Probiotics: Friends or Foes page

[confused_monkey]

I have been suffering some terrible gut dysbiosis and have been thinking about getting some probiotics, but I recently stumbled across an article that has made me think twice. Here is the article (a bit long)...

Why Probiotics Are Not Needed by Bee:

We know our bodies are smart enough to balance out all nutrient levels if we just give it the basics (diet plus supplements) so it can do its job, and I also believe our bodies are smart enough to create any probiotics it needs, when, and IF, they are needed.

My first clue to problems with probiotics was in Dr. Weston A. Price's book Nutrition and Physical Degeneration. He writes on page 436:

"In this group, the saliva, before the treatment began, gained 1.5 per cent in inorganic phosphorus [found in meats and eggs}; whereas after treatment, the saliva lost 13.9 per cent of its inorganic phosphorus. [Note: In the previous paragraph he explains that phosphorus needed for teeth and bones is higher in the saliva of people with cavities.]

Dr. Price changed their nutrition, which included an increase in mineral activators (good fats) by giving them butter oil and high vitamin cod liver oil, and he provided nutritious meals that were low in carbohydrates.

Before the change in nutrition, when the tooth decay was considered active Dr. Price reports that their saliva L. acidophilous averaged, for the group, 323,000 colonies per cubic centimeter of saliva, and, after treatment, averaged 15,000."

So this made me think that IF good bacteria, like L. acidophilous, are so important then why do people who get proper nutrition like Dr. Price provided, have less L. acidophilous? That makes me question the role good bacteria plays throughout the body, and how and why the body creates "supposedly" good bacteria.

Many references state that acidophilous is a lactic acid producing bacteria which is what causes tooth decay/cavities as Dr. Price discovered.

Under conditions of excess glucose and limited oxygen the body produces pyruvic acid, which is used, as noted above, to create lactic acid. Lactic acid producing bacteria, usually found in decomposing plants and lactic products, produce lactic acid as the major end-product of carbohydrate fermentation. Such acidification inhibits the growth of spoilage agents in foods.

Therefore, good bacteria create an acidic environment. However a healthy small and large intestine are alkaline, not acidic. That is why the pancreas makes food emptying out of the stomach alkaline by pouring on lots of bicarbonate of soda (baking soda) first before it produces digestive enzymes.

Digestive enzymes produced by the pancreas and by the intestines only work in an alkaline environment. Also the small and large intestines produce baking soda, as well as the gall bladder; bile is also alkaline.

The mouth produces enzymes that start digestion of carbs which can only work in an alkaline environment too, so the mouth needs to be alkaline. So it makes sense what Dr. Price wrote that L. acidopilous was lower in the mouth when the person got proper nutrition.

When stomach acid increases enough it stops the digestion of carbs. Carb digestion is continued in the small intestines. Stomach acid mainly digests protein.

In searching for information I found that "supposedly" good bacteria are found in the small and large intestines. If that is true then those good bacteria would make the small intestines acidic, which would definitely interfere with digestion.

Like the mouth, I think it stands to reason that good bacteria in the intestines is a sign of poor health due to an excess of glucose and lack of oxygen.

At the end of the small intestines there is very little foods left, which mainly consists of undigestible carb fibres, residues of secretions, dead cells (the intestinal lining regenerates itself every 4 days, so there's a lot of dead cells), and water.

The main functions of the large intestines are to absorb water from the remaining indigestible food matter, to pass useless waste material from the body, and to balance water and electrolytes (minerals) throughout the body.

Therefore, it is obvious probiotics are formed by the body itself when they are necessary, just like our bodies create bacteria in order to clean itself up. However that idea is foreign to people today who believe in the false germ theory of disease.

In any case, taking probiotics by mouth isn't beneficial in any way, since consuming probiotics by mouth won't affect the intestines.

Probiotics are digested just like any other foods, since they consist of protein, fats and carbs. The digestive system doesn't say "Ah, there's some probiotics (friendly bacteria) here so I won't digest it like I do other proteins, fats and carbs."

IF probiotics are important for the large intestines the only way to introduce them is by enema, however probiotics simply changes the large intestines into a hugh fermentation pot, which makes it acidic and not alkaline like it is in a healthy body.

There is also evidence that some people have no probiotics in their intestines at all, yet they are perfectly healthy.

The best in health, Bee

Do you guys have any thoughts on this?

[piano-doctor-lady]

I don't buy it. I notice that Bee talks about "evidence" but does not quote it or link to it.

The body does not "create" probiotics. Its environment either harbors and protects them as they arrive from outside, or does not encourage them. They have to come in through eating, IMO. I do not think that people with sterile intestines are perfectly healthy at all. Flora do a multitude of tasks for us.

Also, I doubt you could find anyone with completely sterile intestines. One of the main purposes of good flora is that they displace bad flora, like yeasts, by taking up the available real estate and eating the constant stream of groceries we provide, leaving less for candida and suchlike to multiply on.


If you have gut dysbiosis, often indicated by struggling to pass tiny dry rocks which chew their way through the exit, then you should have some kind of fermented food, such as apple cider vinegar, sauerkraut, dill pickles, kim chee, aged cheese, and/or kombucha, with every meal. All the live versions.

[billman89]

Bee is way off base, and in my opinion, quite off base when it comes to "Candida".

Her diet is helpful yes, to an extent. But she is wrong about many, many things and is quite stubborn. She is another one of those close-minded "guru" type people who only believe in their own dogma about a certain subject.

The body has it's own stater culture of probiotic bacteria in the appendix. But... antibiotics can really screw this up and damage it. So, without the help of probiotic bacteria, be it from pills, or food, the body will not create it's own probiotics. If the body could just create it's own probiotics, it would do so and we would not have things like candida overgrowth.

Her diet, while like the "Primal" Diet, is far more restrictive and doesnt always work. I think it is helpful in the short term, but she recommends the diet for far too long.

Much better "anti-candida" diets that have real proof in healing are The GAPS Diet and the Raw Milk Cure. Much easier and more enjoyable than Bee's Candida Diet.

Also, "candida" could very well just be SIBO (small intestine bacterial overgrowth), or a host of other things.

I thought I had candida, but it turns out I was just overgrown with gram negative bacteria from a simple month of Tetracycline.

My point is... Bee is in no way the authority on anything. She is a ton of talk, but has little real evidence to back up her statements. She has some things right though.

[confused_monkey]

Bee is way off base, and in my opinion, quite off base when it comes to "Candida".

Her diet is helpful yes, to an extent. But she is wrong about many, many things and is quite stubborn. She is another one of those close-minded "guru" type people who only believe in their own dogma about a certain subject.

The body has it's own stater culture of probiotic bacteria in the appendix. But... antibiotics can really screw this up and damage it. So, without the help of probiotic bacteria, be it from pills, or food, the body will not create it's own probiotics. If the body could just create it's own probiotics, it would do so and we would not have things like candida overgrowth.

Her diet, while like the "Primal" Diet, is far more restrictive and doesnt always work. I think it is helpful in the short term, but she recommends the diet for far too long.

Much better "anti-candida" diets that have real proof in healing are The GAPS Diet and the Raw Milk Cure. Much easier and more enjoyable than Bee's Candida Diet.

Also, "candida" could very well just be SIBO (small intestine bacterial overgrowth), or a host of other things.

I thought I had candida, but it turns out I was just overgrown with gram negative bacteria from a simple month of Tetracycline.

My point is... Bee is in no way the authority on anything. She is a ton of talk, but has little real evidence to back up her statements. She has some things right though.

Yes, to tell you the truth I have noticed that in her. She doesn't seem to back up a lot of her claims scientifically, and if you question her she gets upset. Either way thanks for clearing that up. I need to purchase some probiotics and maybe include some fermented food in my diet. My stool test revealed 0 creation of the beneficial bacteria lactobacillus, and an overgrowth of bacillus but I was confident my body would create its own friendly bacteria, guess not.