Sohan Lalwani

My intention wasn’t to conflate the two but to push back on the broader language that described FMT as “highly speculative,” which could unintentionally paint the entire treatment modality with that brush. That part seemed misleading, especially to readers unfamiliar with the difference between experimental vs. established uses. I will remember this for the future 👍 Thank you 👍

I question the validity of your source See here for reference: https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/25202-fecal-transplant https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8034505/ Fecal Transplant | Johns Hopkins...Fecal TransplantA fecal transplant is a procedure that transplants healthy gut bacteria via donor stool to a patient suffering from recurring infections with Clostridium difficile.I would not say its highly speculative, giving that it has had significant clinical trial and is in fact one of the only encouraged treatments of a C. diff infection. Here's an example of a clinical trial they did on the efficacy of FMT: https://academic.oup.com/cid/article-abstract/80/1/52/7756590?redirectedFrom=fulltext Perhaps your source may be outdated perchance? Keep in mind FMT has been shown to be highly effective in treating recurrent CDI, with cure rates reported as high as 90% or more in some studies. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States has approved two fecal microbiota products (Rebyota and Vowst) specifically for preventing the recurrence of CDI in adults who have completed antibiotic treatment.

I have been spending time reading this thread, please at the bare minimum be open to what everyone else has to say https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385041217_Scientists_around_the_world_report_millions_of_new_discoveries_every_year_-_but_this_explosive_research_growth_wasn't_what_experts_predicted There are about a few million scientific discoveries every year, saying "if any" shows that you need to read more on science in general as a whole.

Precisely!

No thanks

How can I make it better?

Let me repeat what a lot of people have been telling you quite frankly. You seem to have very "pushy" language with the "lets all listen to @Michael Harrop , it would sound like you are trying to push an agenda as @Phi for All noted. Also, the skepticism is not unfounded, even myself came to a similar conclusion as they did. Now I suggest we all return back to topic, this seems like an interesting thread and I would hate to see it get closed.

Not really, tone is actually extremely important in discussion. Lets not argue over trivial things

Thank you my friend!

Super-bad donor (joking).

I call it human evolution, rhymes with grug! As for the idea that early humans modeled their communication on apes, it’s actually kind of the reverse. Our hominin ancestors were apes, just with gradually evolving cognition. But it’s totally possible that as their brains developed, they still leaned on the expressive, gestural systems that their primate relatives used. Eye contact, dominance cues, vocal tones, all that pre-language communication you see in chimps today likely formed the foundation for early human interactions. And funnily enough, the reason H. erectus and H. heidelbergensis do qualify as Homo is because they walked upright. Bipedalism had already been the norm for a couple million years by the time of H. erectus. Earlier species like Australopithecus afarensis (think "Lucy") were already upright walkers, so by the time we’re at H. erectus, walking tall was old news. It’s the brain and behavior that really start to change at that stage.

They likely used a combination of gestures, facial expressions, body postures, and vocalizations (grunts, calls, tonal patterns, etc). Early hominins probably had something similar but increasingly advanced, especially with Homo erectus, who had larger brain sizes and more complex social structures.

Thank you 🙏🙏🙏🙏

The Old Testament is not from the Lower Paleolithic. The Lower Paleolithic is a very ancient time period that started over three million years ago and ended about three hundred thousand years ago. That is when early humans like Homo habilis and Homo erectus were using the very first stone tools. These people did not have writing, cities, or even language as we know it. They were hunter gatherers using basic chipped stones and hand axes. So there is no way that a story like David and Goliath, which comes from a written tradition, could have come from that time. The story of David and Goliath is actually believed to take place around one thousand years before the common era, during what we call the Iron Age. That is when people had organized armies, kings, and written texts. So it is a huge time jump forward from the Lower Paleolithic. As for the slingshot, what David used was not the kind of slingshot with a Y shaped stick and rubber bands that we think of today. Those were only invented in the last couple hundred years. What David used was a sling made from two cords and a pouch that could hurl stones with a lot of force. Slings like that have been around for thousands of years and were common weapons in the ancient world. They were simple but effective, and skilled slingers could hit targets from long distances.

Thank you I still can't change it as there is no option for me too The others such as my email and password can be changed

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the correct term for "high quality donors" in this case should be called "super donors" If I were to put it very simply, a good gut microbiome donor is someone who is healthy and free from any infections or diseases that could be passed on. They should not have taken antibiotics recently because those medicines can disrupt the natural balance of bacteria in the gut. Their gut bacteria should be diverse and balanced, which usually comes from a healthy diet and lifestyle without smoking or excessive alcohol. The donor must not have any digestive problems or chronic illnesses like diabetes or autoimmune diseases because these can affect the quality of their gut microbes. Before donating, they need to be carefully tested to make sure they do not carry any harmful bacteria, viruses, or parasites. Overall, a good donor has a strong and stable community of beneficial bacteria that can help improve someone else’s gut health safely.

I feel you brother I got 3 random DV's recently Don't worry!

Eh? My friend who are you talking too?

Is there a way to change my username? I have had an idea for one that is significantly better sounding, is there a way I can change it or can moderation?

One practical solution to finding good donors is to partner with health-focused communities and institutions where people are more likely to have excellent gut microbiome profiles. This could include fitness clubs, university wellness programs, or even groups that follow long term plant based or even Mediterranean diets. By offering small incentives and educating people on the importance of their role in medical research, you can encourage participation from a broader and potentially healthier donor base. After initial lifestyle and health screenings, a smaller group can undergo more detailed stool analysis to check for microbial diversity, presence of beneficial species, and absence of harmful pathogens. Using this two step approach helps filter out unsuitable candidates early while focusing resources on testing those more likely to meet the high standards required. Creating a small registry of top tier donors from this process would allow for better consistency and scalability in treatments.

Yes I was, my apologies for using the incorrect term. I can’t seem to edit it

The scientific case for expanding microbiome-based therapies is strong. FMT has shown efficacy in recurrent C. difficileinfections and is being investigated for a range of conditions, including inflammatory bowel disease, metabolic disorders, and neuropsychiatric conditions. However, regulatory frameworks in the US remain cautious, possibly due to concerns about safety, standardization, and long-term effects. His frustration is understandable given the potential benefits and the slow pace of institutional response.

This was very nice to read, +1

If climate change is not real Why does Earth not look like itself when the Hadean epoch was the present geological period of time? 😱

All good, don't sweat it