Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The mites in the skin of our faces

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 76 posts

Re: The mites in the skin of our faces

#61

Post by isbn »

polishdude20 wrote: post #58
feet wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to stop lathering ourselves up with soap all the time. Like mites, we have a community living on our skin, our microbiome and soap decimates that community that helps us

Does it though? As long as the soap isn't antibacterial, it shouldn't exterminate everything.

> As long as the soap isn't antibacterial, it shouldn't exterminate everything.

All soap is antibacterial.

Re: The mites in the skin of our faces

#62

Post by stephen_g »

ericbarrett wrote: post #56
sverhagen wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a totally unrelated aside, would one be able to express that distinction using "of" versus "off"?

You could use all the words: "get some from off of your face"

Noting of course that “off of” is mostly an American-English construction (although it does also pop up in some of the more ‘working class’ British dialects like cockney).

Re: The mites in the skin of our faces

#63

Post by feet »

isbn wrote: post #61
polishdude20 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it though? As long as the soap isn't antibacterial, it shouldn't exterminate everything.

> As long as the soap isn't antibacterial, it shouldn't exterminate everything. All soap is antibacterial.

This is true. Soap's purpose is to literally break down the cell walls of bacteria, some are more resistant so antibacterials are needed depending on the constituents of the cell wall

Re: The mites in the skin of our faces

#64

Post by contingo »

LoveMortuus wrote: post #17

But if they're becoming symbionts does the 'symbiont' part just mean that they can't live without the other? I was under a belief that in a symbiotic relationship both parties benefit for the relationship, but I don't see and fail to find what humans gain from this relationship. If anyone knows please do share!

The biological term "symbiosis", by itself, in the strict sense, doesn't imply a benefit for both parties, it just describes a persistent and physically close association between two species. Hence parasitism or commensalism are also forms of symbiosis and so are associations which are not obligate, but facultative (both bionts can live without the other, however prevalent the association). "Obligate symbiotic mutualism" is the category for what you're describing. "Endosymbiosis" implies such an integrated relationship that it is at least obligate for the endosymbiont. In this human-mite case there are various claims of benefits and drawbacks to humans from the relationship, and the symbiosis is certainly already obligate for the mites.

Re: The mites in the skin of our faces

#65

Post by coryfklein »

Super fascinating to see the general trends of genetic drift that happen given the conditions of:

* low competition

* host symbiosis

* significant inbreeding

I wonder how much you can analogize this to a more complex organism like the grey wolf's transition to the domesticated dog? You could potentially use this research to extrapolate trends in canine evolution! As the mites have shed DNA that helped them survive in more hostile environments, we see dogs losing traits that allowed them to survive in their ancestral environment as well; pack hunting behavior, size, ear shape.

Re: The mites in the skin of our faces

#66

Post by coryfklein »

havblue wrote: post #53

>They become active at night and move between follicles looking to mate. Clearly, as good a reason as any to shower in the morning instead of the evening.

As the article explains, the mites can no longer produce melanin to support a day-night cycle and instead rely on the melanin the human produces at dusk, which means by the time morning comes they have probably already returned to the pores. So if, for some odd reason, you wanted to reduce the populations of this symbiotic organism then you would want to climb in bed, relax for a few minutes, then hop out and shower.

Re: The mites in the skin of our faces

#67

Post by coryfklein »

LoveMortuus wrote: post #17

But if they're becoming symbionts does the 'symbiont' part just mean that they can't live without the other? I was under a belief that in a symbiotic relationship both parties benefit for the relationship, but I don't see and fail to find what humans gain from this relationship. If anyone knows please do share!

The article calls it out specifically: they are microscopic pore-cleaning machines!

> Mites have been blamed for a lot of things. The long association with humans might suggest that they also could have simple but important beneficial roles, for example, in keeping the pores in our face unplugged.

Re: The mites in the skin of our faces

#68

Post by coryfklein »

polishdude20 wrote: post #58
feet wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to stop lathering ourselves up with soap all the time. Like mites, we have a community living on our skin, our microbiome and soap decimates that community that helps us

Does it though? As long as the soap isn't antibacterial, it shouldn't exterminate everything.

These aren't bacteria though, they are animals. It's unclear whether antibacterial soap has much of a detrimental effect on them at all.
Post reply on HN