The scientists had periodically sampled the children’s microbes, and when they looked back at this record, they discovered that the microbiome of children who d

The scientists had periodically sampled the children’s microbes, and when they looked back at this record, they discovered that the microbiome of children who developed the disease changed in predictable ways nearly a year before the disease appeared. Diversity declined and inflammatory microbes bloomed. It was as if a gradually maturing ecosystem had been struck by a blight and overgrown by weeds. I wonder if they looked at antibiotic use. Wealthier countries often have better medical access. Perhaps it isn't that poor countries are "dirtier" so much as that when kids do get ill, they are less likely to get nuke-em-from-orbit antibiotics, use of which is known to have a scorched earth effect on the gut. The gut is about 70 percent of the immune system. I really dislike the hygiene hypothesis. I have reversed a lot of the symptoms of my so called auto immune disorder in part by staying impeccably clean and avoiding exposure to germs as best I can. To me, this "a dirtier world is better for you" line of reasoning just does not make sense. It would make a great deal more sense to me if the conclusion was that casual use of antibiotics does egregious harm to the biome in the gut, from which some people never recover. Modern doctors are perfectly happy to prescribe antibiotics and I don't think I have ever had one tell me that I need to consume yogurt afterwards to foster healing of the damaged gut biome.