Un microbiote. Un microbiote est défini lorsqu'un ensemble de micro-organismes vit dans un écosystème précis. Par exemple, nos intestins abritent leur propre microbiote. “On parle d'une grande diversité d'espèces (bactéries, champignons, etc.) auxquelles on peut ajouter les virus. Derrière cette grande diversité d'espèces se cache une grande diversité de fonctions, relativement centrales au fonctionnement des écosystèmes” explique Christophe Mougel.
Cette approche accorde un rôle majeur aux vétérinaires et propriétaires ou gestionnaires d’animaux ainsi qu'aux personnes en contact régulier avec les faunes domestique et sauvage et l’environnement (et en particulier : éleveurs mais aussi pêcheurs, chasseurs, forestiers et gestionnaires d'espaces protégés). Pour l'OIE, sa mise en œuvre passe par « de nouveaux mécanismes amenant tous ces acteurs à s’informer mutuellement et à agir d’une manière concertée, en liaison avec les gestionnaires de la santé publique qui travaillent le plus souvent dans nos pays membres sous l’égide des ministères de la Santé, qu’ils soient fonctionnaires de l’État, personnels de collectivités ou médecins libéraux »3.
Professor Alan Boobis OBE, Toxicologist, Division of Medicine, Imperial College London states that "The body’s own detoxification systems are remarkably sophisticated and versatile. They have to be, as the natural environment that we evolved in is hostile. It is remarkable that people are prepared to risk seriously disrupting these systems with unproven ‘detox’ diets, which could well do more harm than good."
But you might have seen many people around you, who never seem to get an acute illness. People who have never had a cold or never had a fever in ten years. Not all of these people are healthy. In fact many of these people are more ill than their counterparts who keep getting their occasional acutes. I say this because these people are not super humans and most of them are not in ‘ideal’ health either. The fact is that these people do get affected by environmental factors and other stresses. But the result of these forces is not seen on physical plane. Such people are more affected on the mental and emotional plane. They become ‘dis-eased’ but their disease is not easily apparent on the physical level. If you want to cross-check my statement, then go to a mental asylum and enquire about the rate of prevalence of acute ailments. You will find it extremely low.
This may seem a bit idealistic to some, but here we are talking about the ideals. But even this definition does not cover it all. Let me give an example. There are lots of people around us who catch a cold with every change of season or with every sudden change of temperature. Now in common parlance, we say that these people have low immunity. But the fact is that most of these people have normal blood counts and normal immunological tests. So when these people are not down with cold they are in perfect health as per the above definition. And yet they are not perfectly healthy. Their system breaks down with every stressful condition. So we can add another aspect to the above definition of physical health:
Finally, while many testimonial and anecdotal accounts exist of health improvements following a "detox", these are more likely attributable to the placebo effect; where people actually believe that they are doing something good and healthy. Yet, there is a severe lack of quantitative data. Some changes recommended in certain "detox" lifestyles are also found in mainstream medical advice (such as consuming a diet high in fruits and vegetables). These changes can often produce beneficial effects in and of themselves, and it is accordingly difficult to separate these effects from those caused by the more controversial detoxification recommendations.
The first definition of health has a basic fault in it – it tries to define a primary state through a secondary state. Health is a primary state. It cannot be fully defined through a secondary phenomenon, disease. And then there is a larger question. Does being free from any disease which can be given a name, makes one healthy? I think, no. I know so many people who have no known disease and yet they are not healthy. I know a woman who likes to show off her tons of jewelry to those who can’t have it; a woman who snobs at everyone. She has no known disease. But would you call her healthy? I know a man, who is a couch potato. He goes to his job and does nothing else. He does not help his wife with family responsibilities. He behaves with her as if she is his servant. He has no known disease. But would you call him healthy? I know a man who brags about his achievements till everybody around drops dead. He has no known disease. But would you call him healthy?
Cette initiative promeut donc une vision holistique et intégrée de « La santé » (c'est-à-dire sans isoler la santé humaine, de la santé animale et de celle de l'environnement, et en cherchant à mieux comprendre et utiliser les interactions complexes qui existent entre ces trois domaines). Elle encourage une collaboration transdisciplinaire ou multidisciplinaire (à co-égalité) et une communication interdisciplinaire entre les domaines vétérinaires et médicaux (en incluant les médecins ostéopathes, dentistes, la santé mentale, etc.) ainsi qu'avec d'autres scientifiques concernés par la santé, les soins et l’environnement (santé environnementale) et avec des éthologues, anthropologues, économistes, sociologues, etc.