Is the hygiene hypothesis an example of hormesis?

John A Bukowski, R Jeffrey Lewis
{"title":"Is the hygiene hypothesis an example of hormesis?","authors":"John A Bukowski,&nbsp;R Jeffrey Lewis","doi":"10.1080/15401420391434306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Unlabelled: </strong>The \"hygiene hypothesis\" has been suggested to explain the rising incidence of allergic disorders in developed countries. The postulated mechanism is that infectious and/or microbial agents stimulate the immune system toward Th1 (allergy fighting) rather than Th2 (allergy promoting) response. This paper reviews the evidence related to early life infectious/microbial exposures and subsequent atopic disorders and evaluates whether these data suggest a hormetic effect. Our review indicates an insufficient and contradictory association for bacterial/viral infections, with protective effects being either absent or specific to certain infections and/or populations. Chronic, heavy parasitic burdens appear to confer protection against atopic disorders, but are associated with considerable pathology. Moreover, light parasitic burden may increase allergic responses (i.e., no \"low dose\" beneficial effect). In contrast, there is consistent evidence that general microbial exposures, particularly gut commensals, may be protective against allergy development, which is consistent with a hormetic effect (i.e., potentially beneficial effects at low doses and detrimental effects at high levels).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>General microbial exposures in relation to the \"hygiene hypothesis\" may represent a hormetic effect, although further research with more rigorous study methods (i.e., prospective designs and measurement of exposure timing, dose, route, etc.) are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":74315,"journal":{"name":"Nonlinearity in biology, toxicology, medicine","volume":"1 2","pages":"155-66"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15401420391434306","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nonlinearity in biology, toxicology, medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15401420391434306","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Unlabelled: The "hygiene hypothesis" has been suggested to explain the rising incidence of allergic disorders in developed countries. The postulated mechanism is that infectious and/or microbial agents stimulate the immune system toward Th1 (allergy fighting) rather than Th2 (allergy promoting) response. This paper reviews the evidence related to early life infectious/microbial exposures and subsequent atopic disorders and evaluates whether these data suggest a hormetic effect. Our review indicates an insufficient and contradictory association for bacterial/viral infections, with protective effects being either absent or specific to certain infections and/or populations. Chronic, heavy parasitic burdens appear to confer protection against atopic disorders, but are associated with considerable pathology. Moreover, light parasitic burden may increase allergic responses (i.e., no "low dose" beneficial effect). In contrast, there is consistent evidence that general microbial exposures, particularly gut commensals, may be protective against allergy development, which is consistent with a hormetic effect (i.e., potentially beneficial effects at low doses and detrimental effects at high levels).

Conclusion: General microbial exposures in relation to the "hygiene hypothesis" may represent a hormetic effect, although further research with more rigorous study methods (i.e., prospective designs and measurement of exposure timing, dose, route, etc.) are needed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
卫生学假说是激效效应的一个例子吗?
未标注:“卫生假说”被用来解释发达国家中过敏性疾病发病率上升的原因。假设的机制是感染和/或微生物制剂刺激免疫系统对Th1(过敏对抗)而不是Th2(过敏促进)的反应。本文回顾了与生命早期感染/微生物暴露和随后的特应性疾病相关的证据,并评估了这些数据是否表明存在激效效应。我们的综述表明,细菌/病毒感染的关联不充分且矛盾,保护作用要么不存在,要么只针对某些感染和/或人群。慢性、沉重的寄生虫负担似乎赋予对特应性疾病的保护,但与相当大的病理相关。此外,轻寄生负担可能增加过敏反应(即没有“低剂量”有益作用)。相反,有一致的证据表明,一般的微生物暴露,特别是肠道共生菌,可能对过敏的发展有保护作用,这与激效(即低剂量的潜在有益作用和高剂量的有害作用)是一致的。结论:与“卫生假说”相关的一般微生物暴露可能代表一种激效,尽管需要进一步研究更严格的研究方法(即前瞻性设计和暴露时间、剂量、途径等的测量)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Mathematical modelling of dose-response relationship (hormesis) in allelopathy and its application. Whole-range assessment: a simple method for analysing allelopathic dose-response data. Mathematical Modelling of Allelopathy: IV. Assessment of Contributions of Competition and Allelopathy to Interference by Barley. Modeling the effect of density-dependent chemical interference upon seed germination. Implementation of card: curve-fitting allelochemical response data.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1