Over 16,537,162 people are on fubar.
What are you waiting for?
Sheltering kids from nature and showering them with chemical based anti-bacterial soaps has caused decreased resistance to disease and allergy in the industrialized world.
Hippies and Earth Muffins rejoice! You were right and Proctor & Gamble was wrong…muck does help little kids fight disease.
A recent study by the University of California, San Diego shows that the presence of the bacteria staphylococci on the skin prevents wounds from becoming inflamed.
The findings represent the first molecular basis for the “Hygiene Hypothesis.” The hypothesis asserts that “a lack of early childhood exposure to infectious agents and microorganisms increases an individuals susceptibility to disease by changing how the immune system reacts to such “bacterial invaders.”
The notion first surfaced in the 1980s in response to reduced childhood disease resistance in industrialized areas, and conversely, to explain why children in larger families are more disease resistant (presumably due to increased incidence of exposure to bacteria and allergies).
The fact is dirt and bacteria are natural, triclosan and surfactants, toxic ingredients in many conventional soaps, are not. That’s not to say all things natural are good. Certainly one can make the case that the bubonic plague and tuberculosis have their downsides.
The human body has two means to protect itself from disease. The first is, well, avoidance. There’s a lot to be said for steering clear of infectious diseases. From my observations, there’s little difference between the passenger compartment of a plane and the quarantine tents in “Outbreak.” They offer you chex mix on the plane, I guess.
But the “Hygiene Hypothesis” isn’t suggesting that children should be rolled through a sludge of swine flu solids and used hypodermic needles. We’re talking about “good” bacteria, or at least “not bad” bacteria.
Scientists have known for years that the human digestive system is full of good bacteria, probiotics if you prefer. Well it follows that a fair amount of good bacteria would be present on your skin. Unfortunately, antibacterial soap doesn’t discriminate, killing everything within reach.
Which brings us to our second protection from disease. The immune system basically works like a guest list at a party. The pathogen, Mr. Mumps, weasels his way into the party and starts close talking to the invited guests. The head of security, Carl Antigen, sics the bouncers (the Anitbody twins) on Mumps. In short order, they’ve dispatched of his type and are left more prepared for future attacks.
The “Hygiene Hypothesis” also suggests that exposing the body to relatively harmless bacteria early and often makes it easier for the immune system to identify bad guys of all sorts. The UCSD research seems to be the first official step in confirming this theory.
It’s also worth noting that many household and body products may be doing more harm than good. With rap sheets ranging from eye and lung irritants to proven carcinogens, it’s a wonder we slather any of this stuff on our bodies.
Parents, just use common sense. Mud, dirt, and grime are okay, scrapes and cuts needn’t be slathered with bleach. But do avoid lowering your child into a porto-potty at the end of a rope. That wouldn’t be prudent.
