One of the things that worried me about taking minocycline for six months was the loss of intestinal flora. I took large amounts of probiotics daily and was relieved not to develop candida overgrowth or anything similar.
I find this a very interesting debate and hope it continues with more input from others.
Setting aside whether we actually need the 'good' bacteria, the real key to the puzzle, in my opinion, is why some of our bodies 'misunderstand' the normal bacteria in our gut (and other parts of our bodies). The idea of molecular mimicry has made the most sense to me so far.
I belonged to the Canadian Celiac Association for many years and received their monthly newsletter. One of them had a fascinating article about molecular mimicry and I wish I could find it now. However, from memory, in celiac disease it went something like this (and I have mentioned this elsewhere on KA if I seem to be repeating myself):
There is a genetic factor in celiac disease - I don't believe they've isolated yet like they have in AS (HLAB27 etc.) So a celiac is primed to get the disease by their genetic make-up but something has to set it off. One study showed that celiacs had more of a particular immune system cell in their gut lining than non-celiacs.(I recall a T-cell but don't have the article so this is from memory.) So the genetic "priming" may be the presence of these immune system cells that are not present in 'normal' people. When the trigger is introduced, those immune system cells go into action.
I believe it was the same article that suggested that one or more intestinal viruses had a molecular structure similar to gluten - hence molecular mimicry. However, people without these extra immune system cells in their gut don't react to the mimicry, while in celiacs the immune cells kick into gear and from that point forward confuse gluten with the toxic virus.
Celiac is surprisingly common despite the fact that it used to be a killer. Populations that did not rely heavily on gluten-based grains (wheat, rye, barley) but ate oats as a staple instead, have a much higher incidence of celiac. In populations where wheat was the staple, many celiacs died, did not reproduce and hence the numbers are lower. In the west of Ireland, Scotland and (I think) Iceland, it was too wet to grow wheat so oats became the staple. Celiac is very common in individuals whose roots are from those areas.
For a particular genetic factor to be common, typically it must confer an advantage in the individuals who have it. For example, sickle cell anemia confers some resistance to maleria in African populations despite its obvious potential to kill. One theory is that the presence of these special immune system cells in the gut lining of celiacs may have made them more resistant to intestinal infections at one time.
So... I'm getting to my point at last. I wonder what advantage immune system malfunctions may have conferred on the population, perhaps at some time in the past. Do we have 'trigger-happy' immune systems that were once valuable in fighting off infections etc. Why do some individuals get multiple immune system disorders (it's more frequent that one would expect)? Also - what benefits do klebsiella bacteria offer non-AS people - what's their function?
Thoughts anyone?
I've probably just been rambling here but I think I'll post it anyway!
