Wouldn't the paleo diet accomplish the same thing?
OR, would a flora "transfusion" help our kids? I have one other friend with
an "autistic" daughter and she put her on paleo and the child recovered but
still had candida overgrowth which she treats with thyroid supplements and
good bacteria supplements. It is her firm opinion that paleo will not cure
candida overgrowth. Yet she does not believe in antifungals either. To this
day her child still has muscle weakness, a signature sign of candida
overgrowth....
I know of only one other mom (this one) besides me that has a child who
was actually diagnosed as autistic who is doing the paleo diet and her
daughter has completely recovered from "autism" except for the muscle weakness.
She suspects the chronic candida is from the mercury in the vaccines and
from the MMR invading the mucosal lining of the intestines....
Dr Shaw's website states that the child's body becomes in effet unable to
recognize the candida as an invader.
Larry is extremely susceptible to fungal overgrowth, we have tested his
urine and he shows organic acid metabolites from fungal overgrowth.
What would you guys do?
_________________________________________________________
The American Journal of Gastro, November 00
Editorial
November 2000
Volume 95, Number 11
Pages 3028-3029
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
"Flora Power"—Fecal Bacteria Cure Chronic C. difficile Diarrhea
Thomas J. Borody, M.D., F.R.A.C.P., F.A.C.G.a
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Persky and Brandt (1), in this issue of the Journal, amply demonstrated how
normal human flora bacteria are capable of permanently eradicating C.
difficile from the bowel. Lessons learned from this case may have
far-reaching clinical implications. First, courage and an innovative spirit
are required to carry out what was described by the authors as a
"distasteful" procedure. The description reflects our cultural "fecophobia"
and might have been viewed quite differently had the procedure been as
routine as a blood transfusion—conceptually similar, but one that has
largely lost its "hemophobia." Because the procedure is neither routine nor
accepted, it is often dismissed even though it can be dramatically curative.
The main lesson, then, is that patients with symptomatic, incurable C.
difficile seeking out any form of help (2) are perhaps often maintained in a
state of considerable suffering while a safe, rapid, and highly effective
therapy is available to them virtually anywhere in the world. Yet the
therapy is generally not discussed, published, or popularized. Clearly, with
our patients' well-being in mind, this area requires further improvement
through funded research and a scientific approach to its practice.
The second clear lesson is the dramatic and curative, effect of this
treatment. In eight reports (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10), the overall cure rate
was 60 of 67 treated patients. Generally those patients who failed to be
cured were treated late and died from overwhelming pseudomembranous colitis
(PMC) (4). Clinical improvement usually occurred within 1-4 days and has
been reported to be curative, without recurrence. In fact, there are few
medical therapies that reverse severe illness so dramatically. This begs the
question as to how such dramatic treatment works, and whether it could be
used or modified to cure other bowel conditions that may be
infection-driven. Tvede et al. demonstrated in vitro how some but not other
bacteria can profoundly inhibit the growth of pathogenic strains (6). A
similar although less powerful phenomenon has been described for
lactobacillus GG (11). It would seem that inhibitory substances, perhaps
bacteriocins elaborated by bacteria, possess powerful antimicrobial
properties. Unlike available antibiotics, these substances seem to have the
added power of eliminating bacterial spores. In addition, the accompanying
incoming mix of bacteria implants missing flora components such as
Bacteroides species, restoring fecal physiology (10, 12), and deficient
composition (6, 13), which may have initially permitted implantation of the
pathogen such as C. difficile. Hence, colonic infusion of enteric flora may
serve both as an antimicrobial and replacement therapy.
The human fecal flora is a complex mix of organisms and is arguably the
largest organ of the body, containing in a compact mass of living bacterial
cells almost nine times more living cells than does the entire body (14).
Given the bacteriacidal nature of fecal flora, as judged by the >95% cure of
C. difficile, it is instructive to realize that C. difficile may be but one
of many implanted infective agents mediating chronic GI disease. As H.
pylori was found to be the infective cause of ulcer disease, so chronic
clostridial (or other) infections may cause a portion of chronic GI
disorders such as constipation, IBS, or IBD. Indeed, constipation responds
to vancomycin (15, 16) and to fecal flora therapy (17, 18) as does IBS (5,
19). Ulcerative colitis (UC) has also been reported to go into prolonged
remission after fecal flora infusion (20). We have confirmed this finding in
our own prospective series of now seven patients with severe UC, five of
whom remain in clinical remission without therapy 1-10 yr after treatment
(19). In these conditions, no specific bacterial pathogens have yet been
demonstrated. Similarly, when Eiseman et al. (3) treated his four PMC cases
in 1957, C. difficile had not been discovered—yet the therapy was
successful. This very finding teaches us that we can use bacteriotherapy to
treat enteric infections without necessarily identifying the pathogen. Fecal
bacteria home in on the pathogen, apparently because of their broad-spectrum
activity. Hence, when the bacterial species is unknown, fecal bacteria can
still dissect out the pathogen without the need to detect and diagnose the
infection. Although scientifically it is satisfying to recognize the
pathogen, strictly speaking this is not necessary. It is therefore feasible
that progress in IBS/IBD treatment discovery could spring from a successful
therapy rather than from pathogen identification.
For those contemplating the use of this treatment, practical issues that
stem from the report by Persky et al. include a) the method of treatment,
and b) selection of donor. It seems that the method of delivery of the fecal
slurry into the bowel results in cure, whether given by an enema suspended
in saline (3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 19) or milk (10, 12), by a small bowel infusion
via a nasoduodenal tube (5, 7), a gastrostomy (9), or a colonoscope (Persky
et al.). However, there may be advantages delivering via a colonoscope to
infuse as proximally as possible, and to detect any colonic pathology.
Selection of the donor is of crucial importance to avoid infecting the
recipient with a separate disease. The donor should be tested at least for
HIV, hepatitis A, B, and C, cytomegalovirus, and Epstein-Barr virus, with
stool negative for any detectable parasites or bacterial pathogens. In our
experience, choosing the patient's partner offers a theoretical advantage
that any transmissible disease would have been transmitted and emerged by
now.
In the future, it is conceivable that "bacteriotherapy" using combined,
selected bacterial strains resembling human fecal flora (6, 21, 22), perhaps
in capsule form, may become a curative therapeutic agent for C. difficile
infection and perhaps for those GI disorders that we now call "idiopathic"
but that may well have an infective etiology.
-
|
