You can't generalize from very specific to overly broad

The paper focuses on one form of Blastocystis - Blastocystis subtype 3, “It has been suggested that ST3 may be the only subtype (ST) of human origin. That is why this subtype was chosen for analysis in this study.”

The study notes,

Children, the elderly and immunocompromised individuals appear to be highly susceptible to Blastocystis invasion, while other researchers have suggested that people between 30 and 50 years of age are most prone to being infected by Blastocystis.

Also of note,

In the recent literature, researchers have been discussing the correlation between different Blastocystis subtypes and their pathogenic potential. The explanations for pathogenicity may include intra-subtype variations in Blastocystis protease activity, or differences in the intestinal microbiota of the individual host, which can interact to mediate host colonization and Blastocystis virulence. 

The ”different microbiota” Jillian mentions.

BUT,,,

The most recent results of the latest studies leave the pathogenicity of Blastocystis still unclear. Researchers still do not know if Blastocystis is an agent of gut dysbiosis and is responsible for changing the microbiotic diversity, or if the metabolic dysfunctions and changes in the content of microbiota are the reason for the higher colonization by Blastocystis. 

What the author is clear about,

In our study, we have aimed to explore the inhibitory effect of 3 different probiotics and 3 species causing opportunistic infections on Blastocystis proliferation for the first time.

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the lactic acid bacteria Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactococcus lactis and Enterococcus faecium in Blastocystis ST3 eradication and the relevance of the intestinal microorganisms Escherichia coli, Candida albicans and Candida glabrata in protozoan proliferation.

Again Jillian is over generalizing from very specific parameters to very broad – her JJ.

As noted in the discussion, “Our study shows the strong inhibitory effect of various lactic acid bacteria (LAB) at different concentrations,,,.” Again very specific.

While the study is promising, “Our study clearly shows the inhibition of Blastocystis proliferation by LAB, which suggests that people using probiotic rich diets and having a stable gut microbiota are more resistant to protozoan colonization.” Remember, only three strains of lactobacilli where utilized:: Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactococcus lactis and Enterococcus faecium.Jillian's slop is not a probiotic IMO and she can't show what strains of lactobacillus are present. The four criteria I referenced in a May 1, 2019 post still stand.

• First, probiotics must be alive when administered.

• Second, probiotics must have undergone controlled evaluation to document health benefits in the target host. Only products that contain live organisms shown in reproducible human studies to confer a health benefit can actually claim to be probiotic.

• Third, the probiotic candidate must be a taxonomically defined microbe or combination of microbes (genus, species, and strain). It is consensous that most effects of probiotics are strain-specific and cannot be extended to other probiotics of the same genus or species. This calls for a precise identification of the strain, i.e. genotypic and phenotypic characterization of the tested microorganism.

• Fourth, probiotics must be safe for their intended use. The 2002 FAO/WHO guidelines recommend that, though bacteria may be generally recognized as safe (GRAS), the safety of the potential probiotic should be assessed by the minimum required tests.

Another interesting point mentioned. Jillian likes to tout her lab result of 13 million CFUs as being a relevant. According the the author, “In our experiment, the more effective concentration was 1.23 × 10^9 CFU/mL, as well as a longer incubation time,,,.” IOWs 1,230,000,000 CFU/mL

Conclusion:

Our study has shown the potential of using L. rhamnosus and L. lactis, as well as E. faecium as probiotics against Blastocystis colonization. The fact that these probiotic bacterial strains are able to disrupt the cell cycle of Blastocystis shows a promising future in the use of probiotics for prophylactic treatment of blastocystosis, or as an additional treatment regimen in combination with standard drugs. The obtained results did not show what is the mechanism of Blastocystis inhibition by lactic acid bacteria. This issue requires further research.

So as usual, Jillian has cited a study that does not support the use of JJ as a preventive or therapeutic measure.  IF her slop was a probiotic, she is still unable to show what strains(s) of lactobacilli are present. Her own lab results only state 13 million CFUs of LAB. Even if given the benefit of doubt, that is well below the concentration of 1.23 × 10^9 CFU/mL used in the study.

And one final note, “[t]he fecal–oral route is most likely the main mode of transmission.”