Is there any research looking into this?
Is there any research looking into this?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36639608/
There's also a large RECOVER initiative to better understand it.
https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2023/03/02/recover-what-clinic...
Not saying you're wrong or that I disagree, just that PubMed citations aren't a useful way to prove anything.
pubmed doesn't 'sanction' anything. it just a database of published articles.
Sure, that's like saying that Google approves of a given page just because they pull it up in response to a search query. But that goes back to my original point: no intelligent person (or true Scotsman) would back up their argument by saying "Go search Google" and leave it at that.
A hypothetical https://www.google.gov would be held to very different standards than Google is today. I'd like to say the same about PubMed, but can't.
It sounds squarely in the pseudoscience category thus far: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaky_gut_syndrome
These terms are often used interchangably. This particular wikipedia stub is trying to draw a bright line where none exists.
Science isn't static. It's contantly in evolution as people try to find justifaction for unsupported claims. Dismissing unsupported claims prima facie is fundementally incomaptible with the scientific method.