herbs, seasonal veggies. As carb-restricted as I can.

www.SmithtownSmiles.com

Online Satya

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16127
  • April 2014
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2011, 08:38:08 AM »
How do those probiotics stay alive without food?  I could ask the same of the starter culture I sometimes now use for ferments.  Of course, I am not eating the starter, I am feeding it beets and cabbage and letting it grow into a large colony before I consume it. 

And that brings up another question, at least for people who eat no carbs but take probiotic supplements: will the cultures have enough to eat and grow to populate your gut?  Or do they die for lack of food?  Yes, some species at least can live on connective tissues, but still.  I ask because Stefansson and Anderson had their gut flora reduced pretty radically within days of all meat.  Of course, that might be a good thing in the short term, especially if pathogens have taken up residence.  But long term, I dunno.  I am beginning to rethink the whole fiber angle.  And as I mentioned in the traditional carnivores thread, those people were eating fermented plants and animals.  They were not eating a muscle meat only diet by any means.  They were consuming live bacteria and the bacteria's food source (pickled sorrel, stink fish, etc).

New research shows the types of species change with obesity.  From the wilipedia entry on gut flora:
Quote
The microbes occupying the human gut are also in direct relation to obesity. A shift in the ratio between bacterial divisions Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes can be observed in lean and obese individuals—in the latter, a shift towards Firmicutes can be observed. The ratio between Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes dynamically reflects the overall weight condition of an individual, shifting towards Bacteroidetes if an obese individual loses weight.

The mutual influence of gut flora composition and weight condition is connected to differences in the energy-reabsorbing potential of different ratios of Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes, especially in the digestion of fatty acids and dietary polysaccharides, as shown by experiments wherein the (caecum) gut flora of obese mice were transplanted into germ-free recipient mice, leading to an increase in weight despite a decrease in food consumption.[34][35][36][37]


Finally, here is another review which is a bit more extensive.  It brings up the red and processed meat being linked to colon cancer, but then most people eating a lot of those foods are slapping them between slices of wheat bread, so I don't put much stock in that necessarily.  But the part about which bacteria might produce carcinogens is interesting.  Will go down some of these roads of inquiry soon.

Gut flora in health and disease
Quote
Intestinal bacteria could play a part in initiation of colon cancer through production of carcinogens, cocarcinogens, or procarcinogens. In healthy people, diets rich in fat and meat but poor in vegetables increase the faecal excretion of N-nitroso compounds,78 a group of genotoxic substances that are known initiators and promoters of colon cancer. In fact, such diets also increase the genotoxic potential of human faecal water.79 Another group of carcinogens of dietary origin are the heterocyclic aromatic amines that are formed in meat when it is cooked. Some intestinal microorganisms strongly increase damage to DNA in colon cells induced by heterocyclic amines, whereas other intestinal bacteria can uptake and detoxify such compounds.80

Bacteria of the bacteroides and clostridium genera increase the incidence and growth rate of colonic tumours induced in animals, whereas other genera such as lactobacillus and bifidobacteria prevent tumorigenesis.81–85 A descriptive human study16 compared the composition of the faecal flora of people with different risks of colon cancer. High risk of colon cancer was associated with presence of Bacteroides vulgatus and Bacteroides stercoris. Low risk was associated with presence of Lactobacillus acidiphilus, Lactobacillus S06 and Eubacterium aerofaciens. Although the evidence is not conclusive, colonic flora seem to be a major environmental factor that modulates risk of colonic cancer in human beings.

Online Satya

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16127
  • April 2014
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2011, 05:08:28 PM »
Nice short article about a recent study on enterotypes: Your Gut Bacteria Are What You Eat

Next is a pdf piece about gut flora.  Probiotics as modulators of the gut flora

This piece has lots of pictures of some of the buggers.  The Normal Bacterial Flora of Humans

You know how eating red meat, especially processed meat has been associated with colon cancer in studies?  Apparently it is because of the increase in Bacteroides in the colons of meat eaters.  Now, I don't think peoples like the Inuit suffered colon cancer until adopting a western diet.  But let's not forget that they ate fermented foods.  In fact, before the days of canning and refrigeration, fermentation was the main way people stored foods.  Perhaps a bit of fermented veg is a good thing will an otherwise meat heavy diet? :shrug:

Here's a study on increase in cancer rates, which happens to parallel increase in fruit and vegetable consumption.  I wonder if they eat as much lacto or other fermented foods these days?  CANCER IN GREENLANDIC INUIT 1973–1997: A COHORT STUDY


Offline PaleoPhil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1818
  • Mad scientist (not a utopian emulator) Mwuhahahaa!
    • Ancestral Lifestyle
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #4 on: October 13, 2011, 09:44:15 PM »
Interesting stuff, Satya, thanks much. It feeds my mad scientist side and helps make this forum a Nerdvana.  ;)

You know how eating red meat, especially processed meat has been associated with colon cancer in studies?  Apparently it is because of the increase in Bacteroides in the colons of meat eaters.
Yes, this is one reason I've discussed the value of aerobic bacteria, which are reportedly provided by certain traditional Eskimo foods, like raw fermented meat (aka high meat) and raw fermented oils (such as seal, fish, fish liver and whale), which often tend to get ignored with all the focus around the Internet on lacto-fermented foods (which provide mostly facultatively anaerobic bacteria), and warning about the dangers of developing an imbalance of flora dominated by the more toxic of the anaerobic bacteria.

Both cancer cells and anaerobic bacteria like bacteroides reportedly thrive in oxygen-depleted environments, so it's no surprise that abnormally high levels of bacteroides would be correlated with higher levels of cancer. It doesn't mean bacteroides bacteria necessarily cause the cancers, as some scientists and academics have hypothesized (A possible role of Bacteroides fragilis enterotoxin in the aetiology of colorectal cancer, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16842574; Bacteroides fragilis as a potential cause of cancer, http://www.findaphd.com/search/ProjectDetails.aspx?PJID=34491), but it does suggest an oxygen-depleted, cancer-promoting environment is present, which promotes both bacteroides and cancer.

For obligate anaerobes like bacteroides, an anaerobic environment promotes growth, an aerobic environment slows or stops growth, and peroxide (O2, aka superoxide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superoxide) (http://www.textbookofbacteriology.net/nutgro_4.html) is toxic to the bacteria. Thus peroxide is used to treat bacterial infections. Interestingly, oxygen-promoting foods are also used in some controversial alternative cancer therapy regimens. For example, honey produces hydrogen peroxide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honey#Hydrogen_peroxide), a superoxide, and thus honey is used in folk remedies for both bacterial infection and cancer. However, one study produced evidence that the main cancer-protective effect of honey comes from phenolic acids and flavonoids, rather than hydrogen peroxide (Antioxidant and radical scavenging activity of honey in endothelial cell cultures, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17823875). The introductory summary statement of the study report is intriguing: "The therapeutic properties of honey, once considered a form of folk or preventive medicine, are acquiring importance for the treatment of acute and chronic free radical-mediated diseases (atherosclerosis, diabetes and cancer)."

My guess would be that the beneficial facultative anaerobes like lactobacilli would help by helping to keep the obligate anaerobes in check. For heavy-meat eaters like the Inuit and dirty carnivores, I suspect that the aerobic bacteria are even more important. It's fascinating how oxygen connects such seemingly disparate foods as high meat and raw fermented honey.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2011, 10:20:49 PM by PaleoPhil »
> "Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong." - Tatertot Tim Steele
> "I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance." -Socrates
> "The way you walked was thorny through no fault of your own

Offline Flora

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
    • Flora eats Fauna is my Journal
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #5 on: October 14, 2011, 07:02:32 AM »
Quote
this is one reason I've discussed the value of aerobic bacteria, which are reportedly provided by certain traditional Eskimo foods, like raw fermented meat (aka high meat) and raw fermented oils (such as seal, fish, fish liver and whale), which often tend to get ignored with all the focus around the Internet on lacto-fermented foods (which provide mostly facultatively anaerobic bacteria), and warning about the dangers of developing an imbalance of flora dominated by the more toxic of the anaerobic bacteria.

So firmicutes are aerobic bacteria? This is what we want to encourage in our guts.
How does one ferment oil? How does one ferment meat? Is eating these foods the only way, short of a fecal transplant?
Beliefs are nice, but doubt is the road to an education

Flora eats Fauna - My Journal

Online Satya

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16127
  • April 2014
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #6 on: October 14, 2011, 08:37:21 AM »
Phil, our natural colon flora are 100 to 1 anaerobic.  Strictly anaerobic microbes among them, apparently.  They have different species in healthy vs. diseased, but they are usually anaerobes.  Bifidobacterium are obligate anaerobes which are healthy in human gut flora according to some studies of colon cancer.  Much about that in some of these links.  While I think there is tremendous benefit in eating aerobic ferments like natto, moldy cheese and the like which make vitamin k2 and other vitamins among other things, the environment in the colon is anaerobic.  It just isn't exposed to much oxygen any way you look at it.  The aerobe microbes probably won't survive there (but some obviously do.)  That is why eating the lacto-fermented foods can make a beneficial difference.  They can survive the acidic, low oxygen environment and set up shop in the colon.  So in this case it is not that all obligate anaerobes are bad, only some.  So if we can encourage the growth of the good, it is worth it.  And that's what natives did.  They ate both lacto and aerobic ferments of various sorts.  And we see Anderson and Stef killing off between 15-50% of their gut flora eating meat and no ferments, and changing the types of species present over time.  Their gut flora went back to normal after resuming a mixed diet.  So I am inclined to follow native wisdom here.  More ferments. :yes:  Anaerobic, acid loving ferments of the right sort.  And more wine too. :laugh:

Thanks for more links.  I am learning a ton right now and am so glad I have elicited the mad scientist in you. :-*  Pretty fascinating about honey producing H2O2.  I was aware of its use in wound care, but not the reason why it might be helpful.

Flora, I adore your new avatar! :love: :love: :love:
« Last Edit: October 14, 2011, 09:42:11 AM by Satya »

Online Satya

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16127
  • April 2014
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #7 on: October 14, 2011, 10:03:41 AM »
And we see Anderson and Stef killing off between 15-50% of their gut flora eating meat and no ferments, and changing the types of species present over time.  Their gut flora went back to normal after resuming a mixed diet. 

Not sure if it has been posted elsewhere on this forum (I think so), but I need to post the evidence about the gut flora on all meat, no ferments.  Here it is:
http://www.jstor.org/pss/30081508
Quote
A report is given of the effect of an exclusive meat diet on the colonic flora of three men, two of whom (A and S) continued on this diet for thirteen months and one (D) for ten days. The fat averaged from 1.5 to 1.75 times the protein by weight, and the only carbohydrate was that in the meat, amounting to from 5 to 10 Gm, a day. The principal observations were as follows: The fecal specimens during the period of the meat diet consisted of finely divided material with a mild acid, aromatic odor, generally inoffensive, and with a reaction varying from neutral to moderately acid ($P_H$ 7 to 6). Direct microscopic counts of bacteria showed within from seven to ten days a decrease of about 50 per cent in the total number of bacteria. In subject A this lower count persisted throughout the entire period of the meat diet, whereas in S the total bacterial count remained for most of the time about 15 per cent below the level of the preliminary period of mixed diet. As shown by both microscopic and cultural examinations, the decrease in bacterial numbers was due to the suppression of types largely dependent on carbohydrate for their metabolism, such as L. acido philus and B. bi fidus, enterococci, streptococci and a group of micro-aerophil bacteria. In subject S the meat diet proved unfavorable to spirochetes. Long continuance of the meat diet reduced the count of viable B. coli in the fecal specimens of A to one fourth or less of the number during the preliminary period of mixed diet, whereas in S the reduction was less marked. The percentage of hemolytic B. coli was greatly increased during the first few weeks. The sucrose-positive types were favored and also the stronger producers of indol. No increase in virulence was noted. B. z elchii was clearly favored by the meat diet for several months, for A the estimated count being from 10 to 10,000,000 times that of the preliminary period of mixed diet and for S from 100 to 10,000 times. After one year the number was reduced to the level of the preliminary period. Proteolytic anaerobes were not added to the colonic flora by the meat diet, and the native types were not favored. Aerobic proteolytic types, such as Proteus, did not appear in the flora of S and only late in the period of the meat diet in the flora of A. M. zymogenes appeared to be favored by the meat diet. There occurred, however, no definite and consistent increase in the proteolytic action of the whole flora on cooked meat medium, and the observations, as a whole, indicated that an exclusive meat diet, even continued for a long period, is not necessarily conducive to the establishment of an obligate proteolytic flora in the human colon. On resumption of a normal mixed diet, a flora similar to that of the preliminary period of mixed diet, both as regards bacterial types and numbers, recurred.

I found a more recent paper that references this old study, but I will have to look at it and post later. 

Online Satya

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16127
  • April 2014
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #8 on: October 15, 2011, 11:58:49 AM »
Pretty interesting older post on this subject.

The New Genetics -- Part V: Is the Intestinal Microbiome Part of Our Genome?
Quote
We can make a few conclusions from these studies:

    Intestinal flora clearly contribute to our phenotype.  Since they are directly inherited from one generation to another, we cannot assume that any heritable characteristics of our phenotype are "genetic" or even a result of our Homo sapiens cells rather than a result of our microbial partners, without additional evidence supporting a particular mode of inheritance.
    Likewise, it makes little sense to discuss the evolution of humans over time without considering the co-evolution of our microbial partners.
    Normalizing our gut flora may be an important part of fixing our metabolic problems, but normalizing our metabolism may also be an important part of fixing our gut flora.  This emphasizes the need for a multi-faceted approach to improving health.

He has some interesting tidbits on leptin in there too.  Pretty complex subject.

Gut flora are different depending on where in the GI tract they are found.  And they produce biotin, other b vitamins and vitamin k as well.  Here's a bit on the latter.
Lactic Acid Bacteria (page 4)

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1818
  • Mad scientist (not a utopian emulator) Mwuhahahaa!
    • Ancestral Lifestyle
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #9 on: October 16, 2011, 07:13:08 PM »
Phil, our natural colon flora are 100 to 1 anaerobic.  Strictly anaerobic microbes among them, apparently.
Exactly, it's not the presence of any anaerobes or even obligate anaerobes that's the problem, it's apparently an imbalance tilted even farther than that--too far toward anaerobic dominance, as the evidence you presented suggests. Whether the imbalance is the cause of cancer, as some scientists have posited, or merely the result of oxygen-depleted pockets in a human host, or a mix of cause or exacerbant and effect, is unclear. My best guess would be a mix of all three, cause, exacerbant and effect, possibly mostly effect, because these bacteria are not normally a problem when in proper balance in healthy hosts.

In the research that you and I cited, overgrowths of the obligate and facultative anaerobic bacteria Firmicutes, Clostridium, Bacteroides vulgatus, Bacteroides stercoris, and Bacteroides fragilis were reported as correlated with certain risks. Here is some more I found:

Quote
B. fragilis group is the most commonly isolated bacteriodaceae in anaerobic infections especially those that originate from the gastrointestinal flora. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacteroides_fragilis

Enterotoxigenic Bacteroides fragilis (ETBF)-mediated colitis in Min (Apc+/−) mice
A human commensal-based murine model of colon carcinogenesis
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3021131/


Quote
They have different species in healthy vs. diseased, but they are usually anaerobes.  Bifidobacterium are obligate anaerobes which are healthy in human gut flora according to some studies of colon cancer.
Right, and you indicated that Bacteroides, another obligate anaerobe normally in the gut of meat eaters, is associated with increased risk of colon cancer.

FYI just to clarify--bifidobacterium are aerotolerant obligate anaerobes (see Development of the gastrointestinal tract, Volume 1, By Ian R. Sanderson, W. Allan Walker). It's an important distinction because super baddies like  Clostridium botulinum and Clostridium tetani are not aerotolerant.

So given that obligate anaerobes are normally in the guts of healthy people but some of them are also associated with higher risks of cancer and other problems, it appears that gut health is about flora balance. Your sources suggest what may happen when the balance is disrupted. Perhaps what was once benign or even beneficial can become destructive when unrestrained?

Quote
Much about that in some of these links.  While I think there is tremendous benefit in eating aerobic ferments like natto, moldy cheese and the like which make vitamin k2 and other vitamins among other things, the environment in the colon is anaerobic.
Maybe not completely anaerobic, as it is a hollow tube that sometimes opens at both ends? Where the completely anaerobic conditions appear to occur is when the mucosal barrier is broken and the anaerobes gain access to human cells and when the anaerobes can coat themselves in protective layers, sealing off the oxygen, allowing them to go about their dirty work of growth, further penetration, and destruction.

Quote
It just isn't exposed to much oxygen any way you look at it.
Sure, and in a healthy human perhaps there is just enough oxygen, competing bacteria and immune system soldiers to keep the anaerobes in check?

Quote
The aerobe microbes probably won't survive there (but some obviously do.)  That is why eating the lacto-fermented foods can make a beneficial difference.
Yes, that's what I said I suspect--they may help to keep the more truly obligate anaerobes in check by competing with them. I don't understand why one would focus only on the lactobacilli and ignore or downplay the role of the others, especially in nondairy meat eaters like the Inuit, who as I think you pointed out, didn't have as much access to lactobacilli-rich foods. For meat eaters like the Inuit, "zero carbers," and some dirty carnivores who are not into sauerkraut, raw fermented honey or dairy products, the fermented meats, fish and sea oils seem to be especially important. It might be even better to include both types of probiotic foods in the diet. Many people know about lacto-ferments like sauerkraut and yogurt, but few know about non-lacto meat and seafood ferments.

Lex Rooker has hypothesized that animal-sourced bacteria from his intake of raw and mildly fermented meats may be part of the reason for his avoidance of the problems that cooked-meat zero carbers and VLCers have run into after a certain point, such as Mel's folic acid deficiency and Danny Roddy's very similar symptoms. This could be a crucial piece of the puzzle that some are missing, in part because of the wall of American social taboo, in which cracks have recently begun to form.
 
Quote
So if we can encourage the growth of the good, it is worth it. And that's what natives did. They ate both lacto and aerobic ferments of various sorts.
Exactly, and that is my point. As far as I can see, none of the people who failed on zero carb or VLC were consuming plenty of either.

Quote
And we see Anderson and Stef killing off between 15-50% of their gut flora eating meat and no ferments, and changing the types of species present over time.  Their gut flora went back to normal after resuming a mixed diet.  So I am inclined to follow native wisdom here.  More ferments. :yes:  Anaerobic, acid loving ferments of the right sort.  And more wine too. :laugh:
And all I'm doing is adding the aerobic ferments, not subtracting anything. As you know, I consume raw fermented honey and sauerkraut myself. I think it may be improving my tolerance a bit for certain carby foods.

Quote
Thanks for more links.  I am learning a ton right now and am so glad I have elicited the mad scientist in you. :-*  Pretty fascinating about honey producing H2O2.  I was aware of its use in wound care, but not the reason why it might be helpful.
You're welcome, there are other posited reasons too, such as the beneficial microbes in raw and raw fermented honey and the natural plant antibiotics that the bees obtain from plant nectar, especially from wild plants that haven't been weakened by domestication. I'd love to try wild raw fermented honey some day, particularly a good tasting one. Presumably it would be the most beneficial of all types of honeys.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2011, 10:47:55 PM by PaleoPhil »
> "Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong." - Tatertot Tim Steele
> "I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance." -Socrates
> "The way you walked was thorny through no fault of your own

Offline Todd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #10 on: October 17, 2011, 06:29:07 AM »
Here are a few of my notes about gut flora . . .

From Robb Wolf . . .
    * Treat leaky gut with probiotics. It can take weeks or months to heal. Be patient. If it doesn't heal over time, there might be heavy metal toxicity: lead or mercury. Hair analysis can determine that. If taking supplements, be sure they don't contain "modified food starch," which is usually just processed wheat. (Robb Wolf, The Paleo Solution, Podcast #29).
    * For gut problems, a great protocol is super low-carb. That addresses the overgrowth of bad bacteria in the gut. Aggressively supplement with refrigerated probiotics. After 30-60 days, consider slowly re-introducing fruits & vegetables. (Robb Wolf, The Paleo Solution, Podcast #52).

From Chris Kresser . . .
    * The GAPS Diet uses probiotics to heal the leaky gut barrier. (Chris Kresser, The Healthy Skeptic, Podcast #5).
    * Store-bought probiotics are far less effective than the probiotics in fermented foods. The fermented foods have a much higher concentration of microorganisms. And they have a much more diverse population of them. (Chris Kresser, The Healthy Skeptic, Podcast #5).
    * The GAPS Diet uses probiotics, not dairy per se. The Introduction Phase forbids dairy. The problem with dairy isn't just with lactose. Dairy is also a problem due to (beta) casein. (Chris Kresser, The Healthy Skeptic, Podcast #5).
    * For those who have poor digestion, the first step is to restore the good flora in their small intestine. That generally means eating more safe starches such as sweet potatoes, yams, leeks, taro, lotus, green plantains, yucca, et cetera. Chris Kresser himself eats about 100~125 grams of carbs a day. But if adding carbs doesn't work, or the person can't handle starches because of blood sugar issues, then use probiotics and prebiotics. (Chris Kresser, as interviewed by Robb Wolf, The Paleo Solution, Podcast #69).

From Reed Davis . . .
    * Intestinal dysbiosis is when your good bacteria are too few and bad bacteria are too many. It leads to leaky gut. Deal with this by digestive enzymes and probiotics. (Reed Davis, as interviewed by Sean Croxton, Underground Wellness Radio, Podcast October 23, 2009.)
Todd

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1818
  • Mad scientist (not a utopian emulator) Mwuhahahaa!
    • Ancestral Lifestyle
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2011, 08:36:40 PM »
My experiences matches up pretty well with what Chris said, except that if I eat cooked tubers regularly I get more problems than just blood sugar spikes. I also get lower extremity edema and pain, muscle aches, nausea, painful inflamed cystic acne and fluid-filled vesicles, toe and foot arch cramping, from unpleasant dreams to nightmares (I normally don't recall any dreams at all if I avoid cooked/processed carbs), and other issues. I can handle them once in a while with hardly any noticeable effect beyond the fact that they're harder to digest than my raw Paleo foods and sit heavy in my stomach for a while and may cause a slight amount of stomach discomfort.

I've been cooking some of my eggs lately, after getting bored of raw eggs, and was reminded of the fact that I don't digest cooked eggs as well as raw (the more thoroughly they're cooked, the more I get sulfur burps from them and can feel them like a lump in my stomach)--quite the contrary of the conventional view regarding cooked eggs being easier to digest than raw.  :shrug:
> "Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong." - Tatertot Tim Steele
> "I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance." -Socrates
> "The way you walked was thorny through no fault of your own

Online Satya

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16127
  • April 2014
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #12 on: October 25, 2011, 08:09:47 AM »
Came across this article on microbial health through fermented foods.  They bring up grains in the discussion, but we carnivores can just ignore that part. ;)

Nourishing the Center:
Restoring Digestive Health with Fermented Foods
Quote
The increased vitamin and micronutrient levels in fermented foods are significant factors in the promotion of health.  Depending on the strains of bacteria present, fermented dairy products have increased levels of folic acid, pyroxidine, B vitamins, riboflavin, and biotin.  Fermenting vegetables and fruits increases the bioavailability of amino acids, particularly lysine and methionine, and the anaerobic environment of the fermentation process preserves the vitamin C content of the foods.

Offline Osprey101

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #13 on: October 25, 2011, 12:24:55 PM »
I'd like to make some comments here, lest any Crohnies find their way into this thread.

It has been suggested (Ebringer et al.) that Crohn's is caused by a reaction to proteins (specifically, pullulanase- an enzyme that breaks down starch) from Klebsiella pneumoniae. In "her" diet, Elaine Gottschall prescribes large amounts of probiotics in the form of yogurt- however, these organisms MUST be non-bifidobacterial species. (Long story- I tried bifidus by accident, and it didn't agree with me. Go figure.)

Of course, we've known for decades that enteral nutrition works on Crohn's disease, but the "natural" form of food (diet) has largely been ignored by medicine. All these enteral formulations are depleted in complex carbohydrates; some have a bit of starch as a texturizing agent. None (to the best of my knowledge) have ANY wheat, barley, or rye. Probably no oats, either. Simple reason: celiacs might need enteral nutrition.

Of additional interest: antibiotics work to control Crohn's, although not very well. One recent entrant (with only a couple of studies) is Rifaximin (xifaxan), a hemisynthetic rifamycin derivative that is almost entirely insoluble. It stays (97%) in the fecal stream.

It is effective on Klebsiella pneumoniae.

More interestingly, I found a paper that shows at least some bifidobacteria produce pullulanase. Now, whether the non-bifidus strains produce pullulanase- I don't know. I'm working on it.

It all comes full circle, you know?

Offline Paleoeat

  • Support Warrior
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 985
  • "If man made it, don't eat it" Jack LaLane
    • State of the Art Comfort Dentistry
Re: Gut Flora
« Reply #14 on: November 06, 2011, 06:50:21 PM »
Here is a very pertinent article!!!!!!  enjoy!

http://the-scientist.com/2011/10/26/how-probiotic-yogurt-works/
Eating the Diet we evolved to eat: Meat, fat, water, herbs, seasonal veggies. As carb-restricted as I can.

www.SmithtownSmiles.com