Probiotic

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
(Redirected from
Probiotics
)
Not to be confused with Prebiotics, food compounds that induce the growth or activity of microorganisms.
Lactobacillus paracasei

Probiotics are live

generally safe to consume, but may cause bacteria-host interactions and unwanted side effects in rare cases.[3][4][5] There is some evidence that probiotics are beneficial for some conditions, but there is little evidence for many of the health benefits claimed for them.[1]

The first discovered probiotic was a certain strain of

yoghurt-consuming Bulgarian peasants lived longer.[6]

A growing probiotics market has led to the need for stricter requirements for

deceptive advertising in the United States by the Federal Trade Commission.[11] As of 2019, numerous applications for approval of health claims by European manufacturers of probiotic dietary supplements have been rejected by the European Food Safety Authority for insufficient evidence of beneficial mechanism or efficacy.[8][12]

Definition

An October 2001 report by the World Health Organization (WHO) defines probiotics as "live microorganisms which when administered in adequate amounts confer a health benefit on the host."[13][14] Following this definition, a working group convened by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)/WHO in May 2002 issued the Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food.[15] A consensus definition of the term probiotics, based on available information and scientific evidence, was adopted after the aforementioned joint expert consultation between the FAO of the United Nations and the WHO. This effort was accompanied by local governmental and supra-governmental regulatory bodies' requirements to better characterize health claims substantiations.[citation needed]

That first global effort was further developed in 2010; two expert groups of academic scientists and industry representatives made recommendations for the evaluation and validation of probiotic health claims.[16][17] The same principles emerged from those two groups as were expressed in the "Guidelines" of FAO/WHO in 2002. This definition, though widely adopted, is not acceptable to the European Food Safety Authority because it embeds a health claim that is not measurable.[7]

A group of scientific experts assembled in Canada in October 2013 to discuss the scope and appropriate use of the term "probiotic", adjusting the definition to be "live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host."[18]

In food

Live probiotic

fermented foods, and probiotic-fortified foods.[19]

Lactic acid bacteria (LABs), which are food fermenting bacteria, have the ability to prevent food spoilage and can improve the nutritive value of the foods they inhabit. Acid fermentation (as well as salting), remains one of the most practical methods of preservation of fresh vegetables, cereal gruels, and milk-cereal mixtures due to its low cost and energy requirements.[20]

Fermented products that contain lactic acid bacteria include vegetables such as pickled vegetables,[21] kimchi,[21][22] pao cai,[23] and sauerkraut;[24] sourdough bread or bread-like products made without wheat or rye flour, amino acid/peptide meat-flavored sauces and pastes produced by fermentation of cereals and legumes; fermented cereal-fish-shrimp mixtures and fermented meats;[20] soy products such as tempeh,[25] miso,[26] and soy sauce;[27] dairy products such as yogurt, kefir,[28] buttermilk;[29] and non-dairy products such as bee pollen.[30]

More precisely, sauerkraut contains the bacteria

Lactobacillus paraplantarum, Lactobacillus coryniformis, and Weissella spp.[31]
Kimchi contains the bacteria Leuconostoc spp., Weissella spp., and Lactobacillus spp. Pao cai contains L. pentosus, L. plantarum , Leuconostoc mesenteroides , L. brevis, L. lactis, and L. fermentum. A list of many other bacteria found in several Asian fermented fruits and vegetables also is available.
Gluconacetobacter xylinus,[38][39] Zygosaccharomyces sp., Acetobacter pasteurianus, Acetobacter aceti, and Gluconobacter oxydans.[40]

Side effects

The manipulation of the gut microbiota is complex and may cause bacteria-host interactions.

bacteremia, which can cause adverse health consequences.[5] Rarely, consumption of probiotics by children with lowered immune system function or who are already critically ill may result in bacteremia or fungemia (i.e., bacteria or fungi in the blood), which can lead to sepsis, a potentially fatal disease.[4]

Lactobacillus species have been suggested to contribute to obesity in humans, but no evidence of this relationship has been found.[42]

Consumption

In 2015, the global retail market value for probiotics was US$41 billion, including sales of probiotic supplements, fermented milk products, and yogurt, which alone accounted for 75% of total consumption.[43] Innovation in probiotic products in 2015 was mainly from supplements, which produced US$4 billion and was projected to grow 37% globally by 2020.[43] Consumption of yogurt products in China has increased by 20% per year since 2014.[44]

Regulation

As of 2019, the European Food Safety Authority has rejected all petitions by commercial manufacturers for health claims on probiotic products in Europe due to insufficient evidence for a cause-and-effect mechanism for benefit, thus inconclusive proof of effectiveness.[7][8][12] The European Commission placed a ban on putting the word "probiotic" on the packaging of products because such labeling misleads consumers to believe a health benefit is provided by the product when no scientific proof exists to demonstrate that health effect.[7][45][46][47]

In the United States, the

Food product labeling requires language approved by the FDA, so probiotic manufacturers have received warning letters for making disease or treatment claims.[10][48] The FTC has taken punitive actions, including a US$21 million fine coordinated by 39 different state governments against a major probiotic manufacturer for deceptive advertising and exaggerated claims of health benefits for yogurt and probiotic dairy drink.[11]

Yogurt labeling

The National Yogurt Association (NYA) of the United States gives a "Live & Active Cultures Seal" to refrigerated yogurt products that contain 100 million cells per gram, or frozen yogurt products that contain 10 million cells per gram at the time of manufacture.[49] In 2002, the FDA and WHO recommended that "the minimum viable numbers of each probiotic strain at the end of the shelf-life" be reported on labeling,[50] but most companies that give a number report the viable cell count at the date of manufacture, a number that could be much higher than that which exists at consumption.[51] Because of the variability in storage conditions and time before eating, exactly how many active culture cells remain at the time of consumption is difficult to determine. The survival of probiotics was strongly dependent on the storage temperature and remarkable viability loss occurred in room temperature compared to refrigerated storage.[52]

History

Probiotics have received renewed attention in the 21st century from product manufacturers, research studies, and consumers. Their history can be traced to the first use of cheese and fermented products, which were well-known to the Greeks and Romans who recommended their consumption.[53] The fermentation of dairy foods represents one of the oldest techniques for food preservation.[54]

Élie Metchnikoff first suggested the possibility of colonizing the gut with beneficial bacteria in the early 20th century.

The original modern hypothesis of the positive role played by certain bacteria was first introduced by Russian scientist and

autointoxication", which would cause the physical changes associated with old age.[56]

At that time,

sour milk fermented with the bacteria he called "Bulgarian Bacillus" and believed his health benefited. Friends in Paris soon followed his example and physicians began prescribing the sour-milk diet for their patients.[57]

Bifidobacteria was first isolated from a breastfed infant by Henry Tissier, who also worked at the Pasteur Institute. The isolated bacterium named Bacillus bifidus communis[58] was later renamed to the genus Bifidobacterium.[59] Tissier found that bifidobacteria are dominant in the gut microbiota of breast-fed
babies and he observed clinical benefits from treating infant diarrhea with bifidobacteria.

During an outbreak of shigellosis in 1917, German professor Alfred Nissle isolated a strain of Escherichia coli from the feces of a soldier who was not affected by the disease.[60] Methods of treating infectious diseases were needed at that time when antibiotics were not yet available, and Nissle used the E. coli Nissle 1917 strain in acute gastrointestinal infectious salmonellosis and shigellosis.[61]

In 1920, Rettger and Cheplin reported that Metchnikoff's "Bulgarian Bacillus", later called Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus, could not live in the human intestine.[62][non-primary source needed] They conducted experiments involving rats and humans volunteers, feeding them with Lactobacillus acidophilus. They observed the disappearance of the pathogenic protist Balantidium coli as well as of other gas-producing bacteria.[62] Rettger further explored the possibilities of L. acidophilus, and reasoned that bacteria originating from the gut were more likely to produce the desired effect in this environment. In 1935, certain strains of L. acidophilus were found very active when implanted in the human digestive tract.[63][non-primary source needed]

Contrasting antibiotics, probiotics were defined as microbially derived factors that stimulate the growth of other microorganisms. In 1989, Roy Fuller suggested a definition of probiotics that have been widely used: "A live microbial feed supplement which beneficially affects the host animal by improving its intestinal microbial balance."[64] Fuller's definition emphasizes the requirement of viability for probiotics and introduces the aspect of a beneficial effect on the host.

The term "probiotic" originally referred to microorganisms that have effects on other microorganisms.[65] The concept of probiotics involved the notion that substances secreted by one microorganism stimulated the growth of another microorganism. The term was used again[66] to describe tissue extracts that stimulated microbial growth. The term probiotics was taken up by Parker,[67] who defined the concept as, "Organisms and substances that have a beneficial effect on the host animal by contributing to its intestinal microbial balance." Later, the definition was greatly improved by Fuller,[64] whose explanation was very close to the definition used today. Fuller described probiotics as a "live microbial feed supplement which beneficially affects the host animal by improving its intestinal microbial balance." He stressed two important claims for probiotics: the viable nature of probiotics and the capacity to help with intestinal balance.

In the following decades, intestinal lactic-acid bacterial species with alleged health-beneficial properties were introduced as probiotics, including

Lactobacillus casei, and Lactobacillus johnsonii.[68]

Etymology

Some literature gives the word a full Greek

antonym. The related term prebiotic comes from the Latin prae, meaning 'before', and refers to a substance that is not digested, but rather may be fermented to promote the growth of beneficial intestinal microorganisms.[73]

Research

As food products or dietary supplements, probiotics are under preliminary research to evaluate if they provide any effect on health.[2][7][74] In all cases proposed as health claims to the European Food Safety Authority, the scientific evidence remains insufficient to prove a cause-and-effect relationship between consumption of probiotic products and any health benefit.[7][75] There is no scientific basis for extrapolating an effect from a tested strain to an untested strain.[2][76][77] Improved health through gut flora modulation appears to be directly related to long-term dietary changes.[7][78] Claims that some lactobacilli may contribute to weight gain in some humans[79][80] remain controversial.[81]

Acute otitis media

There is inconsistency in the results of different groups of 3488 children as reported in a Cochrane review.[82] Also, it shows no significant difference regarding the adverse effects between probiotic and the other comparators.[82]

Allergies

Only limited, low-quality evidence exists to indicate that probiotics are helpful for treating people with

eczema, or in infants whose mothers used probiotics during the last trimester of pregnancy and breastfeeding, had lower risk of eczema.[84]

Asthma

It is unclear whether probiotic supplementation helps with childhood asthma, as the quality of research evidence is low.[85]

Antibiotic-associated diarrhea

Antibiotics are a common treatment for children, with 11% to 40% of antibiotic-treated children developing

Cochrane review concluded that a protective effect of some probiotics existed for AAD in children.[86] The known risks of using probiotics for treating Clostridium difficile outweighs the uncertain benefits.[87]

Probiotic treatment might reduce the incidence and severity of AAD as indicated in several

meta-analyses.[88][89][90] For example, treatment with probiotic formulations including L. rhamnosus may reduce the risk of AAD, improve stool consistency during antibiotic therapy, and enhance the immune response after vaccination.[91]

The potential efficacy of probiotics to treat AAD depends on the probiotic strains and dosage.[92][93] One review recommended for children L. rhamnosus or Saccharomyces boulardii at 5 to 40 billion colony-forming units/day, given the modest number needed to treat and the likelihood that adverse events are very rare.[86] The same review stated that probiotic use should be avoided in pediatric populations at risk for adverse events, such as severely debilitated or immune-compromised children.[citation needed]

Bacterial vaginosis

Probiotic treatment of bacterial vaginosis is the application or ingestion of bacterial species found in the healthy vagina to cure the infection of bacteria causing bacterial vaginosis. This treatment is based on the observation that 70% of healthy females have a group of bacteria in the genus Lactobacillus that dominate the population of organisms in the vagina. Specific strains of lactobacilli inhibit the growth of bacteria causing BV by producing H2O2, lactic acid, and/or bacteriocins, and/or inhibit the adherence of Gardnerella vaginalis to the vaginal epithelium, which prevents the infection from occurring in the vagina.[94] Currently, the success of probiotic treatment has been mixed, since the use of probiotics to restore healthy populations of Lactobacillus has not been standardized. Often, standard antibiotic treatment is used at the same time that probiotics are being tested. In addition, some groups of women respond to treatment based upon ethnicity, age, number of sexual partners, pregnancy, and the pathogens causing bacterial vaginosis.[95] In 2013, researchers found that administration of hydrogen peroxide-producing strains, such as L. acidophilus and L. rhamnosus, were able to normalize vaginal pH and rebalance the vaginal microbiota, preventing and alleviating bacterial vaginosis.[96]

Blood pressure

As of 2017, only limited evidence indicated any direct link between

high blood pressure and gut microbiota.[97]

Cholesterol

A 2002 meta-analysis that included five double-blind trials examining the short-term (2–8 weeks) effects of a yogurt with probiotic strains on serum cholesterol levels found little effect of 8.5 mg/dL (0.22 mmol/L) (4% decrease) in

LDL concentration.[98]

Depression and anxiety

A 2019 meta-analysis found low-quality evidence for probiotics having a small improvement in depression and anxiety.[99] A 2020 review found probiotics might improve depression, but more studies are needed.[100]

Diarrhea

Some probiotics are suggested as a possible treatment for various forms of gastroenteritis.[101] As a treatment for infectious diarrhea, probiotics are of no benefit to people who have the condition for more than two days, and there is no evidence they lessen the duration of diarrhea overall.[102]

Dermatitis

Probiotics are commonly given to breastfeeding mothers and their young children to prevent eczema (dermatitis), but no good evidence shows efficacy for this purpose.[103] There is little evidence to support the use of probiotics to treat atopic dermatitis, and some risk of adverse effects.[104] The American Academy of Dermatology stated: "The use of probiotics/prebiotics for the treatment of patients with established atopic dermatitis is not recommended due to inconsistent evidence".[105]

Glycemic control

According to an umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, probiotics supplementation reduces glucose homeostasis. This can be an effective therapy for lowering high blood sugar levels unless the body becomes hypoglycemic; caution and glucose monitoring are necessary to avoid this. [106]

Helicobacter pylori

Some strains of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) may affect

peptic ulcers) in adults when used in combination with standard medical treatments, but no standard in medical practice or regulatory approval exists for such treatment.[107] The only peer-reviewed treatments for H. pylori to date all include various Antibiotic Regimens.[108]

Immune function and infections

Some strains of LAB may affect

T lymphocytes and natural killer cells.[109][110] LAB products might aid in the treatment of acute diarrhea and possibly affect rotavirus infections in children and travelers' diarrhea in adults,[109][110] but no products are approved for such indications. There are weak evidence probiotics might lower the incidence of acute upper respiratory tract infections in adults, they were better than placebo or no treatment.[111]

Probiotics do not appear to change the risk of infection in older people.[112]

Inflammatory bowel disease

The use of oral probiotic supplements to modify the composition and behaviour of the microbiome has been considered as a possible therapy for both induction and maintenance of remission in people with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. A Cochrane review in 2020 did not find clear evidence of improved remission likelihood, nor lower adverse events, in people with Crohn's disease, following probiotic treatment. [113]

For ulcerative colitis, there is low-certainty evidence that probiotic supplements may increase the probability of clinical remission.

monotherapy, the likelihood of remission was 22% higher if probiotics were used in combination with 5-aminosalicylic acid therapy. [114] Whereas in people who are already in remission, it is unclear whether probiotics help to prevent future relapse, either as a monotherapy or combination therapy. [115]

Irritable bowel syndrome

Probiotics are under study for their potential to affect irritable bowel syndrome, although uncertainty remains around which type of probiotic works best, and around the size of possible effect.[116][117]

Necrotizing enterocolitis

Several clinical studies provide evidence for the potential of probiotics to lower the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis and mortality in premature infants. One meta-analysis indicated that probiotics reduce these risks by more than 50% compared with controls but that further, large, high-quality trials were needed to inform policy and practice.[118]

Pregnancy

A Cochrane systematic review found no good evidence that probiotics were of benefit in reducing the risk of gestational diabetes, but good evidence that they increased the risk of pre-eclampsia. For this reason, the use of probiotics in pregnancy was advised against.[119]

Recurrent abdominal pain

A 2017 review based on moderate to low-quality evidence suggests that probiotics may be helpful in relieving pain in the short term in children with recurrent abdominal pain, but the proper strain and dosage are not known.[120]

Dry eye

A clinical study investigating the impact of probiotics in relieving the signs and symptoms of dry eye revealed promising results for the ophthalmic formulation of Latilactobacillus sakei, while the oral probiotic demonstrated no discernible benefits.[121]

Urinary tract

There is limited evidence indicating probiotics are of benefit in the management of infection or inflammation of the

urinary tract.[122] One literature review found Lactobacillus probiotic supplements appeared to increase vaginal lactobacilli levels, thus reducing the incidence of vaginal infections in otherwise healthy adult women.[123]

General research

Formulations

Supplements such as tablets, capsules, powders, and sachets containing bacteria have been studied. However, probiotics taken orally can be destroyed by the acidic conditions of the stomach. As of 2010, a number of

microencapsulation techniques were being developed to address this problem.[124]

Multiple probiotics

Preliminary research is evaluating the potential physiological effects of multiple probiotic strains, as opposed to a single strain.[125][126] As the human gut may contain tens of thousands of microbial species, one theory indicates that this diverse environment may benefit from consuming multiple probiotic strains, an effect that remains scientifically unconfirmed.[citation needed]

Strains

Only preliminary evidence exists for most probiotic health claims. Even for the most studied probiotic strains, few have been sufficiently developed in basic and clinical research to warrant approval for health claim status by a regulatory agency such as the FDA or EFSA, and as of 2010, no claims had been approved by those two agencies.[7] Some experts are skeptical about the efficacy of different probiotic strains and believe that not all subjects benefit from probiotics.[7][127]

Scientific guidelines for testing

First, probiotics must be alive when administered.[64][128][129] One of the concerns throughout the scientific literature resides in the viability and reproducibility on a large scale of observed results for specific studies, as well as the viability and stability during use and storage, and finally the ability to survive in stomach acids and then in the intestinal ecosystem.[7][failed verification]

Second, probiotics must have undergone controlled evaluation to document health benefits in the target host. Only products that contain live organisms shown in reproducible human studies to confer a health benefit may claim to be probiotic.[7][130][131] The correct definition of health benefit, backed with solid scientific evidence, is a strong element for the proper identification and assessment of the effect of a probiotic. This aspect is a challenge for scientific and industrial investigations because several difficulties arise, such as variability in the site for probiotic use (oral, vaginal, intestinal) and mode of application.[64]

Third, the probiotic candidate must be a taxonomically defined microbe or combination of microbes (

phenotypic characterization of the tested microorganism.[16]

Fourth, probiotics must be safe for their intended use. The 2002 FAO/WHO guidelines recommend that, though bacteria may be generally recognized as safe (GRAS), the safety of the potential probiotic be assessed by the minimum required tests: [132]

  • Assessment of certain metabolic activities (e.g. D-lactate production, bile salt deconjugation)
  • Assessment of side effects in human studies
  • Determination of antibiotic resistance patterns
  • Epidemiological surveillance of adverse incidents in consumers (aftermarket)
  • If the strain under evaluation belongs to a species known to produce toxins in mammals, it must be tested for toxin production. One possible scheme for testing toxin production has been recommended by the EU Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition.[133]
  • If the strain under evaluation belongs to a species with known
    hemolytic
    potential, determination of hemolytic activity is required.

In Europe, EFSA adopted a premarket system for the safety assessment of microbial species used in food and feed productions to set priorities for the need for risk assessment. The assessment is made for certain microorganisms; if the result is favorable, it leads to "Qualified Presumption of Safety" status.[134]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b "Probiotics". National Health Service. 27 November 2018. Archived from the original on 20 April 2021. Retrieved 2 November 2019.
  2. ^ a b c "Probiotics: What You Need To Know". National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, US National Institutes of Health. 1 August 2019. Archived from the original on 17 September 2018. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  3. ^
    PMID 25922398
    .
  4. ^
    PMID 27081478
    .
  5. ^
    PMID 26900283
    .
  6. PMID 15481739
    .
  7. ^
    PMID 21861940
    .
  8. ^
    PMID 32626282
    .
  9. PMID 23110633
    .
  10. ^ a b c Engle MK, Roosevelt MW, Waltrip EA (22 November 2011). "Warning letter to CocoKefir LLC". Compliance Branch, Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations, US Food and Drug Administration and Federal Trade Commission. Archived from the original on 23 October 2016. Retrieved 4 June 2016.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  11. ^ a b c "Dannon Agrees to Drop Exaggerated Health Claims for Activia Yogurt and DanActive Dairy Drink FTC Charges that Evidence Supporting Benefits of Probiotics Falls Short". Federal Trade Commission, US Government. 15 December 2010. Archived from the original on 14 May 2017. Retrieved 9 May 2017.
  12. ^ a b Chu W (18 April 2019). "Heinz reels from latest probiotic health claim rejection by EFSA". NutraIngredients.com, William Reed Business Media Ltd. Archived from the original on 20 October 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2019.
  13. ^ Schlundt J. "Health and Nutritional Properties of Probiotics in Food including Powder Milk with Live Lactic Acid Bacteria" (PDF). Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Evaluation of Health and Nutritional Properties of Probiotics in Food Including Powder Milk with Live Lactic Acid Bacteria. FAO / WHO. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 22, 2012. Retrieved 17 December 2012.
  14. OCLC 70928765. Archived from the original on 2023-07-01. Retrieved 2022-10-31.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)[page needed
    ]
  15. ^ "Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food" (PDF). Joint FAO/WHO Working Group on Drafting Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food, London, Ontario, Canada. 1 May 2002. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-10-07.
  16. ^
    PMID 20130080
    .
  17. PMID 21327031
    .
  18. PMID 24912386
    .
  19. doi:10.1016/S0958-6946(01)00099-1. Archived
    from the original on 16 June 2022. Retrieved 29 December 2020.
  20. ^ a b Lactic Acid Fermentations. National Academies Press (US). 1992. Archived from the original on 2015-04-01. Retrieved 2021-03-30.
  21. ^
    ISBN 978-1-55581-626-1. Archived
    (PDF) from the original on 28 May 2015. Retrieved 19 May 2016.
  22. PMID 15117551
    .
  23. PMID 14484853
    .
  24. doi:10.2225/vol9-issue4-fulltext-12. Archived
    from the original on 14 August 2013. Retrieved 7 November 2007.
  25. S2CID 20756449
    .
  26. ^ Ehrlich SD (2011-05-24). "Lactobacillus acidophilus". University of Maryland Medical Center (UMMC). Archived from the original on 2015-09-11. Retrieved 2015-09-17.
  27. PMID 12469319
    .
  28. PMID 21497663
    .
  29. S2CID 3059150
    .
  30. S2CID 225208290. Archived
    (PDF) from the original on 2023-03-27. Retrieved 2022-04-21.
  31. PMID 17921264
    .
  32. PMID 25343046
    .
  33. ^ "Table 1: Examples of traditional fermented fruits and vegetables, which are used in various parts of Asian subcontinent". Archived from the original on 2019-02-16. Retrieved 2019-02-16.
  34. S2CID 19963871
    .
  35. doi:10.1616/1476-2137.13938. Archived from the original
    (PDF) on 14 May 2014. Retrieved 20 December 2014.
  36. ^ Bauer B (July 8, 2017). "What is kombucha tea? Does it have any health benefits?". Mayo Clinic. Archived from the original on August 9, 2018. Retrieved September 5, 2018.
  37. ^ Wollan M (24 March 2010). "Kombucha Tea Attracts a Following and Doubters". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2018-07-12. Retrieved 2018-09-05.
  38. doi:10.1016/S0269-915X(00)80034-8
    .
  39. doi:10.1016/s0141-3910(97)00197-3
    .
  40. PMID 33412713
    .
  41. PMID 16762934
    .
  42. PMID 22968407. Archived
    from the original on 2021-06-18. Retrieved 2020-07-01.
  43. ^ a b Feldman M (22 September 2016). "The New Market Profile of Probiotics Consumption". Natural Products Insider. Archived from the original on 5 September 2018. Retrieved 5 September 2018.
  44. ^ Meiling C (21 June 2018). "Yogurt ferments the dairy segment". The Daily Telegraph and China Daily. Archived from the original on 6 September 2018. Retrieved 5 September 2018.
  45. ^ 'Probiotic' As A General Descriptor (PDF) (Report). Yogurt & Live Fermented Milks Association (YLFA). Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 December 2014. Retrieved 12 December 2014.
  46. ^ "Probiotic health claims". Food Safety Authority of Ireland, Dublin. 2014. Archived from the original on 10 July 2017. Retrieved 13 December 2014.
  47. ^ "Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods". European Commission, Brussels. 2006. Archived from the original on 2 February 2016. Retrieved 13 December 2014.
  48. ^ a b Schmidt N (30 July 2014). "Warning letter to Plexus Worldwide Inc". Compliance Branch, Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations, US Food and Drug Administration. Archived from the original on 8 May 2017. Retrieved 9 May 2017.
  49. ^ "Live & Active Culture Yogurt". National Yogurt Association. Archived from the original on 8 December 2014. Retrieved 12 December 2014.
  50. ^ Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food, Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Working Group on Drafting Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food (PDF) (Report). London, Ontario, Canada: Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health Organization. April 2002. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 August 2014. Retrieved 12 December 2014.
  51. PMID 10721912
    .
  52. PMID 24250681
    .
  53. PMID 10493604
    .
  54. ISBN 978-0-321-58202-7
    .
  55. OCLC 287028845. Archived from the original on 2023-07-01. Retrieved 2022-10-31.[page needed
    ]
  56. ^ "Arteriosclerosis and intestinal poisons". [a contemporary review of Metchnikoff's work] JAMA 1910, 55:2311–2312.
  57. PMID 14321564
    .
  58. ^ Tissier, H. 1900. Recherchers sur la flora intestinale normale et pathologique du nourisson. Thesis, University of Paris, Paris, France.
  59. S2CID 1295886. Archived
    from the original on 25 May 2021. Retrieved 29 December 2020.
  60. ^ Nißle A (1918). "Die antagonistische Behandlung chronischer Darmstörungen mit Colibakterien". Medizinische Klinik. 1918 (2): 29–33.
  61. PMID 15039098
    .
  62. ^
    PMID 16576567
    .
  63. OCLC 250265817. Archived
    from the original on 2023-07-01. Retrieved 2022-10-31.
  64. ^
    PMID 2666378
    .
  65. S2CID 26826201
    .
  66. ISBN 978-0-87055-099-7.[page needed
    ]
  67. ^ Parker RB (1974). "Probiotics, the other half of the antibiotic story". Animal Nutrition and Health. 29: 4–8.
  68. PMID 14503687
    .
  69. OCLC 958540533. Archived from the original on 2023-07-01. Retrieved 2022-10-31.[page needed
    ]
  70. PMID 11340528
    .
  71. Perseus Project
    .
  72. PMID 14552330
    .
  73. PMID 26431716.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link
    )
  74. PMID 23990821
    .
  75. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3085
    .
  76. ^ "Health and Nutritional Properties of Probiotics in Food including Powder Milk with Live Lactic Acid Bacteria" (PDF). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. October 2001. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 14, 2012. Retrieved May 14, 2012.
  77. PMID 21637035
    .
  78. PMID 21885731
    .
  79. PMID 23332210
    .
  80. PMID 22634320
    .
  81. PMID 22968407. Archived
    from the original on 2021-06-18. Retrieved 2020-07-01.
  82. ^
    PMID 31210358
    .
  83. S2CID 195259677
    .
  84. PMID 26044853. Archived
    from the original on 2022-03-16. Retrieved 2019-12-12.
  85. S2CID 51723667
    .
  86. ^
    PMID 31039287
    .
  87. PMID 32531291
    .
  88. S2CID 7557917. Archived
    from the original on 2020-07-28. Retrieved 2019-06-30.
  89. S2CID 28439228
    .
  90. PMID 16728323
    .
  91. PMID 10545590
    .
  92. S2CID 2070623
    .
  93. S2CID 37993276
    .
  94. PMID 17633390
    .
  95. PMID 25859220
    .
  96. S2CID 23954527
    .
  97. S2CID 3834130
    .
  98. PMID 11114681
    .
  99. PMID 31004628
    .
  100. S2CID 210121155
    .
  101. PMID 14627948. Archived
    from the original on 2014-10-28. Retrieved 2017-09-08.
  102. PMID 33295643
    .
  103. PMID 26044853
    .
  104. S2CID 243825695
    .
  105. S2CID 52278259
    .
  106. S2CID 252009294
    .
  107. PMID 14522098
    .
  108. ^ "H Pylori Facts" (PDF). CDC.gov. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-01-12.
  109. ^
    PMID 14557292
    .
  110. ^
    S2CID 1870018. Archived
    from the original on 2022-12-02. Retrieved 2022-12-01.
  111. PMID 36001877
    .
  112. PMID 29415116
    .
  113. PMID 32678465
    .
  114. ^
    PMID 32128795
    .
  115. PMID 32128794
    .
  116. PMID 25793197
    .
  117. S2CID 18281136
    .
  118. PMID 33058137
    .
  119. PMID 33870484
    .
  120. PMID 28334433
    . Overall, there is some evidence to suggest that probiotics may be effective in the treatment of RAP, in terms of improving pain in the shorter term. Clinicians may therefore consider probiotic interventions as part of the management strategy for children with RAP (Recurrent Abdominal Pain). However, we were unable to recommend the optimum strain and dosage of probiotics based on this review. The evidence for the effectiveness of probiotics was based largely on shorter-term outcomes. Further trials are required to assess whether improvements in pain are maintained over the longer term; these trials should also consider the importance of using validated and consistent scales to measure pain and other outcomes.
  121. S2CID 258989191. Archived
    from the original on 2023-11-05. Retrieved 2023-10-06.
  122. ISBN 978-1-4160-6911-9
    .
  123. S2CID 4362284
    .
  124. PMID 21030820. Archived
    (PDF) from the original on 2011-05-06. Retrieved 2011-01-28.
  125. PMID 15454313
    .
  126. S2CID 12217513
    .
  127. ^ Bee P (10 November 2008). "Probiotics, not so friendly after all?". The Times. London. Archived from the original on 11 May 2015. Retrieved 18 June 2010.
  128. ^
    PMID 1902810
    .
  129. ^ Fuller R. Probiotics, the Scientific Thesis. London: Chapman & Hall, 1992 [ISBN missing][page needed]
  130. PMID 21637034
    .
  131. PMID 16771855
    .
  132. PMID 23801655
    .
  133. ^ "Commentary by the Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition on Data Relating to Toxin Production" (PDF). Scientific Opinion. European Commission, Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General. December 2001. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 June 2016. Retrieved 5 June 2016.
  134. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2007.587
    .

Further reading
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Probiotic&oldid=1214982316"