The two papers that aimossy linked to above serve to illustrate to me how desperately we need someone with the depth of experience, and the depth of resources, that Lipkin has.
I was particularly struck by this statement in the sciencedirect paper:
"Because prebiotics and probiotics differ in their properties and mechanisms of action, their efficacy for treating many disorders is often unpredictable. Patients take these agents empirically and physician who prescribe them do so without consideration of patient factors, the nature of the disease, and clear endpoints. In addition, these agents are marketed as nutraceuticals and, as such, are not subject to quality control or proof of efficacy. Finally, the notion that these agents can reshape the endogenous gut microbiome in a consistent and predictable way is probably untenable. The gut microbiota in most conditions has a substantial degree of resilience that would preclude fitness and colonization by non-indigenous probiotic microbes."
I've heard the argument used against the Microbiome Project, and Lipkin, that CFS can't be as simple as just taking some acidophilus, because all of us have taken all sorts of such things, and none of us are recovered. Clearly, CFS isn't that simple, and pouring a mix of random microbes from a bottle into an unknown mix of random microbes in our guts isn't the answer...that's why we need Lipkin to figure out specifically what is already in there, what specifically is out of balance, and what specifically is needed to get it back in balance.
If we all took all the money that we spend on supplements, mostly uselessly, and contribute it to Lipkin, maybe we'd meet our goal, and maybe we'd get somewhere.