The Gazette article notes that the project name is the “Brain Microbiome Project” and refers in one other spot to the microbiome being out of whack.

I was aware while writing this up that I could spend more time documenting the context and structure. But my main goal was to get the words “microbiome” and “brain” out on the google-o-sphere in at least one context questioning the idea, quickly.

Look Greg, I wish to apologise for my bad attitude displayed above.
I’ve been arguing with conspiratist yank climate deniers on a super shit format called disqus and their science articulation is waaay worse than my own very limited writing ability and then I saw your thing
and snapped a bit cuz it came across as vacuous as some of denier shit I’d just been reading.
I shouldn’t have commented at all when feeling pissed off already.

Li D
Australia.

Eucalyptus do have leaves.
Here’s some research that says they do.
Link to some research on the colour of Eucalyptus leaves.
Link to image of a twitter page thingy that says Eucalyptus have leaves as a retort to a simple claim they don’t have leaves by an unnamed person.

It’s utterly pointless isn’t it without some sort of detail on a theory Eucalyptus do not have leaves.
It’s sorta creating an argument where none exists. If one exists then lay it out.
The Gazette link never mentions microbiome.
I’ve never considered the idea, but am none the wiser for it.
All there is a picture of some twitter shit with some words on it. Means fuck all.
I’m sorry Greg but this is the worst thing I’ve ever seen you compile as a writer about science. It’s vacuous.
I’m interested though. So could you please do a writeup on brain microbiomes theory (and contrary evidence.)
You must be interested too. That’s why you titled an article as such.
Maybe check up on available lessons at that
Alan Alda science communicating school.
Damn this is disappointing.