Human Health and the Microbiota: Interactions Between Gut Microbes, Hygiene, and The Immune System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In the past, much of the scientific research on microbes focused on mechanisms of infection and disease. This was not in vain, as we gained valuable knowledge about our immune system, as well as the ability to develop vaccines and antibiotics. However, the relationship between humans and microbes is complex. These species have been co-evolving since multicellular organisms evolved on Earth. Summary: Recently, it is beginning to be appreciated that the majority of relationships between humans and microbes are beneficial. From this follows an understanding that beneficial microbes are vital to the normal physiological development of our gut and immune system. This beneficial relationship between the human host and the multitude of microbial communities is well established. However, currently in the developed world epidemiological studies are showing dramatic increases in autoimmunity, allergies, and obesity. It is thus suggested that within westernized societies hygiene is altering the relationship between the gut and the human host in a way that makes humans susceptible to conditions not seen in less developed countries. This understanding advanced the “hygiene hypothesis,” and more recently the, “old friends hypothesis” and “disappearing microbiota hypothesis” as possible explanations for the observed epidemiological phenomena. What follows is a review of the relationship between gut microbes and the host’s immune system, with a focus on how hygiene (antibiotics, chlorination of water, etc.) is beginning to alter this relationship. This review concludes that a further understanding of how hygiene affects the relationship between humans and microbes will be crucial for developing effective therapies considerate of our microbial friends.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".