Your virome

Scientists are learning more and more about our microbiomes—the 100 trillion bacteria, fungi, viruses, and protozoa that live on and in our bodies. They can do this because advances in genome sequencing allow them to determine an organism’s DNA. But they don’t know much about the viruses that live in our guts—in fact, 99 percent of gut viruses are unknown to science. To try to make some headway into this dearth of information, some scientists studied the gut viruses of ten people for over a year. They learned two things: 1) gut virus populations are stable; 2) gut viruses are person-specific (your gut viruses are not like my gut viruses).

They surmise that some viruses are better for your health than others, but—for now—they don’t know which viruses may be good and which may be bad. They do know that most of the viruses in our guts are bacteriophages—viruses that infect bacteria, replicate inside them, and kill them. I suppose those may be good ones. Maybe not. (See an earlier post for an example of bacteriophages at work, killing disease-resistant bacteria.)

The more scientists study our gut microbiomes, the more they are discovering ways in which these microscopic organisms affect our health. Recently, drug regulators in China approved a drug to treat Alzheimer’s disease. The drug adjusts the gut microbiome such that inflammation-causing amino acids from gut bacteria no longer irritate the brain. A neurologist at the Alzheimer Center Amsterdam remarked “These results advance our understanding of the mechanisms that play a role in Alzheimer’s disease and imply that the gut microbiome is a valid target for the development of therapies.” Maybe they should have been studying guts all along instead of brains.

For an introduction to this blog, see I Just Say No; for a list of blog topics, click the Topics tab.

Fungi may spur the growth of pancreatic cancer

Scientists are learning more and more about how the trillions of organisms that inhabit our bodies—bacteria, fungi, viruses, protozoa—can affect our health, both for better (help you digest food) and for worse (make you ill). New research is looking at the link between a fungus by the name of Malassezia (shown below) and pancreatic cancer. Malassezia is typically found on the skin and scalp and can cause skin irritation and dandruff. Some studies have linked the fungi to inflammatory bowel disease.

As far as the pancreas is concerned, researchers found that Malassezia was present in extremely high numbers in samples from pancreatic cancer patients. In fact, it appears that the fungi may drive the growth of tumors by way of a cascade of events involving inflammation and the immune system. Researchers discovered that in mice and humans with pancreatic cancer the fungi multiply 3,000 times more than in healthy tissue. The fungi can also make pancreatic tumors grow bigger. 

The more scientists learn about the microorganisms that inhabit our bodies, the more they concur that a tumor’s “microenvironment” is just as important as the genetic factors driving its growth. As one researcher remarked, “We have to move from thinking about tumor cells alone to thinking of the whole neighborhood that the tumor lives in.”

These new findings may spur new developments in treating people with pancreatic cancer. For one thing, the presence of the fungi can serve as a biomarker for who might be at risk. At some point, anti-fungal treatments can be tried. In mice, an antifungal drug got rid of the fungi and kept tumors from developing. However, nobody is ready to begin administering anti-fungal treatments to people. The interaction between microbes and their hosts is very complex, and anti-fungal medications can have side effects. More experimentation is needed before pancreatic cancer patients will reap the benefits of this research. It sure sounds promising to me.

For an introduction to this blog, see I Just Say No; for a list of blog topics, click the Topics tab.

Re-growing cartilage like a salamander

About three years ago, bending my right knee became painful. An MRI showed that my meniscus (cartilage) was “shredded.” Over about a year and a half, I had two or three cortisone shots in my knee that reduced the inflammation. The pain eventually went away. About nine months ago, I went back to the doc because, again, it hurt to bend my knee. I assumed it was the same knee. But when I checked the earlier MRI report, I was surprised to discover that it was not the same knee that had caused the earlier problem. What had once been my bad knee was now my good knee.

Conventional medical “wisdom” says that meniscus tears don’t get better and surgery is often recommended. But my once-bad knee is now fine! Maybe I re-grew some cartilage. A new study has shown that humans can re-grow cartilage in a manner similar to what a salamander can do when it re-grows missing limbs. The science has to do with the production of new collagen proteins and is rather complicated. At any rate, as one researcher said, “…this study provides compelling evidence that there are many similarities in human and salamander limbs.”

I also came across an article by Richard Bedard who, in his 40s, was told by four different doctors that his bad knees would never get better. He wouldn’t take no for an answer and began a “research odyssey.” He found several studies that proved that cartilage can indeed regrow, as shown in “before” and “after” MRI images. He started a program to heal his knees, which he doesn’t reveal because he’s written a book Saving My Knees. His conclusion: “My own experience showed me that rehabilitating damaged cartilage is a long, trying process. The condition of this tissue changes very, very slowly. But change it does—both better and worse. Today, after a recovery that took almost two years, my knees feel fine.” I guess I have to buy the book and get to work on my left knee.

For an introduction to this blog, see I Just Say No; for a list of blog topics, click the Topics tab.

Eat red meat?

New research has shown that eating red meat isn’t bad for you. After three years of study, a group of 14 researchers in seven countries concluded that eating red meat doesn’t increase your risk of cardiovascular disease or cancer. The research included data on four million study participants. I have always maintained that eating red meat isn’t harmful and for years have been infuriated by the substitution of chicken and turkey for beef and pork in sausage and similar products.

I am newly convinced, however, that the planet would be better off without beef cattle. Here’s why:

• Agriculture consumes more fresh water than any other human activity, and nearly a third of that water is devoted to raising livestock.
• One third of the world’s arable land is used to grow feed for livestock.
• Livestock (mostly cattle) are responsible for 14.5 percent of global greenhouse-gas emissions—a result of the methane they generate as a by-product of their digestive systems.  If cows were a country their emissions would be greater than all of the EU and behind only China and America.
• Every four pounds of beef you eat contributes to as much global warming as flying from New York to London.

One viable solution, besides becoming vegetarian or vegan (not an option in my house) is to eat plant-based fake beef—a relatively new product available in “ground beef” form (pictured to the left). Four companies are currently producing this product, at least one of which, I understand is much like the real thing. In fact, Burger King is selling fake meat burgers made by the Impossible Foods company. I understand you can buy the “beef” at the market. I’ll try it as soon as I can find it here in the Santa Cruz Mountains.  

For an introduction to this blog, see I Just Say No; for a list of blog topics, click the Topics tab.