Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Great Article On Why The "leaky Gut" Isn't Real

28 posts in this topic

There's a lot of wrong stuff in that article.

First, it assumes that digestion is perfect. But let's roll with that. The article states that food is "almost totally digested by the time it leaves the duodenum". This leaves the entire stretch of the duodenum available for undigested food particles to cross. So this alone is no evidence against the so-called leaky gut theory.

Second, intestinal permeability is a very well known phenomenon, and has been extensively studied in athletes (vigorous exercise increases permeability). It has also been studied in cases of microbial enteritis - infection of the gut with pathogenic bacteria, fungi, or viruses. Endotoxins and exotoxins produced by infecting bacteria have been observed to cross from the intestines into the bloodstream, where they cause a variety of symptoms. These toxins are often full, undigested proteins.

The article neglects to realize that it doesn't matter that there are "several layers of cells" separating the intestinal lumen from the bloodstream. Proteins are tiny. The spaces between cells are larger than 1 protein. In fact, there are proteins called selectins, cadherins, and integrins that project into the intercellular spce and interact with other selectins, cadherins, and integrins to hold cells together. Depending on how many there are, the interactions between the cells can be tighter or looser, and thus permeability status can change, as is seen after a period of intense exercise.

Moreover, you don't even need a full protein to incite an immune response. You can have a protein fragment - say, 30 amino acids - that can induce a potent immune response. And since food is still undigested in the duodenum, there are plenty of opportunities for a 30AA fragment to cross into the bloodstream.

The authors of this article also seemed to forget that entire cells pass through blood vessel walls and the walls of the intestine depending on the composition of their surface proteins. How else would macrophages get around?

Antibody testing is a bit of a different story. IgG4 indicates downregulation of an overactive immune response - tolerance. Many food sensitivities look at IgG, and in particular IgG4. People get confused when they get their results back, and see high IgG for a whole bunch of foods that they didn't think caused them problems. And they're right - most of those foods don't cause problems, because a high IgG reading is indicative of tolerance, and not intolerance. However, there is another takeaway from the IgG tests. If you have high IgG antibodies to a certain food, that indicates that an immune response did happen, but is now being controlled. This can be indicative of a related problem. For example; if you come up sensitive to wheat and chocolate, the wheat could be causing damage, thus allowing other molecules to cross into the bloodstream and react. Your problem isn't chocolate, but rather the wheat, even though both come up as problems on the IgG test. It's also possible that a microbe is increasing permeability, and food isn't a problem at all; once the inflammation is dealt with, the problems go away. There are many of these scenarios that are possible, and it's extremely difficult to figure out which one if happening for you.

But what is NOT true is the idea that IgG antibody tests just don't matter. They matter. They give you information that is useful, and can indicate a problem. It is merely difficult to identify the root of the problem.

It's also important to note that the immune system interacts different with particles in the bloodstream as opposed to the lumen of the intestine. There's an interesting study somewhere that explained it nicely. I think you can find it on the wiki page for IgG if you're interested.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that the drug company's probably fund the books from the book companies the med students use to study and you would be correct sir it's called

Rockefeller medicine practiced since the early 1900's when Pasteur the father of the " Germ Theory " was raised on a pedestal and it all went down

hill from there. On his death bed Pasteur admitted " Bernard was right it's not the Germ but the Terrain " I guess he wanted to clear his conscience lol..

Regarding the house of numbers documentary you can watch it on you tube all the parts are there free the corruption is mind blowing it really is.

But your wrong things are changing , people are waking up to the fraud / danger of

allopathic medicine on a daily basis a good place to get

info would be Natural News.com and the system is collapsing / eroding as we speak. (=

Change is coming on so many different fronts. Its hard to gauge at this point whether is a healthy change or a negative one. People are becoming aware of fraud, yet it is still happening. I just found out a major hospital is millions in debt after changing EMR's multiple times.(EMR's are mandated by the government; they are insidiously expensive). They are now in debt up to their eyeballs. They tried passing it off by charging patients extra. They got caught and were reported facing legal action. However, they raised prices and have some damn good lawyers navigating the loop holes.

So while we see safe advances in medicine for efficiency and patient safety we also see prices increase, and more corruption along the way.

This is one example of many. While medicine adopts new ways to treat disease of all sorts down to genetics we see an increase in price and corporate greed. If alternative medicine continues to grow because of success and recognition, big companies take notice and then attempt to buy them out. I wish i could name the institutions (corruption ones) that are greedy beyond measure that have done this, but i fear repercussion so i will say no more. I have incite to more than i wish i knew. That's why i say, although i wish for change in many aspects, the change you wish for is not what is really going to happen. Therefore nothing is really changing.

If your stating that western medicine is collapsing that would be a terrible thing globally. This would incite global collapse of economies, lack of jobs, disease rates increase, decreased life expectancy, possible martial law from the effects of the fallout. Watch Contagion-pray that stuff don't happen. Ever.

My friend in Denmark always remarks about the high taxes and costs, but boasts how well this medical care is. He pays in ways we don't. Give and take,

My dear friend from Canada would have berried her son at the age of 4 if it wasn't for coming to the US to seek treatment for leukemia, the same treatment they were denied. Socialized medicine has its up and downs. Borders are open if you wish to try. I might for LASIK or PRK in the years to come. So much damn cheaper; other than that treat me in the states only.

Something reasonable? That's conjecture. Something reasonable to me is all but un-affordable to the next person that must decide between food and medical treatment. This is because of a array of complexities that have drove up prices not to mention the devaluation of the dollar. This discussion will lead to things outside the realm of medical care.

But again i do not see any decent change happening.Unless we revert as a country to complete socialism tomorrow will things be fair.

There's a lot of wrong stuff in that article.

First, it assumes that digestion is perfect. But let's roll with that. The article states that food is "almost totally digested by the time it leaves the duodenum". This leaves the entire stretch of the duodenum available for undigested food particles to cross. So this alone is no evidence against the so-called leaky gut theory.

Second, intestinal permeability is a very well known phenomenon, and has been extensively studied in athletes (vigorous exercise increases permeability). It has also been studied in cases of microbial enteritis - infection of the gut with pathogenic bacteria, fungi, or viruses. Endotoxins and exotoxins produced by infecting bacteria have been observed to cross from the intestines into the bloodstream, where they cause a variety of symptoms. These toxins are often full, undigested proteins.

The article neglects to realize that it doesn't matter that there are "several layers of cells" separating the intestinal lumen from the bloodstream. Proteins are tiny. The spaces between cells are larger than 1 protein. In fact, there are proteins called selectins, cadherins, and integrins that project into the intercellular spce and interact with other selectins, cadherins, and integrins to hold cells together. Depending on how many there are, the interactions between the cells can be tighter or looser, and thus permeability status can change, as is seen after a period of intense exercise.

Moreover, you don't even need a full protein to incite an immune response. You can have a protein fragment - say, 30 amino acids - that can induce a potent immune response. And since food is still undigested in the duodenum, there are plenty of opportunities for a 30AA fragment to cross into the bloodstream.

The authors of this article also seemed to forget that entire cells pass through blood vessel walls and the walls of the intestine depending on the composition of their surface proteins. How else would macrophages get around?

Antibody testing is a bit of a different story. IgG4 indicates downregulation of an overactive immune response - tolerance. Many food sensitivities look at IgG, and in particular IgG4. People get confused when they get their results back, and see high IgG for a whole bunch of foods that they didn't think caused them problems. And they're right - most of those foods don't cause problems, because a high IgG reading is indicative of tolerance, and not intolerance. However, there is another takeaway from the IgG tests. If you have high IgG antibodies to a certain food, that indicates that an immune response did happen, but is now being controlled. This can be indicative of a related problem. For example; if you come up sensitive to wheat and chocolate, the wheat could be causing damage, thus allowing other molecules to cross into the bloodstream and react. Your problem isn't chocolate, but rather the wheat, even though both come up as problems on the IgG test. It's also possible that a microbe is increasing permeability, and food isn't a problem at all; once the inflammation is dealt with, the problems go away. There are many of these scenarios that are possible, and it's extremely difficult to figure out which one if happening for you.

But what is NOT true is the idea that IgG antibody tests just don't matter. They matter. They give you information that is useful, and can indicate a problem. It is merely difficult to identify the root of the problem.

It's also important to note that the immune system interacts different with particles in the bloodstream as opposed to the lumen of the intestine. There's an interesting study somewhere that explained it nicely. I think you can find it on the wiki page for IgG if you're interested.

It still will remain a theory. The day i see it on a diagnosis sheet will be the day I return here to and announce it.

And lets say it true. Lets say it really is real different than all the other GI disorders-all of them. Is the treatment for those who suspect it successful? Is there clear, concise, and structured evidence to support that the prescribe treatment (whatever its) is actually been proven successful?

Has there been conducted autopsies to reveal this thinning and extra permeability of the intestinal lumen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your right allopathic medicine isn't ALL BAD but sadly most of it is , what they are good at is trauma , emergency's things like that they are very good at also some surgery's after that things tend to go bad quickly . Chronic health conditions are not there strong points . Symptom management is what they do but to actually CURE / HEAL a condition no....and if they do a person will usually have to deal with new conditions caused by the treatment . A lot of jobs depend on it yes but new jobs could be created if people got into traditional forms of healing that have been used successfully for thousands of years , naturopathic medicine I hear it's a growing field. In the early 1900's naturopaths did seven times the business of Allopaths , regular physicians could hardly compete and then slowly it started going down hill , the germ theory was adopted the Rockefeller took over and the church of allopathic medicine was invented with the industrial revolution and everything from then on would be healed ONLY by synthetic drugs , as herbs could not be patented and so no profit was to be had.

Interestingly enough John D Rockefeller lived to the ripe old age of 99 and only used homeopathy for the later part of his life.... that tells a story lol...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites