[HN Gopher] Autism affects the microbiome, not the other way around
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Autism affects the microbiome, not the other way around
        
       Author : wyrm
       Score  : 78 points
       Date   : 2021-11-20 14:23 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
        
       | zackmorris wrote:
       | After going through the worst burnout of my life from 2018 to
       | 2020, I have proof in my own life that diet and digestive issues
       | are hugely correlated with cognition and mood.
       | 
       | Personally, I don't expect these kinds of studies to find a
       | smoking gun. The chemical interactions between foods and the
       | immune system are far too complex to be understood at this time.
       | The immune system is the second most complex biological system
       | after the brain. But we can still get clues. I highly recommend
       | the everlywell comprehensive test (no affiliation) of 200+ foods,
       | which I took that confirmed my suspicions about certain foods:
       | 
       | https://www.everlywell.com/products/food-sensitivity-compreh...
       | 
       | There's also a regular test of 100 foods for about half that
       | price. And yes, these tests have their flaws, but can still
       | inform us.
       | 
       | I've also been taking ashwagandha for a few months for ADHD
       | symptoms (still undiagnosed, but I'll get to it, I swear!) after
       | hearing good things about it online. I'm an INFP with 78% on
       | intuition, so I'm somewhat cursed with knowing the solutions to
       | problems before people finish explaining them to me. Which is
       | great for programming, but debilitating when living in a sick
       | society healing from recent events in these times. My "deficits"
       | (should really be differences) are around dissociation because
       | it's too easy for me to slip down interesting rabbit holes.
       | Living and working in the malignant mundanity of The Matrix while
       | knowing a better world is just beyond our reach due to dogma,
       | takes everything I got, every single day.
       | 
       | Attempting to keep this brief, I believe that ashwagandha may
       | desensitize the immune system to nightshades, which are pretty
       | much all of the fun foods. I also suspect that it raises the
       | proportion of good bacteria in our gut that live on roots. Humans
       | evolved as scavengers eating icky things, but our surroundings
       | and food are too sanitized today, so autoimmune issues and
       | inflammation will eventually come to dominate our medical system.
       | 
       | Which was the plot of a 1990s sci fi series called Earth 2, where
       | a billionaire's kid gets "the syndrome" from living in too
       | sterile of an environment:
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_2_(TV_series)
       | 
       | So people have known about this stuff for a long time.
       | 
       | For anyone curious, the way I got out of burnout (severe anxiety,
       | I learned) was by completely shutting down for a few months and
       | taking care of the chores I had put off for years/decades. I had
       | to relearn how to break overwhelming tasks down into simpler
       | steps on my todo list and just do what I could each day, even if
       | it was only one thing or getting out of bed. But more
       | importantly, service. I let my ego finally die and gave myself
       | over to helping others. That was the missing piece we don't hear
       | about in a capitalistic/patriarchal "me" culture.
       | 
       | Kids are very bright, often just as capable as you and me (you
       | remember) but forced to endure eons of slow growth before they
       | are free. I think we'll find that most developmental "disorders"
       | are clues as to what's wrong with our society, and that as we all
       | heal and ascend, they'll begin to subside.
        
       | lightweb wrote:
       | There's a lot of research that contradicts these notions, and
       | also practical advice on how to remedy through food choices, if
       | one is inclined to look into it. As with anything, it's a
       | controversial subject, probably due to the severity of autism and
       | the real difficulties of changing one's diet radically.
       | 
       | http://www.doctor-natasha.com/gaps-book.php
       | 
       | https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/325046
       | 
       | https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/978904.Gut_and_Psycho...
        
         | molyss wrote:
         | those 3 links are effectively from a single source, Dr Natasha
         | Campbell-McBride, who hasn't practiced as an MD for what looks
         | like 20 years. She makes a living out of that miracle diet.
         | She's anti-vax and hasn't published any research about GAPS.
         | 
         | I think her whole scheme is dangerous and would recommend
         | everyone who's considering this diet to look at the negative
         | press around the diet and its proponent. You'll have to look
         | pretty deep into google results to find those, but they're
         | there. I'm not linking them because I'm not qualified to judge
         | their quality besides superficially.
        
           | nateabele wrote:
           | My son has autism. I'd say he's slightly below 'moderate' on
           | the spectrum. We first started him on the GAPS protocol ~5
           | years ago. We've since evolved our approach and moved onto
           | other dietary protocols (of which there are _many_ --part of
           | the difficulty with studying or treating autism is that it's
           | a diagnosis of a set of behaviors, not of an underlying
           | condition: the underlying conditions are many and varied),
           | but that was the first time we tried something that resulted
           | in observable, material improvements in his quality of life,
           | across a number of different vectors.
           | 
           | When the healthcare establishment shrugs its collective
           | shoulders and tells you that your son is condemned to a life
           | of physical suffering, and being trapped in his own head, you
           | don't wait for the 'experts' to publish studies. You go to
           | work.
        
         | smt88 wrote:
         | The linked article addresses research like this directly.
         | 
         | The subjects of the article did the first high-quality research
         | on this topic in humans.
        
       | strogonoff wrote:
       | Would this be the beginning of a trend? I have an intuition that
       | reversing the causal relationship between high-level (psychology,
       | mind, behaviors) and low-level (physiology, disease
       | manifestations) matters can significantly advance medicine.
        
         | netizen-936824 wrote:
         | So if our behavior is the result of neuronal networks
         | processing information, what is the 'causal relationship'
         | 
         | 'Higher level' stuff like behavior is the result of our cells
         | communicating, there's no magic 'soul' that act on our
         | biological systems. It generally goes from low->high but there
         | is some feedback that occurs at 'high' and induces changes at
         | 'low'
         | 
         | The reality is a combination and thinking it just goes one way
         | is flawed reasoning. Nothing is unidirectional and nothing is
         | binary
        
           | strogonoff wrote:
           | What makes you think consciousness arises from matter? Is it
           | a verifiable hypothesis?
        
             | zajio1am wrote:
             | Does computation in computers arise from matter?
        
               | strogonoff wrote:
               | If matter arises from consciousness, then by extension so
               | does computation.
               | 
               | I'm not saying it as a fact, as it is neither refutable
               | no verifiable--but neither is the conventional view.
        
               | netizen-936824 wrote:
               | The explanation that I offer is note plausible than the
               | conventional view (magic souls)
               | 
               | Perhaps I'm wrong, but it at least seems like a step in
               | the right direction where the hypothesis is based on
               | already verified behavior of neurons and their networks
        
             | kaba0 wrote:
             | I don't think that it would be verifiable, but it is a
             | default hypothesis that we don't assume some yet unseen way
             | of interaction between something and our material bodies.
             | 
             | Also, I don't think that it is unreasonable to imagine
             | "consciousness" happening as an emerging feature of
             | sufficient complexity. Remember, we have 3 billion neurons
             | with orders of magnitudes more connections between them.
        
               | strogonoff wrote:
               | I don't mean some third thing interacting with our
               | material bodies. What I mean is consciousness as the
               | territory, and perceived matter and time-space
               | representation as a simplified map.
        
               | netizen-936824 wrote:
               | Do you have evidence for this? Because it sounds like a
               | larger leap of faith than I have assumed in my post.
        
               | strogonoff wrote:
               | No, but neither do I have evidence for consciousness
               | arising from matter. If you can point me to some, I'd
               | welcome that.
        
             | netizen-936824 wrote:
             | First I would like you to define consciousness
        
               | strogonoff wrote:
               | Perhaps you could give an example by defining "matter" or
               | "reality" or whatever you believe is the underlying
               | territory?
               | 
               | (Without circular definitions or those involving
               | consciousness, of course.)
        
             | Madmallard wrote:
             | It's far simpler to say it does based on the entire body of
             | our research up until this point than it doesn't so the
             | burden of proof is on those saying that it doesn't.
        
               | strogonoff wrote:
               | I don't think there is much existing research that
               | directly tackles this question, is there any? Meanwhile,
               | there is research[0] that appears to be investigating the
               | potential of such reversed causality or at least
               | something adjacent.
               | 
               | [0] https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.20
               | 14.0057...
        
             | Bobylonian wrote:
             | The problem with the consciousness is that by default it is
             | limited to ability perceive senses and bacteria clearly is
             | beyound our limits of consciousness, but that does not make
             | them less real. Our brains collect and process information
             | subconsciously - the layer of our consciousness is not
             | responsible for all the background work, that our brains
             | are doing. There can't exist hypothesis in regards of gut
             | processes affecting very thin layer of consciousness.
             | 
             | So, but can you disprove that gut bacteria can't impact
             | brain processes? They can deliver signals to the brain, so
             | what is exatly the obstacle that it makes it impossible
             | task?
        
         | Bobylonian wrote:
         | Well, if I remember, then there was an article about that some
         | bacteria that was present in brains was also present in gut.
         | 
         | The very quick stupid idea was that bacteria from guts was
         | invading brains, but there might be other explanations to that
         | - bacterias are also living outside gut and if some of them
         | somehow are finding a way into the brains, that does not mean
         | that they came directly from guts. Might be - might be not and
         | brains might have other canals that allows bacteria to enter
         | and once they are in brains, they might be able to get control
         | over things and condition brains in favouring specific gut
         | bacteria, by requesting - craving specific food. So, I don't
         | see that this research has nullified those ideas about
         | bacterias affecting brains and helping their species of
         | bacterias without knowing about them. But what this article is
         | proposing is not illogical - not getting into demands of
         | zombified controlled brains hold hostage of bacterias, or
         | actually - developing healthy dietary habbits, by favouring
         | diversity of gut bacterias in first place.
        
       | im3w1l wrote:
       | I remember when I heard people saying a better gut flora could
       | treat autism alarm bells started ringing about microbiome stuff
       | being way overhyped for me.
       | 
       | This causal direction makes sense though.
        
         | pstuart wrote:
         | I dunno, we're making a lot of discoveries about how our gut
         | influences our health, e.g.,
         | https://www.science.org/content/article/your-gut-directly-co...
        
       | DoreenMichele wrote:
       | I think obviously it's a two-way street. There are many factors
       | here. They seem to be oversimplifying the issue, which is perhaps
       | understandable but will lead to erroneous conclusions rooted in
       | bad mental models.
        
         | Bobylonian wrote:
         | Maybe. Humans developed their brains mainly because primate
         | ancestors ~3 million years ago started to hunt other
         | animals(including other primates) for meat and eat cooked
         | protein rich meat, which allowed to develop and maintain bigger
         | brains. That affected more diverse gut bacteria of primates -
         | they lost ability to process raw meat more efficiently, because
         | there was no more need for that.
         | 
         | My take is that in overall ASD is next evolutionary change in
         | brain development, where things that were coming from natural
         | animal world are given away - that includes easy and intiutive
         | social interaction that monkeys have, filtering of visual and
         | sensory information that is bombarding our brains, where
         | normally humans ignore 80-90% of information that brain
         | receives and that includes gut behaviour as well. Apparently
         | this brain development change can come together only with
         | prolonged life.
        
           | smt88 wrote:
           | I would wager that autistic people are less likely to have
           | children, which means that humans are evolving _away_ from
           | autism (assuming a large enough hereditary factor).
        
             | lupire wrote:
             | That assumes autism is an isolated binary trait, which it
             | is not.
        
             | akiselev wrote:
             | The evolutionary benefits of a dominant allele can vastly
             | outweigh the negative consequences of a recessive one,
             | keeping it alive even though it reduces fitness of some
             | individuals. With a spectrum disorder like autism that's
             | likely caused by many factors, we can't even hazard a wild
             | guess.
        
       | Jeff_Brown wrote:
       | While demonstrating that autism influence the microbiome seems
       | not especially tricky, demonstrating that the microbiome does not
       | also influence autism seems next to impossible.
        
       | acd wrote:
       | Try hacking Microbiome with different kinds of Probiotics. The
       | gut brain axis is two way. Thus you may be able to lessen autism
       | spectrum dissorder symptoms via Probiotics.
       | 
       | Research articles https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28686541/
       | 
       | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34062986/
       | 
       | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2019.0050...
        
         | adolph wrote:
         | > lessen autism spectrum dissorder symptoms via Probiotics
         | 
         | Parts of the HFA experience can be advantageous. I wonder if
         | certain aspects could be enhanced in this manner.
        
       | podgaj wrote:
       | It is also probable that both autism and altered micro biome are
       | co-arising conditions with an underlying genetic link. Many genes
       | implicated in ASD are also genes that can effect the mucrobiome.
       | 
       | If you want me to explain this more let me kmow.
        
       | lthornberry wrote:
       | This is an interesting study, but it's far from the conclusive
       | answer to the question of how the gut microbiome relates to
       | neurological conditions. Given the heterogeneity and complex
       | etiology of autism, a study of this size is not sufficiently
       | powered to pick up all plausible correlations. If there is a
       | causative connection between the microbiome and autism, it's
       | likely only true of a subset (perhaps a small one) of autistic
       | people.
        
         | kennywinker wrote:
         | I'd be shocked if the researchers doing this study didn't slice
         | up the study participants by various traits and look for
         | correlations. I.e. find the similar individuals (wrt gut
         | microbiome) and group them, then check for shared traits (wrt
         | asd).
         | 
         | > it's far from the conclusive answer
         | 
         | Idk it feels conclusive to me. The variance in asd gut
         | microbiome is much more than the variance between asd and non
         | asd gut microbiomes. Whatever we call autism is not "caused" by
         | your microbiome. If there is a single trait or "variant" of asd
         | that IS caused by gut biome that doesn't actually change the
         | truth of the first conclusion.
        
       | peter303 wrote:
       | This talk at MIT a few days ago measured nervous system
       | disruption in rident guts with autism analogs.
       | 
       | http://calendar.mit.edu/event/exploring_gut-brain_signaling_...
       | 
       | The conclusion is both the gut and brain may be affected by
       | whatever causes autism. But the study didnt attempt to establish
       | whether the gut affected the brain, or the brain affected the
       | gut, or were they simultaneous.
        
       | armchairhacker wrote:
       | > So this study concludes that kids with ASD have reduced dietary
       | diversity because of their behaviors, and this alters the
       | taxonomic composition of their microbiome
       | 
       | This sounds reasonable. Anecdotally autism and OCD can cause
       | strange eating habits.
        
         | 1-6 wrote:
         | I'd also like to see a microbiome study done on more
         | neurodivergent individuals to see if this pattern sticks.
         | 
         | Anecdotally, we also have a family where we have to cook
         | separate meals at times because certain foods cause the gag
         | reflex while they eat and they don't like exploring new foods.
        
         | Bobylonian wrote:
         | Yes, but let's be reasonable - not everything that is available
         | as a food can be classified as food(in the sense of healthy
         | food). I, for one, as an omnivore, that shuns extreme food
         | preferences, have a very diverse diet(which includes meat,
         | fish, vegetables) and prepare and cook food myself and my
         | strange habbit is not getting the same food every day, because
         | it gets too boring. Even because of this diverse diet, I still
         | can easily develop some problems, that other people seems to
         | not have eating the same food.
         | 
         | Also, if you think about that - not only smell, but taste and
         | texture can cause sensory overload and if you have eaten
         | something that feels funny, that means that your gut also is
         | sending signals. I have vomited food, that others did not had
         | problems eating, even if that food was probably slighly spoiled
         | - apparently this is something that my gut tolerates less than
         | others.
         | 
         | Let's also think on whom this paper is aimed at - in general
         | people are stupid, like the parent that succumbed to childs
         | demands of food(though, pear is fruit, smoked chicken is meat,
         | waffle is providing hydrocarbonates). So, there are people out
         | there, that has to be taught, that varied diet has to be taught
         | in chhildhood - that knowledge will stay for the rest of your
         | life. If my parents were allowing me to eat only candies, that
         | I was happy to consume in large quantities and not introduced
         | to fish and other foods, that I found repulsive as a kid, then
         | I would be similar to other people, who were not exposed to
         | some foods and still find them repulsive, like in childhood.
         | Some things have to be taught in childhood - like immunity - if
         | children are not exposed to countryside, or exposure to danger
         | - of open flame, etc.
         | 
         | Koalas that are feeding upon specific Eucaliptic trees are not
         | born with those gut bacterias, that are allowing to eat those
         | leaves - they have to receive that gut bacteria via consuming
         | fecal matter of their koala mother - if they are not receiving
         | that bacteria, they are for sure having problems with their
         | diet.
        
       | supperburg wrote:
       | The micro biome is lauded everywhere and considered as the last
       | great frontier of medicine which will solve all human ailments.
       | There is barely any disease that is not regarded as being
       | potentially caused by the micro biome. It's all complete horse
       | shit.
        
       | eluusive wrote:
       | I doubt that. It's likely both; as with most things in nature.
        
         | kennywinker wrote:
         | > They also "failed to replicate previously reported ASD-gut
         | microbiome associations," identifying only one species (out of
         | 607 examined) that significantly differed in abundance between
         | kids with and without ASD.
         | 
         | Not everything is a two way street. Cancer doesn't cause
         | smoking.
        
           | DoreenMichele wrote:
           | _Cancer doesn't cause smoking._
           | 
           | At the risk of sounding nuts: We don't know that.
           | 
           | There are various infections (often parasites) that mind
           | control their victims and get them to engage in bizarre
           | behavior that serves the goal of the parasite to reproduce.
           | 
           | I think ants infected with a particular fungus or parasite
           | crawl to the top of grass stalks, making it more likely they
           | will get eaten by cows which serves the reproductive needs of
           | the infection.
           | 
           | Rats infected with a particular parasite are more aggressive
           | and less likely to avoid cats. Getting eaten by a cat kills
           | the rat but serves the reproductive needs of the parasite.
           | 
           | If cancer is caused by some infective agent that alters the
           | right things in the body, maybe that makes it more likely
           | that you will smoke, thus promoting the kind of environment
           | that serves the infective agent so it can pass some threshold
           | and become "cancer" when it's not recognized as such below
           | that threshold.
        
             | kennywinker wrote:
             | Lotta mental gymnastics there, but ok, so some infectious
             | agent causes cancer and smoking. That's still not cancer
             | causing smoking, that's toxoplasmosis (or whatever) causing
             | both.
             | 
             | You're, of course, right in one sense - I can't prove a
             | negative. Cancer might cause smoking but we haven't found
             | the link yet. But the lack of evidence is suspiciously
             | large at this point.
        
               | DoreenMichele wrote:
               | It's not a lot of mental gymnastics. We know some cancers
               | are, in fact, caused by viruses. For example, human
               | papillomavirus causes cervical cancer, so (iirc) women
               | with fewer than 20 sexual partners are less likely to get
               | cervical cancer because they are less likely to have
               | contracted human papillomavirus.
               | 
               |  _But the lack of evidence is suspiciously large at this
               | point._
               | 
               | Such evidence will not be found if we never look because
               | we already assumed the conclusion and dismiss those
               | thinking out loud as nutters engaging in a lot of mental
               | gymnastics.
               | 
               | Edit:
               | https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/hpv/basic_info/cancers.htm
        
               | kennywinker wrote:
               | Again all you're doing is providing a mechanism for how
               | some infection could cause cancer AND smoking - not
               | smoking causing cancer. That's an easy one to find
               | evidence for... just look for the co-occurrence of
               | smoking, cancer, and this infection. Sorting out which
               | causes which is hard but not impossible after that.
               | 
               | To find smoking causing cancer you'd have to find smoking
               | increasing amongst people who get cancer. I don't have
               | studies to point to but i'm pretty sure that's been
               | looked at. By the tobacco companies if nobody else
        
               | Bobylonian wrote:
               | No, you are getting off the rails here - to prove that
               | cancer causes smoking you have to provide real life
               | example of a non smoker, where after getting cancer, a
               | patient starts to smoke. That patient might be some kind
               | of exception, but this does not work for cancer patients
               | at all. So, cancer akkktually does not cause smoking and
               | there is no way to prove that, unless you are thinking of
               | developing mutation of cancer that carries some mutagen,
               | that as a side effect also causes patients to start
               | smoking, but let's be real...
               | 
               | And it is not smoking that causes cancer, but exposure to
               | chemicals, that causes cancer. And only if that exposure
               | is critical. For the same reason you are able to take
               | x-rays, but not often. So if you are smoking peace pipe
               | ceremonially once per occassion - this is not going to
               | cause you a cancer.
        
               | DoreenMichele wrote:
               | _to prove that cancer causes smoking you have to provide
               | real life example of a non smoker, where after getting
               | cancer, a patient starts to smoke._
               | 
               | No, I wouldn't. I would have to prove, for example, that
               | someone started smoking after getting human
               | papillomavirus and that there was a mechanism plausibly
               | linking the infection with the craving for cigarettes.
               | 
               | I don't readily know how to make the linguistic
               | distinctions I want to make here. Sure, if you want to
               | say "They first have to have a diagnosis of _cancer_... "
               | okay, I'm dead in the water.
               | 
               | That's not what I'm suggesting. I'm suggesting that we
               | don't fully understand what causes cancer so it's
               | possible that whatever living thing is a factor in
               | causing cancer may also alter behavior such that it makes
               | a diagnosis of cancer more likely.
               | 
               | This is probably not worth discussing further. "You
               | cannot solve a problem using the same mental models that
               | created it" but those "proven" mental models are a handy
               | means to dismiss someone in conversation as _getting off
               | the rails_.
        
               | Bobylonian wrote:
               | Hey, English is not my native language and "getting off
               | the rails" here was meant, that you are leading yourself
               | astray and falling off the cliff. I mean you are losing
               | track of this debate that smoke is causing a cancer.
               | 
               | But to be fair, I can't see sense of following other
               | logic of yours, because I recently lost a relative to a
               | cancer and there was absolutelly nothing to blame for,
               | except that she got into toxic environment, which killed
               | her.
               | 
               | Also, if we come to that - did you know, that in UK there
               | were cases, that spouse was poisoned by chemicals, that
               | causes cancer - are you aware that there are thousands of
               | medical drugs, that has side effect that might cause
               | cancer? How are you going to explain those with your
               | logic? So, apparently person is developing a disease, and
               | in process of treating that disease, person develops a
               | cancer... good luck in explaining that with behavioral
               | impact, like you are trying to do on fixating on HPV,
               | which is only one of thousands viruses that can
               | potentially damage cells and eventually damage cell
               | programming and cause a cancer.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > No, I wouldn't. I would have to prove, for example,
               | that someone started smoking after getting human
               | papillomavirus and that there was a mechanism plausibly
               | linking the infection with the craving for cigarettes
               | 
               | Thar wouldn't prove cancer causes smoking (or prove
               | _anything_ ), but it would suggest the potential of a
               | common cause between cancer and smoking.
        
               | DoreenMichele wrote:
               | Yes, I just said that.
               | 
               | I think I'm done here.
        
               | Bobylonian wrote:
               | HPV is causing deformations of human cells. That is
               | basically definition of what cancer does, only cancer is
               | caused by wrong cell service programming itself - not by
               | viruses. HPV itself can't cause cancer upon entering
               | human body - there has to be development of mutated cell,
               | that starts to spread cancer. If you think, that HPV
               | causes behaviour, well... hard luck, you can end up by
               | blaming your parents.
               | 
               | Give your kids a vaccine against herpes and HPV and stap
               | worrying about something you can't affect and reading
               | those articles is not going to help, knowing that
               | (constant)stress also causes cancer. Not intended to be
               | rude, but women are more affected by hormones and no sex
               | also can cause cancer. You don't have to be smoker and
               | can eat healthy to get cancer nowadays, but to prevent
               | degradation of cell programming is responsibility of
               | genes.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-11-20 23:02 UTC)