Here are some things I have been trying. To me, it seems there is a loss of microbial function for many people that is contributing to metabolic disfunction. Prebiotics and synbiotics can be used in combination with diet to combat dysbiotic microbiomes in obese individuals [1]. Obesogenic memory is mediated by dysbiotic strains of bacteria, and oral bacteria play a role (you can get oral probiotics and they're more likely to be persistent after a cleaning when the biofilm has been removed).
Evivo with 2'FL from Layer Origins, a synbiotic prebiotic for this strain. My code is EVIVO-1075 if you want 15% off. It's been successfully engrafted in adults [2] and improving acetate, lactate, and butyrate (byproducts of breaking down the HMO) seems to be correlated with better diabetes outcomes, less inflammation and potential appetite modulation [3]. Bifidobacteria have potential to be protective against T2D [4].
Akkermansia muciniphila with a Layer Origins Super Reds [5, 6]. It's a chicken and egg problem, but reduced Akkermansia muciniphila is associated with obesity and supplementation seems to improve metabolic disorder, but research is limited.
Omega-3 and more poly and mono unsaturated fats [7]. Omega-3 reduced all-cause and cause-specific mortality in diabetes patients [8]. I was vegetarian for a long time and avoided saturated fat, then started eating more when I got into Weston A. Price and started keto and continued to eat moderate fat when not doing a low carb diet. Long term, I've had issues with satiety and discipline even with keto, while a diet with grains helps me feel fuller longer. My sibling did 23 and me and found out they have variation on alleles associated with higher weight with increased saturated fat consumption, which has made me reconsider what kinds of fats I consume [9].
Inositol and COQ10 [10]. Peter Langsjoen, who pioneered the research on ubiquinol, has said he has the healthiest cardiology patients and attributed it to ubiquinol. You need a dose high enough to maintain a certain blood serum level and ubiquinol is water soluble where cheaper ubiquinone is less readily absorbed.
Gluten can be inflammatory for people, and I found this talk helpful for understanding more about leaky gut and dysfunction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evQAzGaW1JU. Emulsifiers have been shown to alter microbiota composition, so less processed foods is probably wise [11]. Dishwasher pods and rinse aids contain alcohol ethoxylates that can disrupt the microbiome but you can find ones that clean decently without them.
They used EVC001, a robust strain of B. infantis that came out of UC Davis research, and HMOs, which are a symbiotic that it can metabolize into short chain fatty acids, to achieve reversible engraftment without the use of antibiotics. The insurance hypothesis has kind of conflated diversity with function, but it could be possible to have a stable microbiome with less diversity but high function using symbiotics and strains we have identified as contributing to improved function [1].
> Therefore the individual species are not of therapeutic relevance
Wanted to point out that this does not hold true for babies, where Bifidobacterium abundance generally does correlate with healthy microbiota and the strain B. infantis is relevant therapeutically and has evolved to metabolize milk sugars into short chain fatty acids.
BPA has been shown to be absorbed transdermally [1]. Patagonia was recently found to have high levels of BPA, along with other brands [2].
Bluesign and Oeko-tex certifications test for BPA. You can find recycled polyester without this (if you have kids, Hanna Andersson's polyester lines claim to be BPA and PFAS free, most Cat and Jack clothing is Oeko-tex certified and Mamavation puts out good information on PFAS in things like children's clothing, backpacks, lunch kits [3]).
I've breastfed multiple children with ups and downs of it being easy and hard, suffered through the struggle of learning to do it the first time as postpartum mother after major surgery, through teething, latch issues, biting, pure physical exhaustion, and the transition of going back to work that leads to decreased supply. I've watched close friends that have struggled with production with underweight, premature babies pump like crazy and feel stressed out trying to get their supply up but ultimately transition to formula on the advice of doctors. My own anxiety around combination feeding and not feeling like I had a clear understanding of differences in the microbiome with a surgical birth or formula use lead to me reading everything I could find to gain a better understanding of the differences in outcomes for exclusive breastfeeding, combination and formula feeding.
We can close the gaps by subsidizing Evivo's EVC001 b. infantis and making it a standard that every formula contains 2'FL. Individuals can choose these formulas and purchase b. infantis already. If we were to make it so that all babies, not just NICU babies at hospitals aware of the research, get these two things, public health outcomes (especially those related to autoimmune conditions) should be better than if we continue allowing formula that is not as analogous with breastmilk. We can have better lactation support that is current and evidence based (such as that from ABM contributor Katrina Mitchell https://physicianguidetobreastfeeding.org).
Another reason mom blogs are toxic is because people read past others points when issues are really emotionally charged for them. Really sorry your wife struggled. Formula is fine, but there are reasons breastmilk is pushed, especially since milk is supply and demand and it's hard to identify those with true low supply and those whose bodies just haven't ramped up production yet. Hopefully as a model of immune system response and the impact of b. infantis and HMOs gains more awareness, there will be less pressure since we are assured babies are getting many of the same benefits.
> you've never been a mother who can't produce milk for her child
That's your assumption.
You're missing the point, which is that you can supplement formula with both 2'FL and b. infantis and get immune system outcomes that are more similar to those that occur while breastfeeding [1]. The fact that milk typically faciliates a cascade of changes that lay the foundation for a healthy immune system is not at odds with formula feeding. Formula is adequate macronutrition, but if we cannot be honest about the ways in which it is not on par with breastmilk, we will never close the gaps.
Formula is adequate as far as macronutrients go, but it lacks sugars present (at varying levels-about 20% of the population are FUT2 non-secretors and cannot produce the α1,2-fucosyltransferase enzyme that is used to make human milk oligosaccharides), stem cells and bacteria present in breast milk. Women in the US are often deficient in the strain that can metabolize the human milk oligosaccharides, b. infantis, and it's not clear afaik to what extent bacteria gets passed vertically in breastmilk. The microRNA present in breastmilk can modulate gene expression, but the extent and effects are unclear.
B. infantis and human milk oligosaccharides create a feedback loop that encourages the formation of a robust immune system during a critical period [1]. Some formulas contain b. infantis, and some contain 2'FL, the HMO present in breastmilk. The most robust strain is EVC001, which has been shown to be present at a year after 21 days of supplementation. In an observational study, it reduced the diagnosis of necrotizing enterocolitis in very low birth rate infants by 73% [2].
I wish this was common knowledge, but most formulas do not contain these (often they contain other pre and probiotics) and babies are missing out on the specific sugars and bacteria that we know impact the development of the immune system.
That does not seem to be the case for coQ10[1]. With coQ10, it's only effective at a therapeutic level which entails higher doses[2].
Vitamin E as α-tocopherol has been associated with increased prostate cancer[3]. Natural tocopherols rich in γ-T, γ-TmT, or similar tocopherol mixtures show more promise for cancer applications[4].
I don't think this is the case for antioxidants across the board. Peter Langjoen, who has pioneered CoQ10 research and used it extensively clinically addressed coQ10 use with chemotherapy in this interview and reluctancy of cancer centers to allow patients to use it: https://youtu.be/9Z7X9WPWv4Y?si=avOV0u4ruy_zNslr&t=746.
While coenzyme Q10 may show indirect anticancer activity through its effect(s) on the immune system, there is evidence to suggest that analogs of this compound can suppress cancer growth directly[1].
I do an unlimited screen time approach (this is a misnomer; most parents using this approach have some kind of limits). I limit content (especially content that seems to give a dopamine hit like unboxing videos and those annoying YouTube videos with constant cheering and sound effects) and have rules about no TV or devices while eating.
We do not use timers or set limits around how much time a day. My preschooler enjoys games, learns a lot through TV, has an exceptional vocabulary and a big imagination. They still enjoy spending time outside and playing with others. My hope is that they learn to self regulate early.
Target is an example of labels working and allowing consumers to be informed while still taking responsibility at the corporate level.
They have a chemical policy[1] that is moving in the right direction, and labels like Oeko-Tex 100, Oeko-Tex Made in Green, Clean Beauty, BPA Free, Paraben Free and Recycled. The changes they are making as a part of their chemical policy (eliminating PFAS and other concerning chemicals from cleaning and baby items) are benefiting everyone, and consumers who have specific concerns can quickly get more information about what they are buying. Most consumers are increasingly aware of risks, but most do not have the desire or time to look into the manufacturing process for everything they buy.
I’m not sure what you take away from that meta analysis, but to me it does not seem to be about diversity as much as which groups of bacteria are associated with general improved health outcomes and disease. If you have more alpha diversity because you have more pathogenic strains, it does not necessarily mean it’s better.
Some studies have found no differences in alpha diversity[1] when looking at outcomes like longevity. Maybe alpha diversity is the byproduct of healthy flora but it could be possible to engineer a microbiome that was more advantageous for a given population that was less diverse.
There seem to be windows where bacterial populations are in flux until the microbiome stabilizes around 3 years of age. It is difficult to modify the microbiome after that. I think our models have to shift so that we prioritize early intervention, especially for those at risk for dysbiosis (like premature and c-section babies).
This article conflates diversity with gut health. It has not been proven that more diversity is necessarily better[1]. In fact, in infants a less diverse b. infantis dominant environment is probably advantageous[2].
If you're having a baby, the best thing you can do is to supplement b. infantis, especially the robust strain from Evolve Biosystems[3]. The Hadza have more b. infantis[4] which kicks off a set of immune host interactions that have positive effects on inflammation during the critical period after birth[5].
"After around 3 years, the gut microbiota stabilises retaining relative proportions of taxa with adaptations to composition harder to impose,"[6] so I doubt it's diet as much as it is vertical transmission of the right kinds of bacteria that set the infants up for a lifetime of healthy immune response.