This further proves my previous statements. This is not a legitimate attempt to find safe and effective stool donors. Someone would have to have severe cognitive impairments or bad intentions to be making such statements. You're essentially claiming you're going to build a skyscraper by using materials from discarded tires and roads.
I see it more as a case of "when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail". Aim for NaN has coding skills, and can handle the web design better than most people, so that's where the focus goes, rather than looking for where the actual "weakest link" is in the process (which has nothing to do with the web design aspect).
I've noticed this too--the areas where I have insight and skills that others might not are not areas I can really apply to this problem at this time. If and when there is good quality data on which donors work better for which conditions, and microbiome profiling of those donors is readily available, I could very well be able to come up with a quite predictive model that explains why those donors work. However, the sticking point right now is that most people with most conditions never even
get to try FMT. And even if I knew exactly which microbes I need, being
able to find people with those microbes is far from easy. It's very frustrating to feel as though the tasks where one could actually contribute are not the ones that are really holding up the process.
It looks like it was because he edited his comment after you loaded the page/thread.
Ah, OK.
Then you understand that it isn't an issue of knowledge, and that one's suffering must exceed an arbitrary threshold for it to even be considered by the unhealthy. Both the "healthy" and the sick are easily turned off by the notion. Studies reveal that those who donate blood are the most willing to donate stool. Which is to say, it has everything to do with the mindset.
I agree that the "ick factor" is an important part. I have said so before in other threads. Again, coding ability has nothing to do with overcoming this.
Despite it not being an issue of knowledge, there still exists the issue of misinformation, especially by those with pseudo authority (e.g. doctors, nurses, etc). Even today, doctors and nurses claim that store-bought yogurt is sufficient to restore balance to the microbiome. Laughable to us, but also a hindrance.
Yes, I agree. As long as the public thinks "gut health = Mediterranean diet and fermented foods", even the microbiome being a subject that's "in vogue", as it is now (I've even heard ads for special pet food to improve your pet's microbiome), won't make a concrete, tangible difference. The thing is, at this point the doctors AND the "big pharma is screwing us over" anti-intellectual crowd are unfortunately in agreement with looking in the wrong place.
But there is generally one thing that helps overcome these things (though not perfectly): money. Sure, the amount must exceed whatever would prevent a person from being a stool donor. As much as I hate to succumb to the idea that "health is for the rich," we are still at the mercy of the "healthy." Yet, this will not stop me from making an effort.
Yes, don't give up.
I'm guessing I'm the only programmer here for others to be unable to see how this would work.
No I am very familiar with programming as well, on the math/computational biology side though, not on the web development side. I still fail to see how web development is going to solve all the problems, though.
I am not so ignorant of how the internet works that I should be unable to gain traffic. And I am not looking to imply the use of stool for the treatment for disease. So, your concerns should make no such assumption. Having made no such assumptions, how many of your concerns remain valid to you?
This sounds a bit like a techbro who has an idea for a new dating site but who doesn't have any experience dating and doesn't know how to make a site appeal to people whom other people actually want to date, yet is convinced that all that is needed is a beautiful work of software engineering to make everyone want to use it. Then two years later it's full of lonely single guys who still can't get dates.
It is not necessary to test everyone. And for the sake of asserting intent, we will not be testing everyone. This, however, does not mean that users will be necessarily ignorant of stool quality, or that no testing will be involved. Besides, testing does not remove risk. All it does is provide some level of confidence regarding the seller. As far as I'm concerned, whether that confidence is valid is up for debate. In the end, all the testing in the world does not prevent someone from selling low-quality stool or tampering with the stool prior to shipping. If anything, stool tests will have to be conducted by the buyers in their own time.
Then you're effectively limiting your customer base to people who have the money to do their own testing of donors before using them.
Also, rid yourself of the notion of "donor." There will be no such concept. You do not see what I see, but that is fine. And constantly responding here takes a toll on my health. It makes no difference to me if no one here wishes for me to succeed; but I never asked for such support anyway.
How does not calling them "donors" (if you wish not to) change anything?
