I guess it's a bit like music, unless you have genius talent out of the box, you will only be able to parse things clearly after 5-10 years of swimming in the pool. Unless we have something to connect the dots for us, for instance something that can cross correlated data from biological pathways, chemistry, physics, maths, so you know what is solid or not.
Also nutrition is too tied to economics and politics, that doesn't help.
Here is another article that specifically addresses this study,
http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2018/08/low-moderate-or-high-carb...
Zoe Harcombe takes a hard look at this study, and there are so many problems with this study, I am amazed that it was published, but wait, I would take a look at this,
https://twitter.com/WGyogaSC/status/1031258976560852992
This was a "paid to publish" study.
Its really mind numbing that we have so much confusion in such an important space as nutrition.
Just look at the credentials of the expert that Ms.Teicholz [1] blames for this mess:
Ms. Teicholz was mentioned earlier in the discussion in the threads above.[2][1]
Nina Teicholz - 'The Real Food Politics'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lww5WH7INI&t=12m26s
[2]
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17794606