Saturday, June 7, 2008

Bugs

I am sitting in the shadows of Mt. Mansfield, in Stowe, Vermont, waiting for my son to wake up. We're going to a sweat lodge in Weybridge, Vermont, that we built last weekend. This will be the second time this lodge has been used. We'll leave at 0930, so I better wake him up at 0900. It's 0830 now.

I just finished three intensive retreats (one partial week), the other two, a week, and more than a week. I wanted to talk about the power of community for healing, the way that we have so much more power for healing. When we had three people together it was more than twice as powerful as two people. Five people were even more powerful. We forget that in conventional medicine when we try to keep people alone in little rooms with us.

I wondered about the kind of world we would have if medicine were more like intensive retreats than it is. We would need to make a big shift in how we think about illness and practice medicine. Current medical practice is primarily aimed at doing whatever it takes, mostly with drugs and surgery, to create a physiological state in which we can’t see physical evidence of disease and the person stops complaining of symptoms. It’s an “anti;” approach. We use antibiotics, anti-depressants, anti-psychotics, analgesics, anti-anxiety agents, etc. Most of our classes of medications can start with the letter “a”. How would medicine look different if we saw illness as an aspect of life, part of the human stories that we live, and not necessarily an external evil attacking us that needs to be destroyed or attacked back. I suppose our current metaphor is the immune system, in which natural killer cells absorb invading bacteria. What this model fails to take into account are the many healthy relationships we maintain with micro-organisms. The environment is not as unfriendly as contemporary medicine imagines. I suspect that what we do with our antibiotics is to kill our friends and strengthen our enemies, perhaps a parallel to what has happened in the various Gulf Wars.

What amazes me is the current terror people seem to feel about germs. I'd like to stimulate some discussion around this. I know people who claim to have had various infectious that my medical training says is impossible. Some have been cured with homeopathic injections, others with months of intraveous antibiotic therapy, others with ceremony and ritual and no antibiotics at all. I think homeopathics have other effects than just ridding the body of germs, some of those effects being quite profound. I have injected Traumeel for joint problems and have been impressed with it and/or the placebo effect associated with it. I got some old ladies in Tucson off steroid injections (which I know are bad for joints) and onto Traumeel injections. Was it placebo or Traumeel? Only God Knows and she's not telling.

Anyway, does anyone know about this approach to illness of using cotton balls to look for germs and then devising remedies energetically (I assume they use a computer system that puts the desired energy into solution) though I don't know. Dr. Schultz is one of the people involved and then there is a person named David in Colorado who makes remedies also. I probably should have gotten more proper nouns from my friend, but didn't.

So here's my question, to myself and anyone reading this, and I found out, as I mentioned in my last post, that some people do read this, because Mothering Magazine read my blog, which actually really touched me. When are germs good and when are germs bad?

I suspect there are some really bad germs that are probably human created, like HIV or Ebola virus. I suspect we have done something to the environment to facilitate the creation of super bad bugs, because I don't think nature would be so stupid as to create something so lethal.

But what about worms, parasites, spirochetes, etc.? We know that children in Third World countries have virtually no asthma or juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. The argument is that their parasites shift their cytokine balance in such a way that they don't get these conditions because the resources are needed to fight bugs and parasites. However, children in New York City, which I suspect is the most germ-fearing city on earth, have tremendous high rates of asthma and JRA. Is it actually healthy to avoid bugs or does it hurt us in other ways? Are bugs our friends?

That's what I meant by the "anti" paragraph above. It seems we're against all life but our own and perhaps our own lives require the lives of our invisible friends to be whole. What if we need germs to be well! My New York friend talked about her doctor seeing spirochetes and staphyloccus in her live blood cell analysis. I had trouble believing that given my training. It seemed that she would be dead if she spirochete or staphylococcal septicemia. Nevertheless, I could believe that immune cells could float around in blood that have encountered these critters at some time and have memory of them. But that's not what the live cell analysis people were claiming.

Leo Omani, who is a healer on Wahpeton Dakota Reserve in Saskatchewan tells his children to tell their children to eat dirt because it will make them healthy. A lot of elders in Saskatchewan believe in the healing power for young children of eating dirt. Could dirt have had protective factors that made it less likely to get TB or smallpox?

I suspect that most of what we do with our medicines is kill the friendlies and encourage the growth of the super-bad-bugs. I know that the death rate from infection began to decline in 1856 with the improvement of plumbing and its implementation and that the slope for the rate of decline didn't change with the introduction of antibiotics on a widespread basis. The argument would be that those we save with antibiotics are balanced out by those we kill with antibiotics (Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, anaphylaxis, overgrowth of Clostridium, etc. etc.). I never cease to be amazed at how physicians hand out antibiotics. I suspect it would be better if they were over the counter like Mexico so that everyone could buy penicillin, ampicillin, etc., and might stop there, because the physicians hand out samples of things like Levaquin or even more powerful new drugs. They do this for conditions that probably won't respond to antibiotics anyway, though all patients expect them now. The name says it all -- "against life."

My friend in New York hesitates to even shake the hand of those who might have bugs. She wants everyone she knows to get checked for bugs and treated. Of course, the treatments might be helpful independent of the bugs, and perhaps homeopathy played a large role in her recovery. I don't know.

I do find my New York friends who are afraid to walk on grass for fear of bugs somewhat amusing. What a state when people are afraid of grass. (It might have deer tics hiding in wait to ambush the unsuspecting humans).

But what about all the bugs who do abound -- hepatitis C is an example of a virus that deserves respect. Those bugs can cause dreadful disease, though I know people who are living well with hepatitis C and have learned to accomodate it to them, and them to it.

Thoughts?

9 comments:

Celeste Howe said...

I have been eating raw grass-fed meat for 6 years and haven't gotten sick. Sometimes it will sit out at room temperature for several hours. Some think that the bacteria makes you stronger.

In my late teens a dermatologist put me on antibiotics for acne. It destroyed my capacity to digest most foods and I became quite depressed.

Have you heard of high meat?

Anonymous said...

I'm glad I've stumbled across your blog. I've been working on reading your books (three down, one more to go!) and have found them very inspirational and informative, not to mention entertaining. I have always preferred books that use stories rather than cut and dry "facts."

Now, on to your actual post. I'm reminded of an opportunity my family had to participate in a survey for the Franklin Institute in Philly. They were working on an exhibit about microorganisms and wanted our opinions on how to present them. One campaign presented them as neutral, even beneficial, while the other displayed them as enemies to humans. My family agreed that the former was more accurate to the role of microorganisms but the latter would garner more attention. I'm not sure what was chosen but I'd dislike to think that my family accidentally helped mar public view of microorganisms!

As to whether germs are good or bad, I've always thought that it's a matter of them being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Having staph in your throat isn't that big of a deal; most people do. I remember people in my microbio class being appalled when we found this out by testing our own throats. The trouble starts when it gets into other places.

I think a lot of what we should be doing is figuring out what is where in our bodies and what it does. There can be pros and cons to any bug in any location. The parasite theory is an interesting one and should be looked into more. We definitely need to have some bugs in our systems so it would be interesting to find that these "harmful" ones can have benefits.

I have also heard some things on the potential benefits on eating dirt, specifically clay. I specifically saw some sort of documentary on animals in the Amazon that eat a specific type of clay. The theory was that the clay would absorb the toxics from the plants that the animals ate. Rain forest plants come up with some interesting ways to prevent herbivory. Thanks to them, we have the joys of chewing gum :) Now if we could only stop destroying them...

And a quick note on publishing content online, I've found that a lot more people are actually reading something than will respond. Of the 400 some people that my web tracker tells me visit every month, about 4 actually say anything (this excludes people that I know personally). So I wouldn't lose too much heart about it. They're out there; they're just quiet.

Lewis Mehl-Madrona said...

Thanks for commenting on "bugs." I wanted to add that free range chickens who eat bugs don't have eggs with Salmonella. I just discovered a wonderful fermented soft drink from Russia, called VLAC, which means brew. It's non-alcoholic, but fermented, low sugar, and wonderful. It's full of healthy bacteria. Lots of such fermented food from Northern Russia. Here in Canada all food is supposed to be sterile.

Anonymous said...

Hello! I've just stumbled across your blog, and am so delighted that I did! your book "narrative medicine" has had an incredibly profound effect on the way I treat my clients (I'm a holistic nutritionist, herbalist and mind/body medicine practitioner). And the discussion about so-called "germs" is one near and dear to my work.

I have found the statistic in several places that there are 10 times more cells that DO NOT share our DNA (mainly bacteria and yeast but also parasites, molds, and other critters) than there are our own body cells. Meaning that just in terms of numbers, I am one tenth the cells from my family's genetic bloodlines and nine-tenths cells from my environment and other places. If I am living in a balanced way (the way that is balanced for *me*), then the majority of these single-celled organisms that make up 9/10 of my cellular make-up are symbiotic - are friends, are *me*, and only a small portion are disruptive or harmful, and are kept in check by the rest of my cells (the ones with AND without the DNA I inherited). The way I explain this to my patients is to say that we are walking consensus-based organizations. Amazing. If I am only 1/10 genetically "me", how does that inform the way I might make other choices? What does this mean about the nature of my "self"?

We are completely interdependent with our environment, and we are more than the sum of our genetics. I think the metaphors (facts) are beautiful, and could have the potential as well to transform the way we approach illness. Under this model, an illness is nothing more than an imbalance, a falling out of consensus. I loved what you said about how most medications are "anti". And of course there may be times when the consensus is so disrupted that perhaps stronger measures must be taken to reestablish a working relationship. But in my opinion, this should be a *last* line of defense rather than the starting-place.

Thank you for posting your thoughts! I find what you have to say to be very inspiring.

Mona Rae Hill said...

Hi Lewis:

I am one of the people who lives quite compatibly with Hep-C. Initially, it was quite a devastating diagnosis, and I was prompted to see a specialist (which I did, for awhile) at $1000.00 a pop. I do have insurance, so the co-pay was manageable (just), but since my virus-load never changed (I am assuming because of my life-style and eating patterns), I decided that this just couldn't be justified. I also have the type (1a) which is impervious to most treatments. I also opted out because one of the side effects is depression; which I already have quite enough of, thanks anyway.

I learned as much as I could about it, including examining CAM, a regimen which I also followed for well over six months.

No change in virus load.

Then I discovered a book written by a fellow who worked as a journalist in Canada, named Nicolas Regush and entitled "The Virus Within".

Seriously good research about HHV-6 as well as some illumination about the politics behind "The discovery" of HIV.

anyway, upon finishing this book, and realizing that things could be a lot worse, I came to the conclusion that I am not going to worry about this, since I have had it for many moons (albeit unknowingly), and having the diagnosis has been sort of liberating.......I'm not manic, after all, just neurotic from lack of proper sleep.

so, to carry on with the theme of your blog.......when is a bug a good thing? well, when it can encourage you to take better care....

so sayeth me, lol. monarae.

p.s. your web site link here does not appear to be working.......trying to find info about your upcoming sweat in bristol........cheers.

Anonymous said...

Lewis, Pam Blunt here from Arizona. How wonderful to rediscover you and what you are doing. I have been inhaling your books. I would have to write a book to tell you all that they have inspired in me for my work and life. Thank you so very much. I wonder if that fermented drink is the same as the one I know of--a fermentation of black tea that grows a kind of layer of good mold at the top once you get a 'starter'. It is tasty and full of good bacteria.

Also I remember a local hunter telling me that hunters age their meat letting the bacteria grow in it and break it down, that this is what makes deer meat so good and tender and easy to digest. He and others have been eating it for years and seem very healthy.

I don't digest pasteurized milk well, but organic unpasteurized, which is now very hard to get, feels good in my body.

I am sure that you are aware that there is a lot out there now on how too much sanitation has left our children without anything for their immune systems to react to, thus the natural process of strengthening their immune systems doesn't occur the way it used to. Of course, nowadays, eating dirt in one's city yard may also have lethal pesticides and other chemicals in it.

I am reminded of the Hawaian healing practise of drinking one's own urine to rid oneself of sickness--a way to kick start the immune system. Maybe there is more to that I don't know about.

I have noticed that my friends from NYC seem to be fearful of nature in general. (not everyone, I am sure) Me, I get a fear in my gut when I get closer to big cities!

I wonder too about evidence that most of us now have high levels of chemicals from plastics in our systems--there are so many variables concerning what we are exposed to with microwaves, plastics, etc. I wonder how all that interacts with the so-called 'bugs'. Perhaps it is also partly what Rupert Sheldrake talks about in his GAIA work: that the earth naturally comes into balance--too many humans? no problem, enter the super bugs.
In good water years in the desert (of which this is one--it is gloriously green out there today) more babies are born to all of the prey animals and more predators abound. The balance just happens.

Like others and you have said, it may not be the bug itself, but how many and where it is in our bodies. Candida is important in the colon, but as we all know, when antibiotics kill off the good and the 'bad' bugs, we end up with too much candida--must be a very hardy little microbe.
Pretty complicated.

Anonymous said...

A little more on bugs--I find what Bari shared concerning our composite selves very interesting and echoed in many other places. My current favorite science article is an interview with Paul Stamens (he wrote: Mycelium Running) in the February 2008 of The Sun. He talks of the fungi having survived the two earth-asteroid encounters, 60,000 and 250,000 years ago, that which survived apparently did so by pairing with fungi. Lichens are really fungus and algae growing symbiotically together. Certain grasses survive the 160 degrees of the Yellowstone geysers, only because a fungus grows on them. When it was removed because researchers thought it was a contaminant (!), the grasses died. They put the fungus back and ,voila, the grasses survived the heat again. When scientists then tried to get this heat tolerant fungus (Curvularia) to convey heat tolerance to tomatoes, the tomatoes all died because when they had preserved the Curvularia in cold storage, unbeknownst to them, they killed off a virus that the fungus carries within it. When they brought back the virus, the tomatoes survived the heat. So the symbiosis was between the plant, the fungus and a virus (at least that is what they know so far!!) So where does one being stop and another begin? Its convenient and necessary to name things, all labeled as separate so that we can talk about an oak tree, a bear, a human,etc., but gives us a false sense of individuality. Stamens says: I guess you could say that I am the "elected voice" of a microbial community."

(Just know that I am quoting a lot here because I think what he writes about is so amazing and he sure says it better than I could!)

He speaks of a mycelial mat in Oregon that is 2,200 acres and over 2000 years old. It has only one cell wall to protect it although it is surrounded by "100s of millions of microbes all trying to eat it." He sees mycelium as similar to neurological networks--the "earth's natural internet" in constant communication throughout its web and with all the surrounding ecosystem.

He talks about a slime mold that some Japanese researchers put into a maze--two of the exits had oats that the slime mold could eat. During the first trial the slime mold went equally in all directions until it found the oats. When the same slime mold was reintroduced into the same maze again, it only navigated directly to the same two end points that had oats, and ignored the other directions.

Another example of the intelligence of fungi concerns the mystery of how young saplings, like hemlock, manage to grow on rotting logs in thick forest with very little sunlight. When the same saplings are brought to a greenhouse and given the same amount of light, they die. Researchers readioactively tagged carbon to see the trasnlocation of carbon in the forest and found that the trees that were growing along the river in good light with plenty of water were contributing nutrients to the shaded hemlock saplings via the mycelia running thoughout the forest soil. The fungi transfer nutrients from plants with some to spare to plants that need it to survive.
Stamens writes: "Nature loves a community." From these stories and those of bari and Lewis: Apparently community is all that there is.

But it certainly gives me a profound respect for my brother and sister--"bugs"--my microbial community within and without, (not that I want to encounter some of those bugs.) So much going on under our feet that is magical.

Unknown said...

In my late teens a dermatologist put me on antibiotics for acne. It destroyed my capacity to digest most foods and I became quite depressed.

================================
saintjoseph

Hawaii Drug Addiction

John Hughes said...

In answer to your question, there are homeopathic energetic machines that make remedies from "bacterial, viral, fungal, etc. sources". You simply stick a probe into the substance and then the machine coverts it into a homeopathic/ energetic dose that can be transfered to a glass vial with a little alcohol in it. see http://www.eagleresearchllc.com/products/

From report, the guy who developed used this type of device to spray his agricultural fields with the effect of stopping the bugs from eating his crops. Was it is a "pesticide?" Or did the homeopathic message (in adherence to the Law of Similars) simply convey to the bugs something more harmonious?

There are times, of course, to be a warrior or even an allopath who fights bugs. Perhaps we have other roles as well, Lewis. Good topic.