6 ms·

I grew up on a farm. It was common knowledge that when a calf, or a lamb was born they needed to get that first milk from their mom. The first milk looked dif

I grew up on a farm. It was common knowledge that when a calf, or a lamb was born they needed to get that first milk from their mom. The first milk looked different and was called colostrum. Colostrum contained a large assortment of antibodies from the mother that were transmitted to the newborn. If there was some health issue, the mother died or the newborn couldn't drink, we had colostrum in the freezer. If we didn't give it, the odds dropped dramatically of the newborn making it more than a few months. So, yes, mammals, including people, get immunities to germs they have not been exposed to.

Ovah 7y ago
This reminded me of neonatal lupus. Lupus is an autoimmune disease where your own antibodies attacks your tissues. In neonatal lupus, the newborn is born with lupus ... because materal autoimmune antibodies are able to cross the placental barrier. So the newborn 'inherits' a lupus condition, which usually self resolves within a month once the maternal antibodies have disappeared. https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/neonatal-lupus/ https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/neonatal-lupus/ This is presumably applicable to other maternal antibodies, which may give immunity against germs the infant has never been exposed to. However, this is a 'temporary' immunity, and distinct from the adaptive immune responses associated with 'immune system memory'.
- refurb 7y ago
  Exactly. They typically give pregnant women a Tdap booster in the 2nd trimester. The mother develops an immune response and she transmits those antibodies to the baby. When the baby is born, they have some temporary protection against those diseases, but as you said, it only last a month or two.
Wowfunhappy 7y ago
My understanding was that breast milk (at least in humans) gave the baby antibodies, but not the ability to create those antibodies. So, the effect wouldn't last.
- sjwright 7y ago
  But still I would imagine that such antibodies would be exponentially more valuable in the earliest moments of life, where it’s likely that the newborn fist comes into contact with the mother’s fecal material and all of the bacteria living on our skin.
  - BurningFrog 7y ago
    Those are (mostly) good bacteria though. Some theorize the baby needs the mother's poop, to start it's own digestive microbiome. It works that way in other species, but I don't know if it's more than speculation for humans. You also need a skin microbiome, but you can get that later.
    - jacobush 7y ago
      I have heard reasoning that c-section babies could benefit from having some given to them.
- romski 7y ago
  That’s correct - one of the proposed treatments for coronavirus is synthetically generated antibodies for seriously ill patients; it won’t teach the immune system as you said but reduces viral load.
- mattlondon 7y ago
  This is what I believe to be the case too - so-called "passive immunity" gained by just having their mother's antibodies from either breastfeeding or even earlier via the placenta (at least for humans - as I understand it not all mammals do it via the placenta?). Eventually I think this protection wears off, but can be topped up with further breastfeeding, or eventually the baby starts to generate their own antibodies
- mattlutze 7y ago
  Humans produce colostrum early after birth as well. There's a practice of saving it if the mother produces enough milk in case the newborn later has an illness and could use the antibody boost.
hutzlibu 7y ago
So it is even more frustrating, that mothers were encuraged for a long time, to not breast feed at all and rather use the artifical, sterile milk, because it is healthier. Fortunately the world moved largely beyond that.
- gerdesj 7y ago
  How on earth could millions of years of evolution possibly compete with Nestle et al "science"? Did I only say millions? I meant: hundreds of millions, silly me. Perhaps evolution needs a better advertising budget.
  - bisby 7y ago
    That's like saying we'll never build a device that moves faster than we can run because evolution produced perfect locomotion for us. Or that we'll never be able to communicate further than we can yell, because evolution produced strong lungs for us. There are plenty of cases where evolution failed. Allergies for instance... our own immune system reacting quite imperfectly to a harmless substance. That doesn't sound like pinnacle of evolution perfection to me. There is a time that science wins and a time that natural things win. What if science added those antibodies to the formula? What about people who are unable to breast feed.
    - tartoran 7y ago
      When you're thinking that science won sometimes it's nothing else but a sponsored think-tank and a big marketing campaign that made you think so. Just saying.
      - bisby 7y ago
        Sometimes. But planes being faster transportation than peak evolution (even among other species, not just humans) is not just "think tank". Blanket declaring evolution as the victor all the time because it has had hundreds of millions of years head start is clearly not always true.
    - 7y ago
acqq 7y ago
Thanks for sharing this, that got me reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colostrum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colostrum and the article from 1961 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1359530/?page=1 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1359530/?page=1 which quotes "first noted by Ehrlich in 1892" and "examined in detail by Howe in 1921."
cannaceo 7y ago
Those are IgA and IgG antibodies that are being transmitted from mother to child. They're effective for a period of time until the child's immune system develops but do not confer lifelong immunity as the child's immune system creates no memory from it.
- ramraj07 7y ago
  There might be other forms of immunity conferred as well. Antibodies provide immediate immunity even before the younglings immune system gets up and running. There's definitely some sharing of immune cells in the womb, who's to tell what else happens there with a long-term plan?
  - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
    Anything might be true, but as far as what's probable, I'm not following your logic.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
tehlike 7y ago
Colostrum also happens in humans. It's different from a regular milk
- werdnapk 7y ago
  Um yes. Was surprised to see colostrum discussed in the context of cows and not just humans in general. Every parent should be aware of this fact.
refurb 7y ago
The antibodies in colostrum don't make the animal or human immune in the usual sense of the word - the body is able to generate an immune response to a foreign substance. It's more similar to therapeutic use of antibodies. Once the colostrum is gone, so is any protection against infection.
chiefalchemist 7y ago
Similar is true of human births: natural vs C-section. https://health.howstuffworks.com/pregnancy-and-parenting/pregnancy/labor-delivery/csections-can-affect-a-babys-immune-system.htm https://health.howstuffworks.com/pregnancy-and-parenting/pre... https://sciencenordic.com/birth-c-section-children/giant-study-links-c-sections-with-chronic-disorders/1411238 https://sciencenordic.com/birth-c-section-children/giant-stu...
downshun 7y ago
Has anyone tried pooling the first milk from different cow moms?
aeturnum 7y ago
Also, if we want to be pedantic about it: way more than half the cells that make up a fertilized zygote are from our mother. Those cells are a living part of her body until the zygote is fertilized. The particular egg might not be fully formed at disease exposure, but it's part of her body just like any other cell.
Ovah 7y ago
Apparently, the science backs this up. This paper shows that the mortality of calves decreases if they get colostrum. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26995131 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26995131

Ovah 7y ago

This reminded me of neonatal lupus. Lupus is an autoimmune disease where your own antibodies attacks your tissues. In neonatal lupus, the newborn is born with lupus ... because materal autoimmune antibodies are able to cross the placental barrier. So the newborn 'inherits' a lupus condition, which usually self resolves within a month once the maternal antibodies have disappeared. https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/neonatal-lupus/ https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/neonatal-lupus/ This is presumably applicable to other maternal antibodies, which may give immunity against germs the infant has never been exposed to. However, this is a 'temporary' immunity, and distinct from the adaptive immune responses associated with 'immune system memory'.

refurb 7y ago
Exactly. They typically give pregnant women a Tdap booster in the 2nd trimester. The mother develops an immune response and she transmits those antibodies to the baby. When the baby is born, they have some temporary protection against those diseases, but as you said, it only last a month or two.

Wowfunhappy 7y ago

My understanding was that breast milk (at least in humans) gave the baby antibodies, but not the ability to create those antibodies. So, the effect wouldn't last.

sjwright 7y ago
But still I would imagine that such antibodies would be exponentially more valuable in the earliest moments of life, where it’s likely that the newborn fist comes into contact with the mother’s fecal material and all of the bacteria living on our skin.
- BurningFrog 7y ago
  Those are (mostly) good bacteria though. Some theorize the baby needs the mother's poop, to start it's own digestive microbiome. It works that way in other species, but I don't know if it's more than speculation for humans. You also need a skin microbiome, but you can get that later.
  - jacobush 7y ago
    I have heard reasoning that c-section babies could benefit from having some given to them.
romski 7y ago
That’s correct - one of the proposed treatments for coronavirus is synthetically generated antibodies for seriously ill patients; it won’t teach the immune system as you said but reduces viral load.
mattlondon 7y ago
This is what I believe to be the case too - so-called "passive immunity" gained by just having their mother's antibodies from either breastfeeding or even earlier via the placenta (at least for humans - as I understand it not all mammals do it via the placenta?). Eventually I think this protection wears off, but can be topped up with further breastfeeding, or eventually the baby starts to generate their own antibodies
mattlutze 7y ago
Humans produce colostrum early after birth as well. There's a practice of saving it if the mother produces enough milk in case the newborn later has an illness and could use the antibody boost.

hutzlibu 7y ago

So it is even more frustrating, that mothers were encuraged for a long time, to not breast feed at all and rather use the artifical, sterile milk, because it is healthier. Fortunately the world moved largely beyond that.

gerdesj 7y ago
How on earth could millions of years of evolution possibly compete with Nestle et al "science"? Did I only say millions? I meant: hundreds of millions, silly me. Perhaps evolution needs a better advertising budget.
- bisby 7y ago
  That's like saying we'll never build a device that moves faster than we can run because evolution produced perfect locomotion for us. Or that we'll never be able to communicate further than we can yell, because evolution produced strong lungs for us. There are plenty of cases where evolution failed. Allergies for instance... our own immune system reacting quite imperfectly to a harmless substance. That doesn't sound like pinnacle of evolution perfection to me. There is a time that science wins and a time that natural things win. What if science added those antibodies to the formula? What about people who are unable to breast feed.
  - tartoran 7y ago
    When you're thinking that science won sometimes it's nothing else but a sponsored think-tank and a big marketing campaign that made you think so. Just saying.
    - bisby 7y ago
      Sometimes. But planes being faster transportation than peak evolution (even among other species, not just humans) is not just "think tank". Blanket declaring evolution as the victor all the time because it has had hundreds of millions of years head start is clearly not always true.
  - 7y ago

acqq 7y ago

Thanks for sharing this, that got me reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colostrum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colostrum and the article from 1961 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1359530/?page=1 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1359530/?page=1 which quotes "first noted by Ehrlich in 1892" and "examined in detail by Howe in 1921."

cannaceo 7y ago

Those are IgA and IgG antibodies that are being transmitted from mother to child. They're effective for a period of time until the child's immune system develops but do not confer lifelong immunity as the child's immune system creates no memory from it.

ramraj07 7y ago
There might be other forms of immunity conferred as well. Antibodies provide immediate immunity even before the younglings immune system gets up and running. There's definitely some sharing of immune cells in the womb, who's to tell what else happens there with a long-term plan?
- Wowfunhappy 7y ago
  Anything might be true, but as far as what's probable, I'm not following your logic.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

tehlike 7y ago

Colostrum also happens in humans. It's different from a regular milk

werdnapk 7y ago
Um yes. Was surprised to see colostrum discussed in the context of cows and not just humans in general. Every parent should be aware of this fact.

refurb 7y ago

The antibodies in colostrum don't make the animal or human immune in the usual sense of the word - the body is able to generate an immune response to a foreign substance. It's more similar to therapeutic use of antibodies. Once the colostrum is gone, so is any protection against infection.

chiefalchemist 7y ago

Similar is true of human births: natural vs C-section. https://health.howstuffworks.com/pregnancy-and-parenting/pregnancy/labor-delivery/csections-can-affect-a-babys-immune-system.htm https://health.howstuffworks.com/pregnancy-and-parenting/pre... https://sciencenordic.com/birth-c-section-children/giant-study-links-c-sections-with-chronic-disorders/1411238 https://sciencenordic.com/birth-c-section-children/giant-stu...

downshun 7y ago

Has anyone tried pooling the first milk from different cow moms?

aeturnum 7y ago

Also, if we want to be pedantic about it: way more than half the cells that make up a fertilized zygote are from our mother. Those cells are a living part of her body until the zygote is fertilized. The particular egg might not be fully formed at disease exposure, but it's part of her body just like any other cell.

Ovah 7y ago

Apparently, the science backs this up. This paper shows that the mortality of calves decreases if they get colostrum. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26995131 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26995131