Probiotics are, at best, a temporary band-aid—not a solution.
What the research actually shows about probiotics:
A 2018 study by Zmora et al. in
Cell demonstrated that probiotics in most cases do not colonize the gut mucosa permanently. They found person-specific, strain-specific mucosal colonization patterns, and probiotics induced only a transient, individualized impact on mucosal community structure and gut transcriptome. Benefits disappear when supplementation stops (
Zmora et al., 2018, Cell, 174(6):1388-1405.e21).
For people with existing dysbiosis, probiotics can even be counterproductive. A 2018 randomized controlled trial by Suez et al. in
Cell found that probiotics delayed gut mucosal microbiome reconstitution and host transcriptome recovery after antibiotics compared to spontaneous recovery, while autologous FMT induced rapid and near-complete recovery (
Suez et al., 2018, Cell, 174(6):1406-1423.e16)
"More strains = better" is marketing, not science.
There are no robust clinical data supporting that products with 8, 15, or 30+ strains are more effective than simple formulations. This represents a dose-response fallacy from manufacturers. As noted in probiotic development literature, while multispecies formulations exist, "clinically randomized trials that actually prove their respective efficacy remain scarce" (
Freimüller et al., 2020, Frontiers in Microbiology). Strain quality and ecological compatibility matter far more than quantity.
FMT vs. probiotics—fundamentally different:
FMT transfers a complete, functional ecosystem (1000+ species, unknown microbes, bacteriophages, metabolites, immune signals). Probiotics are 3-30 isolated strains in massive doses thrown into an already dysfunctional environment. As Michael Harrop notes—they can be "the opposite of FMT" by disrupting more than helping.
A 2020 network meta-analysis comparing FMT and probiotics (VSL#3) for ulcerative colitis found no statistical difference in clinical remission between FMT and probiotics, but noted that FMT introduces "the characteristics of an overall healthy gut microbiota, providing unique advantages compared to prebiotics and probiotics" (
Yao et al., 2020, PLOS ONE).
Another 2024 systematic review confirmed both probiotics and FMT show efficacy for IBS, but FMT "has the characteristics of being effective, easy to perform, and relatively inexpensive" and is "a promising method" (
Zhang et al., 2024, Nutrients).
Regarding your situation:
I understand the desperation, but be careful viewing your brother's stool as an easy fix. "Healthy" doesn't mean "good donor"—screening requires extensive testing for parasites (
Dientamoeba fragilis,
Blastocystis spp.,
Giardia,
Cryptosporidium), pathogenic bacteria (Salmonella, Shigella, Campylobacter, C. difficile, Shiga toxin-producing E. coli), multi-drug resistant organisms (VRE, ESBL, CRE, MRSA), viruses (norovirus, rotavirus, adenovirus, HIV, hepatitis), and metabolic/immune markers (BMI, inflammatory markers, autoimmune history, psychiatric conditions, antibiotic use) (
Kazerouni et al., 2020,
PLOS ONE; OpenBiome, 2025).
Poor donor selection has made people permanently worse. In 2019, the FDA issued a safety alert after an immunocompromised patient died from ESBL-producing E. coli bacteremia transmitted via insufficiently screened donor stool (
FDA Safety Alert, 2019; referenced in Kim et al., 2022, Journal of Clinical Medicine).
Probiotics never worked for me either. That says something about how fundamentally different dysbiosis is from the "digestive issues" the probiotic market is built to "solve."