Post-publication Peer Review (P3R) is an online forum for ongoingreview peer review. To submit a P3R please go to the article you wish to respond to and click on the link that reads "P3Rs: Submit a Response." Submission of P3Rs are open to all health care professionals and experts in related fields.

Post-publication Peer Reviews to:

REVIEW ARTICLE:
Cornelius W. Van Niel, Chris Feudtner, Michelle M. Garrison, and Dimitri A. Christakis
Lactobacillus Therapy for Acute Infectious Diarrhea in Children: A Meta-analysis
Pediatrics 2002; 109: 678-684 [Abstract] [Full text] [PDF]
*P3Rs: Submit a response to this article

P3Rs published:

[Read P3R] Live versus killed Lactobacilllus
Maurice Vanbellinghen   (3 February 2003)

Live versus killed Lactobacilllus 3 February 2003
Top
Maurice Vanbellinghen,
health journalist
belgian consumers association

Send letter to journal:
Re: Live versus killed Lactobacilllus

mvanbellinghen{at}test-aankoop.be Maurice Vanbellinghen

The autors state : "We did not find (...) that the effect of Lactobacillus on diarrhea duration was modified by (...) live versus killed Lactobacillus preparation". From this I infer that the authors suppose that killed Lactobacillus- bacteria are or can be as effective as live Lactobacillus-bacteria. Yet, in Table 1 (Included Studies)I see only 1 study having used killed L. acidophilus (Simakachorn et al.) Furthermore, is it methodologically correct to include in a meta-analysis such differents products? Killed bacteria are not live bacteria, I would say. Seems a bit strange to me. And how can one then conclude, on the basis of only 1 study, that killed bacteria could be effective in reducing the duration of diarrhea in children?