The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
The issue that I think we're seeing in the field is that microbiomes quite often, whether they're diseased or healthy, exist in stable states. They kind of tend towards this well that has gravity to it in a way, biological gravity, where it's really hard to dislodge that community from that state.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
We know with dietary perturbations, quite often you'll see a really rapid change to the gut microbiome. And then it's almost like a memory where it snaps back to something that's very similar to the original state, even though the diet remains different. And so there's this incredible, what we refer to as resilience of the gut microbiome, and resistance to change, or at least resistance to establishing a new stable state.
So there's this incredible res what we refer to as resilience of the gut microbiome and and um resistance to change or at least resistance to establishing a new stable state.