extipion

So that’s a test with a sample size of 3. You can not conclude anything meaningful from this. Med creeds aside, if you have any research creeds you’d know this isn’t particularly powerful.

I have a 2nd cousin that is a fantastic doctor. I also happen to be a doctor, like a bunch of others around here. Not to insult your brother in any way, but I’ve never heard of him until now. Also looking on Scopus, while he may be doing great things in the service of the VA, he does not seem to be a researcher.

Edit: also why do you think making a generalization shitting on “the doctors” that “don’t give a crap” to just follow up with an appeal to your brother “the doctor” strengthens what you’re saying in any way? I can assure you most pediatricians do give a crap (appealing to my own years of working with many), and if yours doesn’t I encourage you to find a new one.

> Doctors don't know everything, and I'd venture that effectively no research on the effects of a cesarian on the baby's gut health was done before the procedure became widespread.

You’d venture wrong. The initial studies demonstrating flora differences date well over 20 years. It was in fact probably a pop science article in some mass media outlet poorly citing one of those papers that got the ball rolling for this seeding practice in the first place.

And did you bother to read the TfA? As mentioned there is no evidence that the biome is influenced by vaginal flora. So there is absolutely no new support for the value of vaginal seeding.

Doctors may not know everything, but many of us know what we don’t know which is why we don’t recommend seeding. There is no evidence that it works nor that it does any good. This new study only further supports this hypothesis.

Michael Douglas had hpv+ SCC throat cancer. Hpv is a virus, has nothing to do with the gut microbiome as it is commonly discussed and is the cause of cancers of the cervix and head and neck. The oncogenic varieties are sexually transmitted. So he’s right.