RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the protective effects of probiotics and fecal transplantation on inflammatory and oxidative parameters in the intestines of two rat models of sepsis. METHODS: Rats were treated with prebiotics, probiotics, or symbiotics and exposed to lipopolysaccharide (LPS) or zymosan after 15 d to induce endotoxemia. Oxidative damage and inflammation were analyzed, and histologic examination of the intestinal tissue was performed. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) was carried out in LPS- and zymosan-induced rat models of sepsis. RESULTS: Supplementation with symbiotics for 15 d effectively reduced the inflammatory parameters compared with supplementation for 7 d. Probiotics, prebiotics, and symbiotics exerted different effects on the evaluated parameters. In general, Lactobacillus rhamnosus and L. casei exerted better local protective effects. Evaluation of the role of the intestinal microbiota through FMT revealed its protective effects irrespective of the previous treatment with probiotics. CONCLUSION: Probiotic strains significantly differ among themselves and exert different effects on the host's health. Symbiotics and FMT could offer additional immunomodulatory benefits to drug therapy, thus serving as a new therapeutic alternative in pediatric patients with sepsis.
Assuntos
Microbioma Gastrointestinal , Probióticos , Sepse , Animais , Criança , Transplante de Microbiota Fecal , Humanos , Prebióticos , Ratos , Sepse/terapiaRESUMO
Research into the reliability of news reports on 'global warming' published by the UOL media group, Folha.com and Folha de S. Paulo reveals a tendency for positions to be polarized between complete agreement with the assertion that the causes are entirely anthropogenic (the dominant position) and complete denial. The sample comprised 676 news items from more than 3,000 published on the topic between October 2007 and October 2008. The study tested the hypothesis that the news output of the three media outlets is dominated by the positions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In absolute terms, the panel is the most frequently cited source, since just seven news items comprised exceptions to the 'consensus.' These contrary opinions made up 1.03% of the sample.
RESUMO
Pesquisa sobre confiabilidade de notícias a respeito do 'aquecimento global', em veículos do grupo de comunicação UOL, Folha.com e Folha de S. Paulo, revelou certa polaridade de posições entre a concordância plena de que as causas sejam exclusivamente antrópicas (posição predominante) e sua completa negação. A amostra compreende 676 notícias, entre mais de três mil relacionadas ao tema, entre outubro de 2007 e outubro de 2008. Avaliou-se a hipótese de ser o noticiário dos três meios de comunicação dominado pelas posições do Painel Intergovernamental de Mudança Climática. Em termos absolutos, o Painel é a fonte mais referenciada, pois apenas sete notícias constituem exceções ao 'consenso'. Tais opiniões contrárias perfazem 1,03% da amostra.
Research into the reliability of news reports on 'global warming' published by the UOL media group, Folha.com and Folha de S. Paulo reveals a tendency for positions to be polarized between complete agreement with the assertion that the causes are entirely anthropogenic (the dominant position) and complete denial. The sample comprised 676 news items from more than 3,000 published on the topic between October 2007 and October 2008. The study tested the hypothesis that the news output of the three media outlets is dominated by the positions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In absolute terms, the panel is the most frequently cited source, since just seven news items comprised exceptions to the 'consensus.' These contrary opinions made up 1.03% of the sample.