How emigrating to another country can change our microbiome

microbiome

When people immigrate to the United States, their microbiomes quickly transition to a U.S.-associated microbiome, according to research published [November 1] in the journal Cell. Changes to their internal population of bacteria start to occur within nine months, and the longer someone lives in the U.S., the closer their microbiome is to that of a U.S.-born person.

Minnesota is home to Hmong and Karen refugees, minority ethnic groups from Southeast Asia. The research team collected stool samples from over 500 Hmong and Karen individuals, including people living in Thailand, who represented the pre-immigration cohort, people who recently moved to the U.S., and second-generation immigrants. They also took samples from 36 U.S.-born people with European-American ancestry to serve as a control.

Analysis of the stool samples showed that levels of Prevotella bacteria in the immigrant microbiomes went down, and levels of the western-associated Bacteroides bacteria went up. The ratio tipped more and more in favor of Bacteroides from the first- to second-generation of immigrants.

A different microbiome doesn’t necessarily mean a worse one, but their microbiomes didn’t just change—the mixture of bacteria that inhabited their guts became significantly less diverse.

Understanding the factors that transform the immigrant microbiome so quickly might help researchers develop ways to stave off that transition, particularly if future work shows that a changed microbiome does, in fact, have a negative health effects.

Read full, original post: Immigrants to the U.S. Rapidly Gain a New Microbiome

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-04-23-at-11.00.36-AM
Regulators' dilemma: Thalidomide, Metformin, and the cost of getting drug approvals wrong
Picture1-5
Science Disinformation Gap: The transatlantic battle over social media and censorship
ChatGPT-Image-May-13-2026-11_56_08-AM
After slashing global health aid by $19 Billion, Trump moves to tap $2.1 billion more—to cover shutdown costs
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-08_39_41-PM
GLP podcast: Big Pharma, Big Ag, Big Food—health harming industries or life-saving innovators?
ChatGPT Image May 10, 2026, 08_16_59 PM 2
Overmedicalization? RFK Jr.’s antidepressant crackdown raises conflict questions over his fee stake in Wisner Baum, the tort firm built on suing drug makers
Screenshot-2026-05-12-at-9.58.31-PM
'He seems fine': Marty Makary out as FDA commissioner
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-13-2026-02_20_22-PM
Viewpoint: Misinformation infodemic? Why assessing evidence is so challenging 
Screenshot-2026-05-01-at-1.29.41-PM
Viewpoint: What happens when whole grains meet modern food manufacturing? Labels don’t tell the whole story.
Picture1-1
Cooling the planet with balloons: Could a geoengineering gamble slow global warming?
S
As vaccine rejectionism spreads, measles may be taking a more dangerous turn
Screenshot-2026-05-11-104424
Hantavirus outbreak research: Trump administration shut down study last year on rodent-to-human transmission
images
The never-ending GMO debate: Pros and cons
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.