Humans, alive or not strictly alive.

[Write4U]

Considering that bacteria are the actual organism that keep us alive, are humans independently alive or only as a member of a microbiome?

The Human Microbiome - University of Washington

The microbiome is the genetic material of all the microbes - bacteria, fungi, protozoa and viruses - that live on and inside the human body.

The number of genes in all the microbes in one person's microbiome is 200 times the number of genes in the human genome. The microbiome may weigh as much as five pounds. Included classifications: Bacteria; Fungus

https://depts.washington.edu/ceeh/downloads/FF_Microbiome.pdf

Without the help of bacteria a newborn baby would not live to procreate, one of the requirements of living organisms.

Some people have to live in a sterile environment because they have no natural defenses against external biological threats.

Think about this. Remove our symbiotic bacteria and the human organism dies in a very short time.

 

[Seattle]

We're alive, even by your definition.

 

[Write4U]

We're alive, even by your definition.

Not without our supporting biome. A newborn baby would never have a chance to procreated without its protective army of symbiotic bacteria. It would die within hours of birth.

We may even be comparable to a virus, unable to exist without the help of our bacterial symbionts.

The human organism exists within its supporting microbiome, without which it would die, much like a virus' inability to exist without its cellular host.

 

[Seattle]

Not without our supporting biome. A newborn baby would never have a chance to procreated without its protective army of symbiotic bacteria.

That doesn't mean that we aren't alive. We wouldn't be able to procreate without oxygen either.

 

[Write4U]

That doesn't mean that we aren't alive. We wouldn't be able to procreate without oxygen either.

Right and that proves my point.
Some living organism are able to procreate without oxygen. Oxygen is even deadly to some living organisms.

Anaerobic organism

Spinoloricus nov. sp., a metazoan that metabolises with hydrogen, lacking mitochondria and instead using hydrogenosomes.

An anaerobic organism or anaerobe is any organism that does not require oxygen for growth. It may react negatively or even die if free oxygen is present. In contrast, an aerobic organism (aerobe) is an organism that requires an oxygenated environment. Anaerobes may be unicellular (e.g. protozoans,[1] bacteria[2]) or multicellular.[3]

Most fungi are obligate aerobes, requiring oxygen to survive, however some species, such as the Chytridiomycota that reside in the rumen of cattle, are obligate anaerobes; for these species, anaerobic respiration is used because oxygen will disrupt their metabolism or kill them. Deep waters of the ocean are a common anoxic environment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaerobic_organism

But citing one variable chemical does not prove anything. The fact that humans will die without the assist from other living organisms is the determining factor. Apparently it is for our classification of viruses.

 

[billvon]

Not without our supporting biome. A newborn baby would never have a chance to procreated without its protective army of symbiotic bacteria. It would die within hours of birth.

Nope, completely untrue. That baby would indeed be sick (diarrhea) but would not die. We can live without gut flora for quite a long time, although we would certainly not be as happy. https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002020

And "the ability to procreate" does not equal "alive." (Unless you are going to argue that a sterile woman is not alive, which would be pretty silly.)

 

[Write4U]

Nope, completely untrue. That baby would indeed be sick (diarrhea) but would not die. We can live without gut flora for quite a long time, although we would certainly not be as happy. https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002020

Well that article assumes life in a perfectly sterile environment free of all microbes. I am talking about attack from outside microbes on a vulnerable human. That's why some people need to live in a sterile dome. They would die oustside the dome. Gut bacteria is but one of hundreds of symbiotic bacteria that keep us alive. How do pandemics originate?

And "the ability to procreate" does not equal "alive." (Unless you are going to argue that a sterile woman is not alive, which would be pretty silly.)

No, if a species is unable to procreate they go extinct. If a woman is sterile her genes become extinct.

1. Our gut bacteria can help to balance our hormones

When we think about hormone balance, we don’t automatically consider gut bacteria—but we should! Our inner microbes play an important role in balancing many of our hormones, including estrogen and thyroid hormones.

Many PMS symptoms are due to an imbalance of estrogen and it’s usually due to too much estrogen in our system.

When the body is done with excess estrogen, it sends it through the digestive system for disposal. Sometimes that estrogen can be reabsorbed through the intestinal wall and brought back into our body. This is where good bacteria help out.

Certain strains of good bacteria will trap this excess estrogen so it continues along its journey out of the body. It stops the estrogen from being reabsorbed, so the body keeps the balance it was hoping for.

2. Supports vaginal health (and reduces yeast infections and BV)

The vaginal canal hosts its own smaller microbiome, and its health mirrors your gut microbiome. When one is in balance, so is the other.

A healthy balance of bacteria in the vagina keeps the area slightly acidic which helps to kill off nasty bacteria and yeast that, if they overgrow, could create a yeast infection or bacterial vaginosis (similar to a yeast infection, but bacteria-based).

Antibiotics, prescription hormones (like the birth control pill), and some spermicides can wreak havoc on our vaginal microflora. Daily probiotic supplements can help to keep our vaginal flora happy and healthy.

3. Pregnant women seed their baby’s gut with their vaginal bacteria.

Babies are fully sterile until they pass through the vaginal canal on their way out into the world and get covered in their mother’s bacteria. These bacteria seed their gut and help grow the diverse and beautiful inner ecosystem that’s so important for our health.

Bonus: gut bacteria are in breast milk too!

The body knows how important good bacteria are for babies so during the third trimester, it does something pretty darn remarkable

. Our immune system takes some bacteria from the colon, moves it through the bloodstream, and places it into the milk ducts. Now, the mother’s milk is also a probiotic supplement.

Research has found that the right strains of supplemental bacteria can help seed the baby’s gut with the right bacteria and help reduce any bacterial imbalances in the mother. This is especially important if the mother needs a C-Section. These strains of bacteria can reduce the risk of antibiotic-associated diarrhea following the operation…a symptom most of us would like to reduce following abdominal surgery[1].

https://www.florahealth.com/ca-en/blog/probiotics-fertility-pregnancy-vaginal-health/#

In short, without our complete microbiome we would die very quickly, just like a virus that is unable to find a host.

The question was rhetorical and in context of ability to stay alive without the help of a host biome. Basically animals are worlds unto themselves and subject to natural disasters in many forms.

 

[Seattle]

In other words this thread is not really about the thread heading. It's "The Microbiome: Do you find this subject interesting?"

 

[Write4U]

In other words this thread is not really about the thread heading. It's "The Microbiome: Do you find this subject interesting?"

If that suits you, fine.

But this is about comparing the question of viruses qualifying as being alive or not, as compared to the fact that humans and most likely all other animals are not wholly independently alive and require the help from a host of other organism to stay alive long enough to reproduce, one of the qualifiers of living organisms.

And we only discussed the important role of gut bacteria. Now consider also the millions of beneficial bacteria on our skin, and in our mouth and nose, that create barriers keeping the virulent bacteria from invading us through every orifice they can find.

This is an attempt to bring some clarity in the use of some "scientific" terms and their objective scientific rigor.

All living organisms share several key characteristics or functions: order, sensitivity or response to the environment, reproduction, adaptation, growth and development, homeostasis, energy processing, and evolution. When viewed together, these characteristics serve to define life.

Does that clarify the context of the OP?

 

[exchemist]

If that suits you, fine.

But this is about comparing the question of viruses qualifying as being alive or not, as compared to the fact that humans and most likely all other animals are not wholly independently alive and require the help from a host of other organism to stay alive long enough to reproduce. One of the qualifiers of living organisms.

And we only discussed the important role of gut bacteria. Now consider also the millions of beneficial bacteria on our skin, and in our mouth and nose, that create barriers keeping the virulent bacteria from invading us through every orifice they can find.

This is an attempt to bring some clarity in the use of some "scientific" terms and their objective scientific rigor.
Does that clarify the context of the OP?

No.

 

[sideshowbob]

humans and most likely all other animals are not wholly independently alive

Then that's a pretty useless definition of "alive": Nothing is alive.

 

[Write4U]

Then that's a pretty useless definition of "alive": Nothing is alive.

Isn't that a novel idea? It opens up a whole new perspective, IMO

Perhaps "alive" is just a pattern. Some patterns are alive, most are not.
Same as "consciousness". Some patterns are conscious, most are not.

 

[C C]

In other words this thread is not really about the thread heading. It's "The Microbiome: Do you find this subject interesting?"

For those who feel cheated by a potential bait and switch, here's Ferris Jabr's opinion from 2013 (SciAm), who seemingly goes full monty...

Why Life Does Not Really Exist
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/brainwaves/why-life-does-not-really-exist/

EXCERPT: . . . Recently, however, I had an epiphany that has forced me to rethink why I love living things so much and reexamine what life is, really. For as long as people have studied life they have struggled to define it. Even today, scientists have no satisfactory or universally accepted definition of life. While pondering this problem, I remembered my brother’s devotion to K’Nex roller coasters and my curiosity about the family cat. Why do we think of the former as inanimate and the latter as alive? In the end, aren’t they both machines? Granted, a cat is an incredibly complex machine capable of amazing behaviors that a K’Nex set could probably never mimic.

But on the most fundamental level, what is the difference between an inanimate machine and a living one? Do people, cats, plants and other creatures belong in one category and K’Nex, computers, stars and rocks in another? My conclusion: No. In fact, I decided, life does not actually exist. Allow me to elaborate... (MORE - details)

 

[Write4U]

For those who feel cheated by a potential bait and switch, here's Ferris Jabr's opinion from 2013 (SciAm), who seemingly goes full monty...

Why Life Does Not Really Exist
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/brainwaves/why-life-does-not-really-exist/

EXCERPT: . . . Recently, however, I had an epiphany that has forced me to rethink why I love living things so much and reexamine what life is, really. For as long as people have studied life they have struggled to define it. Even today, scientists have no satisfactory or universally accepted definition of life. While pondering this problem, I remembered my brother’s devotion to K’Nex roller coasters and my curiosity about the family cat. Why do we think of the former as inanimate and the latter as alive? In the end, aren’t they both machines? Granted, a cat is an incredibly complex machine capable of amazing behaviors that a K’Nex set could probably never mimic.

But on the most fundamental level, what is the difference between an inanimate machine and a living one? Do people, cats, plants and other creatures belong in one category and K’Nex, computers, stars and rocks in another? My conclusion: No. In fact, I decided, life does not actually exist. Allow me to elaborate... (MORE - details)

Well, it's satisfying to see I am not alone in my inquiry.

 

[sculptor]

leave us not to ignore/forget the beneficial skin microbiom which seems to communicate with the gut microbiom.
The skin microbiom seems symbiotic and has protecting the host as a good part of their raison d'etre.
I think that the common overuse of antibiotic soaps and detergents is much like "throwing the baby out with the bath water".

 

[sideshowbob]

It opens up a whole new perspective, IMO

Actually, it closes a perspective that we've been using successfully for years.

 

[Write4U]

Actually, it closes a perspective that we've been using successfully for years.

Perhaps it modifies it in that it may include organisms that have been excluded heretofore, like viruses.

 

[Write4U]

leave us not to ignore/forget the beneficial skin microbiom which seems to communicate with the gut microbiom.
The skin microbiom seems symbiotic and has protecting the host as a good part of their raison d'etre.
I think that the common overuse of antibiotic soaps and detergents is much like "throwing the baby out with the bath water".

And we enter the world of chemical communication to control the bad bacteria as well as stimulate the good bacteria, instead of just wantonly killing everything we consider as foreign to our existence.

 

[sideshowbob]

Perhaps it modifies it in that it may include organisms that have been excluded heretofore, like viruses.

We don't need to exclude ourselves - and most other animals - just to include viruses. It makes more sense to just leave the viruses in a gray area.

 

[Dennis Tate]

Considering that bacteria are the actual organism that keep us alive, are humans independently alive or only as a member of a microbiome?

The Human Microbiome - University of Washington

https://depts.washington.edu/ceeh/downloads/FF_Microbiome.pdf

Without the help of bacteria a newborn baby would not live to procreate, one of the requirements of living organisms.

Some people have to live in a sterile environment because they have no natural defenses against external biological threats.

Think about this. Remove our symbiotic bacteria and the human organism dies in a very short time.

Wow!!!!!

In my sixty one years I have never previously encountered this question before! This is definitely food for thought.