https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/as-scientists-probe-the-mystery-of-how-newborns-develop-immunity-order-rises-from-the-chaos/

Summary:

This article from Scientific American discusses multiple resent studies into the development of the immune system in infants. The first study discussed compared the immune responses of newborns that were born premature vs. full term. The study found very little difference between the two. A second, more broad study compared the imune systems of thousands of newborns from around the world, and also found very little variation. Scientists are now using the information from both studies to formulate a more clear baseline of what a healthy newborn immune system should look like.

Connection:

In class we discussed the elements of the immune system, as well as how infacts are colonized at birth with microbial life. This article drew connects between these two things. It concluded that because most newborns all go through the same rapid colonization, their immune systems also evolve in the same way.

Critical analysis:

This article was interesting because I would not expect the ammount of similarity they found to be present. Also, I never considered that premature babies could have different immune systems. This article was clearly written for the general public. It summarized and cited multiple primary studies and included quotes from the people that wrote them.

Question:

Now that we know that all our immune systems are basically the same at birth, will we be able to determine a specific age when they start to varry?

Summary: This article covers a wide array of topics under the microbe-obesity/ disease umbrella. This is an up and coming field in the science community as scientists attempt to understand the science of losing and gaining weight, and how microbes might play a role in it. One of the main points in this article is how the microbes interact with their environment. The environment being a human and what they might be eating, how they are sleeping, and the host’s daily habits. Some of these areas show a marked change in the composition of the gut flora and this change can bring about diseases like type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and obesity.

Connections: In the article, it talks about how the gut microbiome is really important for humans, otherwise we would be insufficient in breaking down and absorbing all the nutrients we need. Something that I found really interesting in this article is that the gut microbiome changes daily, and not only that but it changes where certain species hang out and what time of the day certain species will thrive at.

Critical Analysis: I found this article interesting as gut flora and obesity are part of the field I would like to get into one day. I mentioned it before, but the gut flora changing composition and location on the daily is something that really struck me as I suppose I have always thought of them as a constant unchanging world unless something drastic in introduced like antibiotics.

I did like that most of the claims made in this article were founded with studies and not like in some mass-media articles that kind of expect the reader to take what they say as fact. This article I think is written more for somebody with at least a little knowledge in the field, unlike many scientific articles I see that are written for just about anyone.

Question: Though we are seeing a marked increase in certain presence/absence of microbes and their correlation with certain disease, could this really be root cause of our problems? Or are there other factors including psychologically and/or socioeconomic factors? Can these also be linked to microbes?

https://www.newswise.com/articles/we-re-only-as-good-as-our-microbiomes-are-happy

— Article and link: Men with beards carry more germs than dogs with deadly bacteria in their facial hair, study reveals

Written by: Padraic Flanagan for the Daily Mail

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6919551/Men-beards-carry-germs-DOGS-deadly-bacteria-facial-hair-study-reveals.html

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00330-018-5648-z (peer reviewed article)

— Summary:  A recent study conducted in Switzerland found that men’s beard had significantly higher amounts of bacteria compared to dogs fur. The goal of this study was to find if humans could confer dog borne diseases from MRI scanners that had just been used for dogs. They took the swabs of 18 men’s beards and 30 dogs’ necks. They found that only 23 of the 30 dogs had high microbial counts, while all 18 men had high microbial counts, and 7 of these men had microbes that are pathogenic to humans.  However, Keith Flett, founder of the Beard Liberation Front, which opposes discrimination against beards, doesn’t believe it, and says the results stem from pogonophobia, the fear of beards.

— Connections: This highlights the principle of Ubiquity we talked about in class, “everything is everywhere, but, the environment selects.’ Interestingly, a human beard harbors more bacteria than dogs fur. This is possibly due to the beard being so close to the mouth, allowing more food availability, resulting in a more advantageous environment for microbes.

— Critical analysis: I found this story interesting because beards are apparently fashionable in our society and I cant grow them. I was surprised that men’s beards had significantly higher microbial communities than dogs coats, especially since humans bathe more than dogs. However, I think this report has some inaccuracies and didn’t account for some externalities,  such as; how much the men showered, what they last ate, or other lifestyle habits. Overall, this article was well written and was easy to understand for people not in the scientific community. After reviewing the journal article, I think the researchers did a good job inhibiting cross contamination, using men of varying ages, and using comparing microbail counts in common dog breeds. However, I think they should have included more men in the study to equal the number of dogs.

— Question:  Since beards are near the mouth, that allows more opportunity for food particulates to be in the beard, which would increase microbial growth because of the food source. My question is how would this compare to urogenital hair across different genders or comparing the results to hair on the underside of dogs, where they lay?