Showing posts with label Infectious disease. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Infectious disease. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 5, 2014

Bill Gates’ Project Tycho and Vaccine Voodo

Infectious Disease Research Gets a Boost from ...
Infectious Disease Research Gets a Boost from Websites, Blogs, and Social Media (Photo credit: pennstatenews)
Richard Gale and Gary Null

Progressive Radio Network, December 16, 2013



Population cohort and ecologic studies have become today’s norm for determining vaccine efficacy and support the belief that vaccination has safely reduced the spread of infectious diseases and saved millions of lives. Never a gold standard for scientific inquiry, population studies now make up the bulk of vaccine advocates’ clinical arsenal to discredit more factual biological research favoring the arguments of vaccine opponents. A recent paper published in the November 2013 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, “Contagious Diseases in the United States from 1988 to the Present,” is the first of what will inevitably turn into a flurry of future studies to persuade legislators and the public that vaccination should be mandatory for assuring the health of the nation.[1] The study was spawned from a new project launched at the University of Pittsburgh, Project Tycho, named after the renowned 16th century astronomer and mathematician Tycho Brahe and mentor of Johannes Kepler. Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the National Institutes of Health, the Project is an enormous multi-tiered undertaking to store mortality data for 56 infectious diseases between 1888 and the present for future data-mining and analysis, and to strategize future policies to increase vaccination rates.



The paper’s authors make the extraordinary claim that “103 million cases of childhood diseases (95% of those that would otherwise have occurred) have been prevented since 1924; in the past decade alone, 26 million cases (99% of those that would otherwise occurred) were prevented” from vaccination. Always the obedient slave to CDC and Big Pharm demands, the New York Times chimed in, stating that this is “one of the kind of analysis that can be done when enormous data sets are built and mined.”[2] If this analysis is factual, it can be heralded as one of the most significant achievements to support the miracles and benefits of vaccines. On the other hand, if the University of Pittsburgh researchers’ analysis is scientifically unreliable and perhaps even found deceptive under sound empirical review, then the paper is one of the most misleading propaganda scams published in a peer-reviewed medical literature in recent years. This wouldn’t be the first time the NEJM failed to perform diligent and satisfactory peer-review of papers submitted for publication. In the past, the prestigious journal has been rife with publishing duplicitous science articles that are best described as medical racketeering.



What is most important is to review the data that the Pittsburgh scientists depended upon in order to reach their conclusions. A review of the Project Tycho website and its database reveals an absence of the most critical information necessary for making any historical determination about a vaccine’s effectiveness let alone how many deaths were prevented.[3] The Projects sole accomplishment is to store vast amounts of data (200 million keystrokes) of mortality statistics, including time and location, for 56 infectious diseases over a 125 year period. Scientific data pertaining to vaccination statistics for eight vaccine-specific contagious diseases noted in the NEJM paper is nonexistent. There is no record for the number of people vaccinated for any of the targeted diseases in any given year or location. There are no records for the number of deaths among unvaccinated persons. Nor are there any records of deaths caused by an infectious disease that may have been caused by a vaccine’s infectious agent or in a data set of the population where the vaccine was ineffective and did not provide protection. In fact, the Project contains no data regarding vaccination data at all!!



In addition, the data makes the a priori assumption that the cause of reported deaths due to the infectious diseases that are tracked over the course of 125 years is accurate. Of course, for the majority of this period accurate biological diagnostic technologies to determine an infectious cause of death were either not in existence or were not routinely performed.



So how did the Pittsburgh scientists derive their conclusions? To understand their modus operandi, the reader is asked to lay aside the most basic principles of the scientific method and critical thought. Rather it would be better to cast our minds back 500 years and adopt an irrational bias that finds more in common with alchemical and magical beliefs than modern science.



Without the crucial data for making even rough estimates for the number of vaccinated and non-vaccinated individuals for any given year in order to make an appropriate calculation, the study’s method is really quite simple. “We estimated the numbers of cases of polio, measles, rubella, mumps, hepatitis A, diphtheria and pertussis that were prevented by vaccines,” the paper states, “by subtracting the reported number of weekly cases after the introduction of vaccines from a simulated counterfactual number of cases that would have occurred in the absence of vaccination” (italics our emphasis). A dictionary’s definition for “counterfactual numbers” would be a number that relates to something that has not happened or a case that doesn’t exist. In other words, it is a magically conjured number relying upon mathematical algorithms with no genuine correspondence to the reality of infection rates. Moreover, the paper states it relies on a “quantitative history,” which translates merely into simple plain numbers of death counts without qualifying what those numbers actually represent in any significant, qualitative way (eg., vaccinated vs. non-vaccinated, margin of errors for misdiagnosing causes of death, the rising number of cases of people contracting infections they have been vaccinated against, etc).



The fact that mortality rates for most of the eight “preventable” infectious diseases under investigation were already declining rapidly before the introduction of vaccines is also ignored categorically. What the Pittsburgh team overlooks is the rapid declining numbers of deaths before the release of specific vaccines.



An excellent example is the mortality rates due to measles. Before the advent of the measles vaccine in 1963, death rates had already dropped 98.6 percent for the period while mortality records were kept. This steady decline started to plateau to less than 1 per 100,000 in 1944 and gradually diminished during the remaining years, aside from an abnormal spike in 1990 after the measles vaccine became part of the standard vaccination schedule. In 1959, the rate was approximately 1 in half a million, approaching zero, before the vaccine’s 1963 release.[4] Since the study ignores any potential reason for the 98.6 percent drop in measles mortality before 1963, there is no rationale to conclude the measles vaccine prevented any deaths whatsoever. Given the many decades of decline prior to the vaccine, whatever the cause(s) for this downward movement, it very likely would have continued to where measles mortality rates are today without a vaccine ever being developed. For example, there was never a vaccine developed for Scarlet Fever, however, in the UK it declined from being one of the more deadly infectious diseases with a mortality rate of 160 per 100,000 around 1860 to almost zero by 1940. Likewise, pertussis was already rapidly declining before the vaccine became widely used in the late 1940s.[5]



In what has now become a standardized assault against parents who either delay or withhold vaccinating their children, the Pittsburgh authors want us to believe that non-vaccinated children were responsible for the recent increase in pertussis cases. However, putting aside the pertussis vaccine’s litany of serious and life-threatening risks, data regarding its efficacy is gradually revealing this vaccine as one medicine’s major debacles. What the authors fail to question is whether the vaccine itself might be responsible for this escalation. Dr. Ruiting Lan and his colleagues at the University of New South Wales have identified a new vaccine-resistant genotype of pertussis (ptxP3) that has increased dramatically. It was responsible for about 30 percent of whooping cough cases before the 2008 epidemic to 84 percent of whooping cough cases in Australia today.[6,7] This new and more deadly strain according to the CDC is now being reported in the US and there is a growing body of research pointing to recent whooping cough outbreaks being directly linked to the vaccine.[8,9] This alone may account for the increase of whooping cough cases being referred to in the NEJM paper and a reason why vaccinated children are coming down with the infection as well. The foremost question scientists should be concerning themselves, rather than investing millions of dollars to play computer games with Magical Numbers, is to determine whether the DPT vaccine is responsible for the emergence of a vaccine-resistant pertussis outbreaks.



Yet there is even more damning research against the pertussis vaccine and its failures. In 2009, the CDC determined that 99.94 percent of American children were vaccinated against pertussis; therefore, the herd immunity threshold was surpassed and according to this unproven theory there should be no transmission. A recent FDA biological study performed on young baboons discovered that the pertussis vaccine, while possibly protecting against wild infection, in fact doesn’t eliminate infection; rather, the study found, that vaccinated baboons are colonizing the virus and transmitting it to others.[10] If this research holds up, it debunks any credibility that may be given to the belief in herd immunity.



The article also makes reference to the large 2010 pertussis outbreak but fails to mention that according to a study published in the December 2012 issue of the Journal of Pediatrics, among the 9000-plus cases in California (the largest among the states), 91 percent were fully “vaccinated according to national recommendations.”[11] During the 1986 pertussis outbreak in Kansas, 90 percent of the confirmed cases were vaccinated. This high percentage of outbreaks among vaccinated children is common during recent pertussis spikes in different locations. So who is truly endangering society? The pertussis vaccine is one instance where widespread vaccination is backfiring and increasing the incidences of infection, hospitalization and death. However, none of these hard historical and qualitative statistics are factored into the Project Tychos calculations.



The University of Pittsburgh’ NEJM article is a grand alchemical illusion of misinformation. The researchers either lack or ignore the most critical data and statistics necessary to arrive at medically valid conclusions about the causes behind deaths attributed to viral and bacterial infectious disease. Therefore, the report is best viewed as an archaic and pseudo-scientific attempt to discredit vaccine opponents and advance Bill Gates’ and his cohorts’ ambitions to legally mandate vaccination and decimate health freedom for individuals and parents to make their own decisions regarding medical interventions for themselves and their children. Wherever Bill Gates’ funding footprint is found in vaccine-related endeavors, we can be certain it is to advance his departing legacy as the foremost leader to vaccinate every infant and child on the planet irrespective of vaccines’ dangers and whether or not they are as effective as the CDC and vaccine makers allege.



Finally, there is a telling aftermath to the NEJM article and the New York Time’s introducing Project Tycho to the public. Why would a project, aimed at increasing vaccination rates, name their initiative after an astronomer credited with laying out the foundation for the Keplerian laws of planetary motion?



There is a perfectly good motive to name the Project after the famous 16th century Danish astronomer but it is not one that Gates nor the university want to acknowledge. Tycho’s significance for a vaccine initiative has nothing to do with the formidable scientist’s observation of the movements of celestial bodies. Rather it is Tycho the notorious alchemist we need to turn to in order to understand the Project’s patron saint. And here we find Tycho’s alchemy mirroring Bill Gate’s financial support for scientists to summon the ghosts of fallacious magical statistics conjured through algorithms to mislead the media and public.



One of the greatest fears parents express against vaccinating their children concerns vaccine’s many toxic chemicals and ingredients and vaccines’ serious and life-threatening adverse effects. For many decades, the scientific literature has documented a wide variety of neurological and physical disorders attributed to vaccines. Many of these long term reactions (development and neurological impairment, asthma and allergies, type-1 diabetes, GI disorders, etc.) are and being observed in epidemic proportions in children. As we have noted, the University of Pittsburgh researchers completely disregarded the questions concerning vaccine efficacy and safety in their study. Their methodology resides strictly in the abstract world of mathematical make-believe, removed from the hard sciences of immunology and molecular biology. Their conclusions to seduce a correspondence between infectious disease mortality rates and voodoo math in order resurrect millions of imaginary saved lives due to a “what if” vaccination has as much credibility as Tycho’s own belief that there was a direct correspondence between the individual planets, certain metals in the earth, and different bodily organs.



In 1901, and again in 2010, Tycho’s body was exhumed for medical analysis. The discoveries and causes of death uncovered the presence of severe toxic poisoning. The skull of his naval cavity was tainted green from excessive copper exposure, and high levels of mercury were detected, likely due to his extensive alchemical experiments to transform base metals into gold and silver and his life’s second endeavor to discover a universal medicine to cure all illnesses.[12]



Bill Gates and the University of Pittsburgh couldn’t have found a more fitting historical personage to honor their multi-million dollar disease surveillance and data mining project to convince legislators to make the vaccination of all Americans mandatory. Tycho’s hubris, in both of his alchemical endeavors, seems certain to have killed him. The alchemist’s drives correspond nicely with the dangers of vaccines, their dozens of toxic chemicals, and the rising epidemic of medical conditions and developmental disorders in children leading to lives of suffering and early death. Therefore dedicating this extraordinary data collection Project after Tycho is perhaps the only thing Gates and the university got correct.



NOTES



[1] Van Panhuis WG, Greenfenstette J, Jung SY, Chok NS, Cross A, Eng H, Lee BY, Zdorozhny V, Brown S, Cummings D, Burke DS. “Contagious Diseases in the United States from 1888 to the Present.” New England Journal of Medicine November 28, 2013, 369; 22.

[2] Lohr S. “The Vaccination Effect: 100 Million Cases of Contagious Disease Prevented,” New York Times. November 27, 2013 http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/27/the-vaccination-effect-100-million-cases-of-contagious-disease-prevented/?_r=0

[3] Project Tycho, University of Pittsburgh. http://www.tycho.pitt.edu

[4] Humphries, S, Bystrianyk R. Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines and the Forgotten History. Self-published. www.dissolvingillusions.com

[5] Humphries, S. Ibid.

[6] Lam, C., Octavia, S., Bahrame, Z., Sintchenko, V., Gilbert, G.L., & Lan, R. (2012) 
Selection and emergence of pertussis toxin promoter ptxP3 allele in the evolution of Bordetella Pertussis.
Infection Genetics and Evolution. 12(2): 492-495; Octavia, S., Sintchenko, V., Gilbert, G.L., Lawrence, A.L., Keil, A.D., Hogg, G., & Lan, R. (2012) 
”Newly emerging clones of bordetella Pertussis carrying prn2 and ptxP3 alleles implicated in australian pertussis epidemic in 2008-2010”.
Journal of Infectious Diseases. 205(8): 1220-1224

[7] Norrie J. “Vaccine Resistant Whooping Cough Takes Epidemic to New Level,” The Conversation, March 21, 2012

[8] “New Wooping Cough Strain in US Raises Questions” Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/02/07/new-whooping-cough-strain-in-us-raises-questions/

[9] Mooi FR, van Loo I, van Gent M, He Q, Bart MJ, Heuvelman KJ, de Greeff S, Diavatopoulos D, Teunis P, Nagelkerke N, and Mertsola J, “Bordetella pertussis Strains with Increased Toxin Production Associated with Pertussis Resurgence” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/15/8/08-1511_article.htm



[10] Mercola J. “FDA Pertussis Vaccine Study Shatters Illusions of Vaccine-Induced Immunity.” Mercola.com December 10, 2013.



[11] California Pertussis Epidemic 2010, Journal of Pediatrics 2012 Dec; 161 (6): 1091http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22819634

[12] Tycho Brahe Biography. Alchemy and Alchemists. http://alchemy-and-alchemists.blogspot.com/2010/07/tycho-brahe-biography.html; Wikipediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tycho_Brahe

Thursday, October 24, 2013

Do You Really Need Poo-in-a-Pill?

English: Picture of the RepHresh Probiotics pi...
English: Picture of the RepHresh Probiotics pill box (Photo credit: Wikipedia)




By Dr. Mercola
Mounting research suggests that supplementing with probiotics (good bacteria) is probably more important than taking a multivitamin, and this is due to the profoundly important role gut bacteria play in your health.
Many still fail to recognize that the microbes in your gut influence far more than your digestion—their influence actually extends to your brain, your heart, your skin, your mood, your weight, even genetic expression…
Colicky babies who are exclusively breastfed may also benefit from probiotics, according to recent research.1 In many ways, your health is deeply rooted in your gut bacteria, both in terms of maintaining emotional and physical wellness and preventing chronic disease.
Modern living, with its obsession with keeping our surroundings as sterile and germ-free as possible appears to have backfired in a most dramatic way, by making us more prone to sickness. Germ-free living, it turns out, is not in your best interest.

Fecal Transplants—the Latest Advance in the Battle Against Severe Disease




Two years ago, I reported on the emergence of fecal transplants, a relatively simple process in which feces from a healthy donor is transplanted into a patient, typically via an enema or colonoscopy. The procedure has shown remarkable results in treating a wide range of health conditions.
Sad to say, earlier this year a relative of a good friend of mine was hospitalized and came down with a serious C. diff infection. I strongly advised the family to get a fecal transplant. However, the family refused, and listened to their conventional doctor. The relative died a few days later. So this is serious, and you need to pay attention as this might affect someone you know.
According to Dr. Mark Mellow, medical director of the Digestive Health Center at Integris Baptist Medical Center in Oklahoma City, fecal transplants lead to rapid resolution of symptoms in 98 percent of patients with Clostridium difficile who don’t respond to multiple previous treatments.
C. difficile is a bacterial infection that is often resistant to antibiotics, is often debilitating, and can be fatal. Research has also found that fecal transplants show promise in the treatment of ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, with symptoms sometimes improving in mere days.
Preliminary research2 from the Netherlands has even revealed that transplanting fecal matter from healthy thin people into obese people with metabolic syndrome led to an improvement in insulin sensitivity, which adds further credence to the immense role healthy gut bacteria can play in your health.
It’s not surprising then to learn that conventional medicine is taking such findings to the next level—this time by putting donated fecal bacteria in a pill... However, I would dissuade you from thinking that this might be a magical route to fix less than life threatening conditions.
While I believe fecal transplantation can be lifesaving in some circumstances, I want to make it clear that you will likely never have to resort to receiving donated feces if you address your gut health on a daily basis—by avoiding factors that kill off your beneficial gut bacteria, and continuously “reseeding” your gut through a healthy diet.
Also, any time you take an antibiotic, it is important to take probiotics to repopulate the beneficial bacteria in your gut that are killed by the antibiotic right along with the pathogenic bacteria. If you don’t, you’re leaving the door wide open for further health problems.

Fecal Bacteria in a Pill May Successfully Treat Gut Infection

That said, as reported in the featured article,3 capsules containing fecal bacteria from healthy donors are another, less invasive way to “transplant” healthy bacteria into your gut, should you suffer with chronic, debilitating gut infections. According to Thomas Louie, an infectious-disease specialist at the University of Calgary in Alberta, Canada, 30 out of 31 patients were successfully cured of recurringClostridium difficile infection with such pills.4
As reported by Scientific American:5
“C. difficile often sets in after antibiotic use has disrupted a person's normal balance of gut bacteria. A gut microbiome transplant using bacteria from the feces of a healthy donor restores that balance, and can be highly effective against C. difficile, which is notoriously difficult to treat with antibiotics.
...The patients in Louie’s study each swallowed 24–34 freshly assembled capsules of bacteria, which were coated with gelatin to survive the stomach and reach the intestines. The team followed the patients' progress for up to one year afterwards by sequencing the gut microbiome. They found that C. difficile had disappeared and bacteria associated with a healthy gut microbiome, such as Bacteroides, Clostridium coccoides, Clostridium leptum, Prevotella, Bifidobacteria and Desulfovibrio, increased in numbers.”
The fecal matter in question is typically donated by a healthy family member, so the pills are made for each individual patient. To make them, the feces are processed until only bacteria remains, which are then encapsulated inside a triple-layer of gelatin in order to safely make it through your digestive system into your intestines before dissolving. According to Dr. Ravi Kamepalli, MD, an infectious diseases physician and author of a study on fecal transplantation tolerance, fecal transplantation has a 98 percent success rate, and the vast majority of patients report being overall satisfied with the ease and effectiveness of the procedure.
"Human beings are 90 percent bacteria and once that balance is altered with antibiotics, opportunistic infections can cause serious problems. All we are doing with this treatment is resetting the balance,” Dr. Kamepalli told Medical News Today.6

What Bush-Men Are Teaching Modern Scientists About Microbial Balance

An interesting article published by The Human Food Project7 highlights the dramatic differences between our ancestral behavior and modern living, in terms of how we maintain this crucially important balance with microbes of all kinds. In it, the author, Jeff Leach, a Human Food Project researcher, describes a recent visit to the Hadzu, a tribe of traditional hunter-gatherers in Tanzania.
“I had come to Tanzania as part of a collaboration of US, Canadian, and Tanzanian researchers to try and understand what the gut microbiome might look like in a group that still hunts and forage’s 95-100% of its food...” he writes.
To his amazement, after killing, skinning, and gutting an Impala, the Hadza men scrubbed the blood off their hands using a handful of the animal’s stomach content. They also consumed partially raw chunks of the Impala’s intestines that had been quickly roasted over an open fire for about a minute. Leach continues:
“Whether it’s an Impala, Dik Dik, Zebra, bush pig, Kudu or any other of the myriad of mammals they hunt and eat, becoming one with the deceased’s microbes in any number of ways is common place – same goes for 700 plus species of birds they hunt (minus abundant amounts of stomach contents for hand sanitizer!). While less obvious than at the ‘kill site,’ the transfer of microbes continued back in camp when women, children and other men handled the newly arrived raw meat, internal organs, and skin. The transfer continued as the hunters engaged (touching) other members of the camp.”
Despite the ingrained fear of germs in Western societies, it is highly probable that many of our modern diseases are the end result of a dramatic disconnect from the natural world, which is teeming with microbiota. The so-called hygiene hypothesis states that early exposure to dirt and germs actually programs your immune system to properly identify threats. According to this theory, if you're healthy, exposure to bacteria and viruses can serve as "natural vaccines" that strengthen your immune system and provide long-lasting immunity against disease.
As Leach discusses in his article, there’s compelling evidence showing that we probably need to be exposed to FAR more microbial organisms than we currently allow ourselves to be:
“[C]learly our hunter-gatherer ancestors had a more intimate involvement in the total microbial metacommunity of the environments they inhabited than we do in the concrete jungles we call home.  It’s tantalizing to think that as part of this microbial web, that our ancestors didn’t benefit in some way with the nearly daily sampling and exchange of microbes with animals as diverse as zebra, impala, birds, or even carnivores... or from a dizzying number of plants sprouting from soil teeming with bacteria (and their genes) worth sampling and possibly utilizing for our mutual benefit. Not only is this plausible, it’s highly likely.”

Gut Health Begins at Birth

A baby’s initial exposure to microbes occurs during the birth process itself. As he is squeezed through the birth canal, your baby receives his first dose of bacteria. This initial transfer of microbes from mother to infant is the reason why it’s so crucial for pregnant women to optimize their gut flora before and during pregnancy. Failure to do so can have wide-ranging consequences for the child’s health.
Research shows that there is a close connection between abnormal gut flora and abnormal brain development—a condition Dr. Campbell-McBride calls Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS). GAPS is the result of poorly developed or imbalanced gut flora and may manifest as a conglomerate of symptoms that can fit the diagnosis of autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), attention deficit disorder (ADD) without hyperactivity, dyslexia, dyspraxia, or obsessive-compulsive disorder, just to name a few possibilities.
In short, abnormal gut flora sets the stage and can have a dramatic impact on your child’s overall mental and physical development. Add to this the tendency for modern mothers to carry disinfectant lotions, sprays and wipes everywhere they go, in case little Junior should happen across a piece of dirt, and this initial abnormal composition of microbiota could easily be compounded.
Inappropriate use of antibiotic drugs is another factor. Despite repeated warnings that antibiotics do not work for most cases of sore throat and bronchitis for example, doctors are still prescribing them8 for these conditions. Not only does this unnecessarily decimate your gut bacteria, which are critical for the optimal functioning of your immune system, this kind of misuse is also driving the rise in antibiotic-resistant infections that are far more deadly.
There’s also been a significant decrease in breastfeeding since the advent of infant formula, and this too plays a role. We now know that breastfed babies develop entirely different gut flora compared to bottle-fed babies. Infant formula never was, and never will be a healthy replacement to breast milk, for a number of reasons, and altered gut flora is one of them.

Your Health Hinges on What You Put Onto and Into Your Body

As discussed by Dr. Robynne Chutkan, MD in a recent interview by The Atlantic9 about her new book  Gutbliss: A 10-Day Plan to Ban Bloat, Flush Toxins, and Dump Your Digestive Baggage, your health is really dependent on your digestive wellness, and it all begins with what you do and do not put into your mouth.
Dr. Chutkan’s expertise is in the area of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, but the impact of gut microbes go far beyond that. For example, she rightfully points out how your skin “mirrors” the state of your GI tract. Skin problems like Rosacea, for example, can be effectively cleared up by addressing your intestinal health. According to Dr. Chutkan, Rosacea is frequently assocated with dysbiosis, a condition caused by microbial imbalances in your body.
Now, since your gut bacteria are an active and integrated part of your body, as such these microbes are heavily dependent on your diet and vulnerable to your lifestyle. If you consume a lot of processed foods and sweetened drinks for instance, your gut bacteria are likely going to be severely compromised because processed foods in general will destroy healthy microflora, and sugars of all kinds feed bad bacteria and yeast. So avoiding processed foods and sugary foods is a critical first step to optimize your gut flora. Your gut bacteria are also very sensitive to:
  • Antibiotics, both in the form of oral medicines and meats from animals raised in confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs). Livestock antibiotic use accounts for 80 percent of the total antibiotics sold in the US, so if you regularly eat CAFO meats, you’re exposed to a continuous supply of low-dose antibiotics
  • Agricultural chemicals (particularly glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, which is used in large amounts on genetically engineered “Roundup Ready” crops)
  • Chlorinated and fluoridated water
  • Antibacterial soap
  • Pollution
Since most of us are exposed to these detrimental factors at least occasionally, it's generally a good idea to "reseed" the good bacteria in your gut by taking a high-quality probiotic supplement or eating fermented foods. This is important for everyone, but as mentioned earlier, it’s imperative if you are a woman who is pregnant, as your newborn depends on you for its initial gut flora. Many women of reproductive age are deficient in a wide range of vitally important probiotic strains—a deficiency that transfers to their offspring, and may set the stage for any number of problems.

You Don’t Need Poo-in-a-Pill to Achieve Digestive Health

The micro-organisms living in your digestive tract form an important inner ecosystem that influences countless aspects of your health. Since virtually all of us are exposed to factors that destroy beneficial bacteria in your gut, such as antibiotics (whether you take them for an illness or get them from contaminated animal products), chlorinated water, antibacterial soap, agricultural chemicals and pollution, ensuring your gut bacteria remain balanced should be considered an ongoing process.
Barring an emergency situation, in which a fecal microbiota transplant could be the difference between life and death, the easiest and best way to reseed your gut with healthy bacteria is to include fermented foods in your diet. Additionally, one of the major side benefits of eating a healthy whole food-based diet like the one described in my nutrition plan is that it automatically supports your gut health by allowing beneficial gut bacteria to flourish.
While you could certainly use a high-quality probiotic supplement, fermented foods can supply your body with good bacteria FAR more effectively and inexpensively than a supplement. As an example, it’s unusual to find a probiotic supplement containing more than 10 billion colony-forming units, but when my team tested fermented vegetables produced using a probiotic starter cultures, they had 10 trillion colony-forming units of bacteria. Literally, one serving of vegetables was equal to an entire bottle of a high potency probiotic!
So clearly, you’re far better off using fermented foods. Again, when choosing fermented foods, steer clear of pasteurized versions, as pasteurization will destroy many of the naturally occurring probiotics. Examples of traditionally fermented foods include:
  • Fermented vegetables
  • Lassi (an Indian yoghurt drink)
  • Fermented milk, such as kefir (like fermented vegetables, a quart of unpasteurized kefir also has far more active bacteria than you can get from a probiotic supplement)
  • Natto (fermented soy)
If you do not eat fermented foods on a regular basis, taking a high-quality probiotic supplement is definitely recommended. It can also be incredibly useful to help maintain a well-functioning digestive system should you occasionally stray from your healthy diet and consume excess grains or sugar, or if you have to take an antibiotic.
Enhanced by Zemanta