Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mikrobiomische Selbstwirksamkeit

Nehmen PatientInnen mit chronischen Darmerkrankungen ihre Darmgesundheit mithilfe von DIY Stuhltransplantationen in die eigene Hand?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Personal Health Science

Part of the book series: Öffentliche Wissenschaft und gesellschaftlicher Wandel ((OEWGW))

Zusammenfassung

Medizinische, wissenschaftliche, mediale und wirtschaftliche Akteure positionieren das menschliche Mikrobiom als einen zentralen Faktor individualisierter Gesundheitsvorsorge und therapeutischer Praxis im 21. Jahrhundert. Dieser Trend weckt in der Bevölkerung große Erwartungshaltungen, insbesondere bei Betroffenen von chronisch entzündlichen Darmerkrankungen. Praktiken wie die sogenannte Stuhltransplantation, d. h. die Anreicherung oder Ersetzung der Darmflora eines kranken Menschen durch diejenige eines gesunden Menschen, werden in Internetforen und sozialen Gesundheitsnetzwerken emotional aufgeladen diskutiert. Mit ihr werden nicht nur Hoffnungen auf Heilung verbunden, sondern auch die Idee, jenseits von etablierten Gesundheitsinstitutionen und Regulierungsinstanzen die Darmgesundheit mithilfe von DIY-Praktiken in die eigene Hand zu nehmen. Dieser Beitrag untersucht, wie Stuhltransplantationen sowohl in der DIY-Szene als auch in Selbsthilfekontexten diskutiert und praktiziert werden, warum im Fall der Darmgesundheit ein regelrechter DIY-Markt am Entstehen ist und ob die beschriebene Praxis zu mehr gesundheitspraktischer Selbstwirksamkeit führt.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 29.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 37.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  • American Gut (2016). http://americangut.org/. Zugegriffen: 30. Juli 2016.

  • Anderson, C. A., Boucher, G., Lees, C. W., Franke, A., D’Amato, M., Taylor, K. D., Lee, J. C., et al. (2011). Meta-analysis identifies 29 additional ulcerative colitis risk loci, increasing the number of confirmed associations to 47. Nature Genetics 43 (3), 246–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. L., Edney, R. J., & Whelan, K. (2012). Systematic Review: Faecal Microbiota Transplantation in the Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 36 (6), 503–516.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aronowitz, R., & Spiro, H. M. (1988). The Rise and Fall of the Psychosomatic Hypothesis in Ulcerative Colitis. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 10 (3). http://journals.lww.com/jcge/Fulltext/1988/06000/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Psychosomatic_Hypothesis.13.aspx. Zugegriffen: 06. Oktober 2017.

  • Arumugam, M., Raes, J., Pelletier, E., Le Paslier, D., Yamada, T., Mende, D. R., Fernandes, G. R., et al. (2011). Enterotypes of the human gut microbiome. Nature 473 (7346), 174–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atarashi, K., Tanoue, T., Shima, T., Imaoka, A., Kuwahara, T., Momose, Y., Cheng, G. et al. (2011). Induction of Colonic Regulatory T Cells by Indigenous Clostridium Species. Science 331 (6015), 337–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auffray, C., Chen, Z. & Hood, L. (2009). Systems medicine: the future of medical genomics and healthcare. Genome medicine 1:2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bain, L. J. (2014). „Microbiomics: The Next Big Thing?“ Penn Medicine 16. http://news.pennmedicine.org/inside/2014/07/microbiomics-the-next-big-thing.html. Zugegriffen: 06. Oktober 2017.

  • Berres, I. (2016). Darmbakterium: Eisige Stuhltransplantation hilft gegen chronischen Durchfall. SPIEGEL ONLINE. http://www.spiegel.de/gesundheit/diagnose/chronischer-durchfall-stuhltransplantation-auch-gefroren-a-1071572.html. Zugegriffen: 06. Oktober 2017.

  • Blech, J. (2013). Fäkalien-Transplantation: Ekel-Therapie heilt Darmkrankheiten. SPIEGEL ONLINE. http://www.spiegel.de/gesundheit/diagnose/stuhl-transplantation-faekalien-heilen-chronische-darmpatienten-a-878156.html. Zugegriffen: 06. Oktober 2017.

  • Borody, T. J., Paramsothy, S., & Agrawal, G. (2013). Fecal Microbiota Transplantation: Indications, Methods, Evidence, and Future Directions. Current Gastroenterology Reports 15 (8), 337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boston Women’s Health Book Collective (Hrsg.) (2011). Our bodies, ourselves. 40th anniversary Touchstone ed. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, L. J., & Aroniadis, O. C. (2013). An Overview of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation: Techniques, Indications, and Outcomes. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 78 (2), 240–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Britishgut (2016). http://britishgut.org/. Zugegriffen: 30. Juli 2016.

  • Bubela, T. M., & Caulfield, T. A. (2004). Do the print media “hype” genetic research? A comparison of newspaper stories and peer-reviewed research papers. Canadian Medical Association Journal 170 (9), 1399–1407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casati, J., Toner, B. B., de Rooy, E. C., Drossman, D. A., & Maunder, R. G. (2000). Concerns of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Review of Emerging Themes. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 45 (1), 26–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caulfield, T. (2004). Biotechnology and the Popular Press: Hype and the Selling of Science. Trends in Biotechnology 22 (7), 337–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charisius, H. (2014). 100 Billionen Freunde. Bakterien im Darm sind nicht bloß Verdauungshelfer. Wie groß ihr Einfluss auf unsere Gesundheit ist, entdecken wir gerade erst. Die Zeit. http://www.zeit.de/2014/12/mikrobiom-bakterien-darm/seite-2. Zugegriffen: 06. Oktober 2017.

  • Colman, R. J., & Rubin, D. T. (2014). Fecal Microbiota Transplantation as Therapy for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Crohn’s and Colitis 8 (12), 1569–1581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corella, D., & Ordovas, J. M. (2005). Integration of Environment and Disease into ‚Omics‘ Analysis. Current Opinion in Molecular Therapeutics 7 (6), 569–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cryan, J. F., & O’Mahony, S. M. (2011). The Microbiome-Gut-Brain Axis: From Bowel to Behavior: From Bowel to Behavior. Neurogastroenterology & Motility 23, 187–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cui, B., Honggang Wang, C. F., Wang, M., Peng, Z., Li, P., Huang, G., et al. (2015). Fecal Microbiota Transplantation through Mid-Gut for Refractory Crohn’s Disease: Safety, Feasibility, and Efficacy Trial Results: Fecal Microbiota Transplantation. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 30 (23), 51–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • CureTogether (2016). http://curetogether.com. Zugegriffen: 30. Juli 2016.

  • DCCV-Forum. Thema Stuhltransplantation (2014). https://forum.dccv.de/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1806. Zugegriffen: 30. Juli 2016.

  • Del Savio, L., Prainsack, B., Buyx, A. (2016). Crowdsourcing the Human Gut. Is crowdsourcing also ‚citizen science‘? Journal of Science Communication 15 (3). https://www.academia.edu/24601801/Crowdsourcing_the_Human_Gut._Is_crowdsourcing_also_citizen_science. Zugegriffen: 30. Juli 2016.

  • Delfanti, A. (2013). Biohackers: the politics of open science. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubriwny, T. N. (2013). The vulnerable empowered woman: feminism, postfeminism, and women’s health. Critical issues in health and medicine. New Brunswick, N.J: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duhaime-Ross, A. (2016). In search of a healthy gut, one man turned to an extreme DIY fecal transplant. The Verge. http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/4/11581994/fmt-fecal-mattertransplant-josiah-zayner-microbiome-ibs-c-diff. Zugegriffen: 30. Juli 2016.

  • Enders, G. (2014). Darm mit Charme: alles über ein unterschätztes Organ. Berlin: Ullstein.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, S. (1995). The Construction of Lay Expertise: AIDS Activism and the Forging of Credibility in the Reform of Clinical Trials. Science, Technology, & Human Values 20 (4), 408–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, S. (1996). Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge. University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finney Rutten, L. J., Hesse, B. W., St. Sauver J. L., Wilson, P., Chawla, N., Hartigan, D. B., Moser R. P., Taplin, S., Glasgow, R., & Arora, N. K. (2016). Health Self-Efficacy Among Populations with Multiple Chronic Conditions: The Value of Patient-Centered Communication. Advances in Therapy 33 (8), 1440-1451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franke, A., McGovern D: T. B., Barrett, J. C., Wang, K., Radford-Smith, G. L., Ahmad, T., Lees C. W., et al. (2010). Genome-Wide Meta-Analysis Increases to 71 the Number of Confirmed Crohn’s Disease Susceptibility Loci. Nature Genetics 42 (12), 1118–1125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franke, A., Balschun, T., Karlsen, T. H., Hedderich, J., May, S., Lu, T., Schuldt, D., et al. (2008). Replication of signals from recent studies of Crohn’s disease identifies previously unknown disease loci for ulcerative colitis. Nature Genetics 40 (6), 713–715.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritz, J. V., Desai, M. S., Shah, P., Schneider, J. G., & Wilmes, P. (2013). From meta-omics to causality: experimental models for human microbiome research. Microbiome 1:14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazzard, B. G., Price, H. L., Libby, G. W., & Dawson, A. M. (1978). The social toll of Crohn’s disease. British Medical Journal 2 (6145), 1117–1119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerson, M.-J. (2002). Psychosomatics and Psychoanalytic Theory: The Psychology of Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn’s Disease. Psychoanalytic Psychology 19 (2), 380–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gershenfeld, N. A. (2005). Fab: The coming revolution on your desktop – from personal computer to personal fabrication. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasdam, S., Oeye, C., & Thrysoee, L. (2015). Patients’ Participation in Decision-Making in the Medical Field – ‘projectification’ of Patients in a Neoliberal Framed Healthcare System: Patients‘ Participation in Decision-Making. Nursing Philosophy 16 (4), 226–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greco, M. (1993). Psychosomatic Subjects and the ‘duty to Be Well’. Personal Agency within. Economy and Society 22 (3), 357–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. A. (2016). Do-It-Yourself Medical Devices — Technology and Empowerment in American Health Care. New England Journal of Medicine 374 (4), 305–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, E. A. (2015). The intersection of microbiome and host at the skin interface: genomic-and metagenomic-based insights. Genome research 25 (10), 1514–1520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helman, C. G. (1985). Psyche, soma, and society: The social construction of psychosomatic disorders. Culture, medicine and psychiatry 9 (1), 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henwood, F., Wyatt, S., Hart, A., & Smith, J. (2003). ‘Ignorance is bliss sometimes’: constraints on the emergence of the ‘informed patient’ in the changing landscapes of health information. Sociology of Health & Illness 25 (6), 589–607.

    Google Scholar 

  • HomeFMT. FECAL TRANSPLANT (FMT) (2013). https://www.youtube.com/watch?-v=xLIndT7fuGo. Zugegriffen: 30. Juli 2016.

  • Hucklenbroich, C. (2014). ‚Darm mit Charme‘ von Giulia Enders: Vom Bäh zum Wow. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wissen/giulia-enders-hat-einen-bestseller-ueber-darmhygiene-geschrieben-12891303.html. Zugegriffen: 06. Oktober 2017.

  • Iedema, R., & Veljanova, I. C. (2014). Editorial: Lifestyle Science: Self-Healing, Co-Production and DIY. Health Sociology Review 22 (1), 2–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffries, A. (2014). The World of Do-It-Yourself Fecal Transplants (Thanks, YouTube!). Motherboard. http://motherboard.vice.com/read/a-guide-to-do-it-yourself-fecal-transplantsthanks-youtube. Zugegriffen: 31. Juli 2016.

  • Keeton, R. L., Mikocka-Walus, A., & Andrews, J. M. (2015). Concerns and Worries in People Living with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD): A Mixed Methods Study. Journal of Psychosomatic Research 78 (6), 573–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keränen, L. (2015). Biopolitics, Contagion, and Digital Health Production: Pathways for the Rhetoric of Health and Medicine. Communication Quarterly 63 (5), 504–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keulartz, J., & van den Belt, H. (2016). DIY-Bio – Economic, Epistemological and Ethical Implications and Ambivalences. Life Sciences, Society and Policy 12:1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kivits, J. (2004). Researching the’Informed Patient. Information, Communication & Society 7 (4), 510–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klitzman, R. (2012). Am I my genes? Confronting fate and family secrets in the age of genetic testing. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kostic, A. D., Xavier, R. J., & Gevers, D. (2014). The Microbiome in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Current Status and the Future Ahead. Gastroenterology 146 (6), 1489–1499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurlemann, R. (2014). Wie Bakterien im Darm unsere Gesundheit steuern. Die Welt Online. http://www.welt.de/gesundheit/article133542884/Wie-Bakterien-im-Darm-unsere-Gesundheit-steuern.html. Zugegriffen: 30. Juli 2016.

  • Leibig, T., Wilke, E., & Feiereis, H. (1985). Zur Persönlichkeitsstruktur von Patienten mit Colitis ulcerosa und Morbus Crohn, eine testpsychologische Untersuchung während der Krankheitsremission. Zeitschrift für Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychoanalyse 31 (4), 380–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, T. (2004). Disposition and determinism–genetic diagnostics in risk society. The Sociological Review 52 (4), 550–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, T. (2006a). Genetic responsibility and neo-liberal governmentality: Medical diagnosis as moral technology. In A. Beaulieu & D. A. Gabbard (Hrsg.), Michel Foucault and power today. International multidisciplinary studies in the history of the present (S. 83–91). London: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, T. (2006b). Lebenspolitik und Biomoral: Dimensionen genetischer Verantwortung. In K. Kerlof (Hrsg.), Die Verfasstheit der Wissensgesellschaft (S. 333–345). Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T. (2006). DIY Selves? Reflexivity and Habitus in Young People’s Use of the Internet for Health Information. European Journal of Cultural Studies 9 (4), 461–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Make (2013). The uBiome Citizen Science Project Interview: DIY Projects and Ideas for Makers. http://makezine.com/2013/01/29/the-ubiome-citizen-science-project-interview/. Zugegriffen: 31. Juli 2016.

  • Mitchell, A., Guyatt, G., Singer, J., Irvine, E. J., Goodacre, R., Tompkins, C., Williams, N., & Wagner, F. (1988). Quality of Life in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 10 (3), 306–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, X. C., Tickle, T. L., Sokol, H., Gevers, D., Devaney, K. L., Ward, D. V., Reyes, J. A., et al. (2012). Dysfunction of the intestinal microbiome in inflammatory bowel disease and treatment. Genome biology 13 (9), 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgen, S. (2002). Into our own hands: the women’s health movement in the United States, 1969-1990. New Brunswick, N.J: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nikolow, S. (Hrsg.) (2015). Erkenne Dich selbst!: Strategien der Sichtbarmachung des Körpers im 20. Jahrhundert. Schriften des Deutschen Hygiene-Museums Dresden, Bd. 11. Köln: Böhlau Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbet, M. C., & Scheufele, D. A. (2009). What’s next for Science Communication? Promising Directions and Lingering Distractions. American Journal of Botany 96 (10), 1767–1778.

    Google Scholar 

  • OpenBiome. (2016). http://www.openbiome.org/about/. Zugegriffen: 06. Oktober 2017.

  • PatientsLikeMe (2016). My data is going to empower the next person. https://www.patientslikeme.com/forum/plm/topics/142607?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=general_newsletter_20160427. Zugegriffen: 31.Juli 2016.

  • Probst, B., von Wietersheim, J., Wilke, E., & Feiereis, H. (1990). Soziale Integration von Morbus Crohn-und Colitis ulcerosa-Patienten: Studie zur Wechselwirkung somatischer, psychischer und sozialer Faktoren. Zeitschrift für Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychoanalyse 36 (3), 258–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rehmann-Sutter, C., & Mahr, D. (2016)., The Lived Genome. In A. Whitehead & B. Woods (Hrsg.), Edinburgh Companion to the Critical Medical Humanities (S. 87-103). Edinburgh: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, H. (2013). Finally, an Accurate Look Back at AIDS Activism in ‘Why We Fight’. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/12/15/finally-an-accurate-look-back-at-aids-activism-in-why-we-fight.html. Zugegriffen: 31. Juli 2016.

  • Schreiber, S., Rosenstiel, P., Albrecht, M., Hampe, J., & Krawczak, M. (2005). Genetics of Crohn disease, an archetypal inflammatory barrier disease. Nature Reviews Genetics 6 (5), 376–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smits, L. P., Bouter, K. E. C., de Vos, W. M., Borody, T. J., & Nieuwdorp, M. (2013). Therapeutic Potential of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation. Gastroenterology 145 (5), 946–953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tachibani, C. (2011). We are all biologists. Life Sciences Insight 1 (1), 42–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Power of Poop (2013). The Power of Poop. Promoting safe accessible fecal transplant. http://thepowerofpoop.com. Zugegriffen: 31. Juli 2016.

  • uBiome (2016). Sequence Your Microbiome – Gut Flora, Microbiota. http://ubiome.com. Zugegriffen: 31. Juli 2016.

  • Van Nood, E., Speelman, P., Nieuwdorp, M., & Keller, J. (2014). Fecal Microbiota Transplantation: Facts and Controversies. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology 30 (1), 34–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogt, H., Hofmann, B., & Getz, L. (2016). The New Holism: P4 Systems Medicine and the Medicalization of Health and Life Itself. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 19 (2), 307–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrieze, A., de Groot, P. F., Kootte, R. S., Knaapen, M., van Nood, E., & Nieuwdorp, M. (2013). Fecal Transplant: A Safe and Sustainable Clinical Therapy for Restoring Intestinal Microbial Balance in Human Disease? Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology 27 (1), 127–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y., & Kasper, L. H. (2014). The Role of Microbiome in Central Nervous System Disorders. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity 38, 1-12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz, M. (2004). Ist der informierte Patient auch ein mündiger Patient?“ Patienteninformation und -betreuung bei Multipler Sklerose in der Rehabilitation. Masterarbeit im Studiengang Consumer Health Care an der Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin. http://www.selbsthilfe-kontaktstellen.de/data/Fachpublikationen/2005/DAGSHG-Jahrbuch-05-Wirtz.pdf. Zugegriffen: 03. Dezember 2017.

  • Young, K. A. (2014). Of Poop and Parasites: Unethical FDA Overregulation. Food & Drug Law Journal 69 (4), 555–563.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bielefeld, Deutschland

    Dana Mahr

Authors
  1. Dana Mahr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dana Mahr .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CC Neue Technologien, Fraunhofer ISI , Karlsruhe, Germany

    Nils B. Heyen

  2. Friedrich Schiedel-Lehrstuhl Wissen, Tech Univ München, München, Bayern, Germany

    Sascha Dickel

  3. Research Ctr for Biotechnology, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Anne Brüninghaus

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mahr, D. (2019). Mikrobiomische Selbstwirksamkeit. In: Heyen, N., Dickel, S., Brüninghaus, A. (eds) Personal Health Science. Öffentliche Wissenschaft und gesellschaftlicher Wandel. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-16428-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-16428-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-16427-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-16428-7

  • eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation