High-quality stool donors are more rare than one in a million? AI, funding, and potential. (Mar 2024, HumanMicrobes.org) Blog 

Michael Harrop

Michael Harrop

Active member
Joined
Jul 6, 2023
Messages
881
Location
USA
Format correct?
  1. Yes
even rarer than your super donor i have a super colon and thats unherd of! having a super colon and pbs or pleasurable bowel syndrome is very unique and enjoyable, an anatomical lottery prize winner, it has taught me a great deal that you would find very interesting. but we live in a world that does not want to know how to tune whats inside them and the medical machine likes and demands itto be that way.... we are outsiders looking in, its all about selling expensive drugs and they protect that with a vengeance
 
Been looking for a donor for years. My family don't, by any means, qualify. Am bedridden from very advanced MS and severe fatigue and vertigo which doesn't allow me to sit up without passing out. Very close to death for a few years. Have had severe IBS since childhood and perpetually worsening fatigue since the age of 4 when almost died of a GI bug. Had pancolitis upon scoping and biopsies around 15 years ago, which magically went into remission and hasn't been identified by repeated colonoscopies and biopsies. I keep thinking that Veterinarians do FMT's on their patients regularly with good results. Could some of them be a resource for finding appropriate human donors?
 
It doesn't seem like many medical doctors are giving enough legitimacy to this as treatment for many chronic illnesses. I know that none of my many gastroenterologists (and I've had at least 8 or 9) have helped in this quest.
 
Is it possible for us to do our own testing of our stool, to see if it’s adequate for donation? I’m fairly certain my son would qualify, as his gut health is fantastic! I understand it’s difficult with a million applicants, but is there something we can do on our end that could help you/us determine if we are a match?
 
Last edited:
I finished emailing 1.2 million people about this. The responses were depressing as hell. Overwhelmingly, the answer to:
How badly do you want a cure for yourself or your loved ones? What are you willing to do for it?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

is absolutely nothing. A mere handful of people, out of 1.2 million, offered some type of small contribution. Even philanthropic individuals like Jimmy Donaldson (AKA MrBeast) who have a personal interest in FMT (Crohn's disease) show zero interest in lifting a finger to do anything about it. A majority of people who responded to the email seem to be illiterate; including people with PhDs and MDs.

I know from experience that some people will read that and accuse me of being insulting. It's not an insult. It's a dry, factual statement.

No one seems to give a shit about chronic disease. I think it's become entirely normalized. Someone told me "I need HM so I can afford insulin for my diabetes". I responded "No, you need HM so you no longer have to purchase insulin". They insisted that no, they just need the money; the diabetes isn't the problem.

You give people the choice of $500 for your poop or a cure for chronic disease, and everyone chooses $500. How fucking delusional I was to think a cure for chronic disease would be highly sought after to the point of being priceless.

One of the Remission Biome guys made a nice tweet about it, and no one did anything.

My experiences and observations continue to be stunningly dystopian and nonsensical, to the point where I continue to question whether this is real https://www.businessinsider.com/the-matrix-do-we-live-in-a-simulation-2019-4.

I am starting to believe the NPC meme. People seem programmed for a narrow set of behaviors, and if you try to get them to do anything outside of that they either don't respond or spit out some nonsensical error dialog.

Telling people they have a one-in-a-million chance doesn't seem to have discouraged anyone from trying. Nor has it raised the quality of applicant. To the contrary in fact; many people read it and then sent in a request to review their denials because they felt they were the one-in-a-million donor. They were not.
 
Last edited:
you are searching for a unicorn, a needle in the haystack kind of microbiome and if you find it don,t be surprised that it wont be effective in most people

michael you have been at this long enough to know the medical world hates this FMT they also feed you bullship to mislead you every step of the way they do not want or support in any way us being able to self cure .....the medical world is a trillion dollar industry and they will fight in every possible way to keep it that way!
 
Michael Harrop said:
https://www.humanmicrobes.org/blog/stool-donors-one-in-a-million-ai-funding-potential

A large number of applicants, but the quality is poor. How this impacts you and how you can get involved.

I wasn't planning on posting this yet, but the FDA letter has been publicly released and news organizations are already picking it up and contacting me about it, so I think it needs to be posted now. I may still make changes to it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I wonder if the poor condition of stool and gut biome occurring in so-called "elite" athletes is attributable to the myriad of unhealthy supplements, irregular diets, and organ altering steroids and other PEDs to which many athletes, regardless of any other condition, subject themselves. The vast majority of even college athletes are on anabolics and related substances.

Would blood work and/or screening for these help to find the "right" donor? I'm not sure of everything you take into consideration, but an "8 pack" and the ability to perform exercises 99%+ of humans could never perform unless taking PEDs may be incongruent to good gut health and stool.
 
Hi Michael, I'm interested in helping to automate some of the donor selection process so you don't have to deal with as many applicants. Do you have anything in place right now (i.e., a script) to automatically filter out candidates that meet exclusion criteria?
 
Another patient created a spreadsheet scoring system for me, so that's what I use to process ~10k applicants at a time. About 80%+ get disqualified from that, and the other 20% get the option to move on to the stool type & physical fitness steps. I don't think this can be significantly improved upon by anything short of AI. What takes the most time is looking at people's fitness & stool photos and ranking them accordingly.
 
Michael Harrop said:
Another patient created a spreadsheet scoring system for me, so that's what I use to process ~10k applicants at a time. About 80%+ get disqualified from that, and the other 20% get the option to move on to the stool type & physical fitness steps. I don't think this can be significantly improved upon by anything short of AI. What takes the most time is looking at people's fitness & stool photos and ranking them accordingly.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I could try and train a type of neural network (AI) called a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) to rank order different physique/stool photos. The hardest part would be curating a dataset of physiques/stools for each classification category (very good, good, mediocre, etc...), and fitting the neural network to find features that drive accurate predictions (a feature in this context would be abs or veins or a dark brown bristol 4 stool). It sounds to me like you've already curated the dataset.

Since photos vary quite a bit, there are a lot of other unrelated features the neural network may learn to predict a physique/stool's rank inaccurately - say, the colour of a person's shorts or the shape of their toilet bowl. On the plus side, you have a ton of data to work with, so it'll be easier to test the CNN for robustness and identify these unrelated features. I wouldn't trust it to completely automate donor selection either, but it could get very accurate at disqualifying inadequate donors. Anything in the very good, good, and mediocre categories you would manually assess yourself.
 
Thanks!

cdadebr said:
Anything in the very good, good, and mediocre categories you would manually assess yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm not sure how helpful that would be since I'm ranking and categorizing candidates. The "completely inadequate" ones that make it through the questionnaire don't take up the majority of time.

I think the main time saver would be if an AI could take over the entire screening process. For example, it would be fed the questionnaire + fitness + stool type pictures and give candidates a score, while highlighting certain answers from the questionnaire such as "C-section, not breastfed, etc.".

I do not have saved copies of applicants' pictures, so they'd have to resubmit everything to the database that the AI reads from.

I was thinking that I would click through a bunch of images and possibly give a x/10 score to hundreds of photos, and that would train the AI. Or I could just mark stools as "firm, brown, medium size", and then a weight for each characteristic would be given to the AI to compute a score for each stool photo.

I'm very hesitant to get into the AI thing unless it can be done by a very experienced & capable team. It seems like it would require significant time and adjustment to the whole process, so the result would have to be very worthwhile and have little to no risk of giving a low rating to a very good donor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top