Probiotics and Gut Health: Does Your Microbiome Affect Your Gains?

The gut microbiome is the most oversold concept in fitness nutrition right now, and it earned that status honestly. The underlying science is real and genuinely strange. You are carrying somewhere in the neighborhood of 38 trillion bacterial cells, most of them in your colon, collectively encoding vastly more genes than your own genome. They ferment fiber you cannot digest, manufacture vitamin K and several B vitamins, train your immune system, and produce short-chain fatty acids that feed your intestinal lining.

That is a legitimately interesting system. It is also the perfect substrate for supplement marketing, because it is complex enough that almost nobody can check the claims, and because "optimize your microbiome" sounds like the kind of upstream lever that fixes everything downstream.

So here is the question this article answers: does any of this move the needle on training outcomes, and if so, which specific products at which specific doses? The honest answer is narrower than the marketing and wider than the skeptics allow. There are three legitimate uses with real trial data. Muscle growth is not one of them.

What a Probiotic Actually Is

The working definition comes from a 2013 expert panel convened by the International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics, published by Hill and colleagues in Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology in 2014. They reaffirmed the FAO/WHO wording: live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host.

Every clause in that sentence is doing work, and every clause is routinely ignored on product labels.

• Live. Dead organisms are not probiotics. Heat, moisture and time kill them. A powder that sat on a warehouse shelf through a Phoenix summer may contain a fraction of its label claim by the time you open it.
• Adequate amounts. The dose has to match the dose that produced the benefit in a trial, which varies from 1 billion to 50 billion CFU depending on the strain. There is no universal number.
• Confer a health benefit. Demonstrated in humans, for that organism. A bacterium isolated from a healthy person's gut is not a probiotic until someone runs the study.

The ISAPP panel was explicit that a product containing undefined microbes, or defined microbes with no evidence behind them, does not qualify for the term at all. The regulatory reality is that nobody enforces this. Under DSHEA, a supplement company does not need FDA pre-approval to put "probiotic" on a bottle, the same structural gap we covered in the multivitamin label-reading breakdown.

The Strain Problem: Why Most Labels Are Meaningless

This is the section that should change how you shop, so it goes early.

Bacteria are named at three levels: genus, species, and strain. Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG breaks down as genus Lactobacillus, species rhamnosus, strain GG. The strain is the specific isolate that got tested, and it is the level at which effects live.

The 2019 International Society of Sports Nutrition position stand on probiotics, authored by Jäger and colleagues in the Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, states the point without hedging: probiotic health benefits are strain- and dose-dependent. Two strains of the same species can differ as much functionally as two unrelated species, because the genes governing bile-acid tolerance, adhesion, enzyme production and immune signaling vary strain to strain.

What that means practically: a study showing Bacillus coagulans GBI-30, 6086 improved amino acid absorption is evidence about Bacillus coagulans GBI-30, 6086. It is not evidence about Bacillus coagulans generally, and it is certainly not evidence about the unnamed "probiotic blend" a protein powder company added so they could put a fourth bullet point on the tub.

The multi-strain mega-count product deserves a specific comment because it dominates retail shelves. Fifty billion CFU across twelve unspecified strains is a marketing spec sheet, and it also carries a real cost: with twelve organisms in a capsule, you have no idea which one is responsible if you feel better, and no idea which one is responsible if you bloat for a week. Single-strain or well-defined multi-strain formulas are diagnosable. Kitchen-sink formulas are not.

Does Training Change Your Microbiome?

Yes, and the direction is favorable, which is the first thing worth knowing because it reframes what a supplement could plausibly add.

Clarke and colleagues published the foundational work in Gut in 2014, comparing an international rugby union squad against two control groups matched for physical size, age and sex. The athletes had higher gut microbial diversity than non-athletes, with greater representation across a wide range of bacterial families. Diversity is one of the few microbiome metrics that tracks reliably with health outcomes across studies.

The authors were careful about attribution, and their caution is the useful part. A substantial share of the difference tracked with protein intake, which was far higher in the athletes. Exercise and the diet that accompanies serious training are entangled, and this study could not fully separate them. Later work has largely supported an independent effect of exercise on diversity, but the honest summary is that training hard and eating like someone who trains hard both push in the same direction.

Then there is the study that launched a thousand headlines. Scheiman and colleagues published in Nature Medicine in 2019, sampling Boston Marathon runners before and after the race. Veillonella species increased in relative abundance after the marathon. Veillonella is unusual: it uses lactate as its sole carbon source, converting it to propionate. Metagenomic analysis of elite athletes found every gene in the lactate-to-propionate pathway at higher relative abundance post-exercise.

Then they tested causality. Mice given Veillonella atypica isolated from a runner ran about 13% longer on a treadmill to exhaustion than mice given a control microbe that cannot metabolize lactate. Delivering propionate directly into the colon reproduced the effect.

That is a beautiful piece of science, and it is a mouse result. No commercially available Veillonella probiotic has demonstrated performance improvement in a human trial. The mechanism is plausible, the translation is unproven, and the gap between the two is where supplement marketing lives. Any product invoking this study to sell you something today is selling you a mouse.

Training already improves your microbiome. A probiotic is not fixing a deficit created by lifting. It is a targeted intervention for a specific problem, and if you do not have the problem, you do not need the intervention.

Protein Absorption: The Best Case for Lifters

This is the most directly relevant mechanism, and it is worth understanding precisely because it is also the most overstated.

Certain probiotic organisms produce proteases and peptidases in the small intestine. In theory, more enzymatic breakdown means more free amino acids available for absorption from a given protein dose. Bacillus coagulans GBI-30, 6086 (marketed as BC30) is the most-studied strain here, in part because it is spore-forming and survives stomach acid, which most Lactobacillus strains do poorly.

Jäger and colleagues ran a crossover trial with 30 participants who took 25 g of milk protein concentrate with or without BC30 for two weeks, separated by a three-week washout, then measured post-meal blood amino acid curves. Adding BC30 changed the absorption profile, with greater between-group differences in area under the curve and peak concentration for several amino acids in women than in men.

The plant protein result is larger and more useful. A trial pairing 20 g of pea protein with two Lacticaseibacillus paracasei strains (5 billion CFU each, two weeks, 15 physically active men) reported significant increases across methionine, histidine and the branched-chain amino acids, with leucine up roughly 23%, isoleucine up 26%, and valine up 21% versus pea protein plus placebo.

Leucine is the specific amino acid that triggers muscle protein synthesis, which we covered in the protein intake guide. Pea protein is lower in methionine and somewhat lower in leucine per gram than whey, which is exactly why a 20% absorption bump is worth more to a pea protein user than to a whey user.

Note the pattern. The absorption benefit scales with how suboptimal your protein situation already is. If you are hitting 2 g per kg from high-quality complete sources, absorption is not your limiting factor and no probiotic is going to make it one. Our protein powder buyer's guide makes the same argument about digestive enzyme blends: they solve a problem most lifters do not have.

Soreness, Recovery, and Body Composition

The recovery data is more interesting than the muscle-building data, mostly because it measures something probiotics might actually influence.

Jäger and colleagues published a 2016 crossover trial in PeerJ with 29 recreationally trained men. Participants took 20 g of casein alone or 20 g of casein plus 1 billion CFU of BC30 for two weeks, then completed a damaging exercise bout. The probiotic group showed significantly better perceived recovery at 24 and 72 hours and less soreness at 72 hours. Creatine kinase, the standard blood marker of muscle damage, rose 266.8% in the protein-only condition versus 137.7% with the probiotic, though that between-group difference reached only a trend (p = 0.08).

Read that carefully. The subjective outcomes hit significance, the objective marker showed a large numerical difference that did not, and the sample was 29 people. This is a promising early trial, not a settled finding. The mechanism proposed is reduced inflammatory signaling plus better amino acid delivery during the repair window.

The body composition question got a cleaner answer, and it was negative. Townsend and colleagues published in Sports in 2018: 25 Division I baseball players, double-blind and placebo-controlled, 1 billion CFU per day of Bacillus subtilis DE111 through a 12-week offseason training block. The finding on the outcome most people care about was blunt. No differences in body composition or physical performance between groups. The probiotic group did show significantly lower TNF-alpha, an inflammatory cytokine, with no other biochemical marker separating.

That combination is the honest summary of the entire category for lifters. Inflammatory and perceptual markers move. Muscle and performance do not. If a probiotic helps you, it helps by letting you train more consistently, not by adding tissue.

Which is worth putting in perspective, because consistency is the variable that actually builds bodies. A supplement that shaves a day off your soreness or keeps you out of bed during flu season is contributing through attendance. That is a legitimate contribution. It is also a much smaller one than the ad copy implies.

GI Symptoms and Leaky Gut During Hard Training

This is where the evidence is strongest, and it is also the use case most lifters do not need.

Prolonged intense exercise, particularly in heat, shunts blood away from the gut toward working muscle. That ischemia damages the intestinal epithelium and increases permeability, letting bacterial endotoxin cross into circulation. The result is the nausea, cramping, and urgent bathroom problems that endurance athletes know well and that most people call runner's gut. Depending on the survey, 30 to 90% of endurance athletes report GI symptoms during competition.

Pugh and colleagues published in the European Journal of Applied Physiology in 2019. Twenty-four recreational runners took either placebo or 25 billion CFU daily of a four-strain blend (Lactobacillus acidophilus CUL60 and CUL21, Bifidobacterium bifidum CUL20, Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis CUL34) for 28 days before a marathon. Moderate GI symptoms declined during weeks three and four of supplementation in the probiotic group but not placebo, and GI symptom severity during the final third of the marathon was significantly lower with the probiotic.

Note the strain list and the four-week runway. Both matter. The effect required nearly a month to develop, which rules out taking a capsule the morning of an event and expecting anything.

For a lifter, the relevance depends entirely on what your training looks like. A 75-minute session of heavy compounds in an air-conditioned gym does not produce meaningful gut ischemia. A long ruck in summer heat, a hybrid endurance block, or a two-hour training session in a hot garage might. If you have never had exercise-related GI symptoms, this section is not about you. If your conditioning work reliably wrecks your stomach, this is the one place probiotics have earned their keep.

Sick Days: The Most Underrated Benefit

Here is the outcome that probably matters most to the average serious lifter and gets discussed least.

Hao and colleagues published a Cochrane systematic review in 2015 pooling 12 randomized trials and 3,720 participants on probiotics for preventing acute upper respiratory tract infections. Probiotics reduced the odds of experiencing at least one acute URTI episode, with an odds ratio of 0.53 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.76). Participants on probiotics also had shorter episodes and fewer antibiotic prescriptions.

Cochrane graded the evidence as low quality, driven by heterogeneous strains, inconsistent dosing, and unclear risk of bias in several trials. That grade is a real caveat and it is not a dismissal. The direction of effect has been consistent across a lot of independent work.

Why this matters for lifters: heavy training blocks transiently suppress immune function, and there is a reason athletes get sick during peak weeks. Do the arithmetic on the cost of illness. A respiratory infection costs you five to ten training days, plus a week of degraded performance coming back, plus disrupted sleep and appetite while you are sick. Losing eight sessions to a cold does more damage to a training block than any supplement in this article could plausibly repair.

That framing puts probiotics in a different category. The realistic pitch is not "get bigger." It is "miss fewer weeks." That is a smaller and more believable claim, and it is the one with the best supporting evidence base.

Why Probiotics Do Not Stay

The mental model most people carry is reseeding: your gut got depleted, you add good bacteria, they take up residence, you are fixed. The best available human data says that is close to entirely wrong.

Zmora, Suez and colleagues published in Cell in 2018, and the methodology is why the study matters. Rather than relying on stool samples, which show what passed through, they used upper endoscopy and colonoscopy to sample the actual gut mucosa where colonization would have to happen. Subjects took an 11-strain probiotic or placebo.

Three findings:

• Colonization was person-specific. Some people were permissive, with the strains establishing on the mucosa. Others resisted colonization entirely. The difference was predictable from baseline host and microbiome features.
• Stool did not predict mucosa. Detecting the strains in stool told researchers nothing about whether they had colonized the gut lining, which invalidates the standard method most earlier studies relied on.
• Effects were transient and individualized. The impact on community structure and gut gene expression was temporary.

The companion paper from the same group found something more surprising: after a course of antibiotics, probiotic supplementation actually delayed the return of the native microbiome compared with letting it recover on its own, while an autologous fecal transplant restored it fastest. That is the opposite of the standard "take probiotics with your antibiotics" advice, and it is one study rather than a consensus. Cochrane-level evidence does support specific strains, particularly Saccharomyces boulardii and Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, for reducing antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Reasonable reading: use a validated strain if you are getting diarrhea from antibiotics, and do not assume you are helping your long-term microbiome by doing it.

The practical implication of transience is straightforward. A probiotic behaves like a medication, exerting effects while it is passing through your gut and stopping when you stop taking it. Nobody is building a permanent colony. That reframes both the value proposition and the cost, because it means the expense is indefinite rather than a one-time repair.

Fermented Foods vs. Capsules

For general gut health as opposed to a specific clinical target, the food answer looks better than the capsule answer, and there is a controlled trial saying so.

Wastyk and colleagues published in Cell in 2021 from Stanford. Thirty-six healthy adults were randomized to 10 weeks of either a high-fermented-food diet (yogurt, kefir, fermented cottage cheese, kimchi and other fermented vegetables, vegetable brine drinks, kombucha) or a high-fiber diet (legumes, seeds, whole grains, nuts, vegetables, fruit).

The fermented food group increased overall gut microbial diversity, with larger servings producing larger effects, and showed decreases across 19 inflammatory proteins, including interleukin-6. The high-fiber group showed neither: no average increase in diversity and no decrease in the inflammatory panel over the same 10 weeks.

The fiber result surprised the researchers and deserves an honest caveat rather than a headline. Ten weeks is short for microbiome remodeling, and the authors suggested that participants whose baseline microbiomes lacked the fiber-degrading machinery could not immediately capitalize on a fiber load. Nobody involved concluded fiber is useless, and the enormous epidemiological literature tying fiber intake to health outcomes has not been overturned by one 10-week trial. What it does show is that fermented foods produce faster and more consistent microbiome changes.

Two things that do not count: shelf-stable pasteurized sauerkraut sold in the condiment aisle has no live organisms left, and sourdough bread is baked, which kills everything. Look for raw or unpasteurized products in the refrigerated case.

Prebiotics, Fiber, and Feeding What You Already Have

A prebiotic is a substrate selectively used by host microorganisms to confer a health benefit. In practice: fermentable fiber that feeds the bacteria you already have. Common forms are inulin, fructooligosaccharides, galactooligosaccharides, and resistant starch.

The logical argument for prebiotics over probiotics is decent. Your existing microbiome is already adapted to you and already colonizing your gut, which sidesteps the whole colonization problem from the Cell data. When gut bacteria ferment these substrates they produce short-chain fatty acids -- butyrate, propionate, acetate -- and butyrate is the primary fuel source for colonocytes.

The complication is dose-dependent GI distress. Inulin at 10 g or more per day causes gas and bloating in a large fraction of people, and a subset with IBS-type symptoms react badly at much lower doses. Nobody should start a fiber supplement at a full dose.

Food-first is the better path here too, for the same reason it is with protein: whole food sources come with a package.

• Resistant starch: cooked-and-cooled potatoes or rice, green bananas, oats, legumes. The cook-cool step converts a meaningful fraction of digestible starch to resistant starch, which also matters for anyone doing batch meal prep.
• Inulin-type fructans: onions, garlic, leeks, asparagus, artichokes, chicory root.
• Beta-glucan: oats and barley.
• Mixed fiber: beans, lentils, berries.

Most people in a Western diet get 15 to 17 g of fiber a day against recommendations near 25 to 38 g. Closing that gap with food will do more for your gut than any capsule, and it costs nothing beyond grocery choices. If you are in a deep cut and fiber is getting squeezed out by calorie budget, that is one of the few situations where a modest supplement is the practical answer -- see the cutting guide for how fiber intake tends to collapse in a deficit.

How to Read a Probiotic Label

Six checks, in priority order.

1. Strain designation on every organism. Genus, species, and strain code, like Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG or Bacillus coagulans GBI-30, 6086. If any organism is listed at species level only, you cannot verify it and should assume no specific benefit from it.
2. CFU guaranteed at expiration, not at manufacture. Live organisms die during storage. "At time of manufacture" is a legal way to print a number you will never actually consume.
3. Dose matching the published trials for that strain. Look up the strain, find the dose that produced the effect, and buy that dose. More is not better, and the range across strains is enormous.
4. Third-party testing. NSF, NSF Certified for Sport, USP Verified, or Informed Sport. This matters for identity verification as much as for contamination, because misidentified organisms are a documented problem in this category.
5. Storage requirements stated and honored. Some strains need refrigeration, some are shelf-stable. Spore-forming Bacillus strains are genuinely robust. If a delicate strain shipped in a hot truck and sat on a warm shelf, the count on the label is fiction.
6. A specific claim you can trace. If the marketing says "supports gut health" and nothing more precise, there is probably nothing more precise to say.

Side Effects and Who Should Skip It

For healthy adults the safety record is good. The typical complaint is gas, bloating, and mild abdominal discomfort in the first several days to a week, which usually resolves. Starting at half dose for the first week reduces it.

The serious risks are concentrated in specific populations, and they are not hypothetical. Live organisms crossing a compromised intestinal barrier or entering the bloodstream through a catheter have caused documented bacteremia and fungemia, including Saccharomyces fungemia in patients with central lines.

Do not start a probiotic without physician clearance if you are:

• Immunocompromised, whether from disease, chemotherapy, or immunosuppressive drugs
• Living with a central venous catheter or other indwelling line
• Diagnosed with short bowel syndrome or significant intestinal barrier damage
• Critically ill or recently post-surgical, particularly abdominal surgery
• Pregnant and dealing with any complication (routine pregnancy is generally fine, but ask)
• An infant or a premature neonate, where dosing is a clinical decision

One trial deserves specific mention because it is the reason clinicians stopped treating probiotics as universally harmless. Besselink and colleagues published the PROPATRIA trial in The Lancet in 2008, giving a multi-strain probiotic to patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis. Mortality was higher in the probiotic arm (16% vs 6%), with bowel ischemia reported in the treatment group. "Live organisms are natural" is not a safety argument in a critically ill patient.

For a healthy lifter taking a labeled strain at a labeled dose, none of this applies. It is worth knowing anyway, because it is the clearest available illustration that the natural-therefore-harmless heuristic fails, which is the same reasoning error behind most of the supplement claims worth distrusting.

When Supplementation Is Actually Warranted

Five situations where the evidence supports buying a specific product, and one default for everyone else.

1. You are on or just finished antibiotics

The best-supported use case in the entire category. Saccharomyces boulardii at 5 to 10 billion CFU per day or Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG at 10 to 20 billion CFU per day, started with the antibiotic course and continued for one to two weeks after. S. boulardii has a structural advantage: it is a yeast, so the antibiotic cannot kill it. Space bacterial strains at least two hours from antibiotic doses.

2. Endurance work reliably wrecks your gut

If long conditioning sessions, hot-weather work, or hybrid training produce nausea, cramping, or urgency, the Pugh protocol is the one with data: a multi-strain Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium formula around 25 billion CFU per day for four weeks minimum before the event you care about. Combine with gut training, which means practicing your race-day fueling in training rather than debuting it on event day.

3. You are plant-based or your protein quality is compromised

The pea protein absorption data is the relevant evidence. This is worth trying after you have already blended your plant protein sources to cover the amino acid gaps, not instead of doing that.

4. You get sick constantly during heavy training blocks

The Cochrane URTI data supports a trial here, and the value is in training days preserved. Run it for a full block and count sick days against your previous block. This is the one use case where you can actually measure the outcome yourself.

5. You have a diagnosed condition your doctor is managing

IBS, IBD, C. difficile risk. Strain selection is clinical and specific, so this is a physician conversation rather than a shelf decision.

Everyone else: food first

If none of the five apply, the highest-return move is a daily serving of fermented food and closing your fiber gap. It costs about a dollar, contributes protein, and has controlled-trial data behind it on the outcome you actually care about, which is a more diverse and less inflamed gut.

The Bottom Line

The microbiome is real physiology and probiotic supplementation is a narrow tool aimed at a small piece of it. Strain specificity is the whole game. A product that will not name its strains is telling you it has no research to point at, and a product with twelve unnamed strains and fifty billion CFU is selling a spec sheet.

For lifters specifically, three uses hold up. Certain strains modestly improve amino acid absorption from a protein dose, which matters most if you are plant-based or eating at the low end of the protein range and matters approximately not at all if you already hit 2 g per kg from complete sources. Certain strains reduce GI symptoms during prolonged endurance work, which matters if you do that kind of work and is irrelevant if your conditioning is twenty minutes on a bike. And probiotics appear to reduce upper respiratory infection episodes, which is the most valuable of the three because sick days cost more training than anything a supplement can add back.

Muscle growth is not on the list. Townsend's 12-week baseball trial found no change in body composition or performance, and no trial has shown a probiotic building tissue in people already eating adequate protein. The recovery data from Jäger is promising and preliminary, resting on 29 subjects with the objective marker only trending.

The colonization data should also change how you think about the purchase. Supplemented strains are transient in most people, personal in their effects, and gone within weeks of stopping. You are renting an effect, not building an ecosystem.

So the default recommendation is unglamorous. Eat fermented food daily, close your fiber gap with actual vegetables and legumes, hit your protein target, and keep training, since training itself improves microbial diversity. If you have one of the five specific situations, buy one named strain at its trial-matched dose, run it for eight weeks, and measure something. Otherwise the money is better spent on food that also happens to feed you.

References

1. Hill, C., Guarner, F., Reid, G., Gibson, G.R., Merenstein, D.J., Pot, B., Morelli, L., Canani, R.B., Flint, H.J., Salminen, S., Calder, P.C., & Sanders, M.E. (2014). Expert consensus document: The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appropriate use of the term probiotic. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 11(8), 506-514.
2. Jäger, R., Mohr, A.E., Carpenter, K.C., et al. (2019). International Society of Sports Nutrition Position Stand: Probiotics. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 16(1), 62.
3. Clarke, S.F., Murphy, E.F., O'Sullivan, O., et al. (2014). Exercise and associated dietary extremes impact on gut microbial diversity. Gut, 63(12), 1913-1920.
4. Scheiman, J., Luber, J.M., Chavkin, T.A., et al. (2019). Meta-omics analysis of elite athletes identifies a performance-enhancing microbe that functions via lactate metabolism. Nature Medicine, 25(7), 1104-1109.
5. Jäger, R., Shields, K.A., Lowery, R.P., et al. (2016). Probiotic Bacillus coagulans GBI-30, 6086 reduces exercise-induced muscle damage and increases recovery. PeerJ, 4, e2276.
6. Jäger, R., Zaragoza, J., Purpura, M., et al. (2020). Probiotic administration increases amino acid absorption from plant protein: a placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, crossover study. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins, 12(4), 1330-1339.
7. Stecker, R.A., Moon, J.M., Russo, T.J., Baker, K.M., Mumford, P.W., Jäger, R., Purpura, M., & Kerksick, C.M. (2020). Bacillus coagulans GBI-30, 6086 improves amino acid absorption from milk protein. Nutrition & Metabolism, 17, 93.
8. Townsend, J.R., Bender, D., Vantrease, W.C., et al. (2018). Effects of probiotic (Bacillus subtilis DE111) supplementation on immune function, hormonal status, and physical performance in Division I baseball players. Sports, 6(3), 70.
9. Pugh, J.N., Sparks, A.S., Doran, D.A., et al. (2019). Four weeks of probiotic supplementation reduces GI symptoms during a marathon race. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 119(7), 1491-1501.
10. Hao, Q., Dong, B.R., & Wu, T. (2015). Probiotics for preventing acute upper respiratory tract infections. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (2), CD006895.
11. Zmora, N., Zilberman-Schapira, G., Suez, J., et al. (2018). Personalized gut mucosal colonization resistance to empiric probiotics is associated with unique host and microbiome features. Cell, 174(6), 1388-1405.e21.
12. Suez, J., Zmora, N., Zilberman-Schapira, G., et al. (2018). Post-antibiotic gut mucosal microbiome reconstitution is impaired by probiotics and improved by autologous FMT. Cell, 174(6), 1406-1423.e16.
13. Wastyk, H.C., Fragiadakis, G.K., Perelman, D., et al. (2021). Gut-microbiota-targeted diets modulate human immune status. Cell, 184(16), 4137-4153.e14.
14. Besselink, M.G., van Santvoort, H.C., Buskens, E., et al. (2008). Probiotic prophylaxis in predicted severe acute pancreatitis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The Lancet, 371(9613), 651-659.
15. Gibson, G.R., Hutkins, R., Sanders, M.E., et al. (2017). Expert consensus document: The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) consensus statement on the definition and scope of prebiotics. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 14(8), 491-502.
16. Sender, R., Fuchs, S., & Milo, R. (2016). Revised estimates for the number of human and bacteria cells in the body. PLoS Biology, 14(8), e1002533.
17. Costa, R.J.S., Snipe, R.M.J., Kitic, C.M., & Gibson, P.R. (2017). Systematic review: exercise-induced gastrointestinal syndrome. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 46(3), 246-265.