NH, Thanks for your reply.
No internal domain issues here but I wish to challenge your view.
Tell me if I am wrong but I see something important here: very important.
As I understand things none of the natural biota humans normally have produce EFA’s. We cannot make our own EFA’s and need to source all our EFA”S via diet. This article is the first time I have ever read a report that there may be a natural system that allows us to produce EFA’s. If this conjecture is true it gives a logical explanation for both how we were able to develop the way we did if our diet were predominantly F&V and secondly why we lost our capacity to produce our own EFA’s. That for me is very significant.
Nh quoting your post: “”If abrassarti is required to digest the green vegetables that undergo no digestion in the stomach, then it will be there or it's task taken by another.””
Yes the task is taken by another and the product is different. I conclude from the article that T.abrassarti is not present in our digestive tract. If T.abrassarti does allow us to produce EFA’s I want to try it.
Your quote: “”but my take on this is that you don't mess with the inner domain.””
My experience and confidence is almost the opposite: I have fermented and produced many cultured foods over the years. Cultures from the contents of animal intestines used animal intestines for sausages and used BIM’s both in agriculture and for food production. None of these have ever caused the slightest illness or unease. Currently I am trying to stabalize a number of these cultures with various agents salt etc. Again no stomach issues. Maybe my very strength is due to the exposures that many decry.
The literature points to the fact that T. abrassarti is difficult to culture. I will continue following this closely. Finding other animal sources and see if I can find a logical vector for human exposure to this MO. Looking at the animal trials literature it appears that transmission is by animal to animal exposure. If we were eating the intestines of killed animals occasionally as appears to have been the case, and is well documented, then it would appear that exposure to T.abrassarti would have been “easy” via the animal to animal vector.
This fits with an idea that I have held for some time: We need view the natural environment as benign if not supportive rather than dangerous if not deadly. The hygiene obsession probably weakens us on some levels while it is beneficial/very important on others. Sure there are baddies out there but also go0dies which we loose exposure to also because of our attitudes. However to my mind too much is made of the dangers and not enough of the important synergies that exist when an organism exists fully in its environment. Not recongising that and failing to recognize that our guts should “mimic”, in a very complex way, that very complexity of the natural environment in which we live is a failure to understand just how much we are a consequence of the very environment which nurtures us.
Pages and Ads Suggested by Google