It is important to note that submitting the same article to multiple journals simultaneously is considered unethical. I observed that this article has also been posted at https://www.rroij.com/peer-reviewed/human-microbiome-effects-on-nutrition-and-health-90209.html. Please adhere to ethical publishing practices and ensure that the manuscript is submitted to only one journal at a time.

The primary issue with the current state of this paper is the lack of a critical assessment of the cited references. Additionally, the objectives of the article and the intended message for the readers remain unclear. Improvement is needed in terms of punctuation errors throughout the article. Clear and effective communication relies on proper punctuation, and rectifying these errors will significantly enhance the overall quality of the writing. Please consider the following comments:

1. Please consider enhancing the abstract by providing a more concise and comprehensive summary of the key findings and implications of the study. Include specific details on the research objectives, methods, results, and conclusions to give readers a clearer understanding of the study's significance. Additionally, ensure that the abstract accurately reflects the content of the full manuscript.
2. Please ensure consistent use of the citation style throughout the manuscript.
3. Please adhere to the standard format for species names throughout the manuscript. Please use the correct binomial nomenclature, italicizing both the genus and species names (e.g., Bacteroides fragilis), to ensure consistency and accuracy in the presentation of biological taxonomy.
4. Please correct punctuation errors in the text.
5. Please clearly state the objective of this review in the manuscript.
6. Please provide a critical assessment of the cited references for a more thorough analysis.
7. Please clarify the method used for conducting the literature review in the article.
8. Please acknowledge the use of any software for generating any figure (I guess, it was Biorender?).
9. Please clarify the information transition between the literature review and the discussion section.
10. The conclusion is too long. Please make a conclusion based on the synthesis of the results.