[krisoft]

How do you know that is a “gut ecosystem collapse” as opposed to hypermotility? Or an overgrowth of the gut ecosystem? Or a problem with the intestinal lining?

Observing that if you eat/drink something specific then you get the shits is valid. Concluding that it is due to a specific mechanism is not valid unless you have something objective like a test supporting that.

It’s like if your train is late and you just conclude that it must be because the steam condenser’s gasket is leaking based on nothing. Maybe true, or maybe the conductor broke his leg, or there is a signaling failure.

[DANmode]

Ummm…because all of those symptoms you listed are symptoms of gut dysbiosis…?

Why do you need to know what the mechanism is to avoid mistakes? - if something fucks you, don’t do it.

Encourage others to do the same.

Not a controversial take!

[pohl]

[Gut Flora Summit banner]

“But what if it’s a big hoax and we create solid stools for nothing?”

[DANmode]

Seriously, though!

This demand for peer-reviewed evidence in place of observation of known and basic mechanisms is out of control.

[jodrellblank]

If you drop an ACME 100Kg anvil on your foot, you get a broken foot, and you can conclude "this fucked me, I won't do it again". But if you say "I suffered foot ecosystem collapse" and people ask you what that means and how you identified it, whinging about how people should stop asking stupid questions because all bad things are bad therefore they must be the same thing, is not helping anyone.

[DANmode]

Except, you intentionally replied up here, and not down below,

where you’d have to reply to “well-understood and basic mechanisms” being ignored.

Including the ones we know inhibit a healthy diverse microbiome!

Sticking with your chosen example:

If you lean an anvil on your foot, and start suffering from poor circulation or discoloration of the foot, remove the anvil.

[DANmode]

> therefore they must be the same thing

Also, this bit is a non-factual read (don’t put words in my mouth, mate, I choose them carefully).

An uncharitable, bad-faith interpretation at best.