Index Home About Blog
From: Steve Harris <>
Subject: Re: alternative to flagyl for intestinal/stomach flora?
Date: 30 Aug 2005 14:04:54 -0700
Message-ID: <>

marcus johannsen wrote:
> I was prescribed flagyl for strong odor in my stool and coating of my
> tongue.
> For 2 months, it worked like magic. No odor in the stool, no coated
> tongue, healty saliva, and good taste in the mouth.
> Afterwards, symptoms came back which means the bacteria in question had
> become resistant and survived.
> When flagyl doesn't work, what are the alternatives?
> I recently heard that flagyl shouldn't be used alone but in conjunction
> with other antibiotics. What are they?
> I also read that fluconazole is used as a substitute in people who
> develop a resistance to flagyl, but isn't fluconazole(aka diflucan) an
> anti-fungal?  do anti-fungals also kill bacteria?
> Finally, are there special bacteriological clinics or labs that test
> for the srains of bacteria that may be causing odors in the stool or
> funny taste in the mouth?
> thanks in advance.


Strong stool odor is not a medical problem. The only people whose
personal feces are not odiferous, are certain high government

Mouth odor which is stopped by Flagyl is probably due to anaerobes.
Treatment is a good going-over by a dental hygienist (root planing,
etc), and a personal program of tongue scraping and regular gargling
with hydrogen peroxide, and perhaps a prescription mouthwash like
Periodex. Long term systemic anaerobic antibiotics are NOT the answer
to such things, and will end up doing you eventually more harm than
good. Occasionally tetacycline-class drugs are given for periodontal
disease, but their effect is not on anaerobes, and probably isn't even
an antibiotic effect per se. So my comments there do not apply. Take
doxycycline or minocycline if the dentist wants you do.


From: Steve Harris <>
Subject: Re: is it safe to rinse your mouth with hydrogen peroxide everyday?
Date: 30 Aug 2005 21:09:35 -0700
Message-ID: <>

Rich wrote:
> "Steven Bornfeld" <> wrote in message
> >
> >
> > Rich wrote:
> >> "marcus johannsen" <> wrote in message
> >>
> >>
> >>>rinsing with this solution(half peroxide/half water) controls some of
> >>>the mucus in my mouth.
> >>>
> >>>the bottle says do not exceed use for 7 days.
> >>>
> >>>is it safe to use this solution for rinsing everyday?
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Rinsing with H2O2 before flossing is an excellent way to prevent gum
> >> disease. I've been doing it for years with no ill effects.
> >>
> >> --Rich
> >
> > I'd emphasize the flossing, rather than the rinsing.
> >
> > Steve
> Agreed. But when I use the peroxide first, the flossing carries the stuff
> down to where the anaerobes like to hide, and I feel like the flossing is
> doing more.


Funny. I have the impression that flossing gets the crud out so the
peroxide can get to the pockets where the bugs like to hide, so IT'S
doing more.

Of course, no doubt that flossing is the best of all things you can do,
and nothing replaces it.

Peroxide may not affect most normal mouth flora, but the smelly
anaerobes just HATE it. For obvious reasons.


From: Steve Harris <>
Subject: Re: is it safe to rinse your mouth with hydrogen peroxide everyday?
Date: 31 Aug 2005 13:05:41 -0700
Message-ID: <>

Steven Bornfeld wrote:
> 	Nah, not hardly.  It will give your tongue a funny whitish appearance
> though.

For about 5 minutes. But that's not discoloration of tissue, it's just
a zillion little oxygen bubbles, which are white. Once the reaction
ceases, the tissue goes back to normal color.

As somebody has pointed out, every cell in your body has catalase for
dealing with hydrogen peroxide. Catalase, in fact, is the fastest
enzyme yet to be found.

Food Chem Toxicol. 2000 Nov;38(11):1021-41.

Assessment of the carcinogenicity associated with oral exposures to
hydrogen peroxide.

DeSesso JM, Lavin AL, Hsia SM, Mavis RD.

Mitretek Systems, McLean, Virginia, USA.

Concern regarding hydrogen peroxide (H(2)O(2)) carcinogenicity arises
from its ability to act as a strong oxidizing agent. In short-term
genotoxicity tests, H(2)O(2) has given predominantly positive results;
however, these assays have been performed using either bacterial
strains engineered to be exquisitely sensitive to oxidant damage, or
mammalian cells deficient in antioxidant enzymes. Significantly, the
addition of antioxidant protective measures
(normally present in vivo) to these assay systems protects against
H(2)O(2) genotoxicity. In most whole animal studies, H(2)O(2) exposure
neither initiates nor promotes tumors. In mice, however, 0.4% H(2)O(2)
in drinking water was reported to induce hyperplastic lesions of the
duodenum and to erode areas in the glandular stomach epithelium. Owing
to the chemistry of dilute H(2)O(2) solutions and the
anatomy/physiology of the gastrointestinal tract, it is
unlikely that orally ingested H(2)O(2) reaches the duodenum. Instead,
greatly decreased water consumption and the resultant abrasion of the
luminal lining on ingestion of pelleted dry rodent chow is the most
likely cause of the observed gastric and duodenal lesions following
H(2)O(2) administration in drinking water. Significantly, when hamsters
received high doses of H(2)O(2) by gastric intubation (and water intake
was not affected), the gastric and duodenal epithelia appeared normal.
In-depth analysis of the available data supports the conclusion that
oral ingestion of H(2)O(2) should not be considered a carcinogenic

Publication Types:
    Review, Tutorial

PMID: 11038240 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Index Home About Blog