Re: Re: The Gut

[Guest guest]

Barb , It looks like the main species of gut flora in horses is lactic acid bacteria .same as us ,if that's the case a look at other fermented products may give a clue as to the beets success.. Many CFS report therapeutic results from including Sauerkraut in their diet ..Now in the fermentation of Sauerkraut one of the products is lactic acid ..Just surmising here ,but if other bacteria have replaced LA producing Bac then its understandable that replacing lactic acid is a beneficial thing to do ...just looking one step further it could kick start the gut bacterial cycle ..

http://www.equerrys.com/thesis-probiotics.htm

http://www.drweil.com/u/QA/QA281235/

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Barb PeckSent: 18 July 2006 14:46infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut

This is what I'm thinking is going on with the SYndrome X population in horses- just don't know how to correct it with them.Reading some interesting stuff of how beet-pulp affects their digestion and fermentation process- and the flora..Humans don't eat beet-pulp though- but we do eat beets..Barb wrote in part:So as per my site .. altered conditions in the gut allowing normally reined in pathogens to escape causing a duel deep seated infections ..>

[Guest guest]

if you read my site, You will see that I believe replacing poor quality gut flora with so callelled normal flora is priority requirement in any therapy .How to achieve this is the question .It's a fact that proprietary probiotics nether multiply or even stay in the gut .gut flora is not permanently restored via probiotics , despite the hype ,

They present as an antigen and subsequently the immune system will mobilise ageist them ... They are very much a double edged therapy ,with a balance to be struck between the undoubted benefits if ingesting friendly bacteria and the flip side being , committing Immune resources to combat alien ,none self microbes . Can conditions in the gut be improved within the time scale that the microbes are effective ..the answer must be no , in most cases anyway .

I have not plucked this view from the air I have the references ..read my site "normal Flora" and the "treatment" section . Click the bold type for links

Vendors of probiotics make a selling point of the transient effect of probiotics ,[not to mention a Mickey Mouse explanation for the reasons of why the transient effect] This link has a nice graph illustrating the point ..

http://www.customprobiotics.com/about_probiotics_a.htm

http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of publicspiritSent: 19 July 2006 00:28infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut

Barb and ,One note on the gut flora: a good friend did her PhD research on thisissue. As a result, there is a very effective commercial probioticavailable in Republic of Georgia. Her research showed thatnon-pathogenic E.coli produces a fermentation that kills offpathogenic "competitors" in the gut. This destruction of competitorsdoes not always work, it depends on how resistant the pathogens are. In treating intestinal infections, it is sometimes necessary toeliminate the pathogenic bacteria first - using appropriatemedications - then restore the normal flora using probiotics. Inaddition to the bacteria in probiotics most commonly found in healthfood stores, this probiotic contains non-pathogenic strains ofEnterococcus and E.coli - both are necessary for digestion. Thisprobiotic is often used to restore the normal intestinal flora in ourpatients.> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:14/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

, are you saying that you've seen any studies refuting specifically the effectiveness of "non-pathogenic E.coli"? This is not an organism I've seen listed on the probiotics I take. Is it available in the U.S.? If not, then it seems like something worth exploring rather than dismissing out of hand. Or if you have specfic info on this organism, I'd like to know more. Here are two links to a German Pharamaceutical site with a lot of research supporting the effectiveness of the e-coli organism. http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=clinical http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=evidence penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: if you read my site, You will see that I believe replacing poor quality gut flora with so callelled normal flora is priority requirement in any therapy .How to achieve this is the question .It's a fact that proprietary probiotics nether multiply or even stay in the gut .gut flora is not permanently restored via probiotics , despite the hype , They present as an antigen and subsequently the immune system will mobilise ageist them ... They are very much a double edged therapy ,with a balance to be struck between the undoubted benefits if ingesting friendly bacteria and the flip side being , committing Immune resources to combat alien ,none self microbes . Can conditions in the gut be improved within the time scale that the microbes are effective ..the answer must be no , in most cases anyway . I have not plucked this view from the air I have the references ..read my site "normal Flora" and the "treatment" section . Click the bold type for links Vendors of probiotics make a selling point of the transient effect of probiotics ,[not to mention a Mickey Mouse explanation for the reasons of why the transient effect] This link has a nice graph illustrating the point .. http://www.customprobiotics.com/about_probiotics_a.htm http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/ -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of publicspiritSent: 19 July 2006 00:28infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut Barb and ,One note on the gut flora: a good friend

did her PhD research on thisissue. As a result, there is a very effective commercial probioticavailable in Republic of Georgia. Her research showed thatnon-pathogenic E.coli produces a fermentation that kills offpathogenic "competitors" in the gut. This destruction of competitorsdoes not always work, it depends on how resistant the pathogens are. In treating intestinal infections, it is sometimes necessary toeliminate the pathogenic bacteria first - using appropriatemedications - then restore the normal flora using probiotics. Inaddition to the bacteria in probiotics most commonly found in healthfood stores, this probiotic contains non-pathogenic strains ofEnterococcus and E.coli - both are necessary for digestion. Thisprobiotic is often used to restore the normal intestinal flora in ourpatients.> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:14/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

No ,I'm not saying that ..I'm saying that ANY introduced bacteria without the recognition code is none self , ..There is no intelligence in the matter ..Our IS do not filter ,sort by desirability ..If the bacteria we come into contact with do not have the recognition molecule [a polysaccharide] then its none self ..Its the reason why we need 80% of our immune system in the gut ,we encounter 95% of pathogens by ingesting them , And of course ,it's why our IS doesn't power up against our own flora. It's a fundamental of medicine . So the bacteria may be very effective ,but the clock is ticking on it's effectiveness ...As per my site , We have our own personal microbial fingerprint , it gives us our unique body odour , if it we assimilated incoming microbes our BO would be constantly changing as the microbe mix changed ...changing the balance of our gut flora is quite difficult to do ...And not so incidentally one of the main symptoms of a yeast infection iis the permanent changing of BO ...

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 19 July 2006 22:58infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut

, are you saying that you've seen any studies refuting specifically the effectiveness of "non-pathogenic E.coli"? This is not an organism I've seen listed on the probiotics I take. Is it available in the U.S.? If not, then it seems like something worth exploring rather than dismissing out of hand. Or if you have specfic info on this organism, I'd like to know more.

Here are two links to a German Pharamaceutical site with a lot of research supporting the effectiveness of the e-coli organism.

http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=clinical

http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=evidence

penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote:

if you read my site, You will see that I believe replacing poor quality gut flora with so callelled normal flora is priority requirement in any therapy .How to achieve this is the question .It's a fact that proprietary probiotics nether multiply or even stay in the gut .gut flora is not permanently restored via probiotics , despite the hype ,

They present as an antigen and subsequently the immune system will mobilise ageist them ... They are very much a double edged therapy ,with a balance to be struck between the undoubted benefits if ingesting friendly bacter ia and the flip side being , committing Immune resources to combat alien ,none self microbes . Can conditions in the gut be improved within the time scale that the microbes are effective ..the answer must be no , in most cases anyway .

I have not plucked this view from the air I have the references ..read my site "normal Flora" and the "treatment" section . Click the bold type for links

Vendors of probiotics make a selling point of the transient effect of probiotics ,[not to mention a Mickey Mouse explanation for the reasons of w hy the transient effect] This link has a nice graph illustrating the point ..

http://www.customprobiotics.com/about_probiotics_a.htm

http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of publicspiritSent: 19 July 2006 00:28infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut

Barb and ,One note on the gut flora: a good friend did her PhD research on thisissue. As a result, there is a very effective commercial probioticavailable in Republic of Georgia. Her research showed thatnon-pathogenic E.coli produces a fermentation that kills offpathogenic "competitors" in the gut. This destruction of competitorsdoes not always work, it depends on how resistant the pathogens are. In treating intestinal infections, it is sometimes necessary toeliminate the pathogenic bacteria first - using appropriatemedications - then restore the normal flora using probiotics. Inaddition to the bacteria in probiotics most commonly found in healthfood stores, this probiotic contains non-pathogenic strains ofEnterococcus and E.coli - both are necessary for digestion. Thisprobiotic is often used to restore the normal intestinal flora in ourpatients.> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:14/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

So how do you explain all that research? This explanation seems a little too black and white to me. Organisms are very adaptable, in all kinds of environments, and many can trick the IS into ignoring them. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible for good bacteria to do the same thing. penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: No ,I'm not saying that ..I'm saying that ANY introduced bacteria without the recognition code is none self , ..There is no intelligence in the matter ..Our IS do not filter ,sort by desirability ..If the bacteria we come into contact with do not have the recognition molecule [a polysaccharide] then its none self ..Its the reason why we need 80% of our immune system in the gut ,we encounter 95% of pathogens by ingesting them , And of course ,it's why our IS doesn't power up against our own flora. It's a fundamental of medicine . So the bacteria may be very effective ,but the clock is ticking on it's effectiveness ...As per my site , We have our own personal microbial fingerprint , it gives us our unique body odour , if it we assimilated incoming microbes our BO would be constantly changing as the microbe mix changed ...changing the balance of our gut flora is quite

difficult to do ...And not so incidentally one of the main symptoms of a yeast infection iis the permanent changing of BO ... -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 19 July 2006 22:58infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut , are you saying that you've seen any studies refuting specifically the effectiveness of "non-pathogenic E.coli"? This is not an organism I've seen listed on the probiotics I take. Is it available in the U.S.? If not, then it seems like something worth exploring rather than dismissing out of hand. Or if

you have specfic info on this organism, I'd like to know more. Here are two links to a German Pharamaceutical site with a lot of research supporting the effectiveness of the e-coli organism. http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=clinical http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=evidence penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: if you read my site, You will see that I believe replacing poor quality gut flora with so callelled normal flora is priority requirement in any

therapy .How to achieve this is the question .It's a fact that proprietary probiotics nether multiply or even stay in the gut .gut flora is not permanently restored via probiotics , despite the hype , They present as an antigen and subsequently the immune system will mobilise ageist them ... They are very much a double edged therapy ,with a balance to be struck between the undoubted benefits if ingesting friendly bacter ia and the flip side being , committing Immune resources to combat alien ,none self microbes . Can conditions in the gut be improved within the time scale that the microbes are effective ..the answer must be no , in most cases anyway . I have not plucked this view from the air I have the references ..read my site "normal Flora" and the "treatment" section . Click the bold type for links Vendors of probiotics make a selling point of the transient effect of probiotics ,[not to mention a Mickey Mouse explanation for the reasons of w hy the transient effect] This link has a nice graph illustrating the point .. http://www.customprobiotics.com/about_probiotics_a.htm http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/ -----Original Message-----From: infections

[mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of publicspiritSent: 19 July 2006 00:28infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut Barb and ,One note on the gut flora: a good friend did her PhD research on thisissue. As a result, there is a very effective commercial probioticavailable in Republic of Georgia. Her research showed thatnon-pathogenic E.coli produces a fermentation that kills offpathogenic "competitors" in the gut. This destruction of competitorsdoes not always work, it depends on how resistant the pathogens are. In treating intestinal infections, it is sometimes necessary toeliminate the pathogenic bacteria first - using appropriatemedications - then restore the normal flora using probiotics. Inaddition to the bacteria in probiotics most commonly found in

healthfood stores, this probiotic contains non-pathogenic strains ofEnterococcus and E.coli - both are necessary for digestion. Thisprobiotic is often used to restore the normal intestinal flora in ourpatients.> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:14/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

I just have explained , and your right it couldn't be more black & white ...Not many have the cloak of invisibility those that use this trick are the killer bugs such as malaria .

Look at this in-depth study you will note they use the term probiotics "plural" many different species ..NOT ONE multiplies or even stays in the gut ..The question is WHY ??? If its not self & none self what is the reason ...

The other extract illustrates very clearly that introduced probiotic bacteria does not permanently colonise the gut ,even when passed from mother to baby ...again WHY?

Now I've given you plenty of cynical evidence of how exogenously introduced bacteria does not stay in the gut ,Give me your evidence for your opinion that probiotic bacteria uses camouflage to hide from the IS and colonise the gut ...

Probiotics: determinants of survival and growth in the gut

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/73/2/399S

Bifidobacteria and lactobacilli are purportedly beneficial to human health and are called probiotics. Their survival during passage through the human gut, when administered in fermented milk products, has been investigated intensely in recent years. Well-controlled, small-scale studies on diarrhea in both adults and infants have shown that probiotics are beneficial and that they survive in sufficient numbers to affect gut microbial metabolism. Survival rates have been estimated at 20–40% for selected strains, the main obstacles to survival being gastric acidity and the action of bile salts. Although it is believed that the maximum probiotic effect can be achieved if the organisms adhere to intestinal mucosal cells, there is no evidence that exogenously administered probiotics do adhere to the mucosal cells. Instead, they seem to pass into the feces without having adhered or multiplied.. Thus, to obtain a continuous exogenous probiotic effect, the probiotic culture must be ingested continually. Certain exogenously administered substances enhance the action of both exogenous and endogenous probiotics. Human milk contains many substances that stimulate the growth of bifidobacteria in vitro and also in the small intestine of infants; however, it is unlikely that they function in the colon. However, lactulose and certain fructose-containing compounds, called prebiotics, are not digested in the small intestine but pass into the cecum unchanged, where they are selectively utilized by probiotics. Beneficial effects may thus accrue from exogenously administered probiotics, often administered with prebiotics, or by endogenous bifidobacteria and lactobacilli, whose metabolic activity and growth may also be enhanced by the administration of prebiotics.

Administration of oral probiotic bacteria to pregnant women causes temporary infantile colonization.Schultz M, Gottl C, Young RJ, Iwen P, Vanderhoof JA.Department of Internal Medicine I, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. michael.schultz@...BACKGROUND: It is difficult to permanently change the composition of the complex intestinal microflora of the adult. Orally administered probiotic bacteria produce only temporary colonization of the intestine in patients with a fully developed gut microflora. The gastrointestinal tract of a healthy fetus is sterile. During the birth process and rapidly thereafter, microbes from the mother and the surrounding environment colonize the gastrointestinal tract until a dense, complex microflora develops. Probiotic bacteria have been shown to beneficially influence the intestinal and systemic immune system and mediate protection against nosocomial infections affecting the neonate. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether oral administration of the probiotic micro-organism Lactobacillus rhamnosus strain GG (L. GG) to the pregnant woman leads to colonization of the newborn infant. METHODS: The authors identified six women who were taking L. GG during late pregnancy. None of the children received L. GG after birth, and their mothers discontinued its consumption at the time of delivery. L. GG concentration in fecal samples was determined by colony morphology and molecular analysis. RESULTS: In all four children delivered vaginally and in one of two children delivered by cesarean section, L. GG was present in fecal samples at 1 and 6 months of age. Three children remained colonized for at least 12 months, and in two children L. GG was detected in fecal samples at 24 months of age. Three mothers were tested 1 month post partum and no L. GG was present in fecal samples. No L. GG was found in one of these women 24 months post partum. There was no L. GG detectable in stools of the siblings of two children at the 2-year and 3-years after birth of the index child. L. GG was not isolated from the stools of children whose mothers were not taking L. GG. CONCLUSIONS: Temporary colonization of an infant with L. GG may be possible by colonizing the pregnant mother before delivery. Colonization is stable for as long as 6 months, and in unexplained circumstances may persist for as long as 24 months.PMID: 15076629 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 07:29infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut

So how do you explain all that research? This explanation seems a little too black and white to me. Organisms are very adaptable, in all kinds of environments, and many can trick the IS into ignoring them. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible for good bacteria to do the same thing.

penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote:

No ,I'm not saying that ..I'm saying that ANY introduced bacteria without the recognition code is none self , ..There is no intelligence in the matter ..Our IS do not filter ,sort by desirability ..If the bacteria we come into contact with do not have the re cognition molecule [a polysaccharide] then its none self ..Its the reason why we need 80% of our immune system in the gut ,we encounter 95% of pathogens by ingesting them , And of course ,it's why our IS doesn't power up against our own flora. It's a fundamental of medicine . So the bacteria may be very effective ,but the clock is ticking on it's effectiveness ...As per my site , We have our own personal microbial fingerprint , it gives us our unique body odour , if it we assimilated incoming microbes our BO would be constantly changing as the microbe mix changed ...changing the balance of our gut flora is quite difficult to do ...And not so incidentally one of the main symptoms of a yeast infection iis the permanent changing of BO ...

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 19 July 2006 22:58infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut

, are you saying that you've seen any studies refuting specifically the effectiveness of "non-pathogenic E.coli"? This is not an organism I've seen listed on the probiotics I take. Is it available in the U.S.? If not, then it seems like something worth exploring rather than dismissing out of hand. Or if you have specfic info on this organism, I'd like to know more.

Here are two links to a German Pharamaceutical site with a lot of research supporting the effectiveness of the e-coli organism.

http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=clinical

http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=evidence

penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote:

if you read my site, You will see that I believe replacing poor quality gut flora with so callelled normal flora is priority requirement in any therapy .How to achieve this is the question .It's a fact that proprietary probiotics nether multiply or even stay in the gut .gut flora is not permanently restored via probiotics , despite the hype ,

They present as an antigen and subsequently the immune system will mobilise ageist them ... They are very much a double edged therapy ,with a balance to be struck between the undoubted benefits if ingesting friendly bacter ia and the flip side being , committing Immune resources to combat alien ,none self microbes . Can conditions in the gut be improved within the time scale that the microbes are effective ..the answer must be no , in most cases anyway .

I have not plucked this view from the air I have the references ..read my site "normal Flora" and the "treatment" section . Click the bold type for links

Vendors of probiotics make a selling point of the transient effect of probiotics ,[not to mention a Mickey Mouse explanation for the reasons of w hy the transient effect] This link has a nice graph illustrating the point ..

http://www.customprobiotics.com/about_probiotics_a.htm

http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of publicspiritSent: 19 July 2006 00:28infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut

Barb and ,One note on the gut flora: a good friend did her PhD research on thisissue. As a result, there is a very effective commercial probioticavailable in Republic of Georgia. Her research showed thatnon-pathogenic E.coli produces a fermentation that kills offpathogenic "competitors" in the gut. This destruction of competitorsdoes not always work, it depends on how resistant the pathogens are. In treating intestinal infections, it is sometimes necessary toeliminate the pathogenic bacteria first - using appropriatemedications - then restore the normal flora using probiotics. Inaddition to the bacteria in probiotics most commonly found in healthfood stores, this probiotic contains non-pathogenic strains ofEnterococcus and E.coli - both are necessary for digestion. Thisprobiotic is often used to restore the normal intestinal flora in ourpatients.> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:14/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

When the bugs have gone the the rest will fix it's self .Cant argue with the logic .But why do you not acknowledge Dr Andy work ..as a fellow victim he is best placed to investigate what pathogens are at work ..He says its spirochetes .morphing to CWD bacteria ..Good enough for me

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of dumbaussie2000Sent: 20 July 2006 16:53infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut

_The gut is the problem at the heart of these diseases-BUT THE ACTUAL PROBLEMATIC BACTERIA ARE BEING IGNORED and all we hear is add this add that and everything will be fine- NOW DARNIT I have never, ever read a forum candida or otherwise where there has been a full success story, so I have put this on my back burner thinking simply that once the pathogens and slime producers are taken care of the rest will fix itself, which is just about on the money IN MY READINGS AND..IMO..tony> > >> >> >> >> >> > --> > No virus found in this outgoing message.> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:> 14/07/2006> >> > > > > > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.2/393 - Release Date: 19/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

I have no evidence that they can hide. It was pure speculation. But in turn, you never directly answer questions like why all those studies support e.coli's effectiveness? Just like you've never acknowledged or addressed the issue of clotting disorders paralyzing the immune system. It seems to me you only accept information that fits your paradigm and ignore everything else. I've never said the gut's not important, or that fungi aren't pathogenic, but don't be like all those docs who can't look beyond their own speciality. penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: I just have explained , and your right it couldn't be more black & white ...Not many have the cloak of invisibility those that use this trick are the killer bugs such as malaria . Look at this in-depth study you will note they use the term probiotics "plural" many different species ..NOT ONE multiplies or even stays in the gut ..The question is WHY ??? If its not self & none self what is the reason

.... The other extract illustrates very clearly that introduced probiotic bacteria does not permanently colonise the gut ,even when passed from mother to baby ...again WHY? Now I've given you plenty of cynical evidence of how exogenously introduced bacteria does not stay in the gut ,Give me your evidence for your opinion that probiotic bacteria uses camouflage to hide from the IS and colonise the gut ... Probiotics: determinants of survival and

growth in the gut http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/73/2/399S Bifidobacteria and lactobacilli are purportedly beneficial to human health and are called probiotics. Their survival during passage through the human gut, when administered in fermented milk products, has been investigated intensely in recent years. Well-controlled, small-scale studies on diarrhea in both adults and infants have shown that probiotics are beneficial and that they survive in sufficient numbers to affect gut microbial metabolism. Survival rates have been

estimated at 20–40% for selected strains, the main obstacles to survival being gastric acidity and the action of bile salts. Although it is believed that the maximum probiotic effect can be achieved if the organisms adhere to intestinal mucosal cells, there is no evidence that exogenously administered probiotics do adhere to the mucosal cells. Instead, they seem to pass into the feces without having adhered or multiplied.. Thus, to obtain a continuous exogenous probiotic effect, the probiotic culture must be ingested continually. Certain exogenously administered substances enhance the action of both exogenous and endogenous probiotics. Human milk contains many substances that stimulate the growth of bifidobacteria in vitro and also in the small intestine of

infants; however, it is unlikely that they function in the colon. However, lactulose and certain fructose-containing compounds, called prebiotics, are not digested in the small intestine but pass into the cecum unchanged, where they are selectively utilized by probiotics. Beneficial effects may thus accrue from exogenously administered probiotics, often administered with prebiotics, or by endogenous bifidobacteria and lactobacilli, whose metabolic activity and growth may also be enhanced by the administration of prebiotics. Administration of oral probiotic bacteria to pregnant women causes

temporary infantile colonization.Schultz M, Gottl C, Young RJ, Iwen P, Vanderhoof JA.Department of Internal Medicine I, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. michael.schultz@...BACKGROUND: It is difficult to permanently change the composition of the complex intestinal microflora of the adult. Orally administered probiotic bacteria produce only temporary colonization of the intestine in patients with a fully developed gut microflora. The gastrointestinal tract of a healthy fetus is

sterile. During the birth process and rapidly thereafter, microbes from the mother and the surrounding environment colonize the gastrointestinal tract until a dense, complex microflora develops. Probiotic bacteria have been shown to beneficially influence the intestinal and systemic immune system and mediate protection against nosocomial infections affecting the neonate. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether oral administration of the probiotic micro-organism Lactobacillus rhamnosus strain GG (L. GG) to the pregnant woman leads to colonization of the newborn infant. METHODS: The authors identified six women who were taking L. GG during late pregnancy. None of the children received L. GG after birth, and their mothers discontinued its consumption at the time of delivery. L. GG concentration in fecal samples was determined by colony morphology and molecular analysis. RESULTS: In all four children delivered vaginally and in one of two children

delivered by cesarean section, L. GG was present in fecal samples at 1 and 6 months of age. Three children remained colonized for at least 12 months, and in two children L. GG was detected in fecal samples at 24 months of age. Three mothers were tested 1 month post partum and no L. GG was present in fecal samples. No L. GG was found in one of these women 24 months post partum. There was no L. GG detectable in stools of the siblings of two children at the 2-year and 3-years after birth of the index child. L. GG was not isolated from the stools of children whose mothers were not taking L. GG. CONCLUSIONS: Temporary colonization of an infant with L. GG may be possible by colonizing the pregnant mother before delivery. Colonization is stable for as long as 6 months, and in unexplained circumstances may persist for as long as 24 months.PMID: 15076629 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 07:29infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut So how do you explain all that research? This explanation seems a little too black and white to me. Organisms are very adaptable, in all kinds of environments, and many can trick the IS into ignoring them. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible for good bacteria to do the same

thing. penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: No ,I'm not saying that ..I'm saying that ANY introduced bacteria without the recognition code is none self , ..There is no intelligence in the matter ..Our IS do not filter ,sort by desirability ..If the bacteria we come into contact with do not have the re cognition molecule [a polysaccharide] then its none self ..Its the reason why we need 80% of our immune system in the gut ,we encounter 95% of pathogens by ingesting them , And of course ,it's why our IS doesn't power up against our own flora. It's a fundamental of medicine . So the bacteria may be very effective ,but the clock is ticking on it's effectiveness ...As per my site , We have our own personal microbial fingerprint , it gives us our unique body odour , if it we assimilated incoming microbes our BO would be constantly changing as the microbe mix changed ...changing the balance of our gut flora is quite difficult to do ...And not so incidentally one of the main symptoms of a yeast infection iis the permanent changing of BO ... -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 19 July 2006 22:58infections Subject: RE:

[infections] Re: The Gut , are you saying that you've seen any studies refuting specifically the effectiveness of "non-pathogenic E.coli"? This is not an organism I've seen listed on the probiotics I take. Is it available in the U.S.? If not, then it seems like something worth exploring rather than dismissing out of hand. Or if you have specfic info on this organism, I'd like to know more. Here are two links to a German Pharamaceutical site with a lot of research supporting the effectiveness of the e-coli organism. http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=clinical http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=evidence penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: if you read my site, You will see that I believe replacing poor quality gut flora with so callelled normal flora is priority requirement in any therapy .How to achieve this is the question .It's a fact that proprietary probiotics nether multiply or even stay in the gut .gut flora is not permanently restored via probiotics , despite the hype , They present as an antigen and subsequently the immune system will mobilise ageist them ... They are very much a double edged therapy ,with a balance to be

struck between the undoubted benefits if ingesting friendly bacter ia and the flip side being , committing Immune resources to combat alien ,none self microbes . Can conditions in the gut be improved within the time scale that the microbes are effective ..the answer must be no , in most cases anyway . I have not plucked this view from the air I have the references ..read my site "normal Flora" and the "treatment" section . Click the bold type for links Vendors of probiotics make a selling point of the transient effect of probiotics ,[not to mention a

Mickey Mouse explanation for the reasons of w hy the transient effect] This link has a nice graph illustrating the point .. http://www.customprobiotics.com/about_probiotics_a.htm http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/ -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of publicspiritSent: 19 July 2006 00:28infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut Barb and ,One note on the gut flora: a good friend did her PhD research on thisissue. As a result, there is a very effective commercial probioticavailable in Republic of Georgia. Her research showed thatnon-pathogenic E.coli produces a fermentation that kills offpathogenic "competitors" in the gut. This

destruction of competitorsdoes not always work, it depends on how resistant the pathogens are. In treating intestinal infections, it is sometimes necessary toeliminate the pathogenic bacteria first - using appropriatemedications - then restore the normal flora using probiotics. Inaddition to the bacteria in probiotics most commonly found in healthfood stores, this probiotic contains non-pathogenic strains ofEnterococcus and E.coli - both are necessary for digestion. Thisprobiotic is often used to restore the normal intestinal flora in ourpatients.> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:14/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

DARNIT, Tony, (lol!) I couldn't agree more. Although, I think that simultaneously using anti-fungals "may" help speed that process along, but that's just a working theory right now. I think you believe it too, because you're such a Nystatin fan. Although you think Nystatin kills more than fungus. Right? pennydumbaussie2000 <dumbaussie2000@...> wrote: _The gut is the problem at the heart of these diseases-BUT THE ACTUAL PROBLEMATIC

BACTERIA ARE BEING IGNORED and all we hear is add this add that and everything will be fine- NOW DARNIT I have never, ever read a forum candida or otherwise where there has been a full success story, so I have put this on my back burner thinking simply that once the pathogens and slime producers are taken care of the rest will fix itself, which is just about on the money IN MY READINGS AND..IMO..tony> > >> >> >> >> >> > --> > No virus found in this outgoing message.> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:> 14/07/2006> >> > > > > > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.2/393 - Release Date:

19/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

, im sold on phage therapy and I respect your knowledge ..I see the advantage of targeted therapy .But to restore gut flora is clearly not a straight forward procedure.Now , with all the evidence of introduced microbes being transient ..One therapy using human probiotics is successful ..Faecal transplant is being used in at least two locations ,one in the us & one in Australia ..It looks like that the all important recognition molecule survives transit through the digestive tract [though the doctors involved do not know why human probiotics are a success]..Introduced faecal probiotics do multiply and do remain in the gut ..and they do CURE...I do now wonder after reading your research that some phages are being transplanted along with the good bacteria...It almost certainly would be the case ..

If you give me a post off line I'll send you a paper on the subject ..[im not sure if it's copyrighted ]...

RE: [infections] Re: The Gut> > > if you read my site, You will see that I believe replacing poor> quality gut flora with so callelled normal flora is priority requirement in> any therapy .How to achieve this is the question .It's a fact that> proprietary probiotics nether multiply or even stay in the gut .gut flora is> not permanently restored via probiotics , despite the hype ,> > They present as an antigen and subsequently the immune system will mobilise> ageist them ... They are very much a double edged therapy ,with a balance to> be struck between the undoubted benefits if ingesting friendly bacteria and> the flip side being , committing Immune resources to combat alien ,none self> microbes . Can conditions in the gut be improved within the time scale that> the microbes are effective ..the answer must be no , in most cases anyway .> > I have not plucked this view from the air I have the references ..read my> site "normal Flora" and the "treatment" section . Click the bold type for> links> > Vendors of probiotics make a selling point of the transient effect of> probiotics ,[not to mention a Mickey Mouse explanation for the reasons of> why the transient effect] This link has a nice graph illustrating the point> .. > > http://www.customprobiotics.com/about_probiotics_a.htm> > http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/>

[Guest guest]

Not good enough to me. I like Andy and his tireless passion a LOT, but I've read all kinds of things by him that can be contested. penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: When the bugs have gone the the rest will fix it's self .Cant argue with the logic .But why do you not acknowledge Dr Andy work ..as a fellow victim he is best placed to investigate what pathogens are at work ..He says its spirochetes .morphing

to CWD bacteria ..Good enough for me -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of dumbaussie2000Sent: 20 July 2006 16:53infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut _The gut is the problem at the heart of these diseases-BUT THE ACTUAL PROBLEMATIC BACTERIA ARE BEING IGNORED and all we hear is add this add that and everything will be fine- NOW DARNIT I have never, ever read a forum candida or otherwise where there has been a full success story, so I have put this on my back burner thinking simply that once the pathogens and slime producers are taken care of the rest will fix itself, which is just

about on the money IN MY READINGS AND..IMO..tony> > >> >> >> >> >> > --> > No

virus found in this outgoing message.> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:> 14/07/2006> >> > > > > > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.2/393 - Release Date: 19/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

Penny I never argued that the e-coli's were not effective ,isee that they were ,But you cant ignore "facts" and they tell us that over time the introduced bugs disappear .probably the time scale of the e-col'i study was too short for that fact to be observed

..Opinions are OK but opinions with substantive evidence are even better...Hyper-coagulation is obviously big in your thinking ..Let me tell you it's a feature of infection , yet another system going awry As your pal Tony cure the infection and the rest will follow ..

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 17:18infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut

I have no evidence that they can hide. It was pure speculation. But in turn, you never directly answer questions like why all those studies support e.coli's effectiveness?

Just like you've never acknowledged or addressed the issue of clotting disorders paralyzing the immune system.

It seems to me you only accept information that fits your paradigm and ignore everything else.

I've never said the gut's not important, or that fungi aren't pathogenic, but don't be like all those docs who can't look beyond their own speciality.

penny

Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote:

& nb sp;

I just have explained , and your right it couldn't be more black & white ...Not many have the cloak of invisibility those that use this trick are the killer bugs such as malaria .

Look at this in-depth study you will note they use the term probiotics "plural" many different species ..NOT ONE multiplies or even stays in the gut ..The question is WHY ??? If its not self & none self what is the reason ...

The other extract illustrates very clearly that introduced probiotic bacteria does not permanently colonise the gut ,even when passed from mother to baby ...again WHY?

Now I've given you plenty of cynical evidence of how exogenously introduced bacteria does not stay in the gut ,Give me your evidence for your opinion that probiotic bacteria uses camouflage to hide from the IS and colonise the gut ...

Probiotics : determinants of survival and growth in the gut

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/73/2/399S

Bifidobacteria and lactobacilli are purportedly beneficial to human health and are called probiotics. Their survival during passage through the human gut, when administered in fermented milk products, has been investigated intensely in recent years. Well-controlled, small-scale studies on diarrhea in both adults and infants have shown that probiotics are beneficial and that they survive in sufficient numbers to affect gut microbial metabolism. Survival rates have been estimated at 20–40% for selected strains, the main obstacles to survival being gastric acidity and the action of bile salts. Although it is believed that the maximum probiotic effect can be achieved if the organisms adhere to intestinal mucosal cells, there is no evidence that exogenously administered probiotics do adhere to the mucosal cells. Instead, they seem to pass into the feces without having adhered or multiplied.. Thus, to obtain a continuous exogenous probiotic effect, the probiotic culture must be ingested continually. Certain exogenously administered substances enhance the action of both exogenous and endogenous probiotics. Human milk contains many substances that stimulate the growth of bifidobacteria in vitro and also in the small intestine of infants; however, it is unlikely that they function in the colon. However, lactulose and certain fructose-containing compounds, called prebiotics, are not digested in the small intestine but pass into the cecum unchanged, where they are selectively utilized by probiotics. Beneficial effects may thus accrue from exogenously administered probiotics, often administered with prebiotics, or by endogenous bifidobacteria and lactobacilli, whose metabolic activity and growth may also be enhanced by the administration of prebiotics.

Administration of oral probiotic bacteria to pregnant women c auses temporary infantile colonization.Schultz M, Gottl C, Young RJ, Iwen P, Vanderhoof JA.Department of Internal Medicine I, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. michael.schultz@...BACKGROUND: It is difficult to permanently change the composition of the complex intestinal microflora of the adult. Orally administered probiotic bacteria produce only temporary colonization of the intestine in patients with a fully developed gut microflora. The gastrointestinal tract of a healthy fetus is sterile. During the birth process and rapidly thereafter, microbes from the mother and the surrounding environment colonize the gastrointestinal tract until a dense, complex microflora develops. Probiotic bacteria have been shown to beneficially influence the intestinal and systemic immune system and mediate protection against nosocomial infections affecting the neonate. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether oral administration of the probiotic micro-organism Lactobacillus rhamnosus strain GG (L. GG) to the pregnant woman leads to colonization of the newborn infant. METHODS: The authors identified six women who were taking L. GG during late pregnancy. None of the children received L. GG after birth, and their mothers discontinued its consumption at the time of delivery. L. GG concentration in fecal samples was determined by colony morphology and molecular analysis. RESULTS: In all four children delivered vaginally and in one of two children delivered by cesarean section, L. GG was present in fecal samples at 1 and 6 months of age. Three children remained colonized for at least 12 months, and in two children L. GG was detected in fecal samples at 24 months of age. Three mothers were tested 1 month post partum and no L. GG was present in fecal samples. No L. GG was found in one of these women 24 months post partum. There was no L. GG detectable in stools of the siblings of two children at the 2-year and 3-years after birth of the index child. L. GG was not isolated from the stools of children whose mothers were not taking L. GG. CONCLUSIONS: Temporary colonization of an infant with L. GG may be possible by colonizing the pregnant mother before delivery. Colonization is stable for as long as 6 months, and in unexplained circumstances may persist for as long as 24 months.PMID: 15076629 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 07:29infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut

So how do you explain all that research? This explanation seems a little too black and white to me. Organisms are very adaptable, in all kinds of environments, and many can trick the IS into ignoring them. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible for good bacteria to d o the same thing.

penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote:

No ,I'm not saying that ..I'm saying that ANY introduced bacteria without the recognition code is none self , ..There is no intelligence in the matter ..Our IS do not filter ,sort by desirability ..If the bacteria we come into contact with do not have the re cognition molecule [a polysaccharide] then its none self ..Its the reason why we need 80% of our immune system in the gut ,we encounter 95% of pathogens by ingesting them , And of course ,it's why our IS doesn't power up against our own flora. It's a fundamental of medicine . So the bacteria may be very effective ,but the clock is ticking on it's effectiveness ...As per my site , We have our own personal microbial fingerprint , it gives us our unique body odour , if it we assimilated incoming microbes our BO would be constantly changing as the microbe mix changed ...changing the balance of our gut flora is quite difficult to do ...And not so incidentally one of the main symptoms of a yeast infection iis the permanent changing of BO ...

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 19 July 2006 22:58infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut

, are you saying that you've seen any studies refuting specifically the effectiveness of "non-pathogenic E.coli"? This is not an organism I've seen listed on the probiotics I take. Is it available in the U.S.? If not, then it seems like something worth exploring rather than dismissing out of hand. Or if you have specfic info on this organism, I'd like to know more.

Here are two links to a German Pharamaceutical site with a lot of research supporting the effectiveness of the e-coli organism.

http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=clinical

http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=evidence

penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote:

if you read my site, You will see that I believe replacing poor quality gut flora with so callelled normal flora is priority requirement in any therapy .How to achieve this is the question .It's a fact that proprietary probiotics nether multiply or even stay in the gut .gut flora is not permanently restored via probiotics , despite the hype ,

They present as an antigen and subsequently the immune system will mobilise ageist them ... They are very much a double edged therapy ,wi th a balance to be struck between the undoubted benefits if ingesting friendly bacter ia and the flip side being , committing Immune resources to combat alien ,none self microbes . Can conditions in the gut be improved within the time scale that the microbes are effective ..the answer must be no , in most cases anyway .

I have not plucked this view from the air I have the references ..read my site "normal Flora" and the "treatment" section . Click the bold type for links

Vendors of probiotics make a selling point of the transient effect of probiotics , [not to mention a Mickey Mouse explanation for the reasons of w hy the transient effect] This link has a nice graph illustrating the point ..

http://www.customprobiotics.com/about_probiotics_a.htm

http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of publicspiritSent: 19 July 2006 00:28infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut

Barb and ,One note on the gut flora: a good friend did her PhD research on thisissue. As a result, there is a very effective commercial probioticavailable in Republic of Georgia. Her research showed thatnon-pathogenic E.coli produces a fermentation that kills offpathogenic "competitors" in the gut. Thi s destruction of competitorsdoes not always work, it depends on how resistant the pathogens are. In treating intestinal infections, it is sometimes necessary toeliminate the pathogenic bacteria first - using appropriatemedications - then restore the normal flora using probiotics. Inaddition to the bacteria in probiotics most commonly found in healthfood stores, this probiotic contains non-pathogenic strains ofEnterococcus and E.coli - both are necessary for digestion. Thisprobiotic is often used to restore the normal intestinal flora in ourpatients.> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:14/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

so I don't understand why we're arguing if we agree on everything? It seems to me that even if the e. coli doesn't stay in the gut, just having the ability to kill the bad bugs and take them along as it goes is a good thing. Just another anitmicrobial weapon in the arsenal. Since Abx and antifungals don't stay in the gut either, I'd keep introducing the e.coli if I could, because it kills the bad bugs while leaving the good, unlike normal amx that kill good and bad. But e.coli's not available here. Or is it? penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: Penny I never argued that the e-coli's were not effective ,isee that they were ,But you cant ignore "facts" and they tell us that over time the introduced bugs disappear .probably the time scale of the e-col'i study was too short for that fact to be observed .Opinions are OK but opinions with substantive evidence are even better...Hyper-coagulation is obviously big in your thinking ..Let me tell you it's a feature of infection , yet another system going awry As your pal Tony cure the infection and the rest will follow .. -----Original

Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 17:18infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut I have no evidence that they can hide. It was pure speculation. But in turn, you never directly answer questions like why all those studies support e.coli's effectiveness? Just like you've never acknowledged or addressed the issue of clotting disorders paralyzing the immune system. It seems to me you only accept information that fits your paradigm and ignore everything else. I've never said the gut's not important, or that fungi aren't pathogenic, but don't be like all those docs who can't look beyond

their own speciality. penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: & nb sp; I just have explained , and your right it couldn't be more black & white ...Not many have the cloak of invisibility those that use this trick are the killer bugs such as malaria . Look at this in-depth study you will note they use the term probiotics "plural" many different species ..NOT ONE multiplies or even stays in the gut ..The question is WHY

??? If its not self & none self what is the reason ... The other extract illustrates very clearly that introduced probiotic bacteria does not permanently colonise the gut ,even when passed from mother to baby ...again WHY? Now I've given you plenty of cynical evidence of how exogenously introduced bacteria does not stay in the gut ,Give me your evidence for your opinion that probiotic bacteria uses camouflage to hide from the IS and colonise the gut ... Probiotics : determinants of survival and growth in the gut http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/73/2/399S Bifidobacteria and lactobacilli are purportedly beneficial to human health and are called probiotics. Their survival during passage through the human gut, when administered in fermented milk products, has been investigated intensely in recent years. Well-controlled, small-scale studies on diarrhea in both adults and infants have shown that probiotics are beneficial and that they survive in sufficient

numbers to affect gut microbial metabolism. Survival rates have been estimated at 20–40% for selected strains, the main obstacles to survival being gastric acidity and the action of bile salts. Although it is believed that the maximum probiotic effect can be achieved if the organisms adhere to intestinal mucosal cells, there is no evidence that exogenously administered probiotics do adhere to the mucosal cells. Instead, they seem to pass into the feces without having adhered or multiplied.. Thus, to obtain a continuous exogenous probiotic effect, the probiotic culture must be ingested continually. Certain exogenously administered substances enhance the action of both exogenous and endogenous probiotics. Human milk contains many substances that stimulate the

growth of bifidobacteria in vitro and also in the small intestine of infants; however, it is unlikely that they function in the colon. However, lactulose and certain fructose-containing compounds, called prebiotics, are not digested in the small intestine but pass into the cecum unchanged, where they are selectively utilized by probiotics. Beneficial effects may thus accrue from exogenously administered probiotics, often administered with prebiotics, or by endogenous bifidobacteria and lactobacilli, whose metabolic activity and growth may also be enhanced by the administration of prebiotics. Administration of oral probiotic bacteria to pregnant women c auses temporary infantile colonization.Schultz M, Gottl C, Young RJ, Iwen P, Vanderhoof JA.Department of Internal Medicine I, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. michael.schultz@...BACKGROUND: It is difficult to permanently change the composition of the complex intestinal microflora of the adult. Orally administered probiotic bacteria produce only temporary colonization of the intestine in

patients with a fully developed gut microflora. The gastrointestinal tract of a healthy fetus is sterile. During the birth process and rapidly thereafter, microbes from the mother and the surrounding environment colonize the gastrointestinal tract until a dense, complex microflora develops. Probiotic bacteria have been shown to beneficially influence the intestinal and systemic immune system and mediate protection against nosocomial infections affecting the neonate. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether oral administration of the probiotic micro-organism Lactobacillus rhamnosus strain GG (L. GG) to the pregnant woman leads to colonization of the newborn infant. METHODS: The authors identified six women who were taking L. GG during late pregnancy. None of the children received L. GG after birth, and their mothers discontinued its consumption at the time of delivery. L. GG concentration in fecal samples was determined by colony morphology and

molecular analysis. RESULTS: In all four children delivered vaginally and in one of two children delivered by cesarean section, L. GG was present in fecal samples at 1 and 6 months of age. Three children remained colonized for at least 12 months, and in two children L. GG was detected in fecal samples at 24 months of age. Three mothers were tested 1 month post partum and no L. GG was present in fecal samples. No L. GG was found in one of these women 24 months post partum. There was no L. GG detectable in stools of the siblings of two children at the 2-year and 3-years after birth of the index child. L. GG was not isolated from the stools of children whose mothers were not taking L. GG. CONCLUSIONS: Temporary colonization of an infant with L. GG may be possible by colonizing the pregnant mother before delivery. Colonization is stable for as long as 6 months, and in unexplained circumstances may persist for as long as 24 months.PMID: 15076629 [PubMed - indexed for

MEDLINE] -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 07:29infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut So how do you explain all that research? This explanation seems a little too black and white to me. Organisms are very adaptable, in all kinds of environments, and many can trick the IS into ignoring

them. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible for good bacteria to d o the same thing. penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: No ,I'm not saying that ..I'm saying that ANY introduced bacteria without the recognition code is none self , ..There is no intelligence in the matter ..Our IS do not filter ,sort by desirability ..If the bacteria we come into contact with do not have the re cognition molecule [a polysaccharide] then its none self ..Its the reason why we need 80% of our immune system in the gut ,we encounter 95% of pathogens by ingesting them , And of course

,it's why our IS doesn't power up against our own flora. It's a fundamental of medicine . So the bacteria may be very effective ,but the clock is ticking on it's effectiveness ...As per my site , We have our own personal microbial fingerprint , it gives us our unique body odour , if it we assimilated incoming microbes our BO would be constantly changing as the microbe mix changed ...changing the balance of our gut flora is quite difficult to do ...And not so incidentally one of the main symptoms of a yeast infection iis the permanent changing of BO ... -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 19 July 2006 22:58To:

infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut , are you saying that you've seen any studies refuting specifically the effectiveness of "non-pathogenic E.coli"? This is not an organism I've seen listed on the probiotics I take. Is it available in the U.S.? If not, then it seems like something worth exploring rather than dismissing out of hand. Or if you have specfic info on this organism, I'd like to know more. Here are two links to a German Pharamaceutical site with a lot of research supporting the effectiveness of the e-coli organism. http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=clinical http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=evidence penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: if you read my site, You will see that I believe replacing poor quality gut flora with so callelled normal flora is priority requirement in any therapy .How to achieve this is the question .It's a fact that proprietary probiotics nether multiply or even stay in the gut .gut flora is not permanently restored via probiotics , despite the hype , They present

as an antigen and subsequently the immune system will mobilise ageist them ... They are very much a double edged therapy ,wi th a balance to be struck between the undoubted benefits if ingesting friendly bacter ia and the flip side being , committing Immune resources to combat alien ,none self microbes . Can conditions in the gut be improved within the time scale that the microbes are effective ..the answer must be no , in most cases anyway . I have not plucked this view from the air I have the references ..read my site "normal Flora" and the "treatment" section . Click the bold type for links Vendors of probiotics make a selling point of the transient effect of probiotics , [not to mention a Mickey Mouse explanation for the reasons of w hy the transient effect] This link has a nice graph illustrating the point .. http://www.customprobiotics.com/about_probiotics_a.htm http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/ -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of publicspiritSent: 19 July 2006 00:28infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut Barb and ,One note on the gut flora: a good friend did her PhD research on thisissue. As a result, there is a very effective commercial probioticavailable in Republic of Georgia. Her research showed

thatnon-pathogenic E.coli produces a fermentation that kills offpathogenic "competitors" in the gut. Thi s destruction of competitorsdoes not always work, it depends on how resistant the pathogens are. In treating intestinal infections, it is sometimes necessary toeliminate the pathogenic bacteria first - using appropriatemedications - then restore the normal flora using probiotics. Inaddition to the bacteria in probiotics most commonly found in healthfood stores, this probiotic contains non-pathogenic strains ofEnterococcus and E.coli - both are necessary for digestion. Thisprobiotic is often used to restore the normal intestinal flora in ourpatients.> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:14/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

No we don't , I say the evidence tells us the IS clears the probiotic bacteria ,,that means the amount of bacteria we ingest needs to be carefully considered .Too much and the IS is compromised .As many have testified [without knowing the cause] on other forums ..and if I remember Dan of this forum ..

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 18:08infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut

so I don't understand why we're arguing if we agree on everything?

It seems to me that even if the e. coli doesn't stay in the gut, just having the ability to kill the bad bugs and take them along as it goes is a good thing. Just another anitmicrobial weapon in the arsenal. Since Abx and antifungals don't stay in the gut either, I'd keep introducing the e.coli if I could, because it kills the bad bugs while leaving the good, unlike normal amx that kill good and bad.

But e.coli's not available here. Or is it?

penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote:

Penny I never argued that the e-coli's were not effective ,isee t hat they were ,But you cant ignore "facts" and they tell us that over time the introduced bugs disappear .probably the time scale of the e-col'i study was too short for that fact to be observed

..Opinions are OK but opinions with substantive evidence are even better...Hyper-coagulation is obviously big in your thinking ..Let me tell you it's a feature of infection , yet another system going awry As your pal Tony cure the infection and the rest will follow ..

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 17:18infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut

I have no evidence that they can hide. It was pure speculation. But in turn, you never directly answer questions like why all those studies support e.coli's effectiveness?

Just like you've never acknowledged or addressed the issue of clotting disorders paralyzing the immune system.

It seems to me you only accept information that fits your paradigm and ignore everything else.

I've never said the gut's not important, or that fungi aren't pathogenic, but don't be like all those docs who can't look beyond their own speciality.

penny

Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote:

& nb sp;

I just have explained , and your right it couldn't be more black & white ...Not many have the cloak of invisibility those that use this trick are the killer bugs such as malaria .

Look at this in-depth study you will note they use the term probiotics "plural" many different species ..NOT ONE multiplies or even stays in the gut . .The question is WHY ??? If its not self & none self what is the reason ...

The other extract illustrates very clearly that introduced probiotic bacteria does not permanently colonise the gut ,even when passed from mother to baby ...again WHY?

Now I've given you plenty of cynical evidence of how exogenously introduced bacteria does not stay in the gut ,Give me your evidence for your opinion that probiotic bacteria uses camouflage to hide from the IS and colonise the gut ...

Probiotics : determinants of survival and growth in the gut

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/73/2/399S

Bifidobacteria and lactobacilli are purportedly beneficial to human health and are called probiotics. Their survival during passage through the human gut, when administered in fermented milk products, has been investigated intensely in recent years. Well-controlled, small-scale studies on diarrhea in both adults and infants have shown that probiotics are beneficial and that the y survive in sufficient numbers to affect gut microbial metabolism. Survival rates have been estimated at 20–40% for selected strains, the main obstacles to survival being gastric acidity and the action of bile salts. Although it is believed that the maximum probiotic effect can be achieved if the organisms adhere to intestinal mucosal cells, there is no evidence that exogenously administered probiotics do adhere to the mucosal cells. Instead, they seem to pass into the feces without having adhered or multiplied.. Thus, to obtain a continuous exogenous probiotic effect, the probiotic culture must be ingested continually. Certain exogenously administered substances enhance the action of both exogenous and endogenous probiotics. Human milk contains many substances that stimulate the growth of bifidobacteria in vitro and also in the small intestine of infants; however, it is unlikely that they function in the colon. However, lactulose and certain fructose-containing compounds, called prebiotics, are not digested in the small intestine but pass into the cecum unchanged, where they are selectively utilized by probiotics. Beneficial effects may thus accrue from exogenously administered probiotics, often administered with prebiotics, or by endogenous bifidobacteria and lactobacilli, whose metabolic activity and growth may also be enhanced by the administration of prebiotics.

Administration of oral probiotic bacteria to pregnant women c auses temporary infantile colonization.Schultz M, Gottl C, Young RJ, Iwen P, Vanderhoof JA.Department of Internal Medicine I, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. michael.schultz@...BACKGROUND: It is difficult to permanently change the composition of the complex intestinal microflora of the adult. Orally administered probiotic bacteria produce only temporary colonization of the intesti ne in patients with a fully developed gut microflora. The gastrointestinal tract of a healthy fetus is sterile. During the birth process and rapidly thereafter, microbes from the mother and the surrounding environment colonize the gastrointestinal tract until a dense, complex microflora develops. Probiotic bacteria have been shown to beneficially influence the intestinal and systemic immune system and mediate protection against nosocomial infections affecting the neonate. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether oral administration of the probiotic micro-organism Lactobacillus rhamnosus strain GG (L. GG) to the pregnant woman leads to colonization of the newborn infant. METHODS: The authors identified six women who were taking L. GG during late pregnancy. None of the children received L. GG after birth, and their mothers discontinued its consumption at the time of delivery. L. GG concentration in fecal samples was determined by colony morphology and molecular analysis. RESULTS: In all four children delivered vaginally and in one of two children delivered by cesarean section, L. GG was present in fecal samples at 1 and 6 months of age. Three children remained colonized for at least 12 months, and in two children L. GG was detected in fecal samples at 24 months of age. Three mothers were tested 1 month post partum and no L. GG was present in fecal samples. No L. GG was found in one of these women 24 months post partum. There was no L. GG detectable in stools of the siblings of two children at the 2-year and 3-years after birth of the index child. L. GG was not isolated from the stools of children whose mothers were not taking L. GG. CONCLUSIONS: Temporary colonization of an infant with L. GG may be possible by colonizing the pregnant mother before delivery. Colonization is stable for as long as 6 months, and in unexplained circumstances may persist for as long as 24 months.PMID: 15076629 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 07:29infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut

So how do you explain all that research? This explanation seems a little too black and white to me. Organisms are very adaptable, in all kinds of environments, and many can trick the IS into ignoring them. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible for good bacteria to d o the same thing.

penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote:

No ,I'm not saying that ..I'm saying that ANY introduced bacteria without the recognition code is none self , ..There is no intelligence in the matter ..Our IS do not filter ,sort by desirability ..If the bacteria we come into contact with do not have the re cognition molecule [a polysaccharide] then its none self ..Its the reason why we need 80% of our immune system in the gut ,we encounter 95% of pathogens by ingesting them , And of course ,it's why our IS doesn't power up against our own flora. It's a fundamental of medicine . So the bacteria may be very effective ,but the clock is ticking on it's effectiveness ...As per my site , We have our own personal microbial fingerprint , it gives us our unique body odour , if it we assimilated incoming microbes our BO would be constantly changing as the microbe mix changed ...changing the balance of our gut flora is quite difficult to do ...And not so incidentally one of the main symptoms of a yeast infection iis the permanent changing of BO ...

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 19 July 2006 22:58infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut

, are you saying that you've seen any studies refuting specifically the effectiveness of "non-pathogenic E.coli"? This is not an organism I've seen listed on the probiotics I take. Is it available in the U.S.? If not, then it seems like something worth exploring rather than dismissing out of hand. Or if you have specfic info on this organism, I'd like to know more.

Here are two links to a German Pharamaceutical site with a lot of research supporting the effectiveness of the e-coli organism.

http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=clinical

http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/ index.php?seite=evidence

penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote:

if you read my site, You will see that I believe replacing poor quality gut flora with so callelled normal flora is priority requirement in any therapy .How to achieve this is the question .It's a fact that proprietary probiotics nether multiply or even stay in the gut .gut flora is not permanently restored via probiotics , despite the hype ,

They present as an antigen and subsequently the immune system will mobilise ageist them ... They are very much a double edged therapy ,wi th a balance to be struck between the undoubted benefits if ingesting friendly bacter ia and the flip side being , committing Immune resources to combat alien ,none self microbes . Can conditions in the gut be improved within the time scale that the microbes are effective ..the answer must be no , in most cases anyway .

I have not plucked this view from the air I have the references ..read my site "normal Flora" and the "treatment" section . Click the bold type for links

Vendors of probiotics make a selling point of the transient effect of probiotics , [not to mention a Mickey Mouse explanation for the reasons of w hy the transient effect] This link has a nice graph illustrating the point ..

http://www.customprobiotics.com/about_probiotics_a.htm

http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of publicspiritSent: 19 July 2006 00:28infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut

Barb and ,One note on the gut flora: a good friend did her PhD research on thisissue. As a result, there is a very effective commercial probioticavai lable in Republic of Georgia. Her research showed thatnon-pathogenic E.coli produces a fermentation that kills offpathogenic "competitors" in the gut. Thi s destruction of competitorsdoes not always work, it depends on how resistant the pathogens are. In treating intestinal infections, it is sometimes necessary toeliminate the pathogenic bacteria first - using appropriatemedications - then restore the normal flora using probiotics. Inaddition to the bacteria in probiotics most commonly found in healthfood stores, this probiotic contains non-pathogenic strains ofEnterococcus and E.coli - both are necessary for digestion. Thisprobiotic is often used to restore the normal intestinal flora in ourpatients.> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:14/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

I can accept that as a likely scenario. penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: No we don't , I say the evidence tells us the IS clears the probiotic bacteria ,,that means the amount of bacteria we ingest needs to be carefully considered .Too much and the IS is compromised .As many have testified [without knowing the cause] on other forums ..and if I remember Dan of this forum .. -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 18:08infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut so I don't understand why we're arguing if we agree on everything? It seems to me that even if the e. coli doesn't stay in the gut, just having the ability to kill the bad bugs and take them along as it goes is a good thing. Just another anitmicrobial weapon in the arsenal. Since Abx and antifungals don't stay in the gut either, I'd keep introducing the e.coli if I could, because it kills the bad bugs while leaving the good, unlike normal amx that kill good and bad. But e.coli's not available here. Or is it? penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: Penny I never argued that the e-coli's were not effective ,isee t hat they were ,But you cant ignore "facts" and they tell us that over time the introduced bugs disappear .probably the time scale of the e-col'i study was too short for that fact to be observed .Opinions are OK but opinions with substantive evidence are even better...Hyper-coagulation is obviously big in your thinking ..Let me tell you it's a feature of infection , yet another system going awry As your pal Tony cure the infection and the rest will

follow .. -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 17:18infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut I have no evidence that they can hide. It was pure speculation. But in turn, you never directly answer questions like why all those studies support e.coli's effectiveness? Just like you've never acknowledged or addressed the issue of clotting disorders paralyzing the immune system. It seems to me you only accept information that fits your paradigm and ignore everything else. I've never said the gut's not important, or that fungi aren't pathogenic, but don't be like all those docs who can't look beyond their own speciality. penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: & nb sp; I just have explained , and your right it couldn't be more black & white ...Not many have the cloak of invisibility those that use this trick are the killer bugs such as malaria . Look at this in-depth study you

will note they use the term probiotics "plural" many different species ..NOT ONE multiplies or even stays in the gut . .The question is WHY ??? If its not self & none self what is the reason ... The other extract illustrates very clearly that introduced probiotic bacteria does not permanently colonise the gut ,even when passed from mother to baby ...again WHY? Now I've given you plenty of cynical evidence of how exogenously introduced bacteria does not stay in the gut ,Give me your evidence for your opinion that probiotic bacteria uses camouflage to hide from the IS and colonise the gut ... Probiotics : determinants of survival and growth in the gut http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/73/2/399S Bifidobacteria and lactobacilli are purportedly beneficial to human health and are called probiotics. Their survival during passage through the human gut, when administered in fermented milk products, has been investigated intensely in recent years. Well-controlled, small-scale studies on

diarrhea in both adults and infants have shown that probiotics are beneficial and that the y survive in sufficient numbers to affect gut microbial metabolism. Survival rates have been estimated at 20–40% for selected strains, the main obstacles to survival being gastric acidity and the action of bile salts. Although it is believed that the maximum probiotic effect can be achieved if the organisms adhere to intestinal mucosal cells, there is no evidence that exogenously administered probiotics do adhere to the mucosal cells. Instead, they seem to pass into the feces without having adhered or multiplied.. Thus, to obtain a continuous exogenous probiotic effect, the probiotic culture must be ingested continually. Certain exogenously administered substances

enhance the action of both exogenous and endogenous probiotics. Human milk contains many substances that stimulate the growth of bifidobacteria in vitro and also in the small intestine of infants; however, it is unlikely that they function in the colon. However, lactulose and certain fructose-containing compounds, called prebiotics, are not digested in the small intestine but pass into the cecum unchanged, where they are selectively utilized by probiotics. Beneficial effects may thus accrue from exogenously administered probiotics, often administered with prebiotics, or by endogenous bifidobacteria and lactobacilli, whose metabolic activity and growth may also be enhanced by the administration of prebiotics. Administration of oral probiotic bacteria to pregnant women c auses temporary infantile colonization.Schultz M, Gottl C, Young RJ, Iwen P, Vanderhoof JA.Department of Internal Medicine I, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.

michael.schultz@...BACKGROUND: It is difficult to permanently change the composition of the complex intestinal microflora of the adult. Orally administered probiotic bacteria produce only temporary colonization of the intesti ne in patients with a fully developed gut microflora. The gastrointestinal tract of a healthy fetus is sterile. During the birth process and rapidly thereafter, microbes from the mother and the surrounding environment colonize the gastrointestinal tract until a dense, complex microflora develops. Probiotic bacteria have been shown to beneficially influence the intestinal and systemic immune system and mediate protection against nosocomial infections affecting the neonate. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether oral administration of the probiotic micro-organism Lactobacillus rhamnosus strain GG (L. GG) to the pregnant woman leads to colonization of the newborn infant. METHODS: The authors identified

six women who were taking L. GG during late pregnancy. None of the children received L. GG after birth, and their mothers discontinued its consumption at the time of delivery. L. GG concentration in fecal samples was determined by colony morphology and molecular analysis. RESULTS: In all four children delivered vaginally and in one of two children delivered by cesarean section, L. GG was present in fecal samples at 1 and 6 months of age. Three children remained colonized for at least 12 months, and in two children L. GG was detected in fecal samples at 24 months of age. Three mothers were tested 1 month post partum and no L. GG was present in fecal samples. No L. GG was found in one of these women 24 months post partum. There was no L. GG detectable in stools of the siblings of two children at the 2-year and 3-years after birth of the index child. L. GG was not isolated from the stools of children whose mothers were not taking L. GG. CONCLUSIONS: Temporary colonization of

an infant with L. GG may be possible by colonizing the pregnant mother before delivery. Colonization is stable for as long as 6 months, and in unexplained circumstances may persist for as long as 24 months.PMID: 15076629 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 20 July 2006 07:29infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The

Gut So how do you explain all that research? This explanation seems a little too black and white to me. Organisms are very adaptable, in all kinds of environments, and many can trick the IS into ignoring them. I don't see why it wouldn't be possible for good bacteria to d o the same thing. penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: No ,I'm not saying that ..I'm saying that ANY introduced bacteria without the recognition code is none self , ..There is no intelligence in the matter ..Our IS do not filter ,sort by desirability ..If the bacteria we come into contact with do not have the re cognition molecule [a polysaccharide] then its none self ..Its the reason why we need 80% of our immune system in the gut ,we encounter 95% of pathogens by ingesting them , And of course ,it's why our IS doesn't power up against our own flora. It's a fundamental of medicine . So the bacteria may be very effective ,but the clock is ticking on it's effectiveness ...As per my site , We have our own personal microbial fingerprint , it gives us our unique body odour , if it we assimilated incoming microbes our BO would be constantly changing as the microbe mix changed ...changing the balance of our gut flora is quite difficult to do ...And not so incidentally one of the main symptoms of a yeast infection iis the permanent changing of BO ... -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of Penny HouleSent: 19 July 2006 22:58infections Subject: RE: [infections] Re: The Gut , are you saying that you've seen any studies refuting specifically the effectiveness of "non-pathogenic E.coli"? This is not an organism I've seen listed on the probiotics I take. Is it available in the U.S.? If not, then it seems like something worth exploring rather than dismissing out of hand. Or if you have specfic info on this organism, I'd like to know more. Here are two links to a German Pharamaceutical site with a lot of research supporting the effectiveness of the

e-coli organism. http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/index.php?seite=clinical http://www.ardeypharm.de/en/ index.php?seite=evidence penny Jaep <Jaep@...> wrote: if you read my site, You will see that I believe replacing poor quality gut flora with so callelled normal flora is priority requirement in any therapy .How to achieve this is the question .It's a fact that proprietary probiotics nether multiply or even stay in the gut .gut flora is not permanently restored via probiotics , despite the hype

, They present as an antigen and subsequently the immune system will mobilise ageist them ... They are very much a double edged therapy ,wi th a balance to be struck between the undoubted benefits if ingesting friendly bacter ia and the flip side being , committing Immune resources to combat alien ,none self microbes . Can conditions in the gut be improved within the time scale that the microbes are effective ..the answer must be no , in most cases anyway . I have not plucked this view from the air I have the references ..read my site "normal Flora" and the

"treatment" section . Click the bold type for links Vendors of probiotics make a selling point of the transient effect of probiotics , [not to mention a Mickey Mouse explanation for the reasons of w hy the transient effect] This link has a nice graph illustrating the point .. http://www.customprobiotics.com/about_probiotics_a.htm http://www.yeast-candida-infections-uk.co.uk/ -----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of publicspiritSent: 19 July 2006 00:28infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut Barb and ,One note on the gut flora: a good friend did her PhD research on thisissue. As a result, there is a very effective commercial probioticavai lable in Republic of Georgia. Her research showed thatnon-pathogenic E.coli produces a fermentation that kills offpathogenic "competitors" in the gut. Thi s destruction of competitorsdoes not always work, it depends on how resistant the pathogens are. In treating intestinal infections, it is sometimes necessary toeliminate the pathogenic bacteria first - using appropriatemedications - then restore the normal flora using probiotics. Inaddition to the bacteria in probiotics most commonly found in healthfood stores, this probiotic contains non-pathogenic strains ofEnterococcus and E.coli - both are necessary for digestion. Thisprobiotic is often used to restore the normal intestinal flora in ourpatients.> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date:14/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

Tony , if you mean medical investigations , well of course not , the doctors have taken a hike on this one ,were on our own ...Both hands!! I I'm symptom free at the moment, The effectiveness of the Antifungal drugs I took for many years is evidence enough , not to mention my symptoms I had IBS to the point of surgery ,the symptoms were banished in two weeks with the onset of AF therapy ..Good enough?

Your experience of microbiology is as an amateur, what you see and report on cannot be verified, my daughter is a microbiologist , much of her training was targeted on interpreting microscopy findings .Her Lab is subject to the most stringent Quality control procedures..you are not...

Your dismissal of AW findings, is typical , when his patients feel at their worst ,he finds that their blood teems with Spiro's? when they feel better they the spiros are difficult to find .THAT IS A MAJOR PIECE OF DEMONSTRABLE EVIDENCE and cannot be dismissed

I agree with your assessment with the situation in treating gut dysbiosis [inappropriate microbes in the gut]

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of dumbaussie2000Sent: 21 July 2006 04:02infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut

Are you happy with your investigations? In your own case do you have both hands around the culprits of your disease?I hear you talk about fungi yet you've possably never ever done a fungal culture.Andy showed us a video of a parasitic invasion of a red cell- this does not stand up in my experience of microbiology as a spirochete.Sorry I can't call a mini minor a semi trailer...I also think that getting the bugs out of the gut is an ongoing never ending cycle because they have fixed themselves a permanent home which IMO necessitates you study IBS or irritable bowel diseases- I can send you a book... and they all find the therapies of antimicrobials and salicytates(sp) work yet DON"T FIX THE PROBLEM.Crohns is another example of things not getting better like you think.Actually this group of problems is extremely ugly and needs more respect...Surgery and dissection of the intestines is more common than the infection/inflammation being eradicated by wippy doo therapies (probiotics)being touted as fix all's.tony > > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > No virus found in this outgoing message.> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 -> Release Date:> > 14/07/2006> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > --> > No virus found in this outgoing message.> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.2/393 - Release Date:> 19/07/2006> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.2/393 - Release Date: 19/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

Here you go again , "dysbiosis is old hat off the radar" Trouble is there are people who take Pennies accolades to you as an endorsement ..I'm under no such illusion .your incredible statements are soon rejected along with yourself by other forums , the only reason your still on this one is because Penny runs it and you helped her in the past pointing out we are extensively infected and need antibiotics to suit No one argues with that ,it's apparent .

I did have surgery BTW ,and my daughter is subject to lab discipline ,which dictates that all testing is strictly limited to doctors requests, Besides my raging Candida that lasted for many years finally succumbed back end of 2001...

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of dumbaussie2000Sent: 21 July 2006 20:09infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut

Also You put into perspective an overview of true gut dysbiosis- YOU ALMOST HAD SURGERY....So the total crap you've been on Penny about pales into insignificance when the true picture of disease of the bowel is represented.Gut dysbiosis take a probiotic and everythings fondalou.. Yet the other wards in the hospital an 18 year old is having pieces taken out of her intestines and she's doing the probiotic yet everything ain't fondalou..I'm sorry I just learned to respect these diseases for what they truly are systemic, gigantic, monsters that need true targeted therapy at the right duration and the right strength to suit each patients needs..Soundinmg off about the candida stories/dysbiosis is so old hat and off the radar in the true scheme of things...We really are here to learn... and absolutely challenge everything.... and going over stories that often date back ten plus years is what is possably jerking pennies chain.> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > --> > > > No virus found in this outgoing message.> > > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 -> > Release Date:> > > 14/07/2006> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > No virus found in this outgoing message.> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.2/393 - Release Date:> > 19/07/2006> > >> >> >> >> >> > --> > No virus found in this outgoing message.> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.2/393 - Release Date:> 19/07/2006> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.2/393 - Release Date: 19/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

Well ,it's got to be said ,Here we go again , Have you ever heard of professional standing, it means you as a professional keep to the rules ..The bio-hazard risks are considerable in a Lab and any breach of statutory rules such as smuggling your own samples in is viewed most seriously and with good cause ...To ask my daughter to jeopardise her professional standing in such a manner is a none starter .Besides What good is a result without the official paperwork .And to boot if the doctors do not want to treat then they don't treat , they find any excuse to rubbish lab findings ...So Buddy ,there it is I'm surprised you didn't know this , being a shit hot lab man ...

I'll answer your comments on amalgams in a separate post ..

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of dumbaussie2000Sent: 22 July 2006 10:12infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut

You are such a whoosy! My daughters lab is subjected to scrutiny.Buddy if you got an opinion FROM OUR 300 forum members that you failed to get a fungal test when you daughter goes to a pathology lab everyday and is a microbiologist, I'm sure they'd think your a turkey.WHAT'S WRONG WITH HER WALKING IN WITH YOUR SAMPLE AND SAYING MY CATS GOT A PROBLEM WITH IT'S EAR AND I THOUGHT I WOULD USE MY SKILLS TO TRY AND FIND THE PROBLEM!MYSELF I get thrown off forums for arguing that someone sufgfering bi polar is actually the product of the whole disease-INFECTION. This didn't go down well three years ago.The other crap shoot that I attack is the silver amalgam story, and that got me thrown off experimental- MY ARGUEMENT IS MANY BECOME ILL AFTER THEY REMOVED THE SILVER AMALGAMS..Sorry but I just found you to be barking out stuff thjat's ten years old, mind you i also believe in it whole heartedly... yet I also look at the bigger picture and feel gut dysbiosis is a lot more sinister and a lot more across the board from mild to extreme to indistinguishable from crohns as opposed to just rambling on about the fungus and whatever you simplify it as.> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > --> > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message.> > > > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 -> > > Release Date:> > > > 14/07/2006> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > --> > > > No virus found in this outgoing message.> > > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.2/393 - Release> Date:> > > 19/07/2006> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > --> > > No virus found in this outgoing message.> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.2/393 - Release Date:> > 19/07/2006> > >> >> >> >> >> > --> > No virus found in this outgoing message.> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.2/393 - Release Date:> 19/07/2006> >> > > > > --> No virus found in this outgoing message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.3/394 - Release Date: 20/07/2006>

[Guest guest]

You know, if I worked in a lab, I would find a way to test my family if necessary. But family dynamics are different in different families. My SIL is a doctor and we approached her for help once concerning ordering a lab test for our son. Big mistake. According to her ethics, physicians shouldn't treat their families, not even a lab test. So I wouldn't criticize for not pressuring his daughter.- KateOn Jul 22, 2006, at 6:11 AM, dumbaussie2000 wrote:You are such a whoosy! My daughters lab is subjected to scrutiny.Buddy if you got an opinion FROM OUR 300 forum members that you failed to get a fungal test when you daughter goes to a pathology lab everyday and is a microbiologist, I'm sure they'd think your a turkey.WHAT'S WRONG WITH HER WALKING IN WITH YOUR SAMPLE AND SAYING MY CATS GOT A PROBLEM WITH IT'S EAR AND I THOUGHT I WOULD USE MY SKILLS TO TRY AND FIND THE PROBLEM!

[Guest guest]

I don't forget anything , don't speak for me ,and illness's are not fashion items .Im not bagging for being different or being as you think direct , just inaccurate uninformed and downright misleading , which on a forum discussing medical matters is inexcusable.

"Cause Mayo says so" So, yes the Mayo cynic does say so , after an extensive study ..their results have been replicated by other labs .that was 6 years ago , no-one has refuted their conclusions ..[i mean in science not a Joe Bloggs off the street like you] .

Im fed up with your bewildering blustering posts ,they mislead and are full of self promoting long live me type rhetoric ..I',m becoming more uncomfortable contributing to a forum where it seems every other post is from a dumb aussie ....

-----Original Message-----From: infections [mailto:infections ]On Behalf Of dumbaussie2000Sent: 24 July 2006 02:56infections Subject: [infections] Re: The Gut

KateThis is like admiting defeat. Everyone knows that with these ilnesses we need more than a doctor, we need the treatment guidance of a lab. has been passionate about his fungus for at least the last year on this forum- he forgets the heart disease, cystitis and umpteen other complaints and just rambles on about the gut and fungus..The problem is he's stuck on first base and what he's waffling about is tried and true absolutely correct from 1979 when the first books on candida and the gut came out.Now he bags me for being different, for being direct, all out attack, actually most people don't like this.... but I can assure you I didn't sit opposite my doctors for very long like a wood duck, I took control and used the science to get myself well.Also The most important thing for anyone to remember is what you know and what you want your doctors to know is a very carefully evaluated strategy.I never ever go into a doctors appointment and tell him to read this article- I go in and show him a line no longer than 20 words so he can get the gist of things, I don't try and reprogram him.Also the fact that PAul will sit there and time and time again tell all how sinusitis is a fungal issue, 'cause mayo said so'.I've been responsable for a huge learning curve on this by getting over 100 cfs samples sent to a lab and myself for evaluation...He can't even formualte a strategy wherby his daughter inside or outside the lab she works in can identify his species..sorry, that's just complete and utter BS and smells like- lost the battle and the war in one swoop.What, while at school she didn't do a shit load of stuff, or she doesn't have friends inside the industry that can achieve this simple objective.Come on we are all sick and not hurdling this simple task is such a loss that it would make anyone think wow!!! I have nothing to look forward to at all..> > > > > You are such a whoosy! My daughters lab is subjected to> > scrutiny.Buddy if you got an opinion FROM OUR 300 forum members that> > you failed to get a fungal test when you daughter goes to a> > pathology lab everyday and is a microbiologist, I'm sure they'd think> > your a turkey.> > WHAT'S WRONG WITH HER WALKING IN WITH YOUR SAMPLE AND SAYING MY CATS> > GOT A PROBLEM WITH IT'S EAR AND I THOUGHT I WOULD USE MY SKILLS TO> > TRY AND FIND THE PROBLEM!>

[Guest guest]

Okay guys, this is getting ridiculous and not very productive. If you're going to argue, take it off the forum. penny dumbaussie2000 <dumbaussie2000@...> wrote: KateThis is like admiting defeat. Everyone knows that with these ilnesses we need more than a doctor, we need the treatment guidance of a lab. has been passionate about his fungus for at least the last year on this forum- he forgets the heart disease, cystitis and umpteen other

complaints and just rambles on about the gut and fungus..The problem is he's stuck on first base and what he's waffling about is tried and true absolutely correct from 1979 when the first books on candida and the gut came out.Now he bags me for being different, for being direct, all out attack, actually most people don't like this.... but I can assure you I didn't sit opposite my doctors for very long like a wood duck, I took control and used the science to get myself well.Also The most important thing for anyone to remember is what you know and what you want your doctors to know is a very carefully evaluated strategy.I never ever go into a doctors appointment and tell him to read this article- I go in and show him a line no longer than 20 words so he can get the gist of things, I don't try and reprogram him.Also the fact that PAul will sit there and time and time again tell all how sinusitis is a fungal issue, 'cause

mayo said so'.I've been responsable for a huge learning curve on this by getting over 100 cfs samples sent to a lab and myself for evaluation...He can't even formualte a strategy wherby his daughter inside or outside the lab she works in can identify his species..sorry, that's just complete and utter BS and smells like- lost the battle and the war in one swoop.What, while at school she didn't do a shit load of stuff, or she doesn't have friends inside the industry that can achieve this simple objective.Come on we are all sick and not hurdling this simple task is such a loss that it would make anyone think wow!!! I have nothing to look forward to at all..> > > > > You are such a whoosy! My daughters lab is subjected to> > scrutiny.Buddy if you got an opinion FROM OUR 300 forum members that> > you failed to get a fungal test when you daughter goes to a> > pathology lab everyday and is a microbiologist, I'm sure they'd think> > your a turkey.> > WHAT'S WRONG WITH HER WALKING IN WITH YOUR SAMPLE AND SAYING MY CATS> > GOT A PROBLEM WITH IT'S EAR AND I THOUGHT I

WOULD USE MY SKILLS TO> > TRY AND FIND THE PROBLEM!>