On Sat, 03 May 2014 20:45:54 -0400, Tom Hendricks wrote:
>> This suggests a test.
>> People in industrialized societies must catch these diseases sometimes
>> (perhaps on a trip abroad).
>>
>> Does their rate of recovery from the disease correlate measurably with
>> the presence or absence of their appendix?
>
>> Mike
>
> Your test suggests that this is a very testable idea.

A similar test has, in fact, been carried out:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/01/02/your-appendix-
could-save-your-life/

> Individuals without an appendix were four times more likely to have a
> recurrence of Clostridium difficile, exactly as Parker’s hypothesis
> predicted. Recurrence in individuals with their appendix intact
> occurred in 11% of cases. Recurrence in individuals without their
> appendix occurred in 48% of cases.

> A similar test has, in fact, been carried out:
>
>
>
> http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/01/02/your-appendix-
>
> could-save-your-life/
>
>
>
> > Individuals without an appendix were four times more likely to have a
>
> > recurrence of Clostridium difficile, exactly as Parker's hypothesis
>
> > predicted. Recurrence in individuals with their appendix intact
>
> > occurred in 11% of cases. Recurrence in individuals without their
>
> > appendix occurred in 48% of cases.

Thanks for that update. Looks to me like the first indications are that having an appendix has real benefits after all.

This study looks at gut microbes in premature infants and finds lots of surprises - the same pattern of colonization seems to follow the age of the infant with 3 main bacteria. Further that antibiotics, etc don't seem to matter that much

http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/40738/title/Gut-s-Earliest-Bacterial-Colonizers/